fuck a creationist

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (415 of them)
http://datomana.com/images/christian-t-shirts-fish.jpg

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link

The thread title is taking on a new meaning.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link

uh do non-christian sites selling tshirts have photography where the frame is 25% shirt, 75% hott chick?? even american apparel shows you the whole fucking garment!

Kenneth Branagh (gcannon), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:23 (seventeen years ago) link

http://datomana.com/images/christian-t-shirts-god.jpg

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:25 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost holy crap dude

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:26 (seventeen years ago) link

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/datomana_1926_24363811

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:27 (seventeen years ago) link

welcome me into your loving bosom o lord

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link

that site is a dsl fiesta

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link

but my connection is only a- ohhhhh right

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:31 (seventeen years ago) link

Kenneth Branagh (gcannon), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:31 (seventeen years ago) link

How could Noah's Ark have possibly held all of the species of big animals in the world!

The largest dragon (i.e. dinosaur) eggs that we've found to date are about the size of a football. One could fit, for example, a dozen brachiosaurus eggs in the trunk of a car, with room to spare! This also means that recently hatched dragons were not very large. Noah's mission was to preserve each kind of animal. You don't need to find the biggest of each kind. And you don't need each sub-divided species either. Did you know that most modern dog breeds are less than 100 years old? 2 healthy young mutts could preserve the genome of the entire "dog kind" of animals. The Bible uses the word "kind" for the different types of life forms. Horses and zebras can (and have) physically mated producing viable offspring; so have tigers and lions, indicating that they (according to creation theory) probably respectively diverged from the same original stock. Dogs and wolves (though considered quite different by humans today) probably originated from their same "kind" too. There are a few large animals (when fully grown) of course: giraffes, elephants, and T-rexes among them. But the average animal size is about sheep size, i.e. the 3-story Ark was plenty large enough to handle the variety of animal kinds plus lots of food for them. Speciation could descend again from original healthy "mutt" stock to start with. Thinking scientifically about this, it shows incredible variable design, huh?

jesus, how did i miss this thread?

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:32 (seventeen years ago) link

apologies for taking the lord's name in vain

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:32 (seventeen years ago) link

Son, you are OUT OF THE CLUB.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:33 (seventeen years ago) link

here, girlie, try this one on, it says the same thing

http://img.hottopic.com/is/image/HotTopic/143596_hi?$product$ http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2005/12/200HallowedBeThyName.jpg

xp

kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Speciation could descend again from original healthy "mutt" stock to start with.

The use of the word "speciation" there is incredible: this sentence practically is the whole theory of natural selection and evolution!

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:35 (seventeen years ago) link

dammit, that was supposed to link to the shirt

kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:37 (seventeen years ago) link

oh wait it did

kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:38 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post

i see it on my browser!

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:38 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/animals.asp

What is a ‘kind’? God created a number of different types of animals with much capacity for variation within limits.4 The descendants of each of these different kinds, apart from humans, would today mostly be represented by a larger grouping than what is called a species. In most cases, those species descended from a particular original kind would be grouped today within what modern taxonomists (biologists who classify living things) call a genus (plural genera).

One common definition of a species is a group of organisms which can interbreed and produce fertile offspring, and cannot mate with other species. However, most of the so-called species (obviously all the extinct ones) have not been tested to see what they can or cannot mate with. In fact, not only are there known crosses between so-called species, but there are many instances of trans-generic mating, so the ‘kind’ may in some cases be as high as the family. Identifying the ‘kind’ with the genus is also consistent with Scripture, which spoke of kinds in a way that the Israelites could easily recognize without the need for tests of reproductive isolation.

For example, horses, zebras and donkeys are probably descended from an equine (horse-like) kind, since they can interbreed, although the offspring are sterile. Dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals are probably from a canine (dog-like) kind. All different types of domestic cattle (which are clean animals) are descended from the Aurochs, so there were probably at most seven (or fourteen) domestic cattle aboard. The Aurochs itself may have been descended from a cattle kind including bisons and water buffaloes. We know that tigers and lions can produce hybrids called tigons and ligers, so it is likely that they are descended from the same original kind.

Woodmorappe totals about 8000 genera, including extinct genera, thus about 16,000 individual animals which had to be aboard. With extinct genera, there is a tendency among some paleontologists to give each of their new finds a new genus name. But this is arbitrary, so the number of extinct genera is probably highly overstated. Consider the sauropods, which were the largest dinosaurs—the group of huge plant-eaters like Brachiosaurus, Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, etc. There are 87 sauropod genera commonly cited, but only 12 are ‘firmly established’ and another 12 are considered ‘fairly well established’.5

One commonly raised problem is ‘How could you fit all those huge dinosaurs on the Ark?’ First, of the 668 supposed dinosaur genera, only 106 weighed more than ten tons when fully grown. Second, as said above, the number of dinosaur genera is probably greatly exaggerated. But these numbers are granted by Woodmorappe to be generous to skeptics. Third, the Bible does not say that the animals had to be fully grown. The largest animals were probably represented by ‘teenage’ or even younger specimens. The median size of all animals on the ark would actually have been that of a small rat, according to Woodmorappe‘s up-to-date tabulations, while only about 11 % would have been much larger than a sheep.

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:41 (seventeen years ago) link

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/datomana_1926_28498942

XTREEM WISEMEN

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link

List alternative names for BREASTS!

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link

The use of the word "speciation" there is incredible: this sentence practically is the whole theory of natural selection and evolution!

