Comments on Ambassador Watch: I Believe: Commentary by Dennis Diehl

Dennis Said "That's all I want in life. I...

2009-07-06T13:16:08.669+12:00

Dennis Said "That's all I want in life. I want to understand origins and meaning. That's all I want and I have taken this path since WCG."

Is that it? Anything else that the universe can do for you today?

Seems to be a pretty simple request, really. Tell you what, let's meet for lunch, bring a pen and paper, because it gets a little confusing to understand right at the beginning of the existence and, for lack of a better word, creation, of the universe part, but other than that it's pretty easy to follow.

Sounds like you already have the monkeys and the people thing figured out, so that will save us a few million years worth of notes.

At this point we won't be getting into the future, because as soon as you scientists figure out the past, then you'll want to know about the future, and I only have a few hours between you and the lady down the street whos kid has cancer. Yeah, yeah, she wants to know why I would take an innocent child, but hey, she can wait. (talk about a lengthy conversation, Jesus Christ!) Dennis, your question is clearly more important and a LOT less difficult to explain.

Tell you what, if you can go ahead and stop by her house, tell her and her kid that there is no God, that hoping for a miracle is pointless, and that when she dies, nothing will happen, that her short life on earth will be, really for the most part, meaningless, then you and I can spend more time focusing on your little need to "understand the origins".

Sincerely,
The Universe and Eternity (some people call me God.)

"And no, I’ve not read Harpur, but I’m pretty fami...

2009-01-22T10:51:00.000+13:00

"And no, I’ve not read Harpur, but I’m pretty familiar with the arguments, which aren’t all that convincing."

The fact that you haven't read Harpur, does not give you free license to discount the points he is making.

That said. I don't agree 100% with everything he says, hence the label of "conspiracy theorist" is unfortunately misapplied by you in this case. If however it was more humour on your part, I do beg your pardon, and rest assured I am highly amused. :-)

It isn't just the Egyptian trinity Christianity was based on, Jared (which you would know if you read the book); the documentary unfortunately only touches on the similarities Harpur found between those two systems. The book also touches on many other examples.

The point being, not that one is to be "saved" by believing one or the other of these gods is real; one achieves (IMO) real salvation by realizing what these myths and allegories can teach us about ourselves, and others, and the world around us. That is Harpur's main point, as well.

I would also put to you, if you would permit, the same question I put to Bob: Tom Harpur identifies himself as Christian (and he continues to do so): Do you believe that Tom Harpur is a Christian?

< So now your disbelief in leprechauns is a bel...

2009-01-22T07:17:00.000+13:00

< So now your disbelief in leprechauns is a belief system, just like any other religion? >

Yep, uh-huh. Okay, you win and I agree that it does not take any belief system whatsoever to reject the imaginary.

However, the fact remains that what one person may believe to be "imaginary", another believes is reality.

Which leads to another point. You, Paul Ray, claim to be a scientist, but just because you say you are one, does not make it so; and, since you have convinced me that you are just an imaginary scientist (and a really dumb one, at that!), I can totally appreciate how easy it is to reject the imaginary.

So that's it - you're a reject and I am done conversing with you. LOL.

I wasn’t being disingenuous, TPH, I was just havin...

2009-01-22T04:26:00.000+13:00

I wasn’t being disingenuous, TPH, I was just having a little fun with your belief that that Christian theology was “ripped off” from the pagan Egyptian triad of Osiris-Isis-Horus. I know I’ve got an odd sense of humor, but I just find the whole thing to be humorous. To me it looks like you’ve traded Armstrongist conspiracy theories for what amounts to a conspiracy theory of a different sort. There’s simply nothing to suggest that Christian theology developed along those lines. The developmental course of Christian theological arguments, speculations, and dogmatic definitions is well documented and not at all hidden, and there’s just nothing in that record even to suggest such a direct influence as you believe in.

And no, I’ve not read Harpur, but I’m pretty familiar with the arguments, which aren’t all that convincing. Analogy and similarity do not prove genealogy.

Back to Darwinian matters, I went to school in Pen...

2009-01-22T00:31:00.000+13:00

Back to Darwinian matters, I went to school in Pennsylvania (not Dover) and if you blinked in science class you may have missed the chapter on evolution. The outline was fairly brief and highly generalized. An argument in English class between the teacher and a pro-evolution student was far more spirited.

Somehow I think if the short coverage of evolution was to be opened for creationist alternative view, it would end in a fight between young earthers, gap theorist, ID, a day is not a 24-hour day and other interpreters of Genesis. Like Europeans being expelled from Japan because of fights between Franciscans and Dominicans.

