Mr_Mohawk's forum posts

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts

I'm not saying you are wrong, I genuinely don't know, but where does the windf*cker thing come from then?

p.s. Is your sig supposed to be Schrodinger's cat?

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts
[QUOTE="Mr_Mohawk"]

It does if you take genesis literally.

LJSEXAY

And you know for a fact that all religious take genesis literally? Seems this topic is doing what religious are accused of in this thread.

And actually taking it literally there is still no contradiction.

You have read genesis 2, havn't you? Where all the animals are created by God to find a helper for Adam? How is that not contradicted by evolution?

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts

[QUOTE="bebopoutlaw3gun"]Cause it contradicts creationism.LJSEXAY

Pst...it doesn't.

It does if you take genesis literally.

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts

The majority of religious people, or at least the rational ones, realise that evolution is not a challenge to religion. all it does is show that there is no literal truth in Genesis. Pope Pius XII (I think that's right, I'm thinking of the guy who was pope after the second world war) officially declared that catholicism would accept evolution.

Fundamentalists hate evolution, because it shows that the bible is not 100% literally true. These people are morons. Matthew quotes a prophet during the birth narratives that doesn't exist, so how can it be literally true?

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts
First off there is another thread below this which answers your question. Secondly yes it is a fact that if a different environmental pressure was put on a species, then those with characteristics that were now an advantage would have more chance of reproducing. the only thing that would chane would be the nature of the desirable characteristics. Don't listen to the person above me, this is accepted as a fact in the scientific community.
Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts
Ah yes, I've heard of f*ck (a f*ckumentary). Doesn't the word come from a german word meaning to strike? I think that's why an old english word for a kestral was a windf*cker.
Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts

No thanks. I've looked at the facts and done some serious thinking and research on the subject and the entire Christian religion is just a retelling/rehash of old Egyptian lore with different names and such. I can't believe a relgion that plagiarizes another.PlasmaBeam44

You know, he is pretty much right about genesis. The current thinking is that there are two main sources for genesis:

The priestly source, which is thought to be the source used for genesis 1, which is thought to beadapted from hymns sung in the temples, explaining its almost lyrical quality.

The other is trhe jahwist source, which features an anthropomorphic God and was probably adapted from babylonian folk traditions. this is clearly evident in genesis 2 and the tower of babel.

Also, Jesus is an awful lot like Mithras.

Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts
70's. Punk rock FTW.
Avatar image for Mr_Mohawk
Mr_Mohawk

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Mr_Mohawk
Member since 2007 • 135 Posts
Intelligent design iclearly should not be taught in science lessons; You might as well teach steady state hypothesis (it is definately not a theory. String "theory" is also guilty of this). How would you test people on it? Just write "God did it" for full marks!