The Revised Science Textbook For Christians [Pic]

Submitted by: Englandrocks 6 years ago in

Editing is next to Godliness.
There are 187 comments:
Female 1,101
Hi everybody! My name`s Crackr. Have you all heard of this totally legitimate article about global warming that`s on Prison Planet this month? No? Then you know nothing about global warming! I`m so much smarter than you all! God I love Prison Planet! LMFAO.
0
Reply
Male 172
Rawrawrawr arguments over religion!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]I`m saying they ensured their high percentage by choosing whom they wanted to poll.[/quote]

Except you can`t prove that and that`s why I accuse you of moving the goalpost. As for NotTHATBored she did NOT bring up Michael Mann, you did. She wasn`t relying on his data to back up her argument, you on the other hand were. Ergo straw man.

0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr I just have to ask you, are you trying to say that "PrisonPlanet.com" is a legitimate source? It is not. Try again.

On the contrary I provided numerous legitimate sources in the past such as the EPA or the United States Energy Information Administration.

You provided "PrisonPlanet.com".

(I win, you lose)

Micheal Mann has nothing to do with whether or not global warming is real.

I UNLIKE YOU DO NOT RELY ON FALSE INFORMATION SO IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT HIS FAKE CHART.

See if I were you I would know about it so that I could try and pass it off as real, until someone called me on it, then I would pretend that I had never cited it!

P.S. I am very capable of using google, but I`m not going to even both looking up this off topic crap you are trying to divert me too.

I`ll bother when you learn what a legitimate source is and what is not.

0
Reply
Male 17,512
Cajun: You also misunderstood me when I rebutted NottaSpy`s link. I`m not demanding they show 100%, I`m saying they ensured their high percentage by choosing whom they wanted to poll.

It`s akin to doing a poll on Obama`s job performance and the pollsters ensured that 98% of those polled were democrats. It would not be a fair or legitimate poll, now would it ?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Cajun: She attempted to discredit me with her supposed knowledge, having tested how little she actually knows about the subject, and failed miserably, she has no credibility to determine what are `legitimate sources` and what aren`t.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Your complete lack of knowledge about who Michael Mann is and your insistence that he has nothing to do with AGW theory is astounding.

You couldn`t answer the question as to where East Anglia is, You need to do a lot more reading and less accusing until you do.[/quote]

Straw man argument.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote">97 or 98% is damn near 100% and that`s near what they were seeking with that paper. Again, THEY chose who THEY wanted to count. That is not a legitimate poll, that`s called horsesh|t made up statistics.[/quote">

Eghhhh...Really
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NottaSpy: 97 or 98% is damn near 100% and that`s near what they were seeking with that paper. Again, THEY chose who THEY wanted to count. That is not a legitimate poll, that`s called horsesh|t made up statistics.

There are a lot more than 1,372 climate scientists publishing papers, and I can show over a 1000 that disagree with it.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: Your complete lack of knowledge about who Michael Mann is and your insistence that he has nothing to do with AGW theory is astounding.

You couldn`t answer the question as to where East Anglia is, You need to do a lot more reading and less accusing until you do.

0
Reply
Male 881
CrakrJak, you have shown a profound lack of knowledge about how the scientific process works. The link I posted is to a very well respected journal. They did not limit the survey to those who agree, otherwise they would have found 100% agreement. Their survey was of actual climate researchers. People who actually submit papers for review about the climate (agree or not). So if your thousand scientists aren`t in their list, it is because they are not well established climate researchers. They are geologists, or computer engineers, or climate denying shills who don`t publish in peer reviewed journals.

I say this again, you are talking poo! You are scientifically illiterate. You are profoundly naive. Worst of all, you have been duped into betraying the planet by big oil companies, and you don`t even get the big fat paycheck that the shills you use as your sources do.

As always, CrakrJak, you are completely wrong.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
In other words my case for human caused global warming has been made completely independent of Mann`s chart. So Mann`s chart has nothing to do with this conversation.

One person`s faulty data has nothing to do with the legitimate data that I have cited to prove my points.

You have not even provided legitimate data with legitimate sources!
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr HA HA HA! I don`t know what a legitimate source is? That`s funny because the last time I checked the Environmental Protection Agency WAS a legitimate source and PrisonPlanet.com WAS NOT!

I guess you have to graduate from college to know that sort of thing though, so I`ll cut you some slack.

P.S. No one here cares about this "Mann" person or his possibly faulty chart (I say possibly because it is YOU making the assertion).

It`s not even relevant to this conversation since no one here has used Mann`s chart to support the case that human Co2 emissions cause global warming.

Do you see me bringing up every person who says something crazy or wrong on the anti global warming side? No, because it`s not relevant to this conversation unless you use it as a source to make a point. Then it becomes relevant.

0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: If you didn`t even know this information about Michael Mann, either who he is or how flawed his findings are, then there is no sense talking to you at all about the subject.

It`s obvious you`ve not done any of your own research on the internet about the subject, I doubt you even know where East Anglia is.

You wouldn`t know good data from bad if crawled up and wriggled on your face.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
Go get some credibility and find legitimate sources. Then come back and try to make something that resembles a point! Maybe then people will actually listen to what you say instead of mock you!
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr Wow even more bad logic! So basically in your book it is alright to do something wrong or to mislead if someone else does it first right? Still not surprised though. I guess it`s also easy to finger point to someone else to deflect from your own BAD UN CREDIBLE DATA.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: Don`t lecture me about `illegitimate data` Michael Mann admitted he only used ring data from just 4 trees, to create his now infamous `hockey stick` chart. He wouldn`t share the equation he used to create the graph either, it eventually leaked out. After some scientists experimented with their own numbers using his equation they found every chart they made looked like a hockey stick, even when they used random numbers !

Then after that broke into the news Mann claimed that his equation had since become `more refined` than that, but still wouldn`t share his new equation with others.

