@BigD

I used the word "cretin" in its truest sense. It is derived from the French for Christian, and was used to describe the innocent ignorance of the simple minded.

Also, your right to express your opinion is guaranteed (which it wouldn't be if religious fundamentalists like you had their way...) but this doesn't make your viewpoint anything like as valid as mine. Based on supporting evidence alone.

Can I just ask, do you actually believe in the story of Adam and Eve as unequivocal truth?

AndyC

@BigD

Quote:

My viewpoint is just as valid as yours and with a greater upswell of support amongst the British people including Scotland.

Please allow me once again, to correct the false impression that you are seeking to create. Polls carried out by reputable polling organisations on a wide sample range of the population, asking non perjorative, balanced questions show a majority of the respondents to be perfectly happy with the proposed change in the law. It is only the organisations that restrict their sample to like minded individuals, asking loaded questions that produce the results that you like.
The days when people like you could simply say the magic phrase "god says so" to instantly end all debate and get your own way are long gone. The majority are no longer impressed because the majority in this country admit to having
no religion, and of the portion claiming affiliation to the CofE most are "classified ad" christians, attending for births, marriages, and deaths only.

Quote:

Save marriage and let the aggression and intolerance of family value stop

Marriage is not under threat, it is being expanded, with its benefits available to people who were previously excluded. In fact the only agression and intolerance being displayed is coming from a christian spreading the usual hate and intolerance

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@BigD

I think if we look over the last month of science versus religion we see some stark constrats on contribution to society.

* Science is.. testing cure for HIV, testing Kidney Cancer Vaccine, launching to other planets, finding the materials that make up mass, discovered a new species of bird.

* Religion has got us bigotry and infighting over eating a greasy chicken sandwich. Not to mention killings in Wisconsin (likely Colorado) and burning Islamic churches.

Which examples show the best of our societies?


And in recent research your eyes give away your sexual desires. Pupil response cooresponds to sexual attractiveness. It'd only be a 'choice' if the pupils responded equally to both sexes. Which it does do for some. We'd call those bi-sexuals as they are attracted to both.

Another notch in the sexual preference is not a choice tree. Do you know what is completely a choice? BIGOTRY

Last edited by BrianK on 07-Aug-2012 at 04:50 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

I think if we look over the last month of science versus religion we see some stark constrats on contribution to society.

What are you on about?! Science sits non-committal on the issue of homosexuality, many scientists are also Christians and even some Geologists are including me! You are confusing unproven scientific theories such as evolution and the 'big bang' theory with the scientific method which is the real driver of technological/medical/scientific advancement that benefits us all.

The real issue here is homosexuality cannot be genetically carried because if it was it would quickly be eradicated due to homosexuals inability to procreate! Think on!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

Science sits non-committal on the issue of homosexuality,

Science is about learning about our universe. This is indeed different than generating morality. So science should indeed be non-committmal.

Quote:

You are confusing unproven scientific theories such as evolution and the 'big bang' theory

You are half right. 'Big Bang' works well but is indeed unproven. However, evolution (defined as: the generation and mututaion of current life from past life due to environmental factors) is proven.


Quote:

The real issue here is homosexuality cannot be genetically carried

We don't know how sexuality is functions from the DNA. It's only since the 70s we have any human DNA sequencing. And we're far from understanding how that key to life works in all it's beauty.

But, let's play with the question if homosexuality can be genetically carried. (Afterall about 1900 different animals display the behavior so there might be something to this idea.) Being gay is not the same thing as being infertile. So being gay can be carried. We might have a lesbian mate with a gay man or straight man. Or, they can, of course, simply go to a sperm bank and make a withdrawl. I know of a Lesbian couple that used the same donor for each of their babies. Thereby creating half genetically related siblings. Also, I'd think we should be able to use the egg from one woman, clone it, drive out the DNA, insert the lesbian partner's DNA, zap it with electricity and make gay clones. (Yes I suspect I gave you nightmares for tonight.)

Also, if sexuality is carried in the genes certain mutuations can occur within genes. So, we would expect two straight parents may have small, but possible, odds of outputting a DNA molecule which could give them a homosexual offspring. It's kind of like the chicken and the egg question - which came first? Science says it's the egg. We certainly know straight parents can have gay offspring. (Perhaps they should stop that. )

While we don't know if sexuality is carried (or not carried) by DNA. If it is there clearly is ways it can be genetically carried.

Quote:

The real issue here is homosexuality cannot be genetically carried because if it was it would quickly be eradicated due to homosexuals inability to procreate! Think on!

