dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
The audacity...
Bill O'Reilly...tell me you can do better than this... you can't be this stupid...
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by dame theory,
- Start date
The audacity...
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
The audacity...
D
Deleted member 43282
Guest
By the sound of it he is that stupid.
D
Deleted member 43282
Guest
By the sound of it he is that stupid.
- 2,885
- 11
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
call me crazy, but i understand his arguments, and he makes valid points
(not that i EVER agree with anything this man does.)
(not that i EVER agree with anything this man does.)
- 2,885
- 11
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
call me crazy, but i understand his arguments, and he makes valid points
(not that i EVER agree with anything this man does.)
(not that i EVER agree with anything this man does.)
- 30,083
- 21,472
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
$$$$$$$$$
- 30,083
- 21,472
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
$$$$$$$$$
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
"Stupid"
Hawking - Oxford
Behe - Penn
O'reilly - Harvard
Dame Theory - ?
The point is, none of these people are "stupid." Differing opinions on the origin of the universe, earth, species... do not make a person stupid, but rather, differing in their opinions.
Hawking - Oxford
Behe - Penn
O'reilly - Harvard
Dame Theory - ?
The point is, none of these people are "stupid." Differing opinions on the origin of the universe, earth, species... do not make a person stupid, but rather, differing in their opinions.
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
"Stupid"
Hawking - Oxford
Behe - Penn
O'reilly - Harvard
Dame Theory - ?
The point is, none of these people are "stupid." Differing opinions on the origin of the universe, earth, species... do not make a person stupid, but rather, differing in their opinions.
Hawking - Oxford
Behe - Penn
O'reilly - Harvard
Dame Theory - ?
The point is, none of these people are "stupid." Differing opinions on the origin of the universe, earth, species... do not make a person stupid, but rather, differing in their opinions.
- 143,428
- 172,597
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
Typical NT athiest thread
And I don't support Bill O'Reilly at all for the things he says but let people believe what they want to believe. No one's stupid because of what they believe in.
And I don't support Bill O'Reilly at all for the things he says but let people believe what they want to believe. No one's stupid because of what they believe in.
- 143,428
- 172,597
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
Typical NT athiest thread
And I don't support Bill O'Reilly at all for the things he says but let people believe what they want to believe. No one's stupid because of what they believe in.
And I don't support Bill O'Reilly at all for the things he says but let people believe what they want to believe. No one's stupid because of what they believe in.
- 2,418
- 585
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
I don't find anything wrong with either of the videos
- 2,418
- 585
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
I don't find anything wrong with either of the videos
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
The fact is...why the hell won't dude read a science book?
These are BELIEFS. His stance on what has already been explained should be ridiculed. If he read a paragraph of anything that answered this, he wouldn't say this stuff. Its sheer ignorance.
I'm not walking around saying God made my car because I didn't know it was made in a plant in japan.
That argument needs to be treated the SAME way.
These are BELIEFS. His stance on what has already been explained should be ridiculed. If he read a paragraph of anything that answered this, he wouldn't say this stuff. Its sheer ignorance.
I'm not walking around saying God made my car because I didn't know it was made in a plant in japan.
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
The fact is...why the hell won't dude read a science book?
These are BELIEFS. His stance on what has already been explained should be ridiculed. If he read a paragraph of anything that answered this, he wouldn't say this stuff. Its sheer ignorance.
I'm not walking around saying God made my car because I didn't know it was made in a plant in japan.
That argument needs to be treated the SAME way.
These are BELIEFS. His stance on what has already been explained should be ridiculed. If he read a paragraph of anything that answered this, he wouldn't say this stuff. Its sheer ignorance.
I'm not walking around saying God made my car because I didn't know it was made in a plant in japan.
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
How the Earth, moon and sun got here. How did the amoeba get here? Dame Theory, please provide your response, that is not a "theory."
The sun. The tide. O'reilly granted in the first video. Those comments are answered through simple science, agreed. O'reilly's point in both is from a creation aspect, neither of those issues are a focal point and were, I agree, poor form.
The sun. The tide. O'reilly granted in the first video. Those comments are answered through simple science, agreed. O'reilly's point in both is from a creation aspect, neither of those issues are a focal point and were, I agree, poor form.
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
How the Earth, moon and sun got here. How did the amoeba get here? Dame Theory, please provide your response, that is not a "theory."