Real scientists don`t hide their data, equations, or methodologies like this.
0
Reply
Male 5,189
I knew 2+2=5. Damn!
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr This is a pretty big quote to be taken out of context...

"And in many of these areas, the referenced papers report finding just the opposite response to global warming, i.e., biosphere-friendly effects of rising temperatures and rising CO2 levels." - First article

Are you sure it`s just not "taken out of context" because you don`t like it?

Also, no comment on your other sources that cite PrisonPlanet.com, Wikipedia, and the The Skeptics Handbook? I`m not surprised. It`s easy to try to pass illegitimate data off as real then back away when people question it. What a lack of integrity.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"I find it odd that so many of you liberals hated the patriot act when GW Bush started it, Now won`t say anything against it when Big Sis, Napolitano, is now in control of it and threatening to snuff out the free speech of those that don`t tow the democratic-socialist party line. I find that very very odd."

I can`t speak for the liberals in your country (what with not BEING in your country and all), but I`ve thought the Homeland Security thing was dumb under Bush, and I still think it`s dumb under Obama.

I suspect (just my own opinion) many liberals are disappointed with the current leadership`s failure to get rid of it.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Musuko: The constitution does not mention marriage at all"

The constitution doesn`t mention copyright law either.

The US Constitution =/= the entirety of US law.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"You say your `basic rights` are being stepped on when it`s not a basic right as defined by the constitution and not a right voted on by the people. Therefore what you are seeking IS a special right."

Alright then, we want the same SPECIAL right that you already have. Fair enough?

Are you married, CrakrJak? I really doubt you are. If you were, you`d have long ago smugly answered my questions on the matter. So I`m assuming not married, and either living in sin (shagging some lady outside of marriage, tsk, tsk), or in your 40s and single, and venting your bitterness about it by trying to deny others the happiness that you yourself have missed out on.

Which is rather stupid, because if all the gay guys marry eachother instead of having to marry women, there`d be more chance for you to find someone.

Unless all the women marry eachother. Oooooh, is that it? Did a lesbian turn you down, CrakrJak?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Musuko: The constitution does not mention marriage at all, Those things not mentioned in the US constitution fall upon the states to regulate. When your group cannot even successfully win the Prop. 8 vote in California that is telling. Now that group seeks to proceed by circumventing the majority vote in the courts.

You say your `basic rights` are being stepped on when it`s not a basic right as defined by the constitution and not a right voted on by the people. Therefore what you are seeking IS a special right.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Musuko: First off, I don`t claim ownership of the cartoon, that is someone else`s work. Secondly, It`s not doomsaying when it`s actually coming to fruition.

I find it odd that so many of you liberals hated the patriot act when GW Bush started it, Now won`t say anything against it when Big Sis, Napolitano, is now in control of it and threatening to snuff out the free speech of those that don`t tow the democratic-socialist party line. I find that very very odd.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Musuko: You mean denying you special rights that you never had to begin with"

Getting married to the person you love is a special right?

Black people in your country didn`t used to have that right. So the fact they have it now means they were granted a "special" right?

"and will lead to others seeking their own absurd special rights."

So why is that line of denial drawn AFTER you`ve got your rights? Shouldn`t we deny the rights to EVERYONE for your reason?

"No one is denying you life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness sir."

Exactly. And I`m pursuing happiness: by seeking to get the rights that will make me, and others, happy.

Just as you say I`m allowed to. Checkmate, numbnuts.

PS: Whom do you love, CrakrJak? Did you have a wife to give flowers to on the 14th?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
PS: Fatpill, if you want to imagine that the "someone" stretching the rubber was a deity, you can go right ahead.

That`s called "the god of the gaps": meaning, you just default to saying "god did it" for the ever-shrinking areas of the world for which we have yet to discover the rational, scientific explanation.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Musuko: You mean denying you special rights that you never had to begin with, and will lead to others seeking their own absurd special rights.

No one is denying you life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness sir. Note: No one is guaranteed happiness, just the pursuit of it.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

You`re calling OTHERS doomsayers? You have the nerve? After your ridiculous "OMG THE SKY IS FALLING, WE`LL ALL GET LOCKED UP BY EVIL COMMIE LIBERAL UNITED NATIONS FLAG-HATERS!" cartoon?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@fattpill

"where did the space for the big bang to happen in come from?"

That question right there shows that you lack the basic understanding needed to be able to approach this subject.

Your question is of the same level of someone asking "why is the sky made of chickens?" You can`t answer why the sky is made of chickens, because the sky isn`t made of chickens, and that invalidates the original question.

In your specific case: the big bang did not need space to explode in; the big bang didn`t occur within a space, it wasn`t an explosion of matter within an already-established empty vacuum of dimensions; the big bang was the explosion/expansion OF the space, with the matter contained inside along with it.

What YOU are imagining is a sheet of paper with an ink blot spreading out onto it, filling the paper. What ACTUALLY happened was the paper was made of rubber, and someone started stretching it.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NottaSpy: So What your saying is, They only counted those people publishing the most lies about `global warming`, those that have the most published papers are the doomsayers themselves. Your link boiled down to them only counting 1,372 scientists, that is not a consensus when I can show you over 1000 scientists that don`t agree.

Quantity of published papers does not equal quality, especially when they only decided to count those within the AGW regime itself.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Musuko: Your anti-theism is at lunatic levels sir, seriously you seem to enjoy it way too much."

Yeah, because I really enjoy having to fight you prats to stop you trying to deny me basic human rights in the name of your imaginary friend.
0
Reply
Female 24
I believe for those of you who have lost your way, that you can drink a lot of orphan tears to regain your faith in God :)
0
Reply
Male 586
I LIKE TURTLES
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Hey I got an idea. How about we stop subsidizing oil. Really! You `conservatives` hate Keynesianism so much. Except when it comes to gasoline that is.
0
Reply
Male 881
Yes, you posted bullpoo links to prop up your bullpoo position. Here is a real (and recent) survey of the top climate researchers:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html
That shows that "97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change". ACC being anthropogenic climate change. It also shows that only "2.5% of the top 200" climate researchers are unconvinced by the evidence.

