Difference between revisions of "Talk:Debate: 15 questions for evolutionists"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Heresy hunting)
Line 88: Line 88:
 
::::AugustO, you still haven't answered all my questions.  For example, is the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck still in decline as far as continuing to lose members? It still appears to me that they are [http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/05/and-here-i-thought-slippery-slope-didnt.html on the slope]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:04, 12 January 2012 (EST)
 
::::AugustO, you still haven't answered all my questions.  For example, is the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck still in decline as far as continuing to lose members? It still appears to me that they are [http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/05/and-here-i-thought-slippery-slope-didnt.html on the slope]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:04, 12 January 2012 (EST)
 
:::Conservative, do you like anchovies on your pizza? I ask because it is about as relevant to this debate as where I went to school. If you want to debate the questions, feel free to add something to the debate page. How is the Question Evolution campaign going to cut global atheism by 50% without Conservative there to defend the 15 questions that every evolutionist can answer?[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 20:08, 12 January 2012 (EST)
 
:::Conservative, do you like anchovies on your pizza? I ask because it is about as relevant to this debate as where I went to school. If you want to debate the questions, feel free to add something to the debate page. How is the Question Evolution campaign going to cut global atheism by 50% without Conservative there to defend the 15 questions that every evolutionist can answer?[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 20:08, 12 January 2012 (EST)
 +
::::::One of the questions is: "Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes?".  I was just pointing out to AugustO that the evolutionism/liberal "Christianity" religion he is subscribing to is morally bankrupt, produces bad fruit and is in decline and the reason it is taught in science classes is that pretentious fraudulent shysters want to promote it. Anyone who has read [[evolution|this article]] or [[Atheism|this article]] and similar material on the internet (or simply honestly examined God's creation) is very aware of this matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:19, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Revision as of 01:19, January 13, 2012

Personal attacks

AugustO, I am sure the homosexual members of the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck that you belong to who were "married" in one of their "churches" are going to love the material you posted here. Liberals love error. By the way, what are your thoughts on the Conservapedia homosexuality article? Conservative 08:47, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Is there a reason you have deleted and then recreated this page without any of the preceding posts? It does seem rather arbitrary. Davidspencer 08:52, 12 January 2012 (EST)

User:Conservative, have you anything pertinent to contribute to the debate? Otherwise I just go to ignore your invectives. AugustO 08:59, 12 January 2012 (EST)

August), is your liberal Protestant denomination still declining in their membership? How is that church's embracing of Darwinist naturalist philosophy and liberalism working out for you guys? Any miracles happen in the last service you attended? "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20) "holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these." (2 Timothy 3:5) Conservative 09:07, 12 January 2012 (EST)

User:Conservative, the Question Evolution! campaign provides a list of questions to be asked, e.g. in school. What good are these questions when they can be answered - and these answers can't be rebutted, because those who should provide such rebuttals prefer to use their time to alienate their fellow Christians? AugustO 09:11, 12 January 2012 (EST)

AugustO, fellow Christians? You still haven't answered my questions from our last exchange or other questions I have. There have been too many heretical groups in history calling themselves Christians for me to automatically believe without due diligence that they are bona fide Christians. The fruit I have seen from my preliminary investigation is not encouraging. Conservative 09:24, 12 January 2012 (EST)
@user:Conservative: Concerning your first post here: I think I told you on the Community Portal, that AugustO's church does not marry homosexual couples. It is one of the things that is stated rather clearly on their German website...--VPropp 11:13, 12 January 2012 (EST)
True, you told me and did not show me. My preliminary research definitely leans towards them embracing this practice although it is not absolutely conclusive. Of course, this could better be cleared up if AugustO simply answers my questions. Conservative 09:48, 12 January 2012 (EST)
  • I doubt that there is anything I could write about me that would change your heart.
  • The answers to your questions can be found in the internet, I think you will have more trust in your own research than in any of my statements.
  • You seem to have not much of a problem to condemn the 900,000 members of the EKKW (or the 23,000,000 members of the EKD) as heretical! What does more harm: to condemn and insult a fellow Christian - or to engage respectfully in a debate with a member of one of the many heretical groups in history calling themselves Christians.
  • All of this doesn't matter when it comes to the 15 questions for evolutionists. Really, I don't know how you want to witness to any of the hostile atheists when you can't keep your cool in this sheltered environment?

