The Old Guard Passes on to Judgment and the Mormons' Future

[_Markk]

One time offer? ...lOl what a tool

Gee thanks your highness

Man, sometimes s*** gets meta fast on this forum. Markk just pulled a Hamblin, and he's too bumbling to see it.

- Doc

What is funny I was thinking that DrW was pulling a DCP with his one time offer to help me out?

Well, at least we are superhero's...you're just a sidekick...Juliann, or maybe wade?

:) gotta love it

Take care
MG

[_Molok]

Uh, I don't know jack crap about evolution either, can I have Markk's book?

*I should also mention I find penises and vaginas to be two of the most interesting things in the universe.

[Guest]

Markk,

I offered to send you a well reviewed book, as a gift, mentioning that I thought it would be enjoyed by your children and grandchildren and that you might even enjoy it as well. More importantly, I mentioned that it would answer your persistent question about genital evolution (with pictures, no less).

Any polite and civil individual would have PM'd me with an email address and a simple 'thank you' from the family. You could have put it in your childrens' or grandchildrens' library and perhaps at least looked at the pictures.

Sorry about the "one time offer" line. But don't worry, my friend. It sure as hell won't happen again

[_Chap]

...

In other words, in my opinion the failure of Chap or Dr. W to provide an answer you will accept has nothing to do with a Christian God being the answer.

Markk has degenerated to chatbot status. Over and over again he runs the same tired old routine:

"Hey! I'm ignorant about a rather complicated topic, and I'm going to ask you a question whose form and content are based on a misunderstanding of what I am asking about.

If I don't find your answer immediately satisfying and comprehensible despite my utter ignorance and lack of willingness to make any intellectual effort beyond a little Googling - guess what! That proves you are really the dumb one."

I notice he is not pushing that totally dumbass question about "which unicellular creature was the ancestor of the mammals?". Even Markk has seen that he has over-reached the pretend dumbness on this one.

Because, in my view, it is just a pretense. He's trolling, in the hope that he can run the the trope about "See? The scientists have no more evidence for their view of evolution than dumb little old me. They just cain't answer my simple questions."

God gave you a brain to waste it on pulling crap like that, do you think Marrk? Either STFU or go off and really study some, Marrk.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

If someone is questioning the science behind evolution then they might as well go on and take a huge crap on relativity, too. That one is problematic for a god, as well.

- Doc

[_DrW]

If someone is questioning the science behind evolution then they might as well go on and take a huge crap on relativity, too. That one is problematic for a god, as well.

- Doc

Yes it is.

And it is especially problematic for the anthropomorphic, Kolobian dwelling, superluminally communicating Elohim.

The scope and severity of the problems that relativity represents for Elohim is surpassed only by the uncanny ability of most believing Mormons to remain blissfully unaware of them, or ignore them altogether.

[_Markk]

Now I am really starting to feel like I am at FAIR...third party attacks?

[_Fence Sitter]

Because, in my view, it is just a pretense. He's trolling, in the hope that he can run the the trope about "See? The scientists have no more evidence for their view of evolution than dumb little old me. They just cain't answer my simple questions."
.

I don't know about trolling. I have seen Markk post enough to believe he is just as he presents himself. He may honestly believe that somehow the inability to give him just the answer he demands allows him to continue in his own religious belief somehow. If that is not what it does than I am puzzled by why he even cares about attacking science.

My point is that this approach of demanding a specific answer to a loaded question is exactly how LDS defend to themselves what Joseph Smith did. It is just a different way of phrasing the question "How could Joseph have done so & so or translated such and such?" When the critic fails to give an answer that is satisfactory to the believer, the believer walks away even more convinced that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and caring very little that the rest of the world would not see a lack of response as reason to believe anything about Joseph Smith.
To put it in a nutshell, it seems to be another version of what Deborah said over on the other board. Something to the effect that since science doesn't know everything we can still expect it to prove Mormonsim at some point in the future.

[_Markk]

I don't know about trolling. I have seen Markk post enough to believe he is just as he presents himself. He may honestly believe that somehow the inability to give him just the answer he demands allows him to continue in his own religious belief somehow. If that is not what it does than I am puzzled by why he even cares about attacking science.

My point is that this approach of demanding a specific answer to a loaded question is exactly how LDS defend to themselves what Joseph Smith did. It is just a different way of phrasing the question "How could Joseph have done so & so or translated such and such?" When the critic fails to give an answer that is satisfactory to the believer, the believer walks away even more convinced that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and caring very little that the rest of the world would not see a lack of response as reason to believe anything about Joseph Smith.
To put it in a nutshell, it seems to be another version of what Deborah said over on the other board. Something to the effect that since science doesn't know everything we can still expect it to prove Mormonsim at some point in the future.

Hey FS,

I am not really attacking science, but defending creation and intelligent design.

Go to a evolution site and go to a creation site and there are good questions and good answers.

If we are going to accept Darwin's theory...then it demands certain things we should expect to find. I used the penis and vagina as a example of many for natural selection.

If you want... there is dna, rna and enzymes...you need all for life, yet each in itself demands design in its self...there are real questions here, amazing questions?

Or the wing...why would a wing continue to develop in mutation form, if it did not serve the species...okay it took billions of years, yet the fossil record falls short in all these different examples.

If you want to use a mopologist argument for this, the evolutionist will say "you don't understand, what would the fossil look like, and it would not have survived?" (Nephite sword)

If you go back to the beginning of this exchange, and you take out the jabs, and my having fun...all I am saying is that I believe in intelligent design, and I conceded I do not have it all figured out...likewise either does evolution...I mean how many different theories are there of evolution?

This is my no means settled.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Uh. Evolution has it figured out. It's about as much a theory as gravity is. ??

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/jibbers_crabst

- Doc