CrakrJak, as always, you are talking poo! Your sources are researchers who are paid by companies that have a lot of money to lose if anthropogenic climate change is real. You are on the losing side of history and people like you will cause us all a great deal of harm.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Yes I said you have to have FAITH to believe in science.[/quote]

Wrong!: Science is observable, testable, and provable, if something disproves a theory we find another one and test it. God isn`t observable, testable, or provable.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]I already posted links supporting my position, don`t see a need to beat a dead horse there.[/quote]

You did a poor job of defending those articles.
0
Reply
Male 256
Mr Hyde: you forget God started time. Your beliefs exsist in only one place. your eye`s and there is more than that. what I think you do not realized is that You have to have faith to believe in science. (for all you screaming what at your computer, Yes I said you have to have FAITH to believe in science.)
The Big bang theory? I pose this question. where did the space for the big bang to happen in come from? what was around before the big bang? I have a few more but I like this one so lets see if angie shows up
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NottaSpy: I already posted links supporting my position, don`t see a need to beat a dead horse there. Scientists with far more education and experience disagree widely. That alone disproves the so called `consensus`.
0
Reply
Male 881
CrakrJak doesn`t seem to want to argue Global Warming with MrHyde, who obviously knows the subject very well. CrakrJak would rather argue how God in unknowable, and how he knows that.

Poor CrakrJak! Always so completely wrong!
0
Reply
Male 17,512
MrHyde: We as humans have but a tiny viewpoint of the universe. We can only perceive the dimensions that we can understand, and according to the latest science there are 11 dimensions.

Much as an ant can only see his world through his senses and view, So we are to God.

You`re asking me to answer mysteries that only God can answer. I have faith, apparently you do not that is the difference.
0
Reply
Male 494
However, looking at the seven ERAS from a philosophical point of view, (For the sake of religious arguments, I will completely ignore everything scientific.) and assuming all seven ERAS are correct, one question comes in to play.

"Where did God come from"?

Even looking at it from the non-linear non-subjective viewpoint, ignoring the naive assumption that time is simply cause to effect, we realize that the universe must exist not because something caused it to, but because it can.

But for the universe to exist because it can, we must assume that the universe is not finite (Because everything finite has something infinite limiting it), and everything that can possibly happened has.

Once you remember that, it is fairly easy to see that the Christian and Islamic view of God is indeed in the linear subjective viewpoint, because a non-linear non-subjective God would not be a victim of it`s own world.
0
Reply
Male 494
@CrakrJak

Right. But the person who wrote Genesis was on the same level of time, correct? Even if they were guided by God, it would be quite naive to assume that by "7 Days", the writer was talking in terms of God`s days, not Earth days.

Looking at the development of the Gregorian calender, it is obvious that the 7 days (Sun-Sat) were based on the 7 days of the genesis era.

However, under further thought, we realize that the writer must not have meant to translate "7 days" into "7 million days", NOR did he mean literally "168 hours", but more along the lines of 7 ERAS, coinciding with the 7 days.

Perhaps the seven days of Genesis are a mistranslation of the original text.

But it the many mistranslations and spreads that made me realize that the bible was unreliable on all levels.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
MrHyde: It pretty much states that God exists outside of time as we know it, which is not very hard to understand.
0
Reply
Male 494
"MrHyde: 2 Peter 3:8–9 - But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."

And that is relevant to Genesis how?
To me, it seems the verse is about this God`s patience.

But I guess if people didn`t warp verses and what they mean to imply whatever they want and add extraneous details to everything, there wouldn`t be a thousand different borderline unrelated bibles.

There`s a bit of a perspective conflict here, which makes this verse way to inconclusive to say anything like that.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: That`s the second time you took that excerpt out of context. Nice try, but read the rest of the report. Or are you so stuck on believing AGW that you must discredit everything that disagrees with it ?
0
Reply
Male 494
Sorry about the URL tag fails. If you have a brain, you`ll be able to fix them.
0
Reply
Male 494
To continue where my post got cut:
And the temperature increase is directly proportional to the increase in GhG`s. While Water Vapor gets taken care of quickly, the Co2 hangs out, reflecting infrared light all day long.

If you want some sources:

>[url]http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/gr...
>[url]http://cdiac.ornl.gov/
[url]http://www.dal.ca/
[url]http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/Earthatmos.html
>[url]http://bcs.whfreeman.com/universe9e...
^^ Non-biased text-book. Make an account, take some quizzes. See how much you (don`t) know.

Note that what I said was based on actual experience and readings. However, I think you`ll find any reliable s
0
Reply
Male 17,512
MrHyde: 2 Peter 3:8–9 - But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
0
Reply
Male 494
@FakeBacon, "In the bible it says a thousand years is like a day to God."

Where? Verse, please.

@Fakebacon,
Before I start, I`d like to say my source.
Bachelors, Physics and Atmospheric Science.
Working on my masters for Physics (Field of Thermodynamics)
Water vapor is NOT a big deal, because it goes away quickly. If it isn`t reabsorbed by things such as plants, the ultraviolet light that leaks through the atmosphere ionizes the hydrogen off of it.

As for the human play in Co2 emissions:
Let`s do a little math.
Before the Industrial Revolution, the Co2 levels were around 280 ppv. In 1998, it was 365 ppv. In 2007, it was 383.
280 to 365 was a 34.3% increase.
365 to 383 was an 4.7% increase.
Let`s give the starting date a mean 1700, which matches the start for the ice core data(+/- 15 years).
The average speed of increase between 1700 and 1998 was 0.28ppm/year.
Between 1998 and 2007, 2ppm/year.
And th
0
Reply
Male 586
@ishiidafishy in genesis when it talks about these `days of creation` they are obviously not literal days as science has already proved that earth, and the universe is much older.

when you say `back in my day we didnt have...` are you talking about a literal day? In the bible it says a thousand years is like a day to God.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr

"The three links were provided to prove that there is no `consensus` among climate scientists"

Wikipedia and PrisonPlanet do not count as climate scientists. So neither does your 2nd article.

