• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

oldest stone tools found

this last page is why I stopped reading this thread several pages ago:laughing
 
Corb said:
Another guy who thinks he should be the judge of approved subjects of discussion on Barf.
Who is forcing you to read this thread? Who is forcing anyone to participate in this discussion if they are not interested in it?
I have no interest in 18 out of 20 thread on the sink. I have never once even thought to complain that I find poop threads stupid or chat whores irrelevant or sport thread boring etc.
I simply ignore them. And best part is, it takes no effort. You should try it.
Click to expand...

Yes you only come into threads where you can interject your militant atheism and imply how much smarter you are than the religious folk. Then repeat the same dialogue youve already said in 20 different threads. Your act is tired. Its annoying because you ruin otherwise interesting conversation.
 
Last edited:
nbean16 said:
Yes you only come into threads where you can interject your militant atheism and imply how much smarter you are than the religious folk. Then repeat the same dialogue youve already said in 20 different threads. Your act is tired. Its annoying because you ruin otherwise interesting conversation.
Click to expand...

I clowned your ass in a thread years ago and ever since you never miss a chance to stalk and harass me.
I was having a interesting discussion about science when people incapable of adding anything interesting on the subject derailed the discussion with completely off topic nonsense.
Nowhere in this thread I brought up atheism. I can't even remember the last creationist thread I participated in.
I'm not going to tell you where to go and what to do with yourself because last time it got me baned, so please use your imagination :)
 
Corb said:
I clowned your ass in a thread years ago and ever since you never miss a chance to stalk and harass me.
I was having a interesting discussion about science when people incapable of adding anything interesting on the subject derailed the discussion with completely off topic nonsense.
Nowhere in this thread I brought up atheism. I can't even remember the last creationist thread I participated in.
I'm not going to tell you where to go and what to do with yourself because last time it got me baned, so please use your imagination :)
Click to expand...

Years ago and you were banned? I think youre confused. Im not sure how many creationist threads there are, but youre involved in every single thread where religion is even hinted at. its really pretty much all you mention and everyone already knows your view and how superior you are so its just boring.
 
Karbon said:
People get a stickler for C14 dating to be inaccurate, well that's why they use other methods too to help verify a timeline.

It's not simply just radio carbon dating, it's a corroboration of geological, other radio isotope data, anthropology and an array of other scientific disciplines.
Click to expand...

This!

It's just like the theory of natural selection. There is no single thread in the fossil record that can prove it. But when you add up the fossil record we do have, plus vestigial anatomy, and genetics there is only one conclusion that can be drawn regarding how life evolves.
 
scootergmc said:
So your problem is with creationists or 6000 year creationists? Are you saying that science is to the point that it has disproven any possibility of creation?"
Click to expand...

"Creation" by an all powerful, omniscient, ubiquitous being?
 
You can't disprove a nebulous undefined thing. Who created, how? In what way? When and by what mechanism?

That's the problem with god or a creator, they have no attributes or charactertiscs.


What can be said is a creator is not required to explain what we know.
 
scootergmc said:
Or beings? Sure, why not? Is that not the sense in which the term has been used?
Click to expand...

Why is it's science's job to disprove theism?
The one thing I can say for sure is that there is no scientifically reproducible or measurable evidence of what you suggest. Does that disprove the existence? No. Is that enough to support a theory that supreme being(s) don't exist? Yes. The nice thing about science is that it is forgiving. It can change if the evidence changes.
 
I really hate hearing that question over and over its so backwards

"look guys! I found evidence that's something that doesn't exist never existed!! Look at the non existing thing that I found!"

Wut
 
carries an axe said:
I really hate hearing that question over and over its so backwards

"look guys! I found evidence that's something that doesn't exist never existed!! Look at the non existing thing that I found!"

Wut
Click to expand...

all existence comes from non-existence
 
CocoLoco said:
Why is it's science's job to disprove theism?
The one thing I can say for sure is that there is no scientifically reproducible or measurable evidence of what you suggest. Does that disprove the existence? No. Is that enough to support a theory that supreme being(s) don't exist? Yes. The nice thing about science is that it is forgiving. It can change if the evidence changes.
Click to expand...


I don't believe for one second it is the job of science to disprove theism. I agree with the rest of your statement to the extent science supports a theory that a certain model of creation may not exist. The research and conclusions do nothing more, and hardly support a theory that supreme being(s) don't exist. But denials of deity based on the science behind dating (using whatever methods) or attempting the earth is farcical. As we've seen (again), drawing that conclusion supports a highly incomplete premise and just leads to ad hom....:kicknuts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top