Conquer Club

An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

What are the facts? Please keep an open mind and read the article first before casting your vote.

 
Total votes : 0

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Neoteny on Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:46 am

That quote checks out. This fact does not compute.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:59 am

I saw this today and thought of creationists:

Image
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby MeDeFe on Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:35 am

jonesthecurl wrote:
He who begins by loving Christianity better than Truth will proceed by loving his own sect or church better than Christianity, aned end by loving himself better than all.

(Coleridge)

Not as big a toilet-head as Asimov then, I take it.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby jonesthecurl on Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:16 pm

I believe that Coleridge was a dope-head, not a toilet-head. I could be wrong.
instagram.com/garethjohnjoneswrites
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 4444
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby betiko on Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:43 pm

viceroy has challenged me in a trench warfare game

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23562&p=4068644#p4068644

looking for some trips/quads for a evolutionists/creationists smackdown; who's up for team evolution?
Image
User avatar
Major betiko
 
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Location: location, location
22

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:50 pm

jonesthecurl wrote:
He who begins by loving Christianity better than Truth will proceed by loving his own sect or church better than Christianity, aned end by loving himself better than all.
(Coleridge)

Nice quote. I will have to save that one!
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:33 pm

betiko wrote:viceroy has challenged me in a trench warfare game

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 4#p4068644

looking for some trips/quads for a evolutionists/creationists smackdown; who's up for team evolution?


I'm down* (edit) for Team Evo.

In the medieval ages, truth was ascertained through duel, so my CC brothers and sisters, let us take up the good fight.
Last edited by BigBallinStalin on Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:07 am

I'm in for Team Evolution! :twisted:
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:56 am

I have too much of an irregular schedule right now to participate in games.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby mejihn7779 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:18 am

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here is the science behind creation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY
Sergeant 1st Class mejihn7779
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:34 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby comic boy on Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:47 am

mejihn7779 wrote:Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here is the science behind creation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY


The guys 'proof ' is an article he wrote himself , solid science that :lol:
Im a TOFU miSfit
User avatar
Brigadier comic boy
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:54 pm
Location: London

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:17 pm

comic boy wrote:
mejihn7779 wrote:Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here is the science behind creation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY


The guys 'proof ' is an article he wrote himself , solid science that :lol:


Einsteins 'proof' was an article that he wrote himself also. :lol:

But nobody denies the logic behind the theory of relativity. :lol:

Did you really understand that explanation? :lol:

Here, watch it again...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z43s4tx9CxM

Now obviously these explanation don't explain the distances of light years that we see from the universe so there must be something else here not covered. Yet!
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby comic boy on Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:42 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
comic boy wrote:
mejihn7779 wrote:Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here is the science behind creation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY


The guys 'proof ' is an article he wrote himself , solid science that :lol:


Einsteins 'proof' was an article that he wrote himself also. :lol:

But nobody denies the logic behind the theory of relativity. :lol:

Did you really understand that explanation? :lol:

Here, watch it again...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z43s4tx9CxM

Now obviously these explanation don't explain the distances of light years that we see from the universe so there must be something else here not covered. Yet!


Einsteins theory was accepted because of peer review and validation , thats how science works , how many of your creationist fantasies have been peer reviewed and validated ?
Im a TOFU miSfit
User avatar
Brigadier comic boy
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:54 pm
Location: London

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:45 pm

By Creationist; All of them!

And it's still science if the observations are logical.

The question is really why would a logically concluding theory be accepted while another logically concluding theory not be accepted?

I have a theory that explains this. People who simply want to "kill" God, do not accept any logically concluding Theory that has anything to do with God.
Last edited by Viceroy63 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AndyDufresne on Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:50 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
comic boy wrote:
mejihn7779 wrote:Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but here is the science behind creation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X9eDTNfQHY


The guys 'proof ' is an article he wrote himself , solid science that :lol:


Einsteins 'proof' was an article that he wrote himself also. :lol:

But nobody denies the logic behind the theory of relativity. :lol:

i r agree

Image


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Frigidus on Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:44 am

Seriously though, people need to stop posting videos and start typing out their arguments. I am just straight up not going to watch a half hour video. I value my time too much.
User avatar
Sergeant Frigidus
 
Posts: 1638
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:15 pm
Location: Illinois, USA

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:42 am

Frigidus wrote:Seriously though, people need to stop posting videos and start typing out their arguments. I am just straight up not going to watch a half hour video. I value my time too much.