(Excerpt from your first source)

"And in many of these areas, the referenced papers report finding just the opposite response to global warming, i.e., biosphere-friendly effects of rising temperatures and rising CO2 levels."

Does this statement or does it not to some degree imply that Co2 and rising temperatures are linked? Of course it does. It`s a very careful unexplicit way of implying it, but it does imply it.

Then of course we know that Co2 is proven to have properties that cause it to trap heat. Those properties do not magically change once it hits the atmosphere. We pump millions of metric tons into the atmosphere PER YEAR... yada yada ya. Etc. Etc. You get it!



0
Reply
Male 2,516
hahaha the faithmath
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: The three links were provided to prove that there is no `consensus` among climate scientists, Also I don`t think you read the whole of the 1st article at all. The third `article` is a infographic from a published textbook, it doesn`t contradict either of the two links, It shows the current carbon cycle and correctly shows how little humans contribute to it. And Yes, Water vapor is a GHG are we going to start regulating that now too ?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Musuko: Your anti-theism is at lunatic levels sir, seriously you seem to enjoy it way too much.
0
Reply
Female 265
lol global warming
0
Reply
Male 773
@Fakebacon/cajun

Isn`t Christianity based on creationism though? So pretty much you are twisting your own god to make Him match whatever you want to believe, or what? Thats pretty much like saying `There`s only 8 commandments, the last two don`t count because I don`t like them, so god doesn`t enforce them.`

Which is why I`m am ok with the whole god and jesus idea, but their fanclub gets on my nerves.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
"A double-plus good book." That one had me chuckling quite a bit.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
I do on the other hand agree with FAKEBACON.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
its funny kos its true
0
Reply
Male 218
Yugure

I disagree. I thought it WAS funny.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@Boredhero78

"@ Musuko42- good point, but still, you know what I`m saying."

No, I don`t think I do.

Because we`re not mocking Christians; we`re mocking Christianity, which itself is a belief, which is an idea; a thought, an opinion, a view.

There`s nothing wrong with mocking an opinion/idea you think is stupid, so long as you don`t stop the other guy from doing it back to you.
0
Reply
Male 192
@Boredhero78 while i do not agree with what you said, i am a christian man but i leave these conflicts as i know my beliefs - they know theirs, so I leave it alone. However i do have an answer to your question "Why don`t you pussies pick on Muslims or Hindu`s?" it is common knowledge why not, because some Christians will complain and feed their trolling needs, but muslems will blow them up ( look at all the hell comedy central went through with south park and not showing Muhammad`s face ) so i answer this question with one of my own. Why try trolling someone who will kill you when you can go after the people that will just complain? not saying christians should get violent just saying bullies only pick on those who wont fight back only complain
0
Reply
Male 108
well I`m glad to see that you guys are responding to what I said. At least I didn`t waste my time.
@ admisok- read my post again about the part where I say I don`t know the answer. I`m pretty sure that really doesn`t indicate what religion I follow.
@ Musuko42- good point, but still, you know what I`m saying.
0
Reply
Female 1,203
even as a joke this isn`t particularly funny. I`m agnostic atheist, so it`s not funny to me because of any offensiveness, it`s not funny. I question these Mods here and their senses of humor.
0
Reply
Male 881
@Boredhero78, Fine strawman you`ve built there. The reality is that religion is dangerous and has a powerful hold on our political process. Ignorance is always dangerous and that is the main product of religion.

“One of the beginnings of human emancipation is the ability to laugh at authority.” -Christopher Hitchens

Say what you want about Hitchens, but there is a powerful truth in that quote.
0
Reply
Male 586
IAB once again putting down someones belief. I think this book would apply to maybe 20/30% of Christians. There are many Christians who don`t believe the world is only 5000/6000 yrs old. Only the creationists believe that. Lumping all the christians together is the same as lumping all evolutionists together, when we know that not all evolutionists agree with each other.

How about we all hate on Chad more and leave evolution and religion alone, or at the least present both sides fairly and equally instead of bashing Christians like we`re the school yard bully and they`re the ones with sweat pants and glasses?
0
Reply
Male 2,855
noah should have at least taken a married couple of velociraptors, damn you noah
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@Boredhero78

"Why don`t you pussies pick on Muslims or Hindu`s? Asshats"

Because we aren`t surrounded by Hindus and Muslims and exposed to them and their beliefs on a daily basis like we are with Christians.

If we were in India or the Middle East, then I imagine we WOULD "pick on them".
0
Reply
Male 516
"Why don`t you pussies pick on Muslims or Hindu`s?"

i like how he doesn`t want us to stop making fun of religion, just his religion
0
Reply
Male 268
@Boredhero78

I thought christians were supposed to be forgiving.

Oh wait.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]which says that Co2 levels are rising. So presumably not all being absorbed by soil or the oceans.[/quote]

That`s compounded with the issue that as temperature of water rises it`s less capable of dissolving gasses.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@Crakr
Ya those oceans definitely producing so much CO2, what with the locking it away in oil and natural gas pockets under ground. That`s still all there right? Nobody was silly enough to do something like burn it and quickly release all of it into the atmosphere without any way of removing it at an equal rate right?