AugustO 09:45, 12 January 2012 (EST)

AugustO, have homosexuals been "married" inside of Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck "churches"? It is an easy enough question for you to answer unless of course you want to hide something as liberals often want to do. Conservative 09:54, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Is this 15 questions for evolutionists or just simply 15 questions for AugustO? Adambro 09:55, 12 January 2012 (EST)

  • What has this to do with Debate: 15 questions for evolutionists? Is this a typical example of the tactic of diversion which is often used by liberals?
  • No "marriages" have been performed - but there may be congregations which have allowed "blessings".
AugustO 09:58, 12 January 2012 (EST)
Evobabbling, women "pastors" "blessing" homosexual "marriages", declining membership - the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck is on the slope. Of course, when you start flouting biblical authority and ignoring the large amount of evidence for the Bible, that's what happens. Conservative 10:23, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Thanks for your telediagnosis! Now, can we get to the debate at hand, or do you prefer to stick to personal attacks - at tactic often used by liberals? AugustO 10:26, 12 January 2012 (EST)

August, when you start presenting actual evidence instead of just-so stories and stop ignoring the large amount of evidence for the Bible and the effects of when a church does this, then we can start debating. Conservative 10:31, 12 January 2012 (EST)
August, by the way, what do you think of Conservapedia homosexuality article in terms of the factual evidence it presents? Conservative 10:35, 12 January 2012 (EST)

I don't see how the perceived decline of the EKKW has anything to do with the 15 questions - how does the very existence of a church you hadn't heard of a month ago can influence your evidence? Please, stop obfuscating (a tactic often used by liberals), and try to support the Question Evolution! Campaign. AugustO 10:44, 12 January 2012 (EST)

I am just point out through the social science of history using church history in particular what happens when churches put on their liberal evobabble skiis and liberalism ideology goggles and start going down the slope - moral depravity and the condoning of the behavior of pretentious fraudulent shysters such as User: RudrichBoucher. Conservative 11:03, 12 January 2012 (EST)
I'm intrigued, the history of which churches have you looked at? The accusation of moral depravity was used during the Reformation quite often and on both sides. Yet Catholicism and reformed churches still flourish.--VPropp 11:13, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Thanks for pointing out! Now I can see the following dialogue happening somewhere in Texas:

  • Pupil: Here are fifteen questions you can't answer, Mr. Evolutionist-Teacher!
  • Teacher: Well, let's see. Question One isn't that difficult to answer - Darwin's 1859 book was called On the Origin of Species, not On the Origin of Life, his theory didn't cover the very beginnings of life, but what happened when speciation started. Similarly, we have helpful physical theories about the behavior of objects in the universe, though there is a scientific debate about the creation of the universe... So, what do you say?
  • Pupil: RudricBoucher is a pretentious fraudulent shyster!

Yes, that will show the teacher! AugustO 11:14, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Hi AugustO, I've always found this answer (Evolution is about origin of species not origin of life) quite lazy. If you contest the fact that God created the species as they are today, you will have to provide an explanation for the beginning of life as well. To me, it's a bit like saying "I don't know how the thief got into the house, I just study how he stole the money"... --PhilipN 15:24, 12 January 2012 (EST)
By the way, I thought you had more than just 3 answers ?--PhilipN 15:26, 12 January 2012 (EST)
  • To provide a theory of everything is a little bit to ambitious for me - most theories have a more or less well-defined area which they are covering: Quantum mechanics starts to explain much of the world shortly after the big bang (if there was one). And there may be specialists who are only looking how the safe was opened in the burglary without knowing how the thief entered the house. Their expertise may help to solve find the criminals. But you should state you rebuttal in the actual debate.
  • I hadn't contributed to the previous version of the debate. There have been more answers to the questions, but they were deleted. I can't reconstruct them on my own...
AugustO 15:44, 12 January 2012 (EST)
  • So, should we add our arguments directly into the debate page, isn't it going to be messy ?
  • Oh, I had not noticed that the previous version had been deleted... I believe this is the consequence of an edit war with a senior admin !--PhilipN 15:54, 12 January 2012 (EST)

