BLASPHEMY: brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Jd JDay123 at BellSouth.net
Thu Dec 5 00:14:05 EST 2002


John Knight wrote: 

>
>"Whitey" <paulaw at attbi.com> wrote in message
>news:SKYG9.216042$P31.87192 at rwcrnsc53...
>>
>> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote in message
>> news:Cy9G9.39630$kz4.1847948 at news2.west.cox.net...
>> > "Gray Shockley" <gray at compcomm.com> wrote in message
>> > news:0001HW.BA0E767E0036A05A11C295D0 at news-central.giganews.com...
>> > > On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 1:14:49 -0600, John Knight wrote
>> > > (in message <JzZF9.33547$kz4.1646689 at news2.west.cox.net>):
>> > >
>> > > > It is BLASPHEMY to Our Lord Jesus Christ, to the Holy Bible, to the
>> 91%
>> > of
>> > > > Americans who REJECT the "theory of evolution", and to two billion
>> other
>> > > > Christians in the world, to proclaim that "we all came from the
>sea."
>> > >
>> > > --------------------------------------------------------
>> > >
>> > > And you are the representative for Jesus, for 91% of the U.S.
>population
>> > and
>> > > for the Holy Bible?
>> > >
>> > > Aren't you confusing yourself with God?
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > If you *really* think it requires God to read the surveys which report
>> that
>> > only 9% of Americans believe that "Human beings have developed over
>> millions
>> > of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this
>> process",
>> > then you *really* are a "liberal".
>> >
>> > To this amoral, thoughtless, amorphous, arrogant, ignorant 9%, a
>statement
>> > that we all came from the sea might sound perfectly ok.  But to the vast
>> > majority of the 93% who're putative Christians in this putative
>Christian
>> > nation, it's the sheer definition of BLASPHEMY.
>> >
>> > Until you change the dictionaries, or the law, or Christianity, or the
>> Holy
>> > Bible, or the US Constitution, it shall remain BLASPHEMY.
>> >
>> > John Knight
>> >
>> >
>> You're full of .hit, John. What surveys are you speaking of? And the
>> question as posed does NOT give the answer you think it does. The
>questuion
>> you quoted was - "Human beings have developed over millions
>> > of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this
>> process",
>> Well, hate to bust your bong bubble Forrest, but the evidence is
>absolutely
>> clear and irrefutable that humans DID develop over millions of years from
>> less advanced life forms, but science does not care whether god even
>exists
>> or whether he/she/it had a "hand" in said evolution, as such things are
>for
>> the theologans to ponder, not the scientists. The question forces people
>who
>> believe that evolution is reality but who also believe that god or some
>> higther power had a hand in it to choose between answering that they
>believe
>> that evolution does not exist or that god had no hand in evolution,
>neither
>> of which they actually believe. So they just chose the lesser of two
>evils.
>> You would be very disappointed if you asked that point as two seperate
>> questions rather than trying to force people into answering the question
>the
>> way you want to by skewing the question towards a predetermined premise.
>> That's dishonest at best, and desperate at worst. You may call it
>> "blasphemy" if you wish, but both Galileo and Copernicus were called
>> blasphemous for merely reporting the REALITY of what can be seen and
>> observed and PROVEN. And such charges of blasphemy did not alter said
>> reality, or cause the sun to orbit the earth, and neither will your empty
>> charges of blasphemy alter the truth and the reality that we have evolved
>> from far humbler things than your ego and closed-minded unthinking
>adherence
>> to a particular world view can allow you to admit. I dub thee Ramses, King
>> of Denial. Let me know when you manage to fire up your other rational
>neuron
>> there, John.
>>
>> Byte Me.
>> GARRYOWEN!
>>
>> P.S. What the .uck is this thread doing on soc.men in the first place
>> anyways? Give me one good reason why I shouldn't erase soc.men from the
>> header.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>Welcome to the 9% moronic minority, garryowen, made up mostly if not
>exclusively of jews, niggers, feminazis, latrinos, and other muds and
>"liberals".
>
>We already know how people would respond to the question, because they've
>already responded to it, and we already know that only 9% of Americans
>accept your "facts" as reality.
>
>The fact that half of American "scientists" also accept your "facts" as
>reality doesn't discredit creation or God--it discredits only those STUPIP
>afffirmative action "scientists", and the once-fine institutions of learning
>from which they stole their degrees.
>
>Your statement "science does not care whether god even exists or whether
>[He] had a 'hand in said evolution", defies logic as well as contradicts the
>dictionary definition of "science".  By doing that, you don't discredit
>"science"--you discredit yourself.
>
>John Knight
>
>
>ps--which surveys?  You got the url's, right?  Do they work?  Yup, just
>tried them:
>
>http://christianparty.net/gallupcreationscientists.htm
>
>http://christianparty.net/gallupcreation.htm
>
>pps-garryowen, if you have a point to make, then you should be able to make
>it sans all the profanity, blasphemy, and other firey rhetoric.  Your
>resorting to such tactics, which is what most "evolutionists" do when
>confronted with the facts, suggests that you can't support your position.

Right. So they spit, curse, and call anyone who disagrees with them
a "racist" or a cult member or both. 

Jd (snoring)





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list