Go look at what happens in any thermodynamic model with mass flow in > mass flow out.
0
Reply
Male 108
This website and its fan base are obviously full of insecure pussies. I obviously don`t know the true answer to why we`re all here but you guys don`t either. Even Darwin had his doubts;read his book. It seems like every day there is something new that slams on Christianity and you dippoos feed on it like a bunch of swine waiting for your next meal of security. It`s like on the playground when a kid feels bad about himself. He/She picks on something that seems like a target and spreads it to other kids hoping they feel the same way so the bully feel less like a loner. It`s funny... at the end of the day, when you`re not happy about your current life situation and you go about replaying all the mistake you`ve made in the past, somehow after all these foul-ups, you of all people can judge a persons faith, and think everybody else`s beliefs are somehow inferior to your own. This is the biggest example of ignorance. Why don`t you pussies pick on Muslims or Hindu`s? Asshats...
0
Reply
Female 1,101
Your first article is somewhat plausible, but the other two articles you liked to are crap.

The second cites WIKIPEDIA, "The Skeptics Handbook", and PrisonPlanet.com! How can you submit this as proof of ANYTHING!!

Then it goes on to basically say that Co2 without water cannot increase the global temperature. Assuming that this is even true, do you not realize that the planet is covered by 2/3 water?
So what does that mean in relation to global warming and THIS planet?!
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@mattocho
The only thing that`s creationism there is the skull the dino and the history book. That`s not even half the contents of the image.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
(continued) which says that Co2 levels are rising. So presumably not all being absorbed by soil or the oceans.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crackr you really need to read what you`re linking to before you post it. It contradicts what you`ve been saying all along completely, which was that Global Warming isn`t real.

"And in many of these areas, the referenced papers report finding just the opposite response to global warming, i.e., biosphere-friendly effects of rising temperatures and rising CO2 levels." - First article

All this says is that they don`t expect global warming to be as bad as let`s say Al Gore. It doesn`t refute it.

Further, I could find nothing in any of your articles saying that the ocean produces 16x more Co2 than humans.

EVEN FURTHER, your third article also contradicts your first and second articles. (I assume this is where you thought you got your information about the ocean producing 16x more Co2 than humans). It contradicts the first article which pretty much admits that there is a link to climate change and Co2. It also contradicts the second article wh
0
Reply
Female 298
LOLOLOL ...but incredibly sad...
0
Reply
Male 2,670
You doubters are making someone`s imaginary friend VERY ANGRY!
0
Reply
Male 3
@mattocho: Dude, it`s a joke. Everyone knows not every Christian is bad at math and science. But a lot are and all are delusional people with a stupid old book about their favorite imaginary friends.
0
Reply
Male 21
Guys, if you don`t respect religion it`s fine, but PLEASE don`t mix stuff up.. CREATIONISM is different from CHRISTIANITY. this is a science book fro creationists, christians believe in science, and evolution.
get your facts straight before you go around talking about stuff you don`t understand
0
Reply
Male 2,796
LOL, I absolutely knew I wouldn`t need to defend myself or my comments; that fellow logic users would jump in and lead the charge. Leave it up to religious zealots to destroy themselves both literally or figuratively.

As I awlays say: The only way to win an argument with a moron is to never get into that argument in the first place.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@Zach82

"Can`t we let just ONE religion joke pass without using it as an opportunity to preach about the how false it all is?"

No, we cannot. Because we are BORED. It helps to pass the time.
0
Reply
Male 319
The comments on every religion related IAB post teaches me that non-religious people are just as incapable of taking a joke as religious people. Can`t we let just ONE religion joke pass without using it as an opportunity to preach about the how false it all is? I assure you everyone still remembers the exact same comments from the last IAB religion post.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Also, I did not say all scientific theory is wrong, I said some of it is unexplained and unproven"

But ALL of religion IS.

Don`t try and badmouth scientific thinking for sometimes being guilty of something that religion is ALWAYS guilty of.

PS: BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!
PPS: Whom do you love, CrakrJak?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Excuse me, I must take my leave. I must go tell the famine-stricken areas of the world that all their problems will be saved by putting their efforts into building a church, rather than this silly "farming" and "digging wells" malarky they`ve been spending their time on!

BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Heh...but seriously...yeah, all that "manpower" spent sitting in buildings all across the land that were built for the sole purpose of mumbling wishes to something that doesn`t exist...

...yeah, all that stuff REALLY cleans the water, builds homes, and makes the food grow abundantly.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"How much manpower has been wasted trying to explain away God and what if that time and effort were used to work with him and glorify him? This would be a much better world."

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!

*pause*

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!

*pause*

Okay, I think I`ve got it all out of my sys-AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
0
Reply
Male 116
How much manpower has been wasted trying to explain away God and what if that time and effort were used to work with him and glorify him? This would be a much better world.
0
Reply
Male 10
I want to buy 5 loaves and 2 fish. That would be a bygod blessing (hurr, get it) with the budget I`m on.
0
Reply
Male 60
God created the Universe in 6 days

OR (if you`re feeling really brave)

There was nothing, and then it exploded.

...Choose wisely.
0
Reply
Male 24
hahahaha this good stuff,ruthless pray your god that IAB stop putting these kind of things it might work hahahahahahaha
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Cajun: Yea, They investigated themselves and found themselves `not guilty`, What a shock.

I`ll counter with This, This and This Showing that our oceans produce 16 times more CO2 than humans.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Tell you what Crakr we`ll continue this discussion later. Right now, I REALLY need to go to bed.

Toodles!
0
Reply
Female 3,001
IAB has been very anti-religion over the last couple of months, i mean, normally sure theres a few, but its getting ridiculous.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Aww hell your survey was 2008 maybe opinions have changed since then?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
continued...

The survey you cited showed an unfavorable opinion, granted it is cause for concern, but does not equal hostility, not by a longshot.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote">A lot of facts about how the data was manipulated have been divulged since then.[/quote">

Apparently you overlooked various reports which have actually exonerated the scientists in question.

[quote">I`ve not said that all muslims lie because of taqqiya[/quote">.