Yeah, that's another fun bit; the deliberate misrepresenting of what folks actually mean when they say "evolution," much like the deliberate misuse of the word "theory" (i.e. instead of "hypothesis"). A lot of it seems like both projection and a cluelessness about how science changes and can disprove itself over time, like all we in the secular world worship upon the altar of Darwin, and we do it in the exact same unquestioning, blindly following way they follow their own leaders.

I think that's why they always call it "Darwinism,"(we only follow the man, who ain't Jesus) and hold up the fact that we've evolved theories that go beyond his as some sorta prove that we're wishy-washy nihilists who don't believe anything strongly(even to refute it).

kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link

One commonly raised problem is ‘How could you fit all those huge dinosaurs on the Ark?’ First, of the 668 supposed dinosaur genera, only 106 weighed more than ten tons when fully grown. Second, as said above, the number of dinosaur genera is probably greatly exaggerated. But these numbers are granted by Woodmorappe to be generous to skeptics. Third, the Bible does not say that the animals had to be fully grown. The largest animals were probably represented by ‘teenage’ or even younger specimens. The median size of all animals on the ark would actually have been that of a small rat, according to Woodmorappe‘s up-to-date tabulations, while only about 11 % would have been much larger than a sheep.

lol, this is some seriously Star Trek-level biblical retcon!

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:46 (seventeen years ago) link

has this story, about creationists trying to force a kenyan museum to tuck away pre-human fossils, been mentioned yet in this thread?

Eisbär (Eisbär), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:47 (seventeen years ago) link

yup, i linked to it upthread. One gets the image of club-/axe-handle-wielding crazies breaking thru the glass doors of the museum and start a-smashing all the Natural History exhibits.

kingfish in absentia (kingfish), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:49 (seventeen years ago) link

Where are all of these quotes coming from again? It actually looks to me like there's a big shift in thinking going on with them -- like the authors have chosen to sign on with evolution on the small scale, insofar as it helps them make a plausible case for literal interpretation of the Bible. (Which is obviously the bigger point; evolution's more or less moot so far as everything fits with the text.) That word "speciation" is ridiculously important, in terms of acknowledging that a common ancestor could diverge and modify into different, incompatible species. (Which is really as far as Darwin personally got with things, with the grander rise-of-man stuff coming well after.)

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:50 (seventeen years ago) link

OK I can't be the only person getting "Jesus Loves Pink Pussy" out of one of those shirts.

Allyzay is cool: with Blue n White, with Eli Manning, with NY Giants (Allyzay Ei, Monday, 4 December 2006 19:51 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/OneBlood/images/ch5_marriages.gif

xpost im getting quotes from answersingenesis.com & a couple other linked or googled creationist faqs - theres nothing even close to consensus on any of this stuff, it basically amounts to biblical fan fiction

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:51 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah, but Darwin-on-Genesis slash is something I've never seen before, like on a "Sonic the Hedgehog's Erotic Borg Adventure" level.

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:55 (seventeen years ago) link

http://datomana.com/images/jesus-tees-hsucks.jpg

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:55 (seventeen years ago) link

"...but i'm better" on the matching underwear

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:56 (seventeen years ago) link

OK now i'm really grossing myself out

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 19:57 (seventeen years ago) link

It actually looks to me like there's a big shift in thinking going on with them -- like the authors have chosen to sign on with evolution on the small scale, insofar as it helps them make a plausible case for literal interpretation of the Bible

this has pretty much always been the strategy of creationists though!

latebloomer (clonefeed), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:00 (seventeen years ago) link

ha! you made that one up!

horseshoe (horseshoe), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:03 (seventeen years ago) link

OKAY HAWT. Except it's "forgive US our trespasses." I dig my Lord's Prayer OLD STYLEZZ.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:04 (seventeen years ago) link

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/datomana_1926_27679742

Jesus can get in line, baby.

(sorry for being so frat boy, I've always had the hots for xtian girls. Feeds from my self-defeating nature, I guess.)

(and that red-head is OOTW)

Johnney B has zeros off the line (stigoftdumpilx), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:05 (seventeen years ago) link

is there such a genre as actual christian porn?

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:07 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost never mind the bullocks, here's the christians

whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:08 (seventeen years ago) link

didn't larry flynt try out christian porn at one point?

whoop de doodle (kenan), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:08 (seventeen years ago) link

Wait, is that guy asking to be forgiven for his sniper assassinations, kidnappings, ill-gotten ransom money, and sowing of anarchy?

(The freckly god-is-good girl is cute.)

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:08 (seventeen years ago) link

i don't mean people in nun outfits; i mean the "for christians, by christians" type of thing

xpost i think he's asking to be forgiven for spreading his oral herpes

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:09 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4347news7-21-2000.asp

X-amining X-Men

It is ironic that the film on one hand depicts the horrors of the Holocaust but on the other embraces evolutionary premises. We must point out that it was evolutionary ideas that actually fueled Hitler’s genocide of ‘less-evolved’ peoples like Jews, Gypsies, Slavic peoples, etc. Evolutionary ideas have never advanced humankind either biologically or socially. On the contrary, they lead to the decay of societies—for example, today’s increase in abortion has been greatly influenced by evolutionary thinking (see Ken Ham’s book Genesis and the Decay of the Nations).

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:09 (seventeen years ago) link

they're all preternaturally beautiful. clean living, I guess.

i think he's asking to be forgiven for spreading his oral herpes

otm!

horseshoe (horseshoe), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:10 (seventeen years ago) link

the fundies have a point about Hitler, and other eugenicists

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:11 (seventeen years ago) link

JB, likes 'em clean. They unnerve me with their shining eyes and glossy coats.

Ed (dali), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:11 (seventeen years ago) link

no, they do not

xpost

and what (ooo), Monday, 4 December 2006 20:13 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.