Homoerotic Creationism - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-10-2006, 04:36 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:41 AM
Homoerotic Creationism

With Growing Pains Kirk Cameron

Bananas Proof Of Creation

The argument is that the banana is perfectly "designed" for people to hold and this disproves "evolutionists" wrong, I have two retorts

1) The Banana is a domesticated plant, it has been artifically selected by human beings to be the best possible fruit ~ there are no wild bananas that like a modern banana, we have selected them to have all the attributes.

2) Pineapples, how are they designed for human hands
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 04:41 AM   #2
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,349
Local Time: 03:41 PM
Kirk Cameron said the banana is an argument for creationism?
__________________

__________________
blueyedpoet is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 04:48 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 11:41 AM
"It's pointed at the top for easy entry."

Indeed!

My god it's like a commercial for the penis!
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 05:40 AM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:41 AM
I wonder why those that seem so vehemently opposed to the principle of selective pressures on infinitely varying replicators are the ones that do so much of the replicating, it's as if biology wants to outbreed those that elucidate it's principles, then I am reminded that regardless of belief the base sexuality still permeates through
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 05:51 AM   #5
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,349
Local Time: 03:41 PM
What if the belief in creationism is selected for?
__________________
blueyedpoet is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 06:13 AM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:41 AM
In some ways I suppose that it is, since it isn't the pro-choice atheists who are having kids.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 06:30 AM   #7
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:41 AM
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 08:16 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:41 AM
So how does "intelligent design" explain the appendix? Or the spleen? Get a certain disease and it bleeds to the point that it has to be removed.

How about cancer? Tumor suppression is controlled by one gene--and it's one gene that's easily mutated/corrupted, so that's why we have so much cancer, despite having a genetic protection against it.

What about genetic diseases? Where's the "intelligent design" in fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP), where those afflicted gradually are paralyzed and turn to bone?

And how about pregnancy in itself? It's thought that 80% of fertilized eggs naturally never attach to the uterus, so they are, by some definitions, naturally aborted. Beyond that, where's the "intelligent design" in growing a tail in utero, and then shedding it (or, in some instances, not shedding it and being born with a tail)?

And where's the "intelligent design" in the fact that every early fetus has *both* male and female sex organs, and a complex coordination of approximately eight hormones between the mother and fetus in a narrow window in the third month creates a male or female child? Where do the intersexed, XY females, and the infertile fall in "intelligent design"?

Where do children born with only a brain stem and die within the first week of birth fall in "intelligent design"?

"Intelligent design" advocates are idiots. And, yes, Kirk Cameron, the fucking banana is domesticated.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 08:58 AM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Suddenly Alan Thicke looks like a Mensa member
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 10:01 AM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BrownEyedBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Posts: 3,510
Local Time: 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
So how does "intelligent design" explain the appendix? Or the spleen? Get a certain disease and it bleeds to the point that it has to be removed.

How about cancer? Tumor suppression is controlled by one gene--and it's one gene that's easily mutated/corrupted, so that's why we have so much cancer, despite having a genetic protection against it.

What about genetic diseases? Where's the "intelligent design" in fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP), where those afflicted gradually are paralyzed and turn to bone?

And how about pregnancy in itself? It's thought that 80% of fertilized eggs naturally never attach to the uterus, so they are, by some definitions, naturally aborted. Beyond that, where's the "intelligent design" in growing a tail in utero, and then shedding it (or, in some instances, not shedding it and being born with a tail)?

And where's the "intelligent design" in the fact that every early fetus has *both* male and female sex organs, and a complex coordination of approximately eight hormones between the mother and fetus in a narrow window in the third month creates a male or female child? Where do the intersexed, XY females, and the infertile fall in "intelligent design"?

Where do children born with only a brain stem and die within the first week of birth fall in "intelligent design"?

"Intelligent design" advocates are idiots. And, yes, Kirk Cameron, the fucking banana is domesticated.

Melon
I can´t believe someone as smart as you is honestly making those questions.

Turn it the other way around. How does a "lucky shot" explain this or that?

You have to have more faith to believe in a lucky shot than in intelligent design.
__________________
BrownEyedBoy is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 01:19 PM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:41 AM
Re: Homoerotic Creationism

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
With Growing Pains Kirk Cameron

Bananas Proof Of Creation

The argument is that the banana is perfectly "designed" for people to hold and this disproves "evolutionists" wrong, I have two retorts.
It is perfectly designed for man to hold.


and this proves what?





__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 01:28 PM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
S
How about cancer? Tumor suppression is controlled by one gene
Um, closer to 200....
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 03:37 PM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
AtomicBono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 10,486
Local Time: 09:41 AM
dude, you can't prove the existance of God. you gotta figure that out on your own, with or without the help of bananas.
__________________
AtomicBono is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 05:17 PM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy


I can´t believe someone as smart as you is honestly making those questions.

Turn it the other way around. How does a "lucky shot" explain this or that?

You have to have more faith to believe in a lucky shot than in intelligent design.
There was no lucky shot making a human being from a collection of atoms and molecules, it has been at least 3.5 billion years of the most selected pressure on life ~ hardly a lucky shot.

Faith is blind, the evidence for a naturalistic world is all around us; no faith necessary.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-10-2006, 09:44 PM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
I can´t believe someone as smart as you is honestly making those questions.

Turn it the other way around. How does a "lucky shot" explain this or that?

You have to have more faith to believe in a lucky shot than in intelligent design.
You've built this entire argument on a fallacy:

That if I do not believe in "intelligent design" that I'm an atheist.

But even Roman Catholicism, the religion I grew up in, is opposed to "intelligent design," because they officially believe in "evolutionary creationism" (a.k.a., "theistic evolution"), which basically states that all of science is correct as-is, while believing that God was responsible for it. "Intelligent design" differs, because it rejects core aspects of science and creates pseudoscience to fit a religious agenda. "Evolutionary creationism," in theory, rejects no science at all.

Of course, in practice, I'm well aware that the Vatican is viciously homophobic in spite of what science says about the nature of homosexuality, but I guess every religion has contradictory theology.

Those questions are worth asking, because ID advocates only focus on the rosy parts of science to further their agenda. Nature and science is hardly that one-sided, and for that reason alone, ID is a joke.

I'm not sure what kind of plan God had, but it's increasingly looking like God created the laws of science and the building blocks of nature (i.e., atoms, elements, organic material, etc.) and just let everything go from there. I don't see any indication that things were meticulously planned, but I do not think less of God for that. The idea of "perfection," after all, is a human invention.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com