Maybe not but you`ve made straw man arguments against Muslims before regarding Sharia Law, their Holy book, the Hadith etcetera. Last time you made a straw man argument against the people of Turkey for "being hostile towards Jews". The survey yo
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Davy: Your so called "recent" survey was taken 2 years ago in 2009, A lot of facts about how the data was manipulated have been divulged since then.

Next, I`ve never said the bible is the "ONLY" truth, I`ve not said that all muslims lie because of taqqiya, and I never said Christians "Gave up" the old testament for the new. Those are all distortions, miss-characterizations, and outright lies.

Also, I did not say all scientific theory is wrong, I said some of it is unexplained and unproven, And unified field theory certainly is in the realm of philosophy at the moment.

You say this sort of crap about me all quite often, trying to discredit me. You know it`s not truthful, but you type it anyway.

Keep spinning and twisting away Davy, It only makes you look ridiculous.
0
Reply
Male 3,076
well that makes sense XD
0
Reply
Male 193
Okay @snack1928 even though you made an absurd jump to Albert Einstein I will take a stab at your bait.
Einsteins "math" Also known as General Relativity is widely accepted today(you were right on that part). At the time Einstein did not want to believe the universe was expanding because that would mean the universe was finite(you are 2 for 2). There would be and end to our universe and there had to be a start. Einstein did not like this idea and came up with the equation known as cosmology. This solved the problem of an expanding universe and helped Einstein hold on to the notion of a supernatural being. Because after all Einstein was agnostic... not atheist. Which goes to show, that even if there is just a small part of you that believes in a god or higher being you are in fact crazy or retarded. He tried to disprove his own math in hopes of saving a universe that was infinite... I`d say he was crazy
0
Reply
Male 40
Not all Christians are creationists...

Catholics aren`t suppossed to be.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@FCMXD


0
Reply
Male 181
Quoting davymid:
"Hey, all cool, all cool. But then why do people like you rail against things like gay marriage, when Jesus said f*ck all on the subject?"

A comedian posing as a nun answered that question:

When Jesus was in the desert being tempted by the devil, he three times said, "Get behind me, Satan".
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Snack Yea well sleeping with your cousin is not something that a completely sane person would do. He may have been a mathematical genius but that doesn`t mean he wasn`t a little "out there".
0
Reply
Male 35
@notthatbored: Figuring out how the universe works is not something that a crazy person can do.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
}-) Yeeeeeeaaaaa! LOL!
0
Reply
Male 12,138
On a roll. Let`s say someone in your life, someone important to you, got cancer and died. Who are you going to look to? The scientists, doctors and medical professionals who have a course of treatment, or are you going to pray and just hope for the best?

Crakr, Climate Change is real, it`s HAPPENING, and we`re helping it happen. And if there were less people like you in the world, we`d be dealing with it a whole lot sooner.

Peace out, a PhD Scientist.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Dear CJ, you say crap like "Scientific theory is now indistinguishable from philosophy." while typing crap into your plastic keyboard, which is encoded into data sent down a computer through fibre-optic cables, to other continents, via the internet, which arrives on my LCD computer screen so that I can respond like I`m doing right now.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
The world`s scientific community is made up of millions of professional scientists. In fact, in a RECENT SURVEY, 97% of professional scientist polled showed that they believed that Climate Change is real, it`s happening right now, and that humans have an effect. Notably, as for the 3 percent of scientists who remain unconvinced, the study found their average expertise is far below that of their colleagues, as measured by publication and citation rates.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Hey, all cool, all cool. But then why do people like you rail against things like gay marriage, when Jesus said f*ck all on the subject? Why pick on that as a sin and not eating shellfish, which is also abhorred? Or wearing clothes made of two different materials? Dude, just trying to understand where your vehemence comes from. Cause there`s a lot of vehemence.

On-topic, and not to derail the thread, but you speak of having hundreds of quotes from Climate Change deniers. Cool.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Alright, so I already said I`m NOT going to derail this convo into a Climate Change debate, and I won`t.

On-topic ,I found this post kinda funny, and like most good comedy it`s funny because it`s true, or at least you can relate it to personal experience.

I can see friends of mine reflected in this deliberately satirical pic. For example, you, Crakrjak, think evolution is a lie, the Bible is the only truth, Global Warming is a myth, the Muslims are all Taqqiya lying deceitful bastards, the Rapture is going to happen, and various other weird things that I don`t understand. Heck, you even think homosexuality is a disease, despite you bullsh*tting us just a posts back about true Christians giving up the Old Testament in favour of the New Testament.
0
Reply
Male 881
I am beginning to believe that CrakrJak isn`t real. I do not see how it is possible for someone to be so consistently and completely wrong. Even a monkey banging on a keyboard will eventually type something correct.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Crakrjak said: "davymid: Last time I posted just a few of the hundreds of quotes from scientists all over the world that do not believe that global warming is occurring or that it`s man made. Several of them were members of the IPCC itself.

So give it your best shot, I`d love to debate it again with you."
0
Reply
Male 2,700
The global warming one made me lol
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Davymid it`s so hard to resist isn`t it?
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@snack1928 Ah, Einstein. Well actually snack, he was probably both a little retarded and crazy!

Retarded - because it`s suspected that he was a savant of sorts, possibly with a rare form of autism called Asberger`s Syndrome

Crazy - because he had a little too good of a relationship with his cousin, if you know what I mean.

@Crackr want to debate if our atmosphere can clear itself of excess Co2 again? No? Global warming is not a crock, you are.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
davymid: Last time I posted just a few of the hundreds of quotes from scientists all over the world that do not believe that global warming is occurring or that it`s man made. Several of them were members of the IPCC itself.

So give it your best shot, I`d love to debate it again with you.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
vv Rammo, unfortunately, you`re right. It`s taking every fiber of my being not to join in the derailment. Must... resist... publicly embarassing... Crakrjak... again...

