Just for final clarification yes, we evolved from monkeys.

[Astrophile]

I'm pretty positive that that should actually be "hoisted by your own petard" in that context.

'Let it work; For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard, and it shall go hard but I will delve one yard below their mines and blow them at the moon.' (Hamlet, III, iv, 206-211).

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

'Let it work; For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard, and it shall go hard but I will delve one yard below their mines and blow them at the moon.' (Hamlet, III, iv, 206-211).

Yes, I know the quote and I know the history behind the quote (a petard being an explosive device used during the period of the 30 Years War and English Civil War). I'm saying that in the context that radrook used it in, the quote should "hoisted by your own petard".

 

[SteveB28]

Well, if evolutionists sometimes admit dishonesty then why are you taking umbrage with their honesty? If indeed evolutionists admit to practicing chicanery, they are to be commended for being forthright.. As to predictive, I find nothing predictive in evolution that can not be interpreted differently. Neither do I trust evolutionists in their predictive claims. Such claims can be simply discoveries followed by evolutionist interpretations claimed to be predictions followed by discoveries. Evolutionist dishonesty records do not make for trust in their ethical adherence to scientific mores. Because of that unsavory evolutionist reputation, I suspect the latter instead of the former.

What you "suspect" is fortunately unrelated to the facts. Evolutionary theory is capable of making predictions concerning expected outcomes in the biology of living things, in the location of fossilised remains, in the likely ongoing evolution of species.

Its successful record in this regard is clear.

 

[SteveB28]

I witnessed that throwing of a newborn baby in an incinerator as a child myself.
Humans can be extremely cruel and do things unknown in the animal world.
Yet we claim we are made in God's image?
If indeed true and God is good, then our image must have become extremely warped in order to allow such things.

People like you make those claims. I promote no such nonsense, so leave me out of your "we", thank you.

 

[JackRT]

The British in WW2 developed a sort of mine that could be attached to wall or door with the intent of blowing it in. Turned out to be almost as dangerous to the people using it as it was to the enemy. They decided to call it, what else, a "petard". It was never widely used.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The British in WW2 developed a sort of mine that could be attached to wall or door with the intent of blowing it in. Turned out to be almost as dangerous to the people using it as it was to the enemy. They decided to call it, what else, a "petard". It was never widely used.

I've never heard of that one. The only other petard I've heard about is the name for the gun on the AVRE variant of the Churchill tank, the 290mm Petard Mortar. But this is off-topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

By the way, how did God make DNA out of dust,

The same way He made grape juice out of water.

... and how did he give all living species different DNA if he made them all out of dust?

He had the entire Periodic Table with which to work with.

The technical term is: ontological reduction.

Again ... concentrate on the differences, not the similarities, or you'll end up confusing yourself like sfs did.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, I know the quote and I know the history behind the quote (a petard being an explosive device used during the period of the 30 Years War and English Civil War). I'm saying that in the context that radrook used it in, the quote should "hoisted by your own petard".

I think the word "petard" comes from "pensive retard."

A term ascribed to scientists who are so caught up in the product they are creating (pensive), that they accidentally use it on themselves, instead of on others (retard).

Examples would be mustard gas and Thalidomide.

 

[AV1611VET]

I witnessed that throwing of a newborn baby in an incinerator as a child myself.

They don't even have to be born yet.

Incinerated Aborted Fetuses

Just pluto "child in the womb" to "fetus," and bingo!

Fuel to heat your hospital!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think the word "petard" comes from "pensive retard."

A term ascribed to scientists who are so caught up in the product they are creating (pensive), that they accidentally use it on themselves, instead of on others (retard).

Examples would be mustard gas and Thalidomide.

Well then that proves that you really don't know anything. But I won't get drawn in to this since it's off topic, so leave your thalidomide/"I hate scientists for no rational reason" schtick at the front door.

 

[AV1611VET]

... so leave your thalidomide/"I hate scientists for no rational reason" schtick at the front door.

That's what one of my bosses once told me I could do with my Christianity, when I witnessed to him at work.

 

[SteveB28]

I think the word "petard" comes from "pensive retard."

A term ascribed to scientists who are so caught up in the product they are creating (pensive), that they accidentally use it on themselves, instead of on others (retard).

Examples would be mustard gas and Thalidomide.

Another "example", of course, would be the death of Madame Curie from radiation poisoning, following the years of research and experimentation conducted by her husband and her.

The fact that that research now permits YOU to have YOUR health monitored more efficiently and may help in YOU avoiding serious disease should be entirely dismissed, of course, in the pursuit of demonstrating the folly of science.....!