VPropp, Western Roman Catholicism which has many members which have embraced liberalism and evolutionism (particularly starting in the 1950's and accelerating post 1960's), is not flourishing and is: bleeding members, plagued with scandals and experiencing a shortage of priests. It is not uncommon for Jesuits in academia to claim the Bible is riddled with historical error, etc. etc. Conservative 17:11, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Heresy hunting

"Conservative", if you're really on the lookout for the "many heretical groups in history calling themselves Christians" why don't you start with Uncle Ed? I guarantee you that no matter what August's church believes, it doesn't include the idea that Jesus is a rich old Korean guy who owns the Washington Times. --MarkSpace 11:18, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Lately, my editing at this wiki has been on the world economy, the 2012 U.S Presidential election and the Question evolution! campaign (which will accelerate the global decline of atheism). I will paraphrase and take liberties with a quote a relative of mine said to me: "In life, you have to pick your battles" (the actual quote related to his relationship with his wife). While it is certainly possible for me to battle every religious faith different from my own and every false ideology (Darwinism, liberalism), ultimately I am a mere mortal (or perhaps several). :) Of course, if Richard Dawkins' wacky false ideology (which is bereft of evidence and counter to the vast evidence we have for Christianity) were true, I could easily be an advanced piece of artificial intelligence left by little green men who were the product of Darwinian evolution! Conservative 16:46, 12 January 2012 (EST)
User:Conservative, applying the defintion of Christianity that you seem so fond of using (capitalist, anti-homosexuality, pro-life, anti-evolution, democratic) the number of real Christians might be between 60 and 100 million globally. You seem to lack any sort of imagination of other countries or understanding that their structures, as much the American structures, are fundamentally different rom each other. Quite frankly, I and most other people would say that upon reading this discussion, you belong in a mental asylum. As I have lived in Germany all my life, it is very probable that that was were the German authorities would put you. And I believe they would be right in doing so. --NekD 17:38, 12 January 2012 (EST)
NekD, I would suggest using Firefox as it finds typos and misspellings. You misspelled the word definition. Second, please demonstrate I have defined Christianity in the exact manner you have claimed (for example, I personally believe in a republic with a representative government rather than a democracy plus capitalism. Plus, where have I said that biblical Christianity precisely prescribes a certain form of government or economics?). Third, you seem to be quite angry and have a penchant for armchair internet pop psychological diagnosis. I think I struck a nerve and pointed out some unpleasant truths for you. Often, the bitten dog yelps the loudest! Lastly, consider reading this essay. Conservative 18:10, 12 January 2012 (EST)
Really? Are you that stupid not to recognize trolling? Have you so gotten used to being called insane that it doesn't even jump out at you?
Most people will believe the exact opposite of what you tell them, Ken DeMyer, that it because you are so often wrong people have stopped counting the times you are wrong and started counting the times you are right. --NekD 18:22, 12 January 2012 (EST)

User:Conservative, you should follow your own advice. Then you wouldn't have to erase revisions to cover up your mistakes while lecturing others on theirs! AugustO 18:20, 12 January 2012 (EST)

NekD, I see you are unable to back your claim that I have defined Christianity in the precise manner that you claimed I did - very telling. :) Second, I am used to armchair internet psychological diagnosises by some very angry and frustrated members of a certain website who have many members afflicted with Severe Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder. :) However, I don't give credence to the obsessive ruminations of atheist clowns. By the way, no true skeptic claims to know my/our name. :) Conservative 18:35, 12 January 2012 (EST)
Hi Conservative, I've seen you say "no true skeptic claims to know my/our name" a couple of time and I was wondering, what do you mean by that ?--PhilipN 19:07, 12 January 2012 (EST)