I watched long enough to see the first claim. It said that the galaxies are winding up too fast, and starts the explanation by saying that the stars at the center of a galaxy are moving much faster than the stars at the edges of a galaxy, and this would lead to an effect where the galaxy would wind up down to a much smaller, more dense cluster of stars and planets in less than 300 million years, therefore disproving that galaxies can be 10 billion years old as taught by current cosmology.

Then I went and googled the actual facts, and guess what? All stars, the ones near the middle and the ones at the edge, are moving at roughly the same speed. The ones in the middle aren't moving faster at all. They have greater angular momentum because they are closer to the center and so they take less time to move one circuit around the center, but they have around the same basic speed as the stars at the edge. Therefore the argument this guys starts out with is pure BS.

Having wasted 10 minutes of my life watching that far and googling for the facts I decided not to waste any more time listening to the other lies he's been paid to whore his PhD's credibility out to tell...
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby betiko on Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:02 am

bring on your creationist team viceroy (if you can find 2, i doubt it!), we're game with bbs and crispybits to solve this on the battlefield. whoever loses stops posting on this thread! :)

if your imaginary friend exists he will give your team the dice I guess.
Image
User avatar
Major betiko
 
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Location: location, location
22

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:04 am

Frigidus wrote:Seriously though, people need to stop posting videos and start typing out their arguments. I am just straight up not going to watch a half hour video. I value my time too much.

From here forth, I promise the only videos I'll post will be related to Futurama.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AAFitz on Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:06 am

betiko wrote:bring on your creationist team viceroy (if you can find 2, i doubt it!), we're game with bbs and crispybits to solve this on the battlefield. whoever loses stops posting on this thread! :)

if your imaginary friend exists he will give your team the dice I guess.


oh, lets make a whole damn tourney out of it...Im in

It will be the perfect match...Knowledge of mathematics, psychological theory, and probability vs pure luck.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby comic boy on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:21 am

Viceroy63 wrote:By Creationist; All of them!

And it's still science if the observations are logical.

The question is really why would a logically concluding theory be accepted while another logically concluding theory not be accepted?

I have a theory that explains this. People who simply want to "kill" God, do not accept any logically concluding Theory that has anything to do with God.



So basicly you dont understand the concept of Peer review :lol:
Im a TOFU miSfit
User avatar
Brigadier comic boy
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:54 pm
Location: London

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AAFitz on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:26 am

Viceroy63 wrote:By Creationist; All of them!

And it's still science if the observations are logical.

The question is really why would a logically concluding theory be accepted while another logically concluding theory not be accepted?

I have a theory that explains this. People who simply want to "kill" God, do not accept any logically concluding Theory that has anything to do with God.


I hate to poke another hole in another one of your "theories", but many of the scientists that you suggest want to "kill" God, actively believe and worship him as well, but still believe in evolution, because the actual science behind it, is beyond reproach.

It is you that have let your beliefs affect your view of the evidence, and are therefore the illogical one, and as such, perhaps the most hypocritical being in existence....and if that's a stretch, which it is, certainly you hold the crown in CC land.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:10 pm

Youtube Video "Evolutionist Dirty Little Secret" at the bottom of this comment.
Thank you.

AAFitz wrote:
Viceroy63 wrote:By Creationist; All of them!

And it's still science if the observations are logical.

The question is really why would a logically concluding theory be accepted while another logically concluding theory not be accepted?

I have a theory that explains this. People who simply want to "kill" God, do not accept any logically concluding Theory that has anything to do with God.


I hate to poke another hole in another one of your "theories", but many of the scientists that you suggest want to "kill" God, actively believe and worship him as well, but still believe in evolution, because the actual science behind it, is beyond reproach.

It is you that have let your beliefs affect your view of the evidence, and are therefore the illogical one, and as such, perhaps the most hypocritical being in existence....and if that's a stretch, which it is, certainly you hold the crown in CC land.


Please, Poke away! And don't let the fact that you twist my words bother you in the slightest, while you're doing all of your "poking away." OK. ;)

I never said "scientist" who want to kill God but rather "People," as in people in general of whom some of them do play the role of the "scientist" from time to time. But it's People who generally want to Kill God.

