1/11/2013 1:13 PM
I wonder if bis appreciates the choice of meme. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of those scientists who would be laughing at bis' dumb ***.

Nah...probably went right over his head.

Anyway, he's no Duane Gish, right?
1/11/2013 1:19 PM
I am glad you're back. This is fun.

It's fun for me because I've designed it that way.

As for you having fun, well, whether the puppet has fun makes no difference to the puppeteer.

Tell me more about how the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics are arguments for an old earth? (You've never done that) Also, respond to the fact that C14 is produced in the atmosphere. (You've ignored this point every time it has been brought up)

I won't be doing either of these things no matter how many times you ask (as I've already told you many other times). I will never re-enter an actual debate with you, at least not on this topic. But then, the debate isn't the point of my posting here, so I'm not concerned with it.
You didn't post and there was nothing stupid to ridicule. Now you're back.

You didn't respond to the stupid things bad_luck was saying with a ridicule or anything else for that matter. I guess if you want to ridicule yourself you don't need an internet message board to do it.
bad_luck thinks your out-of-touch-with-reality dumbassery may have surpassed that of swamp. I don't think you're there yet.
It's nice having  you here whether or not you are different people or the same. It's nice to have two puppets to string along as it makes for varied interaction.

Assuming you and bad_luck truly are separate individuals, the two of you combined don't have anywhere close to enough credibility to label anyone as being "out-of-touch-with-reality".  But you go right ahead, keep banging your head off the wall in the padded room and telling the doctors that THEY are the ones who are crazy.
1/11/2013 1:28 PM
So you're the puppet master again?

You believe in a young earth. That's stupid. That's not name calling, it's just a fact.

You never responded when your "evidence" was challenged. I've linked to those posts dozens of time. 
1/11/2013 1:30 PM
Posted by genghisxcon on 1/11/2013 1:13:00 PM (view original):
I wonder if bis appreciates the choice of meme. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of those scientists who would be laughing at bis' dumb ***.

Nah...probably went right over his head.

Anyway, he's no Duane Gish, right?
Tyson is hilarious but bis is completely objective and therefore thinks all science is bullshit.
1/11/2013 1:37 PM
So you're the puppet master again?

You've been nothing but a puppet for quite some time. Feel free to keep wishing to be a real boy, though.
Tyson is hilarious but bis is completely objective and therefore thinks all science is bullshit.
Now that I've pointed out how you're using two identities, responding to yourself will put that cat right back in the bag, won't it?

Man, the laughs just keep coming.

1/11/2013 1:40 PM
Cool.

Care to explain (for the first time) how the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics preclude an old earth?

Or did you **** up and accidentally write down a creationist anti-big bag theory argument when you were frantically googling for young earth evidence?
1/11/2013 1:41 PM
Cool.

So you've accepted your role as nothing but my puppet in this thread?
1/11/2013 1:48 PM
Yes, that's clearly what's happening here. No one is making fun of you for being stupid and thinking a young earth is a possibility.

Care to explain (for the first time) how the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics preclude an old earth?

Or did you **** up and accidentally write down a creationist anti-big bag theory argument when you were frantically googling for young earth evidence?
1/11/2013 1:54 PM
Yes, that's clearly what's happening here. No one is making fun of you for being stupid and thinking a young earth is a possibility.

I'm glad you've accepted your role as a puppet.

I'm sure it bothers doctors in mental hospitals a great deal when their patients make fun of them for being stupid. If that isn't clear enough for you, it bothers me about as much when you do it here.
1/11/2013 1:59 PM
Please, bis, tell us more about how you're so objective that you can't decide whether or not the earth is 4.5 billion years old or 10,000 years old.

Because, you know, there's equal evidence for both sides.
1/11/2013 2:05 PM
Let me think about it....hmmmm...

No.

You lost the debate long ago. Now you get to wallow in it.

A puppet that enjoys being reminded of its failure in a debate. Quite the plot line for a puppet show.

1/11/2013 2:12 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 1/8/2013 1:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 1/8/2013 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Here's where the war on christmas thread started getting redlined.

I moved it to a new thread. 

Here's your last post on the topic in the new thread.