"But I don’t recall them bringing any Egyptian god...

2009-01-21T12:52:00.000+13:00

"But I don’t recall them bringing any Egyptian gods to this continent, nor forcing America Indians to worship them."

You clearly have never read Tom Harpur's The Pagan Christ, then.

"The holy trinity" was actually a ripoff of Isis/Osiris/Horus, Egyptian gods. If you don't believe me, watch for yourself.

Also note, I said Europeans, not Africans, and your attempt to subvert my words into some kind of racist remark is extremely disigenuous.

"...it was to point out that your atheist beliefs ...

2009-01-21T10:09:00.000+13:00

"...it was to point out that your atheist beliefs are every bit as much of a belief system (or faith) as any other religion..."

So now your disbelief in leprechauns is a belief system, just like any other religion? This is where your point shatters and plummets. It does not take faith or a belief system to reject the imaginary. Unless, of course your rejection of the existence of leprechauns is a faith/belief system, like any other religion. Is it??

Paul Ray

To Paul Ray:My original intent was not to argue wi...

2009-01-21T06:15:00.000+13:00

To Paul Ray:

My original intent was not to argue with you over whether or not God exists; it was to point out that your atheist beliefs are every bit as much of a belief system (or faith) as any other religion. That you would prefer to substitute other descriptors for your beliefs (a.k.a. "reality") does not change the REALITY that atheism is a religion, and merely YOUR VERSION of "reality."

If you cannot or will not see this simple truth, then you are far more ignorant and in-denial than anyone would have thought.

Someone posted: "Cancer was rare in 1900. Now...

2009-01-21T04:42:00.000+13:00

Someone posted: "Cancer was rare in 1900. Now, between 33 and 50 percent of the population will develop cancer."

--> Diagnosis of cancer was less common in 1900, that does not necessarily mean cancer was rare. It stands to reason that as both knowledge and access to services grow we will have a better idea of who is afflicted with what.

Paul wrote: "All seriousness aside, you really have no idea what you are talking about and it's really not your fault. I know many people just like you and most of their scientific and medical knowledge comes from two sources: The pulpit and documents with headlines that always start with "The secret cure all that doctors don't want you to know!"

--> Paul, that is all too tragically true. That particular attitude is affecting someone very very close to me who has cancer and diabetes. Neither the crackpot ideasa in the books or the laying on of hands has made a bit of difference and the situation is getting worse...and this man has much more faith than a mustard seed...

I like Raytard! It flows off the tongue much bette...

2009-01-20T15:49:00.000+13:00

I like Raytard! It flows off the tongue much better than the bulky Armstrongtard, or Sabbatard.

"Paul, it looks like you are just carelessly repeating the unproven and baseless cheap shots..."

What cheap shots? I asked you to support your charges. Once again, what is the difference between "true science" and the science used by "evilutionists?" Can you show us how the fossil record does not support evolution?

"The modern meddling of "science" certainly is creating a lot of "resistant strains" that might be coming to visit you in the near future."

How do resistant strains of virus and bacteria come about?

"It also seems to be increasing the number of people who get cancer, but does not seem to be curing it."

How does a "resistant strain" cause cancer?

"It is just always raising more money for nice houses and cars and golf clubs that get hidden on the accounting papers under the heading of "cancer research.""

You've unveiled it at last! The grand conspiracy of cancer research. Yes, we go to college for 9-10 years just to make all that big money! In fact, when I graduate and start a postdoc position, I'll be making an ungodly 33K a year! And then if I join a pharmeceutical firm, I can make a staggering 75K a year! I'll sleep on hundred dollar bills! And I'll let you in on a secret- at the lab, we don't actually do any research. We worship the devil, play ping-pong and throw darts and smoke cigars rolled from money! We could care less about furthering scientific knowledge and working to cure people of disease!

By the way, what is God's track record on curing cancer?

"Cancer was rare in 1900. Now, between 33 and 50 percent of the population will develop cancer."

Source?

""Cancer research" might be too profitable now to find a cure."

Uh, could you let the NIH know about this little nugget? Because they won't renew most of our grants in the department (because invading Iraq takes precedence) and we are running out of money to light our cigars with.

As far as drug companies go, and medicine in general, I agree with you. They haven't done anything in the past hundred years or so except make people more sick and enslave them financially. I am sure that you and others of like mind experience no disease ('cause God heals you and if that doesn't work rub in a bit of tea-tree oil)and I sure that part of that comes from staying away from doctors and pharmaceuticals in general.

