Posted on 04/29/2013 10:55:17 AM PDT by imardmd1
They (the so-called Christians) used the term first. As for the rest of what you say, I really don’t care about the anti-christian left. I am no part of them and they are no part of me.
Glad to see you watched the video. It was hilarious, wasn’t it?
“but I would never hold out Michael Mann as an exemplar of a good scientist in any case.”
Too bad; you already did. See post 31.
“There are other, better, examples of former warmists who have had the scales removed from their eyes. I just don’t want to take the time to dig them out on behalf of someone who wouldn’t be grateful.”
Honestly, this is the genuine truth: I’m trying to stop LOL sufficiently to type. That is the weakest post I’ve ever read on such a thread. It’s its own parody; nothing I can say cd possibly improve on it. If you had to lose the argument [& you did], thanks for losing in such a hysterically funny way. The comedy is much appreciated.
I guess it is you after all. I NEVER have had any regard for Michael Mann. You are a straight up liar. Weak assed lamer, can’t do research, want others to do your legwork, get lost.
“I NEVER have had any regard for Michael Mann.”
That’s why you cited him in post 31 as a scientist who had changed his position on global warming. Because you had no regard for him.
Sorry, that makes no sense. Why cite him at all, if you hold him in such disregard? You destroyed your own case; never a good move. If you imagine that standing up for the ‘scientific’ side of the argument means descending to this level of invective, you lose the argument twice.
Neither does your over-the-top hostility. Are personal/ad hominem attacks a rational response to being challenged? I gotta tell you, it makes you look illogical at best. If you imagine that standing up for the ‘scientific’ side of the issue means descending to this level of personal invective, you lose the argument twice.
LOL, between saying things like “(the so-called Christians)” and calling Christians “taliban”, I think you are pretty transparent and contradict your claim of “I really don’t care about the anti-christian left. I am no part of them and they are no part of me.”.
Your reason will not save you.
<><><
Then why do you muddy the waters with a reference to factual scientific observations at all?
Would your faith be insufficient without the appeal to science?
I never knew of a passage in the Bible where He says there is no such thing as evolution. I look forward to you posting that piece of scripture.
Seems pretty improbable to me, but who knows what will happen.
Sakic, it’s not improbable. It’s impossible. Protein, blood, soft-tissue—they cannot & do not remain intact for even one million yrs. This is a fact. 65-68 million yrs is so far out of the realm of possibility, it’s beyond description. Blood just doesn’t last that long under any circumstances.
Yet soft tissue, blood, etc., was found in the thigh bone of a T-Rex. This actually happened. If there was a single honest scientist on the evolutionary side, they wd have rushed to the nearest mic & announced the entire ‘science’ is a fraud. It’s all a lie. The scientific evidence just disproved it’.
Iow, the discovery of soft, flexible tissue inside a T-Rex thigh bone is so contrary to the foundation of evolutionary science as to negate it in total. But it didn’t because evolution isn’t really a ‘science’. It’s a faith system, & therefore nothing negates it. Its adherents merely ignore what doesn’t fit, & continue looking for evidence that actually does fit. This is what they will always do, because they are emotionally wedded to the theory.
Here is the link about the soft T-Rex tissue. It’s the last full section of the article, entitled “Dinosaur Soft Tissues and Blood”. I hope you will give it a read. It could change your views.
Sorry; forgot to actually paste in the link. [I’m multi-tasking, & it shows.]
http://www.detectingdesign.com/fossilrecord.html
And you are an ignorant know-nothing. You need to get control of your typewriter before it exposes more of your ignorance.
Maybe so, but you can bet your life that it is NOT T. Rex soft tissue, blood, etc.
Like you say, that would be impossible. "...so far out of the realm of possibility, it’s beyond description," is the way you put it.
I agree.
You post even ONE legitimate reference that demonstrates the present day existence of T. Rex soft tissue, and there is a Nobel Prize in there for someone.
And it isn't T. Rex tissue, then what's the fuss?
The information is at the link.
ROTFL, that was very intelligent and classy.
People who dislike Christianity so much are often very ill-tempered.
As I re-read this post I have been forced to conclude that the reason for your adherence to nonsense is that you cannot reason through a single thought from beginning to end.
I made it clear from the start that I had no regard for Michael Mann. That’s why I used the words “of ‘hockey-stick’ notoriety”. That was apparently too abstract for you. Why cite him - because he is a warmist! I have no respect for any of the warmist so called scientists, but the request was for one who had listened to the evidence, finally. You and he are of a cloth, both of you hold to views that are unsupported by any evidence, but abjure others with greater perception and understanding.
As for destroying my own case, I really have no “case”. YOU are the one advancing an ideology. I don’t have to justify my rejection of either yours or Michael Mann’s.
A pox on you both.
Actually, I'm rather well disposed to Christianity. It's dumbasses of all persuasions that get my ire up.
If I could identify a single rational thought/idea in your entire post, I’d respond to it.
PS: Are ‘poxes’ really scientific? I had no idea....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.