The sun. The tide. O'reilly granted in the first video. Those comments are answered through simple science, agreed. O'reilly's point in both is from a creation aspect, neither of those issues are a focal point and were, I agree, poor form.
The sun. The tide. O'reilly granted in the first video. Those comments are answered through simple science, agreed. O'reilly's point in both is from a creation aspect, neither of those issues are a focal point and were, I agree, poor form.
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
A theory is a model used to describe phenomena. Saying God did it is a refusal to accept information but also a resort to ignorance. Its okay to say "I dont know." To say God did it means you KNOW God did it...which is in essence false.
You want my response? Look up abiogenesis and its surrounding theories. I can point you to information, I can't take the time to break it down for you.
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
A theory is a model used to describe phenomena. Saying God did it is a refusal to accept information but also a resort to ignorance. Its okay to say "I dont know." To say God did it means you KNOW God did it...which is in essence false.
You want my response? Look up abiogenesis and its surrounding theories. I can point you to information, I can't take the time to break it down for you.
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
To say anyone other than God did it means you KNOW that there was another cause of "it," which is in essence false.
Like you said, a theory is a model. As is hypothesis. It is not fact.
Do you understand the flaw yet?
Pointing me to abiogenesis is as futile as pointing someone to the Book of Genesis, Darwin's Black Box or any other Creationist "model."
Getting the point yet?
Like you said, a theory is a model. As is hypothesis. It is not fact.
Do you understand the flaw yet?
Pointing me to abiogenesis is as futile as pointing someone to the Book of Genesis, Darwin's Black Box or any other Creationist "model."
Getting the point yet?
- 90
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2001
To say anyone other than God did it means you KNOW that there was another cause of "it," which is in essence false.
Like you said, a theory is a model. As is hypothesis. It is not fact.
Do you understand the flaw yet?
Pointing me to abiogenesis is as futile as pointing someone to the Book of Genesis, Darwin's Black Box or any other Creationist "model."
Getting the point yet?
Like you said, a theory is a model. As is hypothesis. It is not fact.
Do you understand the flaw yet?
Pointing me to abiogenesis is as futile as pointing someone to the Book of Genesis, Darwin's Black Box or any other Creationist "model."
Getting the point yet?
- 2,418
- 585
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
If you listened closely instead of rushing to post these videos on NT, trying to downplay Christianity, you would realize that Bill O'Reilly's ultimate point is that he doesn't believe in all creation being a "mistake."
There are many other examples that support his arguments e.g. the Earth's axis, its distance and relation to the sun and moon, etc.
- 2,418
- 585
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
If you listened closely instead of rushing to post these videos on NT, trying to downplay Christianity, you would realize that Bill O'Reilly's ultimate point is that he doesn't believe in all creation being a "mistake."
There are many other examples that support his arguments e.g. the Earth's axis, its distance and relation to the sun and moon, etc.
dame theory
Banned
- 3,281
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
A. There is a common misunderstanding that "theory" in the scientific sense is equivalent to "hypothesis" and this always isn't true. The theory of evolution is called a theory when it in should be called a fact. Things like abiogenesis have been proven and replicated time and time again.
B. MERELY addressing the points Oreilly put up, all of his questions can be answered IN TOTALITY as we can not only show evidence of the formation of the solar system, we can also refer him to a plethora of astronomers that can witness this formation of planets and gases in other solar systems. Its real and it happens.
Comparing factual evidence to a book created by man to control man is irrelevant. There is more evidence to suggest God DIDNT do it than there is to say God DID do it. You are lying to yourself if you choose to ignore that. Additionally on that same note, there is more evidence to suggest spontaneous existence of life rather than creation of life.
...and Yes. OReilly is stupid. You can go to the best schools and have the best education and still be reluctant to have a basic understanding of elementary principles of science or be versed enough in the ability to think critically. For goodness sakes he can't explain the tides on the shore-line and thinks God does it. You can't argue with a man like that. Especially when he refuses to accept the explanation for it. ORielly even changes his answer to represent that he learned that the Moon impacts the tides. BEFORE this he said he didn't know that God did it. Do you not know the power of education? By virtue of an answer like that you can judge how else he might view the world. Lets not pretend OReilly has ever shown himself to be a representative of rationale on a consistent basis.