All seriousness aside, you really have no idea what you are talking about and it's really not your fault. I know many people just like you and most of their scientific and medical knowledge comes from two sources: The pulpit and documents with headlines that always start with "The secret cure all that doctors don't want you to know!"

Paul Ray

"LOL! Well congratulations - you "accept reality."...

2009-01-20T15:11:00.000+13:00

"LOL! Well congratulations - you "accept reality." So do I, and so do millions of other professing Christians."

No you don't. You no more accept reality than does the fellow who is convinced that the Zeltoids from Saturn are eating up his brainwaves.

"...you have nothing to look forward to after you die..."

Why would I? Am I supposed to? Is life a blue collar job where you earn a some sort of a cosmic pension?

"...and that must scare the crap out of you..."

Not at all. Death is death, and it comes to all living organisms. However, for you it will hold a bit of trepidation. Did I really get saved? Did God really forgive me for that pork chop? Will I be thrown in the Lake of Fire? Am I sure it's Jesus up there and not Allah?

"All of your research, workaholism, learning, living and spending time with your loved ones for......NOTHING!"

What do you mean "for nothing?" Was I supposed to conduct research and love my family for a lick of a heavenly brass ring? For the sole purpose of sucking up to a psychotic god or godess? This where I feel sorry for many Christians. To them, life has no purpose- it's a giant waiting room where they flip through magazines and look at their shoes, waiting for the Magical Mystery Tour to begin.

"Unless there really is a hell, and you find out after it's too late that your soul cannot die."

Yep. I better repent now. There's nothing like love and adulation inspired by the threat of torture and death.

"Well, good luck with your version of "reality.""

And good luck with yours. I hope in the last few minutes of your life, your brain provides you with a nice hallucination of some kind of magical afterlife. I really do. It will all seem worth it then.

Paul Ray

"All of these costs have to be factored into a pil...

2009-01-20T14:43:00.000+13:00

"All of these costs have to be factored into a pill that cost "1 cent" to manufacture."

Absolutely. Many people simply do not understand the tortuous (but necessary) path that results in a FDA approved pharmaceutical. It literally takes years, and only a tiny minority of those drugs being developed will see the marketplace.

Paul Ray

Hey brain-genius Paul Ray:LOL! Well congratulation...

2009-01-20T10:52:00.000+13:00

Hey brain-genius Paul Ray:

LOL! Well congratulations - you "accept reality." So do I, and so do millions of other professing Christians.

The only difference is, that your verson of "reality" (a.k.a. your atheist beliefs/faith) is that you have nothing to look forward to after you die, and that must scare the crap out of you. All of your research, workaholism, learning, living and spending time with your loved ones for......NOTHING!

Unless there really is a hell, and you find out after it's too late that your soul cannot die.

Well, good luck with your version of "reality."

--CLA

The jovial Hindu had no problem with the Christian...

2009-01-20T09:47:00.000+13:00

The jovial Hindu had no problem with the Christian trinitarian Godhead, he simply viewed it as a Christian glimpse of Hindu idea of avatars of God. "Its very much like Shiva and Ganesh you know..."

No, it’s not at all like Shiva and Ganesh. The Hindu notion of avatars of Brahma-Atman has no relation or similarity to the Christian doctrine of the three Divine Persons of one eternal God. Hindu avatars would be closer akin to a Sabellian modalist view of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and even that’s only an imperfect comparison. The ideas of “persona” and “avatar” arose and were developed independently and within wholly different cultural and theological milieus.

Bible thumpers like Larry, Byker Bob, Questeruk should ponder why their religious-nut cousins, the Muslims, reject the crucifixion as unhistorical.

Because the founder of Islam took a fancy to some of the Gnostic/docetic myths he’d come across, in which Jesus wasn’t really crucified but turned Himself invisible and deceptively let poor unwitting Simon of Cyrene get nailed to the cross in His place. That myth appealed to Muhammad, who seems to have been unable to comprehend how the crucifixion and death of Jesus could have been God’s greatest success. Furthermore, since Muhammad wanted to exalt himself over Jesus as the pinnacle and seal of God’s prophets, it obviously wouldn’t do to have a lesser prophet be God Incarnate, which Muhammad certainly wasn’t, and rise from the dead the third day, which Muhammad had no ability to do, nor is it probable that he would ever have taken too keenly to submitting to torture and death. When you’re trying to convince everybody that you’re the greatest man in all of time and space, all rivals must be demoted or shunted aside. It’s remarkable that Islam accepts doctrine of the virginal conception of Jesus (even though the Quran mashes Mary together with Moses’ sister Miriam).