Homosexuals don't have an inability to procreate. And that isn't really the issue here either. Heterosexuals not being able to procreate are very much allowed to get married, right?
But perhaps the inability to procreate is a choice as well? I mean, if it was genetic, the heterosexuals with the inability to procreate would be eradicated too, right?


Furthermore, I'd really like to hear an answer to AndyC's question regarding your stance on Adam and Eve and the snake.

_________________

@BigD

You, sir, are no geologist. Irrespective of what a piece of paper may say to the contrary.

AndyC

@BigD

First off - the AW site says 666 so I wanted to make another post. Didn't want you to be too scared of posting.

Second - you claim your viewpoint is just as valid. When bear false witness against your neighbors by claiming untruths such as evolution is unproven and humans are only devolving not improving it's fairly hard to say you have validity there. Your viewpoint is as free to express as anyone else - that's fair. Same validity - in many ways is not the case. Freedom of speech is not equivalent to equality in worth of ideas.

Last edited by BrianK on 08-Aug-2012 at 05:17 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @BigD First off - the AW site says 666 so I wanted to make another post. Didn't want you to be too scared of posting.

Actually, the number is 616. The 666 comes about due to a mistranslation.

(In 2005, however, a fragment of papyrus 115 was revealed, containing the earliest known version of that part of the Book of Revelation discussing the Number of the Beast. It gave the number as 616, suggesting that this may have been the original. Apparently the two different numbers reflect two different spellings of the Emperor Nero/Neron's name, for which this number is believed to be a code.)

Makes you wonder how many other things are poorly mistranslated. Perhaps Wejus Christ was cross when he died? A dame was the first in the garden of Oden and she ate a snake in an apple pie.

I'll be sent straight to Hull for this rasperous comment.

_________________
"Anyone with a modicum of reasonableness may realize that it is like comparing the ride in the world to descend the stairs to catch the milk in the house."

Google Translate

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

Actually, the number is 616. The 666 comes about due to a mistranslation. Makes you wonder how many other things are poorly mistranslated

Revelation 22:18 says "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll"

Oops I guess Christians get the original beast w/ 616 and a new beast of their own creation with 666.

@BrianK

Quote:

BigD Quote: You are confusing unproven scientific theories such as evolution and the 'big bang' theory BrianK Qoute: You are half right. 'Big Bang' works well but is indeed unproven. However, evolution (defined as: the generation and mututaion of current life from past life due to environmental factors) is proven.

Quote:"You are half right."



No need to be so patronising! The truth is that you are 'half right'; natural selection has been observed and proved but mutations to the point of creating a new species is only observed in viruses and that doesn't constitute the proving of the theory of evolution with all the inevitable extrapolations people with your 'faith position' seem to take for granted!

Last edited by BigD on 08-Aug-2012 at 06:48 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 08-Aug-2012 at 06:43 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 08-Aug-2012 at 06:40 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

The truth is that you are 'half right'; natural selection has been observed and proved but mutations to the point of creating a new species is only observed in viruses and that doesn't constitute the proving of the theory of evolution with all the inevitable extrapolations people with your 'faith position' seem to take for granted!

First we may want to define what a species is. Species are defined by individuals that resemble each other and can interbreed. So any new species is one that cannot interbreed with it's previous lineages.

Small changes in DNA make small changes to creatures. At some point sufficent changes in DNA make enough seperation in a gene pool that the original creatures couldn't breed with their consecutive offpsring. (Aka a new species is born) And not it's not virus only. I cited the 30 year E. Coli study (bacterial) where this happened in the lab and was proven.

(EDIT: This is fairly important as bacteria are alive. Unlike virus they have a metabolism, can self reproduce, and grow without the help of other cells. Virus need a host cell to do the reproductive copying and work.)

Changes to a new kind is also inferred from the available evidence of historical past species and constructs versus today's species and constructs. Such as horses and their related species. Or dogs and their related species. Not only are there fossil evidence of this event but DNA evidence of such an event.

Do you know of "Ring Species'. There are only a few but they're a great example of evolution in action. The starting and ending points of the species cannot breed with each other. The intermediate relatives can breed with each other. These are a demonstrative example of a living animals with DNA changes that has brought about a new species.


(EDIT2: Look up droposphilia in Hawaii. There are roughly 750 native species. They can't interbreed. Their lines converge back 800 Million years to a single species ancestor.

Bird evolves over 80 years. http://ecolocalizer.com/2009/03/21/new-bird-evolves-faster/ -- at the end of this article are other examples of specization.)


(EDIT 3: Something to consider is where di this new life come from. If Genesis is accurate, historically, then all these should exist at the same time. (Genesis 1 says animals came first, Gensis2 says man did so take your pick) Either way we know that not only did all these animals not live at the exact same time they didn't live at the exact same time as man did either.)