*hits up Civilization V to take his mind off it*
0
Reply
Male 35
@splurbyburbl: well by your logic, if you DON"T believe in something that IS scientifically proven (or mathematically proven) then you are also "clinically crazy or clinically retarded." Right?
Well, by that way of thinking, Einstein was either crazy or retarded. According to Brian Greene, a leading string theory physicist, Einstein did not believe his own math when his math told him the universe was expanding, which is now scientifically excepted. So, it seems that, by your own logic, one of the greatest physicist of the 20th century, was retarded.... or crazy... which one I leave up to you...
0
Reply
Male 139
This religious troll bait crap is getting old and lame guys. You might as well rename the site "I hate religion".
0
Reply
Male 1,116
This thread is now about global warming.
0
Reply
Male 119
lol don`t doubt splurbyburbl he obviously knows everything there is to know about logic, philosophy and science....
0
Reply
Male 17,512
splurbyburbl: There is a huge amount of science that has not and likely will not ever be proven. Scientific theory is now indistinguishable from philosophy.

So please, Don`t go questioning people`s sanity unless you are willing to put into question hundreds of scientific theories themselves.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]im a christian... I`m a pre-med student. I have had a TON of science classes. I`m not science illeterate[/quote]
*illiterate.

(Sorry, I`m no Grammar Nazi, but how could anyone resist an open goal like that?)
0
Reply
Male 17,512
NotTHATbored: I`ve stated the case against the global warming scam before to you. Thousands of scientists with PHDs and university professors with decades of research experience have evidence that `global warming` is not occuring, and is not tied to CO2.

The scientists and doomsayers on global warming are the ones that are most likely to profit from it`s restrictions, research, and carbon credit schemes.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
Religious people everywhere, no matter how miniscule you believe... are either clinically crazy or clinically retarded. You can debate it all you want, however, any person who continues to believe in something that absolutely cannot be proven through scientific means, is illogical at the very best. This means you are void of a very profound logic that would work to define your sanity. It needs to end.
0
Reply
Male 119
yes some Christians believe the earth is 5000 years old and some Christians believe dinosaurs walked with man, but there also Christians in the leading scientific world who are not morons.
0
Reply
Male 35
@mervviscious... I loved my neighbor as I loved myself and I got my Iphone stolen.
Yea, you can help someone and it hurt you, or cost you something. The Samaritan spent a lot of his own money to keep the Jewish guy alive. Image finding a guy on the side of the road, beaten close to death, taking him to the hospital, and saying, "Whatever it costs for you to help this man and keep him from dying, do it. I will pay for it when I return. Right now, here is some money." I mean, just because helping someone costs us something doesn`t mean we should stop helping people.
Now, addressing your divorce. I dunno if you want me to ask questions about it and whatnot, but in order for me to address that issue, I would have to know a little bit more. For example: why did you get divorced?
Also, if you do not want to hear my opinion, tell me, otherwise, don`t be offended at what I say.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
"I`m a Christian and I find this absolutely ridiculous. There is nothing in this "scientific" pamphlet that is in the Bible. These types of beliefs are the result of church doctrine, and not what the Bible says."

You best be troll`n
0
Reply
Male 35
I`m a Christian and I find this absolutely ridiculous. There is nothing in this "scientific" pamphlet that is in the Bible. These types of beliefs are the result of church doctrine, and not what the Bible says.
0
Reply
Male 1,793
@snack1928.... I loved my neighbor as I loved myself and now I am divorced... wacky bible...
0
Reply
Male 1,793
god people are the silliest of all peoples...
0
Reply
Female 1,048
So - how does this explain the extinction of the unicorns? They didn`t have rickets or were too heavy for the Ark?
0
Reply
Male 490
This reminds me of a borat book i bought, and im with TysonRP.
0
Reply
Male 312
Okay, I`m and atheist and I have to say that IAB should stop posting to many anti-religious posts. This site should be primarily about entertainment, not debates.
0
Reply
Male 251
Saying science and religion don`t mix is just misleading overall. It`s not so much that they don`t mix, it`s simply that science does not deal with the supernatural or faith-based reasoning. Science is a tool used to explain natural phenomena. If one chooses to infer supernatural causes in their view of things as a whole, that`s their choice, but not necessarily incorrect. If one chooses to disregard scientific explanations due to their religious beliefs, or infer supernatural causes in scientific explanation, that is also their choice, but that is scientifically incorrect. Mixing science into your religion, well, that`s up to whatever religious authority you believe in. Mixing faith into the scientific process basically invalidates it as a science; however, it is possible to scientifically operate within religious parameters. The closest proper science gets to faith-based reasoning is statistical analysis and probability.
0
Reply
Male 1,365
I smell a flame war in process. To the victors go the spoils and to the victims...well good luck with all that.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@JPFU220

"There is actually a pretty interesting and plausible theory about noah`s flood as a result of plate tectonics"

I find it entirely possible that there is scientific evidence to support a massive flood in the past. Maybe even on more than one continent at the same time. I would even be able to find it probable if you could provide evidence that related to soil samples, not just speculative evidence about what could have happened with plate tectonics.

However, let`s discuss this evidence that supports a man putting a pair of every species on a giant boat and repopulating the world part.
0
Reply
Male 721
there is no god in any religion... stop devoting your lifes to thinking there is! fuc.ing hell
0
Reply
Male 291
Hey, jpfu220, you seem to be more open minded than most. I encourage you to read "The God Delusion" by Charles Dawkins and then reevaluate what you think. Also when you say that the creationist museum teaches stuff that might be a little bit of a stretch I challenge you to do some research on exactly what they are telling you. It should be expected that people challenge everything, there are more fraudulent people out there than you would expect.
0
Reply
Male 493
"but it is REAL science that gives REAL evidence for God and biblical events."
How much real science and where can I see ANY of it?
0
Reply
Male 65
@notthatbored
There is actually a pretty interesting and plausible theory about noah`s flood as a result of plate tectonics. Its been a few years so i don`t remember all of the details but it was really well researched. There were more...but i have an exam tomorrow so this is my last post tonight on the subject. have fun flamin me! haha
0
Reply
Male 93
Hi I`m an atheist and I think I`m really really smart by misrepresenting Christianity and putting it in a comic book. This is how I get my meager sense of self esteem. Us atheists are kind of dumb, so really, it`s the best we can do.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@JPFU220 Just out of a sick sense of curiosity I have to know, what events in the Bible do you believe they have scientific evidence to support?
0
Reply
Male 2,440
[quote]I have been the the creation museum in kentucky. Some of the stuff there is a strech.[/quote]
Understatement.

