@andrew321remov: ""Budikka666" wrote in message news:<email_address>
<quote>
  "It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science,
  has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific."
Intelligent design is an origins model; referring to the origin of the universe
and the origin of life. Observable data may be compared to any origins
model, but no origins model has been tested and ~proven~ experimentally.
Therefore the above statement, "intelligent design has no basis in science,
has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific"
would also apply to the naturalistic origins model. That is, origins apart from
a Higher intelligent input and purpose .
Variations among living things is not contested, the real controversy has to
do with............ origins.
Andrew "
    @mmman_90: ""Andrew" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
Tell me Andrew, just what is the ID origins model? "
    @nunya: "On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:58:54 -0700, "Andrew" <email_address>
wrote:
<quote>
<sigh> The cluelessness of the "faithful.""
    @andrew321remov: ""Ralph" wrote in message news:r3qCk.35561$<email_address>
<quote>
There are basically two origin models. One says that the universe
and living things are the result of a Higher Intelligence that had an
active role in their creation.
The other model says that the universe and the living things therein
are the result of naturalistic factors only, apart from any input from
a Higher Power.
Andrew "
    @mmman_90: ""Budikka666" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
My question involved the ID origins 'model'. Upon what basis does the higher 
intelligent model exist? "
    @mmman_90: ""adman" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:NVzCk.40156$<email_address>
<quote>
You wouldn't know a great post, Assman. You've never made one before.
Andrew, you're a pretty sharp theist, tell me if you would, how god gathered 
the raw materials for the creation of the universe and how did he use his 
voice to arrange these materials? "
    @nobody: "<quote>
"Higher Intelligence" alone would not be sufficient.  It would have to be
a "Higher Intelligence" that had magical powers.  As soon as you invoke
magical powers, you are, by definition, no longer talking science.
MarkA
Keeper of the Butter Dish of Balshazar"
    @grat: "<quote>
I would go with the one that has 10,000 yrs worth of history.
The one that says evolution has never been observed. "
    @ingilt: ""bob young" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
I don't know about that.
Some dogs and their masters  it gets awfully close to 
worship."
    @hypatiab7: ""Elijahovah" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
Shot up any Post Offices lately, Richard? "
    @ingilt: ""bob young" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
It's a nice feeling, though .....
;-) "
    @andrew321remov: ""Syd M."  wrote in message news:<email_address>
<quote>
Those who choose the macro-evolutionally theory of how man
came to be, are the ones who choose FANTASY over reality.
FROG BECOMES PRINCE BY A KISS  =  FAIRY TALE
FROG BECOMES MAN THROUGH EVOLUTION  =  HOAX"
    @andrew321remov: ""Budikka666" wrote in message news:<email_address>
<quote>
Both models have the same evidence. The difference is in how evidence
is interpreted. To me it is obvious that our universe and the living things
therein are the result of a Higher Intelligence that had an active role in its
creation. Naturalistic factors such as -horizontal- variation within genetic
boundaries will occur, because it is in the genetic code to do so; and
"code" implies intelligence.
Andrew "
    @andrew321remov: ""Ralph" wrote in message news:hBACk.40171$<email_address>
<quote>
I believe He creates matter from energy. This is my
belief. What is your belief as to the origin of matter?
Andrew"
    @Virgil: "<quote>
That particular hoax is one hawked only by creationists and like idiots.
FROG AND MAN HAVE COMMON ANCESTOR = TRUE
FROG AND MAN HAVE TOO MUCH COMMON DNA TO BE TOTALLY UNRELATED = TRUE
Only a maliciously deceitful god would have created a world full of 
evidence of what did not happen.
If such a god did exist, no sane person would want any part of 
him/her/it."
    @jhachmann: "<quote>
So where is you evidence for an intelligent designer? Admit it. You have 
none.  Science marches on and leaves superstition choking in the dust.
John #1782"
    @PF: "news:hBACk.40171$<email_address>
<quote>
    That is of course the big question, for this can only be true in a
virtual reality, which atheists discount pro forma, but for which they lack
evidence to the contrary. We Christians believe, also sans evidence, that
there may be a multitude of realities, this one in the here and now being
only one of them, and that on death we will go to the next reality, which
will likely be heaven or hell, ...the destination being your choice alone.
