2cents, just in case you haven't seen this. You seem to be engaging the troll in this thread, but always remember ... -------------------------------------------------------------- Trolling 101: If you happen to play poker, understand that professional trolls utilize a very similar strategy: Tight-aggressive Tight: Don't give the victim an inch! Never admit the possibility of ever having been wrong. Never say anything which can be remotely useful or helpful to anyone. Never provide the prey with a single word he may wish to hear. Give nothing! Aggressive: Focus! Your goal is not conversation or debate, but the exact opposite- nihilism. Mercy is merely a handicap of the weak. You are a disease with only one goal in mind: writing whatever it takes to piss off the victim. Contradict yourself all the time, repeat the victim's words verbatim like a bratty child, take the high road and repeatedly request that the victim stay on topic, post in every single thread and then accuse the victim of 'stalking' when he shows up in one of them, make ridiculous statements- but do it assertively and repeatedly, but most importantly: Laugh when nothing is funny! Laugh at the victim constantly, use smiley faces, and pretend to completely miss every single point he tries to make. Remember, looking like a complete idiot yourself is unavoidable if you wish to troll at the professional level. Another key troll tactic is the practice of winning by losing. While the victim is trying to put forward solid and convincing facts to prove his position, the troll's only goal is to infuriate its prey. The troll takes (what it knows to be) a badly flawed, wholly illogical argument, and then vigorously defends it while mocking and insulting its prey. The troll looks like a complete idiot, but this is all part of the plan. The victim becomes noticeably angry by trying to repeatedly explain the flaws of the troll's argument. Provoking this anger was the troll's one and only goal from the very beginning. Another important trolling tip I learned by observing LoZZZer's work: The lioness does not indiscriminately launch an attack on every animal she wishes to eat. She stalks her prey, determining which specific individual antelope is weak, tired and slow. The expert troll must use this very approach, as not every post is worth trolling. ZTroll specifically waits for someone to discuss a topic which is of great personal importance to the prey. With an innate sense of unyielding discipline- a product of millions of years of painstaking troll evolution, ZTroll crouches in the brush, patiently waiting for an emotional, dedicated post. A post where the prey feels so strongly about a certain topic, he can't restrain his emotional enthusiasm when arguing his point. Any post of this sort in chit chat is guaranteed to spark a LoZZZer trolling effort. The predator will then deftly pounce upon its prey, pretending to laugh hysterically at the victim's strong willed, passionate assertions while distorting them in straw-man fashion. Eye on the prize, the creature will then tightly lock its fangs around the prey's neck, clinging tightly to the jugular while deftly wringing the life from its prey until the victim cracks- i.e., becomes highly frustrated and visibly redfaced. This in turn provides the troll with its well earned nourishment, as well as the creature's only source of sexual gratification: Furious anger and anguish. Thus, the circle of life continues.
It's not Creationism, but back door Creationism with an ambrosia of modernity. So, it isn't a literal acceptance of Genesis. Big deal. The point is it is not science either.
Nonsense. Quote me a single sentence in which Dawkins refer to himself as a "Darwinist." It's a title that the religious zealots and ignorant media put on him, against his own protests. Here is what he actually said: "Contrary to my rather ludicroos reputation as an 'ultra-Darwinist' (a slander I would protest more vigorously if the name sounded less of a compliment than it does), ..." Indeed, any serious scientist would consider being called "Darwinist" a slander.
lol... why do I think that Zeleologist will fail to provide any evidence for his assertion that Dawkins referred to himself as a Darwinist. Zeleologist, you're outed....again.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from 2cents: which question is it u want answered that i haven't yet answered in the last n pages my son? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i see u have no questions son, and that is fine, for the Creator has answered them all... he is the Answer... you go in peace now and play with yr little friends in the park...
Santa Claus theory: Axiom 1: Santa Claus IS Santa Claus Axiom 2: Everything that is IS Santa Claus (Axiom 2', preferred by the SantaClaulologians: Santa Claus IS Everything that is) Axiom 3: Nothing IS NOT Santa Claus (and form an abelian group with Santa Claus...) THATs common sense my son... what do u want for Xmas again? Santa Claus
no more no less than a contemporary scientist would consider being called "Newtonian" a slander in the age of General Relativity & Quantum Mechanics but that doesn't remove anything from Newton, Darwin etc major achievements in the face of the church's obscurantism...
thks Nik but zizzz's not trolling... he just lacks the brains to understand what defines a scientific theory, what randomness means and Santa Claus knows what else... but he does understand that science & knowledge represent a threat to his family the bozos out there, cause it blows away their creator-based fairy tales one after the other... bit of a bummer... gotta give 'em that