(EDIT 4: Sorry just found this very timely article Islands do have more species than mainlands )

Last edited by BrianK on 08-Aug-2012 at 09:55 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 08-Aug-2012 at 09:50 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 08-Aug-2012 at 09:31 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 08-Aug-2012 at 09:30 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @BigD [quote] Save marriage and let the aggression and intolerance of family value stop at your sad attacks on an internet forum. Let's not let your bile overspill into normal life.

It's funny that you are screaming about tolenrance while you are at same time wanting intolenrance...

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

Makes you wonder how many other things are poorly mistranslated

At least 1,500 errors

@BrianK

Quote:

At some point sufficent changes in DNA make enough seperation in a gene pool that the original creatures couldn't breed with their consecutive offpsring.

It has not been proven that this has happened in humans or other animals outside of the realms of viruses! You talk like you're an expert in your field. I'm a geologist I know the tripe your reiterating are JUST THEORIES! Stop being so pompous and accept the limitations of our ability to see into humanities past. Ring species etc are fancy names for things we simply cannot prove happened with humanity. This is just theoretical science and very, very wooly!!! You can try and disguise it if you want but you are on very thin ice scientifically with little or no hard evidence behind your faith position and yet you discount the evidence contained within the Bible out of hand. Gulls, Warblers, Salamander and Euphorbia tithymaloides are not humans and this evidence doesn't prove we came from apes. Even in the case discussed in the link they could just be very similar sub-species of the same animal/plant family living in the adjacent vicinity!!!

One phrase you should ponder on my friend is FAITH POSITION because that is what you are clinging on to; a 'belief', the sooner you realise that the better. Then we can get back to the tread and consider the effect redefining marriage will have on our society. Something we CAN postulate and do something about rather than digging around in the mud for a 'missing link' for humanity to chimps that doesn't exist. I can tell you that the 'ring species' thing definitely isn't true for humans, because we can interbreed with humans from across the continents in case you didn't know!!!!!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@Rose

Quote:

It's funny that you are screaming about tolenrance while you are at same time wanting intolenrance...

Yeah, hilarious

Though you haven't stopped to think about the intolerance this redefinition will cause to the majority of parents you don't want their primary school kids to be taught about 'Gay Marriage' as if its a perfectly normal basis for a family unit on par with proper marriage!!! That is true intolerance! Committed homosexual partners (despite their inherent promiscuity) are legally acknowledged through Civil Partnerships. No intolerance exists only a properly stipulated difference.

Homosexuality is not normal but it occurs in our society and hence if any mention is made in schools we should most sensibly just concentrate on the issues that arise from predatory adults and the dangers of abuse from pedophiles or homosexual adults in unsuitable positions of trust or guardianship over these children. If the kids themselves have any homosexual feelings then it should be explained that is probably just a phase which shouldn't necessarily be acted upon especially for school age children. The damage caused by experimentation should be emphasised, especially the risky nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

Do you think these concerns will be 'tolerated' in your brave new world that would be ushered in if marriage is redefined? No because this wouldn't be true tolerance in action but liberal activists forcing their world view on the majority of Britain who think marriage is fine the way it is and certainly don't want their children to be taught about Homosexual Marriage in Primary School!!!!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Mate, are you like this in real life? How are you still breathing!?

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -

@Frags

What? Is it wrong to care about things that matter now?! We keep talking about the Olympic Gold trawl making Britain 'great' again but we seem to be sleepwalking into allowing marriage to be destroyed and we still allow upwards of 190,000 babies to be aborted every single year!

It'll take a lot more than a few Sir Chris Hoy wannabes to turn this country around!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

For the record, it is entirely acceptable for members of civilised society to be utterly intolerant of peddlers of hate, ignorance and bigotry, such as yourself...

I didn't think you could stoop much lower, but these last few posts have taken the biscuit!

AndyC

@BigD

Quote:

One phrase you should ponder on my friend is FAITH POSITION because that is what you are clinging on to; a 'belief', the sooner you realise that the better. Then we can get back to the tread and consider the effect redefining marriage will have on our society. Something we CAN postulate and do something about rather than digging around in the mud for a 'missing link' for humanity to chimps that doesn't exist. I can tell you that the 'ring species' thing definitely isn't true for humans, because we can interbreed with humans from across the continents in case you didn't know!!!!!

Heh, five exclamation marks...

Anyway, now I know you're not a geologist. Digging around in the mud indeed.

Quite apart from that, its not a particularly scientific approach to make a stupid comment about breeding across continents when you know full well that no human community has been isolated for anywhere near long enough for speciation to occur. Or perhaps I ought to say, when any geologist ought to know that full well.