    In heaven you will be joyful and spend eternity praising and glorifying,
and those in hell are permanently dissatisfied and therefore wail complaints
eternally, ...an activity btw atheists posting here like to practice
assiduously in preparation thereof. 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:PxACk.40170$<email_address>
<quote>
    On the basis that only God is real and the universe is in fact virtual,
meaning that what you call reality is in fact virtual reality and any
evidence you can mount to the contrary is also merely virtual. See the
Biblical evidence for this possibility below.
    It must always remain a possibility, because there can be no evidence
for nor against it, ...but it would explain everything. That is also why
religion is a matter of belief and faith, never a matter of facts in
evidence.
Pastor Frank
    Acts:17:28: For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain
also of your own poets have said, For we are also His offspring.
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:r3qCk.35561$<email_address>
<quote>
   Are you REALLY  interested, or just looking for something to trash and
someone to flame?
    Basically ID is NOT evolution.  Normally only atheists look for what is
not, false, lies, erroneous and scams. But when it comes to ID we can play
the same game, by merely claiming the primitive Darwinism is wrong,
unproved, impossible statistically, not evidenced except for minor changes
within species, never across species etc. etc. and because of it's weak
foundation it must be propped up by censorship in classrooms and legal
edicts from the courts. See below
Pastor Frank
    "In conclusion, evolution is not observable, repeatable, nor refutable,
and thus does not qualify as either a scientific fact nor theory."
    - Dr. David N.Menton, PhD in Biology from Brown University. 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @lunch: "On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 09:51:09 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
You are a stinking liar. What a pathetic fake you are. You are another
in a long series of self-described Christians who worships ignorance and
treats lying as a sacrament. How pathetic. Keep it up, you are doing an
excellent job of driving people from belief.
[misleading, out of context, misunderstood, and other such quotations
deleted because Pastor Frank cannot be bothered to learn a thing about
science]"
    @lunch: "On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 09:59:57 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
Of course your claim is false, a lie, indefensible.
You lie by misleading, but mostly, you lie because you worship
Ignorance."
    @replytonewsgroup: "<quote>
More importantly, why did you have to quote the whole
friggin' 500 lines to make your point??  :-)"
    @PF: "news:<email_address>
<quote>
    That scenario is according to YOUR religion, not ours.  It's a child's
view, but then you are old enough to be in your second childhood, are you
not? 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:<email_address>
<quote>
    You forgot to prove your "fact", that frog becomes man through
evolution. Till then your "facts" are our hoaxes. See below scientist speak
the truth!
Pastor Frank
    "In conclusion, evolution is not observable, repeatable, nor refutable,
and thus does not qualify as either a scientific fact nor theory."
    - Dr. David N.Menton, PhD in Biology from Brown University.
Pastor Frank 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: ""Alex W." <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Sure is!! Especially if that's the only adulation Bob Young gets.  
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Why should they think that, when you do miracles for them like providing
free food? Of course they probably don't know, that you likely do that to
just fatten them, so you can get a good price for them on the Chinese dog
meat market. 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: ""Tim Miller" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:gbfq8b$b6g$<email_address>
<quote>
    You might as well face it Andrew, little Timmy here has SEEN evolution 
occur, 'IMAGINARY' of course, but one can't argue with true-believers and 
win, can one?  
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Glad you didn't try to argue, that speciation has been observed in the
last 10K years or we would all succumb to fits of apoplectic laughter.
   Interesting though, that nature abhors inter-species breeding to create
new species. Also all attempts to create new species by irradiation have
failed. All experimental attempts to date have invariably been unsuccessful,
i.e. like goats breeding with sheep. The odd success, like mules, are 100%
sterile, without a single exception throughout history, ...and to think a
donkey and a horse are not even that far apart as species. 
** Posted from <url> **"
    @PF: "news:IUDCk.39633$<email_address>
<quote>
    "Another dimension" may too difficult a concept to grasp. Simpler might
be to say in another reality, where the word reality means whatever the
person in that reality considers real. I.e. In a dream, the dreamt person
considers himself a real person in a real universe. Anyone telling him there
that he and his entire universe is just a dream, a kind of virtual reality,
an illusion, and that the creator of that dream exists in another reality
probably lying in a bed asleep and snoring, would be instantly dismissed.
