Jump to content

Denali Expedition 2008 - Looking for 10-12 member


vertical_hiker

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You got that bit of vitriol from me after accusing me of spewing bile. And that hardly qualifies. I can certainly come up with some language that will leave you no doubt of its malicious nature. Using a post made after your accusation is feeble at best.

 

yeah, that is one of the common approaches to dealing with spray. If it happens in a forum where it’s not allowed we move it to the SPRAY forum.

 

It is the interenet. Anyone posting in a public forum should expect anyone of a number of types of reply. Should he not post here? Maybe if he’s too thin skinned to deal with public response. And the same would apply to anyone posting anywhere on the internet. He was also free to not post any further responses and the thread might have died pages ago.

 

You act as though this thread has only been people disagreeing with VH. His position is getting as much support as the opposing position. Quit acting as though Christians are being victimized here.

 

If I had wanted to “sacrifice” him, I could’ve dumped the whole thing into the garbage can, banned him, not locked his next post for partners, etc.

 

You rock Minx.

I don't care what they say about you behind your back.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pointless conversations like are great evidence against intelligent design - if we were made so smart, how come none of us can agree on the most basic damn thing? 'cuz that mean man lucifer fawked it all up? what bullshit - look, either the Big Guy in the Bathrobe is all-powerful or not - and if he did purposefully infuse a psychopathic assfuck into our existences, then tvash is right, he ain't the kind of god who deserves any respect, any more than i'd have a right to raise my own kids if i occasionaly threw a rattlesnake into their bedrooms, just to keep'em on their toes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if VH was driving in a car and a Hot chick walked by and he had some naughty thoughts and got in a head on he's going to hell?? Don't think it works that way or I'm screwed.

 

Your not me so of course your going to burn.

Just ask any muslim...

or or jew....

or hindi...

or Southern baptist...

.

.

.

.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pointless conversations like are great evidence against intelligent design - if we were made so smart, how come none of us can agree on the most basic damn thing? 'cuz that mean man lucifer fawked it all up? what bullshit - look, either the Big Guy in the Bathrobe is all-powerful or not - and if he did purposefully infuse a psychopathic assfuck into our existences, then tvash is right, he ain't the kind of god who deserves any respect, any more than i'd have a right to raise my own kids if i occasionaly threw a rattlesnake into their bedrooms, just to keep'em on their toes!

 

He didn't throw the rattlesnake in your room. He told you to watch out for the rattlesnake but you said screw you I can do what I want and went outside picked the rattlesnake up and decided it was a pet. When it bite you, you were pissed that the rattlesnake existed and blamed the person warning istead of the idiot that decided not to listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me this....why is it that atheists/agnostics are so vehemently opposed to the mentioning of intelligent design alongside evolution in a classroom setting?

 

because evolution is taught in science classes, and ID is not science.

 

why does evolution need to be taught in a classroom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ID is not only not science, but the Pennsylania case proved that ID is creationism, and therefore religion, under a different name. Hard evidence for this (as in damning documents) came out in the trial (rent the flick, it's all there). A previous Kansas case had already ruled that a) Creationism was religion (duh), and that b) teaching it in a public school violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution (duh).

 

Evolution, on the other hand, is a highly successful (in that it makes testable, verifiable, repeatable predictions) scientific theory that is central to understanding the living world. Why teach that in a science class? Gee, I couldn't hazard a guess. Because we don't want to raise an entire generation of ignoramuses, perhaps?

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me this....why is it that atheists/agnostics are so vehemently opposed to the mentioning of intelligent design alongside evolution in a classroom setting?

 

I'm not a atheisist/agnostic so I can only guess. My quess is that they truely beleive what they beleive like us all. Being like any other human they are dogmatic and want what they beleive taught. I'm fine with evolution being taught but some time should be spent also on other thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ID is not only not science, but the Pennsylania case proved that ID is creationism, and therefore religion, under a different name. Hard evidence for this came out in the trial (rent the flick). A previous Kansas case had already ruled that a) Creationism was religion (duh), and that b) teaching it in a public school violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution (duh).

 

On the other hand, Evolution is a highly successful and tested scientific theory that is central to understanding the living world. Why teach that in a science class? Gee, I couldn't hazard a guess.

 

How is it central to understanding the living world. More importantly, if it were left out of the curriculum, what specifically would our children be missing out on? Other than budding young paleontologists whose highschool education would be stunted if it were left out?

Edited by ericb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are truly surprised by this response, rather than just annoyed that your post didn’t sail smoothly by the attention of those who don’t share your beliefs, then you are truly oblivious to the world around you...We are not weak minded fools who have made the decision not to believe in a Christian god lightly. Most of us have given some measure of consideration.