There are true Scientist out there and they do go on record for being anti-envolutionist. Because the theory of evolution has no foundation to go against established facts. You and I for example, are compose of carbon based molecules. That is to say dirt of the earth. Who established this fact before scientist ever figured it out? The Bible did of course.

"And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground..."
Genesis 2:7

If the Bible was so full of shit as some would presume it is, then how would it get so many things right, and right of the bat as it does? If it is merely some fable then why did this imaginary god not make man from fire or star light? The facts are the facts and they are recorded for us to see in the bible first, before any so called scientist actually figured them out.

But here also is my point. If all of those, so called God of the Bible, and that is what I am talking about, "God of the Bible" believing scientist; If those so called scientist who believe in the theory of evolution are actually God fearing, God believing Christians, then how can they also go against the very words of God and say that Man evolved from a common ancestor of lower form of animals on the planet? When the Bible specifically states that the only evolution that actually took place was that of Dirt evolving into Man in a mere matter of moments?

I would think that any scientist who believes that man evolved from lower life forms and at the same time consider themselves "believers" of god??? Well, these are the true hypocrites and thank you for pointing that out to us.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjprkQbOouQ
Last edited by Viceroy63 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby mejihn7779 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:12 pm

I find it interesting that none of the supporters of evolution were willing to watch any more than 10 minutes of the videos. That's like listening to a hypothesis and saying it's wrong or useless before giving the person a chance to explain. I dare any of the evolution supporters to watch both the videos & refute all his evidence. I BET YOU CAN'T!
Sergeant 1st Class mejihn7779
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:34 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AAFitz on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:17 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
Viceroy63 wrote:By Creationist; All of them!

And it's still science if the observations are logical.

The question is really why would a logically concluding theory be accepted while another logically concluding theory not be accepted?

I have a theory that explains this. People who simply want to "kill" God, do not accept any logically concluding Theory that has anything to do with God.


I hate to poke another hole in another one of your "theories", but many of the scientists that you suggest want to "kill" God, actively believe and worship him as well, but still believe in evolution, because the actual science behind it, is beyond reproach.

It is you that have let your beliefs affect your view of the evidence, and are therefore the illogical one, and as such, perhaps the most hypocritical being in existence....and if that's a stretch, which it is, certainly you hold the crown in CC land.


Please, Poke away! And don't let the fact that you twist my words bother you in the slightest, while you're doing all of your "poking away." OK. ;)

I never said "scientist" who want to kill God but rather "People," as in people in general of whom some of them do play the role of the "scientist" from time to time. But it's People who generally want to Kill God.

There are true Scientist out there and they do go on record for being anti-envolutionist. Because the theory of evolution has no foundation to go against established facts. You and I for example, are compose of carbon based molecules. That is to say dirt of the earth. Who established this fact before scientist ever figured it out? The Bible did of course.

"And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground..."
Genesis 2:7

If the Bible was so full of shit as some would presume it is, then how would it get so many things right, and right of the bat as it does? If it is merely some fable then why did this imaginary god not make man from fire or star light? The facts are the facts and they are recorded for us to see in the bible first, before any so called scientist actually figured them out.

But here also is my point. If all of those called God of the Bible, and that is what I am talking about, "God of the Bible" believing scientist; If those scientist who believe in the theory of evolution are actually God fearing, God believing Christians, then how can they also go against the very words of God and say that Man evolved from a common ancestor of lower form of animals on the planet? When the Bible specifically states that the only evolution that actually took place was that of Dirt evolving into Man in a mere matter of moments?

I would think that any scientist who believes that man evolved from lower life forms and at the same time consider themselves "believers" of god??? Well, these are the true hypocrites and thank you for pointing that out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjprkQbOouQ


Well, as far as twisting your words....Scientists are people too. :lol: And its scientists, even believers that most contest your insane lack of knowledge on the subject.

And its not hypocritical at all to believe in an omnipotent being that set up a universe in which animals evolved from one another over millions of years. In fact, its just stupid, to think hed have done it any other way really.

Your bible description is just sloppy and the work of an amateur. The real universe is infinitely more beautiful than the fantasy you have chosen to believe in. That, is the hypocricy of your entire life's beliefs, from what Ive seen you post in here.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jusplay4fun