Why couldn't Christian apologists refute this "heresy" way back in the 7th century?

Refuting the heresy is easy: however, it’s much more difficult to engage in successful apologetics when you’re opposing the beliefs of somebody who is dreadfully convinced he’s right and is apt to put a scimitar to your throat if you dare challenge him.

Why couldn't they cite the Muslims reliable historical accounts?

They did, but Muslims accept no historical accounts as superior to the alleged revelation in the Quran. Muslims explain away earlier, more reliable accounts as, ever so conveniently for them, having been corrupted and rewritten by the Jews and the Christians.

Because there were none except for the non historical "Gospels" - the first of which - Mark - was a colossal fraud with stories taken from the Homeric Epics and applied to "Jesus".

I trust you’ve read the Iliad and the Odyssey, so which stories from the Homeric epics does St. Mark’s Gospel apply to Jesus?

Or perhaps you’re confusing Homer with Hesiod?

The following gospels then copied Mark (not a good sign) except John who was just plain stoned when he wrote his rambling gnostic ravings.

A tendentious hyperbole, obviously. I’ve read stuff, and heard music, from people who were stoned when they wrote, and St. John’s Gospel doesn’t bear any similarity to it. Nor does that Gospel resemble the genuine “Gnostic ravings” that were churned out by various sects during the second and third centuries.

the Europeans came along and started forcing African (Egyptian) aboriginal gods down their throats.

Well, we know African slaves brought some of their aboriginal gods to America – hence the religions of voodoo, Santeria, and Palo Mayombe. But I don’t recall them bringing any Egyptian gods to this continent, nor forcing America Indians to worship them.

Of course you’re just repeating your belief that the monotheistic Christian God was in fact derived from pagan Egyptian polytheism, a contention that cannot be taken seriously.

Oh come on...just write them in a concise list and...

2009-01-20T09:12:00.000+13:00

Oh come on...just write them in a concise list and send it in.

Well, the concise list would be the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. The advantage of being a Catholic is that you can just disengage your brain and let the Pope do all the heavy intellectual lifting for you. It’s so much easier that way. ;-)

Yes, I’m just having a little fun. I’ll try to get serious now.

You know, heaven, hell, Mary, Pope, evolution, creation etc...Rubber hitting road stuff

Well, the “Mary” and “Pope” stuff is pretty straight-down-the-line traditional and orthodox: the four Marian dogmas (immaculate conception, divine motherhood, perpetual virginity, assumption), Mary’s powerful intercession, Petrine primacy, papal infallibility. I think several of the claimed Marian apparitions are probably authentic, including Fatima, but others such as Medjugorje, Garabandal, and Akita I believe are bogus. I cringe whenever there are reports of crowds of the gullible and superstitious flocking to images of “Mary” in defective window glass of office buildings or in the rust and salt deposits under interstate overpasses. I believe the unworthiness and gross corruption of so very many of the Roman pontiffs is a good argument that the papacy was divinely instituted, because a merely human institution should have been consumed and annihilated long ago by the venality, sensuality, greed, lust, and blinkered foolishness of far too many of the Popes. By extension the argument can be applied to the whole Catholic Church and her cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and laity, whose lives and conduct have been so frequently a counter-witness to the Gospel.

I believe evolution in some form is very, very likely to be correct, though I’m not entirely convinced. I do not believe that God created the heavens and the earth in seven literal 24-hour days, nor do I believe the author of Genesis (Moses or whoever) believed that or intended his readers to take him literally. I believe so-called Creation Science could never have originated had certain kinds of Protestants not dismissed the traditional allegorical sense of Sacred Scripture. I do believe that all humans have a common origin in a single primeval couple, known in Scripture as Adam (Man) and Eve (Mother), and that they fell from divine grace through disobedience, thus bringing curses on all creation, but I believe it is fruitless to try to ascertain when exactly they may have lived. The chronologies of Gen. 5 and 11 may be literal, or may be symbolic – I do not trouble myself wondering about which approach may be the right one, though the literal interpretation seems pretty unlikely based on what we know, or think we know.

I believe that so-called “Peking Man,” whose remains so conveniently disappeared making it impossible for them to be studied, was probably just another hoax perpetrated by Teilhard the Charlatan, er, de Chardin, who also seems to be implicated in the Piltdown Man fraud.