    However, it would be perfectly feasible, that a dreamt person might
accept the proposition, and now will seek to communicate with the dreamer
through prayer, and supplications in order to assure himself a pleasant
existence. Not only that, but he might very well succeed in getting what he
wants.
    Though there can be no evidence for any of this, for all evidence would
also be virtual, but seen from that viewpoint, religion and creationism make
perfect sense. See below the Biblical reference.
Pastor Frank
    Acts:17:28: For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain
also of your own poets have said, For we are also His offspring.
    Proverbs 10:22 God is nearer than our own soul, closer than our most
secret thoughts.
** Posted from <url> **"
    @trigby: ""Tim Miller" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:gcb2ib$ti6$<email_address>
<quote>
Sorry.  I've stopped posting via Googlegroups and am trying to remember how 
this other system works.
Wombat "
    @PF: ""bob young" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Like I said, that near everything is "silly mythology" Is doctrine of 
YOUR religion of Scientism. Science however has no answers regarding 
quality, especially quality of character. i.e. perfection, however Jesus 
has. See below
Pastor Frank
    Jesus in Jn:15:13: Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay 
down
his life for his friends."
    @lunch: "On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 04:30:20 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
Frank, you worship the god Ignorance and your most sacred duties are to
remain ignorant and foolish and lie to others. You are a very good
worshipper of Ignorance indeed."
    @PF: ""bob young" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Glad you admit that. For a moment one gets the impression you think 
yourself exempt from this imperfection.
    Then it's only a small step for you to welcome those who came to remind 
us to seek perfection, as per below.
Pastor Frank
     Jesus in Jn:15:13: Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay
 down his life for his friends."
    @PF: ""Free Lunch" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    That matters of love need brains, and that ignorance makes you incapable 
of loving and caring, is an atheist doctrine. We believe, that love and care 
which are at the center of religion don't require much knowledge, in fact 
the opposite may be true, that an intellectual approach to love tends to 
destroy love. "
    @lunch: "On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:52:13 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
Your claimed belief shows your disdain for humans and your indifference
to others."
    @PF: ""Free Lunch" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Your answers always are complaints of sorts. Don't you know that 
complaining is the activity of those in hell for all eternity? Learn to 
praise and worship, which is what those in heaven do!!!!
Pastor Frank
    Jesus in Mt:8:12: But the children of Satan's kingdom shall be cast into
outer darkness: There shall be wailing (of interminable complaints and
accusations) and the gnashing of teeth (in perpetual frustration and
impotent rage)."
    @PF: ""bob young" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    Again, that is just another tenet of YOUR religion, not ours. Jesus died 
for us on the cross of Calvary because He loved us regardless of our 
shortcomings, certainly not because we deserved His love because of our 
perfections. "
    @PF: ""Tim Miller" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:gd75pl$ek3$<email_address>
<quote>
    What an uninspiring religion you have. "Just the here an now" indeed!! 
Doesn't that bore you to distraction? We have great ideals to live up to and 
bring them into existence. We have a purpose in life for which we praise and 
thank our God unceasingly. What have you got but the same "just here and 
now" for ever? Get a life and join us already, and forget about all your 
excuses!!!!!! "
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
I don't HAVE a religion.
Yup. And you're WASTING yours. It's a real pity, but I
really don't care any more. Stupid people deserve what they
get. It's that "reap what you sow", crap... you STOLE that
from earlier gods, by the way.
inguyen@example.net. Life (if you're not wasting it with Bronze Age
myths) is really INTERESTING!
We do too. But it doesn't involve sky pixies...
Why? What's your invisible friend ever DONE for you? Oh.
Yeah. NOTHING. The dopey fuck hasn't even "talked" to
anyone in 2000 years!  LOL!"
    @lunch: "On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 02:50:30 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
You are silly. You could change your foolishness if you wanted to."
    @PF: ""Tim Miller" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:gd8mh7$s5b$<email_address>
<quote>
    Just more atheist doctrine. EVERYTHING in civilization is "stolen"  from 
predecessors and likely improved upon, including your language. Even you 
yourself are merely recycled and hopefully improved upon dirt or dust. Don't 
you believe that? "
    @PF: ""Yap" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    What are you trying to say? I see you say, that modern man would never 
lay down his life willingly for anyone, nor anything, and will always prefer 
to look after number one first. "
    @danielsan: "<quote>
So, no one goes to war?
