My Response to The Nightline Debate

ColinS
Theist
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
My Response to The Nightline Debate

Hey everyone,

    I just recently joined the forums and wanted to present my articles to everyone.  First of all, I am a Christian so I am here to argue against atheism.  I recently wrote two articles, and I have two more on the way, that are critical of the arguments put forth by Brian and Kelly during the Nightline debate.  They are posted on my website at www.vineoflife.net.  You should see the link for the Nightline debate on the main page.  I hope you all check it out!

 -Colin


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
I have to go to work, so I

I have to go to work, so I can't refute all of your 'points' just yet, but I can say that I do see some grevious errors in your articles.

 

I will say right now that Brian and Kelly did a great job, and are new to organized debate, such as the one you saw.

They are already aware of any and all mistakes they made.

 

Edit:

 

And why are you posting essentially the exact same thing on three seperate boards? 

 

 


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
http://www.vineoflife.net/id

http://www.vineoflife.net/id38.html

I just quickly looked over this, but a couple problems I've found:


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Maragon wrote: I have to

Maragon wrote:

I have to go to work, so I can't refute all of your 'points' just yet, but I can say that I do see some grevious errors in your articles.

 

I will say right now that Brian and Kelly did a great job, and are new to organized debate, such as the one you saw.

They are already aware of any and all mistakes they made.

 

Edit:

 

And why are you posting essentially the exact same thing on three seperate boards?

 

 

 

Yeah, I made a great response in the kindness board with photos and everything..  and then it turns out he's just spamming this thread everywhere. Sad 


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
He's started this thread on

He's started this thread on three seperate boards.

 

I refuted one of his articles over in the Atheist vs Theist forums, but there's a few more, if anyone wants to lend a hand. 


SamSexton
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
As a theist you should know

As a theist you should know that around here, people will respect you if you don't simply deny what we tell you but actually think about it. the ideas  that your religion is afalse are completely valid and deserve due consideration. I wish there was a proper disclaimer we could offer to theists.

 

a building is not evidence of a builder. a sandcastle is evidence of a builder, but throwing sand on the floor is just a random configuration of sand.You could argue that i created it, but i'd suggest the sand was already there (but lets not get in to such a trivial debate).

 

Secondly, we were not once all female. It is possible that as men we once breastfed, it's really not important because the fact is we know things evolve. Ever heard of a super bug? it's a genetic mutation of a string of bacteria that makes it better at resisting the anti-biotics that we've been throwing at it for ages. Why has it evolved in a relatively short space of time? bacteria are relatively simple organisms hence can reproduce fast, this an the ongoing threat of anti-biotics causes the organisms to adapt. I don't know how that can seem stupid to anyone. don't let it go in one ear and out the other, it's extremely important that you understand, the same way you adapt to changes throughout your life, so life does throughout it's span. 

Also, we weren't just put here with a symbiotic relationship with dogs, but they have relied oin us for so long that their chemistry has changed. Please don't let evolution go over your head. It is possible that your bible is wrong, don't commit to knowing the answer to creation if you can't be 100% sure of the bible (and if you are, go away)


ColinS
Theist
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
I have read those articles

I have read those articles several times in other debates I have been in.  I have found they are not straightforwards in their arguments.  For example, recieving heat from the sun does not somehow cause amino acids in a non-existant primordial soup to organize in a fashion that Astronomer Fred Hoyle calculated was 1 in 1 to the 40000 power chance of happening.  Counter-arguments to this type of reasoning can be found at...

http://www.trueorigin.org/steiger.asp

This one is probably the best

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/370.asp

 Also check out this quote by biological thermodynamicists Donald Haynie  "Any theory claiming to describe how organisms originate and continue to exist by natural causes must be compatible with the first and second laws of thermodynamics."[ (1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

 Just because there are refutations for an argument doesn't mean they rest there.  You have to follow the debate back and forth until you see where the buckstops.  If you take the time to examine the arguments and counter-arguments carefully creationism comes out on top for the most part.  Thanks for the reply!


SamSexton
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
right, the thermodynamics

right, the thermodynamics stuff is simple. Evolution is not an isolated system, so the second law does not apply to it, there are people who manipulate the law by leaving the "isolated" part out, much like those articles do, but it's important to understand that they are decieving you in omitting the basics.

 

The second law of thermodynmaics cannot be used to disprove evolution sorry. I wonder if you did abondon your own rationality in favour of academic articles, i can't tell what part of "we know that bacteria evolves" you can't grasp. 

 

Ofcourse, we can't just accept the views of some articles, it's important to read lots, equally from both sides.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13182
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ColinS wrote: I have read

ColinS wrote:

I have read those articles several times in other debates I have been in.  I have found they are not straightforwards in their arguments.  For example, recieving heat from the sun does not somehow cause amino acids in a non-existant primordial soup to organize in a fashion that Astronomer Fred Hoyle calculated was 1 in 1 to the 40000 power chance of happening.  Counter-arguments to this type of reasoning can be found at...

http://www.trueorigin.org/steiger.asp

This one is probably the best

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/370.asp

 Also check out this quote by biological thermodynamicists Donald Haynie  "Any theory claiming to describe how organisms originate and continue to exist by natural causes must be compatible with the first and second laws of thermodynamics."[ (1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

 Just because there are refutations for an argument doesn't mean they rest there.  You have to follow the debate back and forth until you see where the buckstops.  If you take the time to examine the arguments and counter-arguments carefully creationism comes out on top for the most part.  Thanks for the reply!

Those sites have been completely refuted. Every creationist site has. Take a look at the site previously linked to. Just because we don't know if/when/how/etc something happened doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. Abiogenesis as the origin of life on Earth will never be proven to a creationist unless time travel is possible and becomes an option.
Evolution however is a different story. Creationists don't even know what evolution is, so any attempted refutation automatically backfires.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Rev_Devilin
Rev_Devilin's picture
Posts: 485
Joined: 2007-05-16
User is offlineOffline
Hi Colin I'm new here

Hi Colin

I'm new here myself

just a silly question 

in the ancient Hebrew language there was no J

Jehovah was in fact Iehovah

Jesus = Iesus 

? when you pray to Jesus did you realize you were pronouncing his name incorrectly

 

 


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
I find it most probable

(Edit to keep with the 'kindness' forum)   Thank you for starting this lovely thread.  I welcome you, and found your stories to use proper spelling.  However...

I find it most probable that Ray and Kirk's "true" cause is to rile up people in hopes that they buy...

 

The board game for 29.95

 

The DVD for $5

The book for 10.99

 

The other book for $2

 

Another book for $5.99

 

 

Another DVD for $20

 

 

The coke can test for $12

 

This thing for $7

 

For lovers of evidence, an evidence bible... $49.99

 

Yet another book... $14.99

 


I'm a bit surprised I can't find a quality bottle of snake oil in the Living Waters online store. Ray, Kirk, Todd and the rest of their "WOTM" team are charlatans, and they're just whipping up debate and attention so you buy their stuff.