Why are atheists so threatened by Intelligent Design?

Not posting any facts would still better than posting things that are simply wrong. Devolution is an obsolete phrase in science, deal with it.

 

They don't admit it, but take that attitude when convenient.

OK, fine, but then you can't have it both ways by saying atheism isn't a religion.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't a lifetime of financial support in a marriage a form of compensation?

 

I just said that religion is belief and worship of a superhuman controlling power. Atheism denies the existence of a particular class of superhuman controlling power. The two might potentially overlap by containing some individuals that match both descriptions, just like some republicans might be Christians, but that doesnt make atheism a religion, any more than Christianity is a form of Republicanism.

 

Is there some advantage to being able to pull an engine with one hand?

 

What do you think?

And yea in your world the NFL just hires the weakest defense ends and pays them million's to suck.

 

Probably not since I have a three ton engine crane just for that purpose. This tool gives me the advantage of getting an engine out without getting a hernia in the process.

Is there some sort of advantage to the NFL? Would the world come to an end if the NFL ceased to exist?

 

Well now your stupid response's is starting to bore me.

 

And why would you need to buy it if you "evolved" stronger then a monkey?

 

And a engine don't weigh more then 500 lbs unless you still drive an edsel

Lol..

 

(My bold)

Fur presumably is an adaptation to cold. Once you have sufficient brainpower for the problem, you can learn to take fur from animals, build fires, take/build shelter, & so on. & of course, you can function in the tropics without keeling over from heatstroke right away.

Is humanity weak? & compared to what? We're @ the top of the local food chain - there is nothing as a species that successfully hunts & kills man, except other men. This is the mistake that the Imperial Japanese Army & Navy made in the 1930s through WWII - they were v. good retail killers - sword, bayonet, rifle, etc. They trained hard & were v. proficient. Pound for pound, they were likely the best soldiers in the World, @ the time.

The US theory of warfare was that we were wholesale killers - arty, bombers, firebombs over Japan, & ultimately nukes. The Japanese military created proficient individuals, we built military systems - radios/field phones, spotters, ballistics calculators, arty, logistics; bombers, photo analysts, logistics; mining, physicists, engineers, techs, explosives. & of course, by comparison with Japan, we had nearly unlimited resources & manpower to work with.

an engine block ... with one hand - That's an interesting conceit. As if a kind of Superman were the object of evolution. It doesn't work like that, TMK, evolution isn't constantly selecting for the physically strongest specimen possible. If that were true, evolution would have stopped @ the large dinosaur carnivores, or the giant mammals - apes, etc. - that followed the dinosaurs.

There's another problem there - the strength of materials. Flesh & bone can only do so much - even if you seriously juiced muscle fiber - laced it with titanium & other high tensile-strength materials, you still have the bones. Those would also have to be braced - probably easier to replace them outright & reweave muscle/nerve etc. around them. But I'm not aware of any material that would do what you describe. The other issue there is the engine block itself. If you could exert enough horsepower through your bare hand to lift an engine block, How would you apply the power without distorting the metal? It would need a harness of some kind, attachment points, etc. Otherwise, there's no point to the exercise. It's the same issue with Superman lowering a 747 to Earth by the tail - there's nothing back there to support all that weight. The structural supports are built into the landing gear structural assembly, holding the wings/engines/fuel tanks on, & the spine of the aircraft.

It's a non-starter, from start to finish.

 

Evolution isnt about raw physical strength. Its about capability to reproduce. If being able to lift something as heavy as an engine with your hands led to having more offspring than being smart enough to invent the wheel and discover fire, maybe your bizarre Hulk-like apes might have been sitting here instead of us.

 

It's hardly lifetime for everyone and only cowards post partial quotes

 

I agree, I just wish atheists would stop trying to have it both ways by saying NK isn't an atheist state.

- - - Updated - - -

And only dummies put up posts that make no sense.

 

Because then I could hire 10 people like you and make money while you bust your ass making me money. And since using the tool is far more efficient, I wouldn't have to pay workman's comp insurance for you not to work while you nurse your hernia.

- - - Updated - - -

Y block's weren't that heavy.

 

You lack the capability to "tick me off", dear boy, whatever made you think you could?
All you did was mouth some assertions unworthy of the silliest beginner.

The one about proving a theory is a perennial fav. for the stone ignorant.

As for debating you, you havent a clue what you are talking about, its no more possible for you to debate me on this than it would be a debate if you wandered as a 8 yr old into a math conference and tried to debate them on a claim that they were just making funny squiggles, not doing math.

You will notice that others commenting on your posts say the same:

You have no capacity to engage adults here in a debate on evolution.

 

He made it up.

 

Yup like I posted before it is about getting a mate. If you study the animal world only the strong survive.

Hey just throwing a curve ball out there to make people to think.

It's not like one day a human was born into a air condition mansion with a color t.v

 

There is a distinct disadvantage to having a lot of expensive muscle mass.

See who would survive in the jungle / desert better,the 110 lb Filipino or a 250 lb Schwarzenegger?

 

now that just is not so. there are also the dishonest, and the incapable.

 

As has been pointed out numerous times, misogyny isn't just hate. You're stuck on the definition that is easiest to attack. There's no point continuing this conversation since you're unable to have an honest discussion. In multiple threads, you repeat the same lame defense and pretend as though questions go unanswered. I could answer you a half dozen times (like in the other thread), and you'd just keep acting as though I haven't. I have no more patience for showing you the problems with your holy book when you're just going to keep ignoring them and imagining your faith has no history of misogyny.

 

Show me an honest fundy and I will show you a probable miracle.

 

I never said that statement, please try and keep up.

 

Yes, worm or dog will, do, as some atheist crazily said the NT implied.

My feelings about you completely, you ignore the answers to your bogus Biblical objections. We do agree to continue is pointless.

I'll give you points for ego, but why should a Christian agree with an atheist's slimy, unfounded attacks?

 

More juvenile insults from the usual suspect.

 

slimy? is that a new way of saying concerned enough to ask the hard questions (which are easy questions when asked of anything other than religion - aka, buying a used car).

I see you've also chosen to call scrutiny 'unfounded attacks'. it's not our fault that scrutiny reveals the unsavoury nature of your myths, any more than it is an unfounded attack by a jury when a murderer is determined to be guilty. granted, we run with it at times, but if you could see your myth from outside the bubble you might understand why we're prone to doing so. further fuel is added when people with good intentions buy into a fairy story which forces them to compromise their own morals.