****************************************************
*          DanielSan  alt.atheism #2226          *
**
* Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He *
* can't eat it?                                    *
****************************************************"
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
Reading comprehension never WAS the strong point of you folks,
was it? That's the ONLY way you can get past all the errors
and contradictions that appear in your "word of god"..."
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
Bullshit. There are over a thousand websites DEDICATED to
pointing out the contradictions. AND the factual errors.
Only a COMPLETE imbecile would deny them.
Oh wait. I almost forgot who I'm talking to."
    @lunch: "On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:09:50 -0700 (PDT), Ray Martinez
<email_address> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
You are lying to us. 
You have misunderstood
What nonsense.
More nonsense.
You are making a false claim, a claim that you have been corrected on in
the past. Why do you choose to lie when everyone you are lying to knows
that you are lying?
Who should we listen to, liars who make money conning the faithful?"
    @lunch: "On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:19:52 -0700 (PDT), Ray Martinez
<email_address> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
You know that is a lie as well.
You act like a fake believer."
    @lunch: "On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:42:47 -0700 (PDT), Ray Martinez
<email_address> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
So, in your doctrine-addled mind, you appear to be telling us that the
vast majority of Christians who belong to denominations that do not
accept your pseudo-literalism are atheists? Cool. It's nice to know that
the vast majority of people in the world and the USA are atheists. Too
bad your definition is silly."
    @lunch: "On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:43:39 -0700 (PDT), Ray Martinez
<email_address> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
I see, once again, that have decided to dismiss any facts that
incoveniently show that your doctrines are false.
You are truly a self-worshipping fool."
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
Heh heh.
Here are 419,000 for you to get started with...
<url>
Or, if you're too fucking stupid to google (and, I'm guessing
THAT'S a given) here are about 200 to get started with. JUST in
the New Testament...
<url>
THESE are just contradictions. When you're done with THESE,
we can start on the FACTUAL errors, if you haven't run away.
Again.
ROFLMAO!!!"
    @mmman_90: ""Ray Martinez" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
On Oct 19, 4:25 pm, Tim Miller <email_address>
wrote:
<quote>
Depends on your definition of 'contradictions'."
    @mmman_90: ""Ray Martinez" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
Yes, too bad there isn't any way to explain your "opinions". "
    @danielsan: "<quote>
Okay, did God create Adam first or the animals first?
****************************************************
*          DanielSan  alt.atheism #2226          *
**
* Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He *
* can't eat it?                                    *
****************************************************"
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
The POINT was, you ASKED me for contradictions, and I GAVE you
some. A LOT of 'em.
I note you're unable to address ANY of them. Not even
ONE.
No one is surprised.
What SHOULD surprise YOU, is that "atheists" know your
holy book better than YOU do. Maybe that's because
WE'VE actually READ it."
    @replyonnewsgroup: "<quote>
The ONLY thing I admit is what EVERYONE can see. YOU
CAN'T REFUTE EVEN ONE OF THE CONTRADICTIONS.
Not one.
None.
ROFLMAO!!"
    @npublicus: "<quote>
No "belief" is required.  The contradictions are there.  Are christians
supposed to choose which to believe or pick and choose depending on the
question being asked?
Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church
1034 gods I don't believe in: <url>"
    @PF: ""Free Lunch" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    FL is looking for a text book, or users' manual etc. not ancient Semitic 
philosophical / spiritual / religious poetry. FL insists on interpreting 
poetry literally, objectively and factually, and thus he misses all that 
poetry is designed to do. "
    @PF: ""Free Lunch" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
    You have presented no "facts" whatever,  just your automatic contrarian 
opinion based on atheist doctrine. Consequently, all you ever end up with 
are more "fools" to add to your list, and  in whose company alone you feel 
at home. "
    @mmman_90: ""Ray Martinez" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
The fact that Christians control the world prove that Islam is false.
The God of the Bible exists; Allah does not.
Ray
Reply: The fact that you think Christians control the world says all we need 
to know about you."
    @PF: ""Tim Miller" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:gdjg6d$u2n$<email_address>
<quote>
    You may have read the Bible, but did you understand it? "
    @coryalbrecht: "Ray Martinez wrote, on 2008-10-21 16:19:
<quote>
"It's inerrant, except for where it's not."
How do you know the correction are correct? Or even what parts need 
correcting?