.

 

[AV1611VET]

Another "example", of course, would be the death of Madame Curie from radiation poisoning, following the years of research and experimentation conducted by her husband and her.

I was going to mention her, but thought against it.

That would be a little crass.

 

[mmksparbud]

Lions practice infanticide.

I was talking about primates-----everybody knows that male lions kill the infants of the other males when they take over a pride to ensure only his offspring will survive. It is not done for sport, or out of meanness, it is preservation of their genetic line. They do not kill their own.

 

[mmksparbud]

I witnessed that throwing of a newborn baby in an incinerator as a child myself.
Humans can be extremely cruel and do things unknown in the animal world.
Yet we claim we are made in God's image?
If indeed true and God is good, then our image must have become extremely warped in order to allow such things.

What we do is nothing short of demonic. It is forgetting we are made in His image and treating each other as such. Of course, there are the idiots who think they are doing the will of God by beating them, and starving them into submission. They have no concept of God or are just plain crazy.

 

[SteveB28]

I was going to mention her, but thought against it.

That would be a little crass.

I would be surprised if you knew what that word means........

 

[Larniavc]

I was talking about primates-----everybody knows that male lions kill the infants of the other males when they take over a pride to ensure only his offspring will survive. It is not done for sport, or out of meanness, it is preservation of their genetic line. They do not kill their own.

Fair enough.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That's what one of my bosses once told me I could do with my Christianity, when I witnessed to him at work.

And yet you didn't learn.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I believe in a creator. I do not claim to know for 100% certainty everything about the creator.
I do believe that the creator used the Bible to communicate with mankind.
I do believe that the Bible contains historical facts.

In other words, I was correct in my assumption that you indeed are a bible believing christian.

But please keep well in mind that so do all archeologists and historians.

Right, but none of it includes mythological stories like noah's flood, genesis, etc.

As to the creator ordering the termination of human life-yes, the Bible tells us that he did order the termination of human life and that it included the very young on various occasions. Does it justify that we do the same at a whim. No! that would be like saying that because a high court issues a death sentence that we also have the same right to do so at a whim.

Nevertheless, it does validate my objection to your sweeping, generalised statement concerning the killing of babies.

Clearly, it means that, according to your god, it's not "always" the case that the killing of babies is the wrong thing to do.

There is an infinite difference between the creator taking a life and we humans deciding to do so.

I disagree.
I consider the killing of babies immoral. I don't agree that there is a "context" in which it is moral to do so. And frankly, I consider myself immensly morally superior to people who think that there IS a context in which the mass killing of babies is okay.

First, he is the source and sustainer of all life and that grants him the right to terminate it whenever he considers it necessary.

I disagree with that as well. Assuming for a second that this god is real and that he is all-powerfull, then he certainly has the might to consider such a rule and there is nothing anybody could change about that.

But that is not what I would call "good" or "righteous" or "just".
Instead, it is immoral, barbaric and tyranical. Might, does not make right.

Second, He able to resurrect, so death is viewed as merely a temporary sleep

I consider that a deeply immoral worldview as well. Because it renders life meaningless and invaluable.

Also, I'ld suggest that you don't really believe this either.
Why else would you mourn the death? Why else would you be deeply saddened by the loss of loved ones?

Third his superhuman faculties allow him to discern on a consequentialist level the almost infinite ramifications of his life terminating actions whereas we are limited in that respect.

That's what I would call a cop-out.
Also, it doesn't change the immoral acts of killing someone before they commit their crime.

On top of that, it also has serious implications in terms of for example free will. It means that someone's decisions and actions are pre-determined.

But let's take a step back and see if you agree with your own logic.
If you had access to a time machine, would it be moral to go back in time, and kill Adolf Hitler while he was still a toddler?

Finally, his position as supreme judge of the universe, it doesn't amount to murder just as a court decision to level capital punishment does not involve murder.

Babies are innocent and haven't committed any crimes.

So since we limited humans are not in that privileged position, we cannot terminate life without risking committing an injustice.

Another cop-out. You appeal to an (undemonstrable) authority, only to escape your own moral responsabilities.

You do this, in order to be able to defend the mass killing of innocent children.


But all this is off topic.

The main point in this post: I was right in my assumption and there is no need for me to retract any statement I made.


EDIT: fixed quotes

 

[Astrophile]

Yes, I know the quote and I know the history behind the quote (a petard being an explosive device used during the period of the 30 Years War and English Civil War). I'm saying that in the context that radrook used it in, the quote should "hoisted by your own petard".

Perhaps you are right.