 

Belief is a choice. If this were untrue, there would be people who believed but did not want to and people who wanted to believe but couldn’t. This is not the case; belief *is* a choice. So, given the constant, inescapable bath of Christianty and Jesus-talk in America, how can you presume that any climbers “need to hear” the Good News? It seems very arrogant that you would think it was your place and role to put your religion in climbers’ faces. They have heard it all ad nauseum. If they wished to pursue it, they would.

 

Add your frikkin guitar and that’s a tasin’.

 

Muddy thinking (of which, I am King).

 

If your premise were true, there would be no product advertising anywhere. You simply don't want VH's "goods" advertised in a specific location.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ID is not only not science, but the Pennsylania case proved that ID is creationism, and therefore religion, under a different name. Hard evidence for this (as in damning documents) came out in the trial (rent the flick, it's all there). A previous Kansas case had already ruled that a) Creationism was religion (duh), and that b) teaching it in a public school violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution (duh).

 

Evolution, on the other hand, is a highly successful (in that it makes testable, verifiable, repeatable predictions) scientific theory that is central to understanding the living world. Why teach that in a science class? Gee, I couldn't hazard a guess. Because we don't want to raise an entire generation of ignoramuses, perhaps?

 

how would a person be an ignoramus if they didn't learn evolution. Let's talk about career fields for which the understanding of macroevolution is critical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me this....why is it that atheists/agnostics are so vehemently opposed to the mentioning of intelligent design alongside evolution in a classroom setting?

 

because evolution is taught in science classes, and ID is not science.

 

why does evolution need to be taught in a classroom?

 

evolution is not science. Plenty of real science with out a huministic relgious belief of evolution. Chemical compound chart provides lots of fun and its real. Evolution is a basis of beleif and not science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me this....why is it that atheists/agnostics are so vehemently opposed to the mentioning of intelligent design alongside evolution in a classroom setting?

 

I'm not a atheisist/agnostic so I can only guess. My quess is that they truely beleive what they beleive like us all. Being like any other human they are dogmatic and want what they beleive taught. I'm fine with evolution being taught but some time should be spent also on other thoughts.

 

Since there is no scientific theory that competes with evolution, that might be difficult. If parents and children want religious education, however, they can get all they want; just not from schools that my tax dollars pay for. Sorry. BLame the U.S. Constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pointless conversations like are great evidence against intelligent design - if we were made so smart, how come none of us can agree on the most basic damn thing? 'cuz that mean man lucifer fawked it all up? what bullshit - look, either the Big Guy in the Bathrobe is all-powerful or not - and if he did purposefully infuse a psychopathic assfuck into our existences, then tvash is right, he ain't the kind of god who deserves any respect, any more than i'd have a right to raise my own kids if i occasionaly threw a rattlesnake into their bedrooms, just to keep'em on their toes!

Go to your room.

No climbing for a week and stop masturbating in the bathroom.

You act like a kid, you get treated like a kid.

Your post reveals that you have only really read the science geek posts - some of which are really good. But don't push that simplistic kid convoluted nonsense in your post off on me.

It has nothing to do with me. It is all from YOUR brain.

But I do like your style.

Keep blasting. Just try to come up with some substance.

I mean content. You would just abuse a substance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me this....why is it that atheists/agnostics are so vehemently opposed to the mentioning of intelligent design alongside evolution in a classroom setting?

 

I'm not a atheisist/agnostic so I can only guess. My quess is that they truely beleive what they beleive like us all. Being like any other human they are dogmatic and want what they beleive taught. I'm fine with evolution being taught but some time should be spent also on other thoughts.

 

Since there is no scientific theory that competes with evolution, that might be difficult. If parents and children want religious education, however, they can get all they want; just not from schools that my tax dollars pay for. Sorry. BLame the U.S. Constitution.

 

and I would say evolution is a religion unto it self and your above rational thoughts above should apply.

Edited by Seahawks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ID is not only not science, but the Pennsylania case proved that ID is creationism, and therefore religion, under a different name. Hard evidence for this (as in damning documents) came out in the trial (rent the flick, it's all there). A previous Kansas case had already ruled that a) Creationism was religion (duh), and that b) teaching it in a public school violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution (duh).

 

Evolution, on the other hand, is a highly successful (in that it makes testable, verifiable, repeatable predictions) scientific theory that is central to understanding the living world. Why teach that in a science class? Gee, I couldn't hazard a guess. Because we don't want to raise an entire generation of ignoramuses, perhaps?

 

how would a person be an ignoramus if they didn't learn evolution. Let's talk about career fields for which the understanding of macroevolution is critical.

 

Well, lets see. Not much really. Understanding natural selection/evolution is only central to a few sideshow disciplines, like...

 

....agriculture, all the biological sciences, pharmacology, pathology, anthropology, paleantology, ecology, genetic engineering....

 

...other than that, not much would suffer.

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...