Rabbits chewing their cud. That there was a world-wide flood.
I, as a Christian, "defend" the Bible as the word of God. I don't, 
however, defend it as inerrant or literally true. Hint: this is where 
you take up your No True Scotsman cross."
    @lunch: "On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:17:44 -0400, "Pastor Frank" <email_address>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
<quote>
I have presented the fact that you have made claims that are not backed
up with evidence. That fact is unassailable and you refuse to admit it
or even discuss it because you know that you have nothing to back up
your claims."
    @ingilt: ""thomas p." <email_address> wrote in message 
news:491c204f$0$56796$<email_address>
<quote>
Oh, but there is.
And it's the best possible defence  porous, weak, crumbling, held together 
by little more than spit and pious hope.  If you had to assault a position, 
you couldn't wish for better. "
    @coryalbrecht: "Andrew wrote, on 2008-11-13 05:31:
<quote>
How about we restore the part that you snipped? Directly following that 
single sentence which you quote mined from me, I said this, in response 
to Ray Martinez:
"I don't, however, defend it as inerrant or literally true. Hint: this 
is where you take up your No True Scotsman cross."
P.S. Andrew, I also try to defend the Bible against liars and hypocrites 
like yourself."
    @coryalbrecht: "Cory Albrecht wrote, on 2008-11-13 11:40:
<quote>
So, Andrew, are you going to do the honest thing like an honest 
Christian would do and honestly own up to your dishonest quote-mining of me?
Or are you going to be yet another one of the people that make me 
ashamed to say I go to church every Sunday morning out of disgust of 
being associated with you?"
    @andrew321remov: ""bob young" wrote in message news:<email_address>
<quote>
As a theist, I feel sorry to know that you are likely to complete
a lifetime without hope of life in God's eternal kingdom of glory.
Is this why you have embraced atheism and the deceptions of the
majority?
Those who blindly follow what one has been taught and told by others,
will accept the popular, naturalistic and atheistic *origins model* which
rejects the abundant evidence of an intelligently directed creative power
that has been involved in the creation of life and the universe we live in.
Andrew "
    @calee: "On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:00:22 -0800, "Andrew" <email_address>
wrote:
<quote>
Which is no different than an ancient Greek's Hades or a Hindu's
reincarnation as a greater or lesser life form, imbecile.
What part of "you are in the real world outside your religion" are you
still pretending you are too stupid to understand"?
Atheism cannot be "embraced" any more than its exact equivalent of not
believing in pixies.
When did you "embrace" that, imbecile?
Would you even give it a thought if idiots like you didn't insist that
leprechauns were real?
Like you.
What "popular, naturalistic and atheistic 'origins model'" are you
lying about?
Scientific explanations as a result of investigation are hardly
atheistic, because non-fundamentalist Christians and other educated
religionists who far outnumber atheists in the educationally backward
USA, accept them.
But then you already know this because it has been explained to you so
many times that you can only be lying.
What "abundant evidence of an intelligently directed creative power"
are you lying about this time?
Where did you demonstrate it before this bullshit?
Get an education and stop embarrassing yourself."
    @kelseyb: "<quote>
No need to feel sorry for us.  You see, we have compensations.  Little 
things such as the ability to think instead of swallowing unfounded 
balderdash.  Also, we're never left in a position of trying to figure out 
why we've spent our entire lives in the service of something which has 
all the objective validity of a bad B horror movie.
Personally, I'd tend to feel sorry for the people who wasted their lives 
focusing upon such stuff and nonsense, rather than getting out into the 
world and learning what a truly majestic and wonderful place it really is 
- all the more so because we can, by and large, actually *understand* it, 
not just cower behind mother's apron strings, whimpering "Too hard to 
understand, must be God."
There's a popular atheistic origins model?  News to me.  
There's *evidence* of this creator?  Well, do please post it.  In all the 
thousands of years of believers, and all the billions of believers, you'd 
be the first.
Let's just say I haven't got my hopes up."
    @mmman_90: "news:<email_address>
<quote>
As an atheist and former theist, I'm sorry that you will miss the excitement 
of living this life on earth as if it were your only life.
Atheism is far from the majority, you idiot.
Gee Andrew, sounds just like what happens when you are indoctrinated in 
Christianity. "
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 68, "forum_name": "alt.religion.christian.adventist.20140711.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.religion.parquet'}