Here's me, directly responding to your "evidence."

Here's you, going into hiding.
I never gave up. Here's proof.*

*I know proof isn't really your thing...you know...with the whole "believing in a young earth" brain damage you have. But just in case.
Did I lose? I linked these posts several times. I also directly quoted your "evidence." You refused to respond.

Not sure why you want this to keep going. If said something as stupid as "a young earth is equally as likely as an old one," I'd want to run away and hide. I wouldn't want to perpetuate a thread that reveals my stupidity.

I can't lose this debate because science already won it for me 50 years ago. But, please, continue.
1/11/2013 2:24 PM
Posted by bistiza on 12/28/2012 4:12:00 PM:
Yes. And over time, science debunked these notions. To attempt to portray yourself as open-minded because you can see both sides of the flat earth vs round earth "issue" is ridiculous. Your young earth "theory" falls into this category.

The difference is that there is scientific evidence to support a young earth model (I listed some before in the other thread, but I'm not going to rehash it now), just as there is to support an older earth model. THAT is why I remain neutral on the subject.

The problem is that too many people can't look at the evidence from anything remotely resembling an unbiased point of view, and you're obviously among them.

You take the word of mainstream science as unquestioned gospel, which is surprising in this day and age when you can easily look up evidence for any and all scientific theories if you so desire.

Yet instead of reading the information with an open mind, you accept what has been spoon-fed to you and spew it back out without ever looking at any of it with a critical eye or thinking for yourself.

I guess I can understand why you do that.  The pressure to conform and join the group think  is enormous. After all, if you dare to think for yourself and somehow come to a conclusion other than that of the majority - even if you don't take a side - someone like bad_luck may attack you mercilessly and most people would rather avoid dealing with those kinds of issues.
Quote post by genghisxcon on 12/28/2012 9:54:00 PM:


"The difference is that there is scientific evidence to support a young earth model (I listed some before in the other thread, but I'm not going to rehash it now), just as there is to support an older earth model. THAT is why I remain neutral on the subject."


Horseshit. I'm not sure where you posted your "evidence," though I'd just about bet you have some of Duane Gish's nonsense in there. In any case, the thermodynamics objections have long been part of the creationist literature (btw, can we stop pretending this "young earth" crap is anything but a prelude to creationism?) and has long since been discredited. Ironic that you don't want to rehash what you posted in another thread, but scientists are supposed to keep answering an objection that was debunked before you were born, ad infinitum, just so you can pretend you're discussing a "competing" theory.

And I haven't even mentioned the countless areas of well established science that need to be thrown out to accommodate your crackpotology, I'm sorry, "theory." Biology, geology, radiocarbon dating, for starters. But the best part is that we are apparently contemporaries of the dinosaurs. To paraphrase Lewis Black, I can't be kind about this, because bis is watching The Flintstones as if it were a documentary.



As for the masturbatory drivel that is paragraphs 2-5 of your post, it scarcely merits a response. I will say I'm reminded of the words of John Dewey. He argued that genuine open-mindedness is like being hospitable to guests; it is not tantamount to putting a sign out saying, "Come on in, no one's home."




bistard never responded to this in the other thread. I guess he lost. He's done here.
1/11/2013 2:26 PM
Posted by genghisxcon on 1/8/2013 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by genghisxcon on 1/8/2013 1:21:00 PM (view original):
How old are you, bis?
bump
bump
1/11/2013 2:41 PM (edited)
Did I lose?

Yes.

We've been over this several times.

Our interactions in this thread, in a nutshell:

You gave up and somehow didn't realize that meant you forfeited the debate. When I pointed it out, suddenly you wanted to restart the debate again. I haven't let you do that, so the loss stays. You've spend the rest of this thread begging me to restart the debate, but I'd rather see you wallow in the loss, so I never indulge you. 
Not sure why you want this to keep going.
Sheer entertainment. It's amusing to me that you can't accept the fact I won't debate you on this again.
I wouldn't want to perpetuate a thread that reveals my stupidity.
No. You'd rather perpetuate a thread that reveals you lost a debate.

Yeah, that's much better.  *rolls eyes*
of 37

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.