As for heaven and hell, again my views are orthodox and traditional. Our souls are in peril, but I hope and pray that no one has ever or will ever definitively reject grace and go to hell, even though I strongly suspect that is an unrealistic hope. But I believe God is the judge, not me, and so I pray for everyone and commit them to His justice which is merciful, and to His mercy which is just. It is my hope that, in the end, in Christ none shall be lost and that every soul will be reunited with the Father who gave us life. I believe that heaven is the full experience of God’s boundless love beyond time and space, and the perfection and fullness of all the good that we know only incompletely and temporarily in this world.

An ignorance is bliss anonymous posted wrote; "It ...

2009-01-20T03:17:00.000+13:00

An ignorance is bliss anonymous posted wrote; "It has been said that the unethical and godless people behind the drug companies are not interested in curing anyone of anything, as that would put them out of business. What the drug companies really want is to make MONEY. The drug companies are interested in developing a pill that they can make for a penny and sell for $50, and that they can get people to start taking as early in life as possible, and that they will have to take every day for the rest of their lives."

"Drug" companies have developed treatments, vaccines, anti virals, and anti biotics that have cured, prevented, or eradicated a lot of diseases that were problematic for humankind.

You might want to take note of that.

"Drug" companies have developed therapies to deal with organs damaged by disease, abuse, or congenital disorder to improve quality of life and longevity for those suffering from them.

You need to understand the difference between killing off bacteria or a virus and propping up a failing organ(s).

"Drug" companies spend billions of dollars to research, patent, conduct 3 phases of clinical trials, get FDA approval(FOR USA), and get the pertinent data in front of prescriber so that an informed decision can be made by the prescriber as to which "drug" will best deal with a patient's issue. The clock on the patent expiring continues to tick whether or not they have FDA approval. All of these costs have to be factored into a pill that cost "1 cent" to manufacture.

They have a reasonable expectation to a return on their investment.

I don't like the prices of drugs anymore than the next guy, however the efficacy is a million times better than a rag soaked in olive oil, laying on of handss and some words uttered sotto voce...

Anon 5:15Thanks for the tip on the SciAm article. ...

2009-01-19T20:12:00.000+13:00

Anon 5:15

Thanks for the tip on the SciAm article. I haven't been to their website for a while, and their podcasts haven't been downloading correctly.

As for What the drug companies really want is to make MONEY, perhas it would be better to add an adjective of abundance or use a word like profiteering. I like to provide my services for free, but I also like to make money. And while some company (or church) boards put reward over service, sometimes it's due to us greedy shareholders.

And you're right about business ideas rising and falling. The current splinter leaders will never repeat the billion dollar success of HWA's WCG.

Please, refer to scripture by all means, but spare...

2009-01-19T17:34:00.000+13:00

Please, refer to scripture by all means, but spare us all the actual quotes. We're all well trained to turn up passages quick-smart - an enduring legacy from Sabbath sermons.

The pot, once again, is stirred 2 Cor 4:4 whose ...

2009-01-19T17:18:00.000+13:00

The pot, once again, is stirred 

2 Cor 4:4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.

1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

2 Tim 2:12-14 If we endure, We shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself. Remind them of these things, charging them before the Lord not to strive about words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearers.

Rom 10:14-17 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Thank you Dennis, at least you have gonads

Yes, the same science that brought us wacky things...

2009-01-19T17:15:00.000+13:00

Yes, the same science that brought us wacky things like antibiotics for resistant strains. Or treating cancer. Yep, it's all false.

You retards have had to go underground, your terminology "evolving" from "Creationism" to "Creation Science" to Intelligent Design" to "Teach the Controversy" to "Teach the Strengths and Weaknessess" as your psychotic cause keeps getting pimp-slapped in the courts.

Paul Ray

Paul Raytard,
(Oops! Forgive me, Gavin, for I have told it like it is. Ha ha ha. Forgive me some more, Gavin, for reading some of this stuff gives me the giggles. Ok, Gavin, can I just buy some indulgences?)

Paul, it looks like you are just carelessly repeating the unproven and baseless cheap shots from an article in some recent UnScientific UnAmerican magazine that uses "the power of steady misrepresentation" to try to explain "The Evolution of Evolution." The reason that the theory of evolution has had to evolve is that it was wrong from the start and yet some bad people still wanted to believe in it.

The modern meddling of "science" certainly is creating a lot of "resistant strains" that might be coming to visit you in the near future. It also seems to be increasing the number of people who get cancer, but does not seem to be curing it. It is just always raising more money for nice houses and cars and golf clubs that get hidden on the accounting papers under the heading of "cancer research." Cancer was rare in 1900. Now, between 33 and 50 percent of the population will develop cancer. "Cancer research" might be too profitable now to find a cure.