[quote]...but it is REAL science that gives REAL evidence for God and biblical events.[/quote]
Riiiiiiiiiiiight.
0
Reply
Male 65
@darkgear6:
im a christian...not that offended cause it is just ignorant. In my experience, there are really uneducated people on BOTH sides of the issue. Most of the Christians i know do not adhere to these ideas. I`m a pre-med student. I have had a TON of science classes. I`m not science illeterate, and i know many of you guys are not either. I have been the the creation museum in kentucky. Some of the stuff there is a strech. That being said, there is A LOT of ACTUAL science being taught in that place. I know i am gonna get a bunch of "God and science don`t mix...you`re dumb! stupid christian" replies...but it is REAL science that gives REAL evidence for God and biblical events.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Crakr Again with the global warming? REALLY? )-|
0
Reply
Female 412
It`s funny because it`s so wrong and stereotypical.
0
Reply
Male 79
works for me... i can not think for myself so being told what to do and what to believe is fine by me. saves me time.

0
Reply
Male 559
"Human sexuality is not a `science` class."
This is true!

"Arguably global warming isn`t science either, it`s How to scam the world 101."
And now we`re back to 0.
0
Reply
Female 3,598
hahaha the no-no zone...
0
Reply
Male 730
Haha I love the 2+2=5 and "double-plus good" reference to 1984
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Human sexuality is not a `science` class. Arguably global warming isn`t science either, it`s How to scam the world 101.
0
Reply
Male 244
wheres one fish, two fish, blue fish, holy fish?
0
Reply
Male 3,745
to bash or to laugh...

meh ill laugh...
0
Reply
Male 1,081
2+2 does equal 5

...for extremely large values of 2, that is.
0
Reply
Male 1,744
Finally! Global warming explained in a way I can understand.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
You could sell it. Bible-Thumpers wouldn`t even recognize it as sarcasm.
0
Reply
Male 907
My health test on labeling the no-no zone would have been so much easier. Leaf.
0
Reply
Male 490
Its funny how none of the Christians I know think like that at all. =D But whatever, its always the 5-10% that are out there that get the spotlight.
0
Reply
Male 1,598
I just read Angels and Demons last week, and I`m having Dan-Brown-logic flashbacks... SCIENCE AND RELIGION ARE COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE, RAWR RAWR RAWR
0
Reply
Male 2,121
This is too over the top for me to think it`s serious. So I will laugh at it. Lol.
0
Reply
Male 1,587
darkgear- if mormans can have a sense of humor, so can the rest of us Christians
0
Reply
Male 360
hahaha!! double-plus good!!
0
Reply
Male 1,249
Note: Will work for other religions as well.
0
Reply
Male 881
[quote]Wow! Showing intolerance with more intolerance, mocking and stereotyping. No wonder we`re in the crap we`re in here in the good ole United States of I`m Better Than You.[/quote]That is how humans encourage others to conform to the group norm. It is as old as human socialization and it is not responsible for the "crap we`re in". What is responsible is not enough mockery. The internet and cable TV gives as much credibility to the crazy as it does to the sane.

Complete faith in religion used to be the accepted norm, but that is changing. Long overdue too!
0
Reply
Male 371
Chapter 5 is really abridged.
0
Reply
Female 102
Yeah, you especially better watch out for the no-no zones on those indeterminable gays. It`s almost certain that you would catch the Gay Plague then.
0
Reply
Male 1,244
a double-plus good book... lol 1984 XD
0
Reply
Male 1,378
Where are all the offended christian`s wall of texts?
0
Reply
Male 407
Use caution,many seem normal!!!!!
0
Reply
Male 639
If you say "No-no zone" a couple times in a row it sounds like "Known O-zone."

Just a fun fact to share with your friends. :P
0
Reply
Male 1,116
FEAR THE SWEATY GAYS
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Looks legit to me
0
Reply
Male 1,357
the no-no zone lol
0
Reply
Male 1,231
Massive lols at the `double plus good book`. Goota Love George Orwell!
0
Reply
Male 1,678
I like their theory on Global Warming.
0
Reply
Male 864
A condom DOES NOTHING. A woman should consult a man before anything.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
Another religious troll post??... These are getting old.
0
Reply
Male 256
Wow! Showing intolerance with more intolerance, mocking and stereotyping. No wonder we`re in the crap we`re in here in the good ole United States of I`m Better Than You.
0
Reply
Male 1,931
What`s not funny is a great deal of people actually believe this poo, if only to support their clouded delusions.
0
Reply
Male 880
A woman should consult a man before any thing.

Sounds reasonable.
0
Reply
Male 39,556
Last week, my buddy Ron and I went to the Creationist Museum here in San Diego. So many fun things there but as an example of what we saw, I`ll just describe the Neanderthall exhibit.

Neanderthals, it seems, have the same body shape as cold-weather people, like eskimos. And the shape of their heads are not dissimilar from what bones experience through aging. Since people lived to be 600 back in bible times the aging effects would be more than we see to day.

In a nut shell, Neanderthalls are just really REALLY old eskimos.

God says so.
0
Reply
Male 2,893
Yeah! F*ck religion!
0
Reply
Female 491
Link: The Revised Science Textbook For Christians [Pic] [Rate Link] - Editing is next to Godliness.
0
Reply