Suppose the Resurrection was proven false, what would explain the Gospels?

Martin23233

Active member
Worth another post... just to poke the cabal in their 'evolved' eyes... as the complex eye has shown up in over a dozen different times and creatures... purely debunking the moronic Darwin evo theory... just as Darwin feared.


 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Worth another post... just to poke the cabal in their 'evolved' eyes... as the complex eye has shown up in over a dozen different times and creatures... purely debunking the moronic Darwin evo theory... just as Darwin feared.
...except that the complex eye showing up in over a dozen different times and creatures in no way debunks evolutionary theory...and Darwin didn't fear it.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
And yet again Martin makes a post to me, without actually replying to me. Is he really so scared of me replying to him? Has he really not learned that I am wise to his trickery and will check this thread?


What Martin Pretends I Said​

Why is it that the atheists here have no clue? they dodge and whine and tell falsehoods? why would they do that?
Speaking for myself, I complain about falsehoods because I get annoyed when Martin pretends I said or did things I did not.

I mean, I understand why he does it. He knows he has lost the debate, but lacks the integrity to admit it - even to himself. So he constructs a make-believe world in which I said thinks that he can attack. But knowing why he does it does not make it right - or any less annoying - so I will continue to point it out.

Here is a selection I have pointed out a few times, but Martin has yet to address. This, despite promising to do exactly that: You show me where once something was made up and I'll be glad to address your (self proclaimed PhD concerns)... This is about the fourth time I have posted this list, and of course he has not addressed any of these.

I sure this time will be no different.

How many times did you pretend I said SETI does not use science?

"The Pixie can't bring himself to admit what scientists believe that SETI is using sound science to try to detect non-earthly signals / intelligence for the last 70+ years.....and applying more and more better science behind it's efforts."

You pretended I said goatsbeard proves evolution. It was not true.

"The Pixie thinks that evolution is proven by a plant changing color or size... or reproduction capabilities... but it just remains the same type of plant it always was.. 'goatsbeard'"

You pretended I said not finding mermaids proves evolution. It was not true.

"The Pixie makes a failed attempt at logic to show that mermaids not being found prove evolution ..."

You pretended I misrepresented you by saying hundreds, when the truth is you had said hundreds and I was repeating what you had said
"wrong again.. my post clearly stated Thousands (not 100) but maybe you did not read it ... figures...
do you often misrepresent other's posts? if so why do you misrepresent what others clearly post?"


Evolution Is Slow And Blind​

the Pix says they believe in Darwin...slow blind and random evolution... but then the Pix shape shifts to try and show why they believe in rapid and guided evolution-
I have never said evolution is either guided or rapid. We have another example of Martin saying something that is simply not true.

'pre-adaptation'... hmmm such a conflict that the pix can't defend
Martin continues to pretend that pre-adaption is not part of evolution, despite the fact that Darwin himself proposed it! This has been pointed out numerous times. See for example here, where I went into that in some detail.

This is just straight up denial.


The definition Of Species Is Fuzzy​

The Pix says that the definition of a species is that it can't interbreed....
Again, this is not true.

What I said is that that is the classic definition, but that that the definition is fuzzy. You can search the forum (just click this link) to see that I did that NINE TIMES in this discussion.

Once again, Martin is caught making stuff up!

hmmm but when put to the test the Pix ignores why Wolves and dogs or many other 'species' that do interbreed are considered separate species? clearly just more silly shady stuff... they can't nail it down..and must make it up as they go.
See, this is why I get annoyed.

Martin starts off with a falsehood, and uses that to support his insults. There is nothing "silly" or "shady" in what I have posted in any of this debate. I have said repeatedly that the definition of species is fuzzy.


Martin Cannot Defend His SETI Claim​

The Pix says that the scientific search for intelligence 'SETI' is not science..... wow... I bet the 100s of scientists using real science would just kick the Pix to the curb ... but no need we all know the bs about trying to claim SETI is not science. Heck the Pix even admitted that SETI uses science but is not science... I still laugh at that one... coming from a (self proclaimed Phd) it seems that they just don't understand science.
I have presented my argument as to why SETI is not science (eg here).

Martin continually fails to present a counter argument.

That means I win by default, Martin.


ID is Creationism In Disguise​

Eventually creationists who label themselves as IDists let the mask slip, and we see the reality behind the façade.