One author wrote, "Let's think for a moment about how many diseases have been cured in the last fifty years. The answer is no disease has been cured! Every single disease is on the increase. The last disease that was ever cured was polio." When Jonas Salk's wife developed polio, Jonas Salk went into the laboratory and within six months developed the cure for polio. At the time, polio was a billion dollar a year business. The problem for some people was that the polio industry virtually went bankrupt overnight.

It has been said that the unethical and godless people behind the drug companies are not interested in curing anyone of anything, as that would put them out of business. What the drug companies really want is to make MONEY. The drug companies are interested in developing a pill that they can make for a penny and sell for $50, and that they can get people to start taking as early in life as possible, and that they will have to take every day for the rest of their lives.

For the reality-challenged:What is Science?http://...

2009-01-19T09:34:00.000+13:00

For the reality-challenged:

What is Science?

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com 2009/01/what-is-science.html

Paul Ray

Thick-skinned anonymous 01:29:You may be closely r...

2009-01-19T08:07:00.000+13:00

Thick-skinned anonymous 01:29:

You may be closely related to the Neandertals but recent genetic studies show that the rest of us are "only distant relatives".

See, for example:

100,000 Year-old DNA Sequence Allows New Look At Neandertal's Genetic Diversity

The key quote is:

"The Neandertal sequence from Scladina confirms that Neandertals and modern humans were only distant relatives..."

Hope this is not too strong for the tender-skinned creationists here.

"True science leads to technical innovations like ...

2009-01-19T07:13:00.000+13:00

"True science leads to technical innovations like some of the wonderful American automobiles."

And if "true science" used the method of "science" used by Kreationists , then we probably wouldn't have the technology we have today.

"The evilutionist's so-called "science" is just a trick to justify immorality and give "funny boys" a pain in the arse."

What is the difference between "true science" and "evilution science?" And you are right, you know. Darwin made all of this up just to ensure that homosexuals would have a legitimate reason to engage in sodomy. It's all a big conspiracy.

"It is your own falsely so-called "science" of evilution that is biting people on the arse. Ha ha ha ..."

Yes, the same science that brought us wacky things like antibiotics for resistant strains. Or treating cancer. Yep, it's all false.

"The fossil record has never supported the theory of evilution. There were NEVER ANY true intermediate species..."

That's a pretty hefty charge. Can you demonstrate this for us, using the fossil record? What I mean is, can you go through the fossil record (not the Kreationist fossil record)and explain to us how it doesn't support evolution? And then can you tell us what those fossils, if they aren't transitional species, are supposed to be?

"Evilutionists still using ancient mistakes, lies, and deliberate frauds in school textbooks to promote evilution can only go on for so long. Ha ha ha ..."

We'll see about that. You retards have had to go underground, your terminology "evolving" from "Creationism" to "Creation Science" to Intelligent Design" to "Teach the Controversy" to "Teach the Strengths and Weaknessess" as your psychotic cause keeps getting pimp-slapped in the courts.

Paul Ray

"P.S. I hope this is not too strong for the tender...

2009-01-19T05:24:00.000+13:00

"P.S. I hope this is not too strong for the tender-skinned skeptics here, or for Gavin who seemed to be really hoping to get away from the truth of God."

Awwwwww, Tom.

If only you hadn't misspelled "evolution", ya mighta been a contender.......

"the Indians were already suffering in America for...

2009-01-19T05:22:00.000+13:00

"the Indians were already suffering in America for at least 4,000 years

Hey! Watch it, Corkster! They were just living their lives, and didn't really start "suffering" till the Europeans came along and started forcing African (Egyptian) aboriginal gods down their throats.

(African gods had a practical place, in the deserts of Africa. Transplanting those gods to the forests and plains of North America --- not so much useful.)

"except John who was just plain stoned when he wrote his rambling gnostic ravings."

Apparently so was Moses. And some science fiction writers. Doesn't mean you can't enjoy the story --- so long as you never forget where to draw the line, between reality, and fiction.

"man's treatment (au naturel) of fellow man would cry out for a better standard of behavior."

What about the ethic of reciprocity Bob? What about mirror neurons Bob?

You may require a self-created god to see these things, but that doesn't mean your self-created god is right for anyone else --- but yourself.

Stop trying to fit all other humans into the mold that your god insists upon, and start focusing on trying to fit into that mold yourself.