User:Conservative, earlier I tried to answer one of your questions... AugustO 19:08, 12 January 2012 (EST)

AugustO, that was not the question I specifically asked. Oftentimes, liberals engage in the style over substance fallacy rather than address the facts I present so I can understand your reluctance to address central issues. Once again, you prove to be a slippery character who fails to address the relevant questions I ask. Conservative 19:16, 12 January 2012 (EST)
  • LOL* taking into account your comments on this very page, this is the funniest thing I have seen today! AugustO 19:20, 12 January 2012 (EST)
PhilipN, see symptom #8. Often, people with SCOCD like to obsess about various Conservapedia Admins, but unfortunately for them their one-way obsessions are unrequited obsessions not shared by the targets of their obsession. Conservative 19:23, 12 January 2012 (EST)
AugustO, I was just trying to be helpful. He had two typos in his post to me. I merely made a single helpful suggestion. I didn't desperately create a whole web page of material indicating I had style over substance issues when it comes to my debate opponents that I was obviously losing to like you unfortunately did. Conservative 19:27, 12 January 2012 (EST)

d. Conservative 19:27, 12 January 2012 (EST)

I'd like to point out that every question on the page has an evolutionist response as of writing, and it is not looking good for the Question Evolution campaign. Maybe it should be changed from "15 questions evolutionists cant answer" to "A fifteen question exam on basic high school evolutionary biology, with some weird, bizarrely vague questions thrown in."TonyPark 19:42, 12 January 2012 (EST)
Tony, do you attend a public school? The reason I ask is that in many public schools it doesn't matter if the answers to questions on tests are wrong answers or poorly answered, they still pass the students onto the next grade level. Tony, it appears as if you don't yet understand that poorly answered questions deserve a failing grade. Conservative 19:54, 12 January 2012 (EST)

User:Conservative, I created a whole web page discussed the first sections of your article on homosexuality on its talk-page. Judging from the corrections you made to the article afterwards I get the impression that I not only tried, but actually succeeded in being helpful! You're welcome!

As for losing the debate - where is this debate? I can find only personal attacks, while I am waiting for your rebuttals to evolutionists' responses.

AugustO 19:59, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Now I can see the following dialogue happening somewhere in Texas:

  • Pupil: Here are fifteen questions you can't answer, Mr. Evolutionist-Teacher!
  • Teacher: Well, let's see. Question One isn't that difficult to answer - Darwin's 1859 book was called On the Origin of Species, not On the Origin of Life, his theory didn't cover the very beginnings of life, but what happened when speciation started. Similarly, we have helpful physical theories about the behavior of objects in the universe, though there is a scientific debate about the creation of the universe... So, what do you say?
  • Pupil: RudricBoucher is a pretentious fraudulent shyster!

Yes, that will show the teacher! AugustO 11:14, 12 January 2012 (EST)

AugustO, you still haven't answered all my questions. For example, is the Evangelical Church of Hesse Electorate-Waldeck still in decline as far as continuing to lose members? It still appears to me that they are on the slope. Conservative 20:04, 12 January 2012 (EST)
Conservative, do you like anchovies on your pizza? I ask because it is about as relevant to this debate as where I went to school. If you want to debate the questions, feel free to add something to the debate page. How is the Question Evolution campaign going to cut global atheism by 50% without Conservative there to defend the 15 questions that every evolutionist can answer?TonyPark 20:08, 12 January 2012 (EST)
One of the questions is: "Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes?". I was just pointing out to AugustO that the evolutionism/liberal "Christianity" religion he is subscribing to is morally bankrupt, produces bad fruit and is in decline and the reason it is taught in science classes is that pretentious fraudulent shysters want to promote it. Anyone who has read this article or this article and similar material on the internet (or simply honestly examined God's creation) is very aware of this matter. Conservative 20:19, 12 January 2012 (EST)