Posted on 07/03/2006 10:05:56 AM PDT by doc30
Bald face lie.
I was the person you were addressing and I never even remotely implied what you say. Not even close.
We asked the question why was someone posting a nonchristian/pro-evolution cartoon on a conservative board.
I said he implied that only christians can be conservatives. Thats exactly what he did. You then attacked me when I said Christians who believe that only Christians can be conservatives should join their ignorant brethern on the left. You then proceeded to twist and turn what I said to imply I said all Christian which i did not say and haven't said yet.
The only liar here is you because this is I believe the third time zi have had to repeat exactly what I said in this thread because you seek to twist the words everytime you post.
You obviously believe that only Christians can be conservatives or you would have shut your mouth about this as I have clarified a statement that has needed no clarification all these times.
Tell me you dont believe that and we can all just go our own way or admit the truth and out yourself as one of the morons I have been ranting about.
I find birds fascinating, especially the more intelligent species like parrots and crows. They are so like us yet so different-- intelligent, visually and verbally oriented creatures like ourselves, but in every other way they're different.
In the last post that should start HE not We
No, he said specifically that he wanted white Christians who believed in Creation to join the Democrats. When I called him on it, he accused me of being a Nazi.
I cannot conceive of anyone so ignorant as to deny your place as a conservative because of your religion. But, if you say someone has, I believe you.
Perhaps you aren't the person to whom the comment was intended.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1659759/reply?c=11
Even if the post was addrssed to you, it may have been a slip.
Sorry, I slipped.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1659759/posts?page=11#11
Even though this article doesn't mention it, it seems red-green color blindness would be very similar, if not identical to the dichromatic vision of other mammals. So your family members may have color perception similar to a dog or cat.
<aybe you need a course in remedial reading. I never said white Christian who believe in creation needed to join the libs. I said white cristians who believe only Christians can be conservatives and I have said that ten times already read it read it now.
Do you think the structure of the eye disproves evolution?
I'm sorry i am posting frustrated and I am not spell checking or rereading these posts. I can't stand to be accussed of things I didnt say.
Please find the post where I even remotely implied that only Christians can be conservative. Go ahead. Back up your lunatic attacks. Go ahead.
And I twisted and turned nothing. Your posts are still there, as are mine. Yours contain lies about me, mine contain no lies about you or anyone else.
And, no. I do not think that only Christians can be conservatives. That is ignorant. Almost as ignorant as your inane rantings.
The only moron on this thread is you, bud.
My point is that evolution can produce what we would call forward and backward changes. If adaptation to a simpler form is beneficial, it can be selected naturally. In other words, evolution is not a one-way street. My point behind the eye discussion is that many creationists claim eye complexity discredits evolution. The example for humans shows that eye complexity can be reduced by evolution. The article did not also meantion the lack of color filtering oils in mammilian vision. These oil droplets in non-mammilian eyes actuially increases color acuity and contrast. So human eyes have lost 2 major components for color vision.
Your not even the person I was responding to at first. You just jumped in and started defending him after I posted that his view were moronic. You posted at me first bud, and you are the one that looks like an idiot for attacking me for three pages after I have said over and over again, the same thing you are now calling ignorant.
You did the stupid "I have to defend the poor Christian" routine even if the poor Christian your defending is a mouth breathing racist idiot. Stop doing that, if you think the thing I am attacking about the person is ignorant look before you leap.
Hell, you have even had several people on this board try to explain to you what I said and it still took you this long to figure out I was right and now you're still insulting me.
I'm a parrot owner, too, and was wondering about theri vision. Do you suppose it would be possible to train a bird to distinguish betwwen UV colored and non-UV colored objects? They could be UV-seeing guide birds for us UV blind humans!
God, people like this make me so angry.
Me insulting you?
Hilarious. You're the one who called me a Nazi.
And, as I have stated before, I defended NO ONE. I just called you on your bigotry. Then, you went berserk.
Possibly, but there are a number of different variations on color vision among humans. The most common one may be as you describe. The interesting thng is that color deficiency varies with luminosity. Color blind people can often distinguish colors better in bright light.
"Its such a shock that we are at the top of the food chain despite being "de-evolved."
Try swimming off the Great Barrier Reef at night and see who's on top of the food chain.
According to creationist information, there is no variation between 'kinds', but there can be within 'kinds'. So you are not saying that a change from a species with legs to one without is not a change of kind? Even your own logic is counter to prevailing creationist rationale. And it does not include the evolution of the legs first, then the subsequent loss. You have to look at the whole genetic heirarchial history and not just one form to the next.
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.