It is not science, it is religion. When they fail with their pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo they revert to kind.
 

Algor

Well-known member
LOL "moved the goalposts".... how weak of an excuse for failure is that? typical Evo-devo shape shifting...when they get caught they just accuse and shift... now why is it that they just can't deal with facts? hmmm because a blind hate filled agenda is probably why. I will pray for you too... as I do for the Pix and her silly obvious mis-truths.
Tsk. You gave a standard, I met the standard, you changed the standard, and then proclaimed I failed. That’s what moving goalposts means. Don’t blame me for your standard.

Not only that, but I’d bet any number of beers that you didn’t read the paper. Lol. “I’m gonna get me a beer!”
 

Martin23233

Active member
Tsk. You gave a standard, I met the standard, you changed the standard, and then proclaimed I failed. That’s what moving goalposts means. Don’t blame me for your standard.

Not only that, but I’d bet any number of beers that you didn’t read the paper. Lol. “I’m gonna get me a beer!”
Too sad the the lefty liberal atheistic Mats can't stick to their own science. and the silly false claims being made are just more desperation. Goal posts remained where they have always have been.... and yet A-mats can't even show how darwinian evolution works... such deep faith they hold...and such horrible attempts that they make to defend it w/o real evidence.
 

Martin23233

Active member
the Pixie is lost in space once again.

Trying to run from the many many inconsistancies that the 'self -proclaimed Phd' has stated... it is so humorous to see an claimed PhD atheist make so so many blunders ..but atheism is itself a pretty obvious blunder ( hint they don't believe in truth yet they claim to know truth)

Martin Cannot Defend His SETI Claim​


I have presented my argument as to why SETI is not science (eg here).

Martin continually fails to present a counter argument.

That means I win by default, Martin.
Exposing The Pixie again...and again... and...
Let's just take a closer look at the brilliance that the Pix ( a self claimed PhD) comes up with when 'claiming' that they presented an argument to debunk the science behind SETI.. the Pix thinks it's not science. IN FACT...here is what the PIx comes up with about SETI :

I agree that looking is part of science, but looking for something does not make it science

So for all to see - the PIXIE wasted $$ on a PhD...and what ever school gave out that 'claimed' PhD is embarrased. "looking for something does not make it science" wow.tell that to all the biologists.... chemists.... virologists. ..etc.. TOO DANG funny Pix... looking for something does not make it science
How about unless it uses science in its endeavors and fully employs the scientific method. Sadly The PIX can't grasp what real science is (as proven by darwinism).

LOL in your mind Pixie you always think you win by default - yet your own words are here to expose you... and set the record steaight how badly a PhD gets schooled. Thank you for claiming you were such a smart person.

ID is Creationism In Disguise

Eventually creationists who label themselves as IDists let the mask slip, and we see the reality behind the façade.



It is not science, it is religion. When they fail with their pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo they revert to kind.
Eventually the atheistic falshoods all get exposed (like above) one can see the desperate fasle claims like ID = Creatioinism... sadly it is just a ploy used by the un-educated in ID. ID makes no claim as to the designer - it cannot so for Pixie to make such a silly comment just exposes the inabiliity for the Pixie to even intellectually challenge it. One needs to understand what they comment on before they embarrass themseves further....but we have seen many slip-ups by this 'self-procliamed PhD' before ...whats one more?
 

Martin23233

Active member
Why is The Pixie so untruthful about their own comments?

It seems like the Pix can't defend Darwinism as well as the 'self proclaimed PhD' thought they could.
Firs they lost all points on transitional fossils
Next the Pix tried to claim evolution is still happening (trying to ploy macro evo ) into a plant the goatsbeard evolving into ..well um... just another goatsbeard... what brilliance
Next the Pix tried to cliam they knew abotu SETI and it is not science... even going so far as making such an absurd claim about SETI "I agree that looking is part of science, but looking for something does not make it science" YIKEs... The Pixie fails the first and most importan step in the scientific process - and I bet they don't even know what that is.
Next the Pix tried to claim that the claissic definition of a species is something that can't interbreed w/ another. ...the The Pix was educated on Wolves, dogs and cyotes all interbreeding.... (and yet called different species) the embarrasment did not end there but this post ends here.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member

More Vacuous Bluster​

Trying to run from the many many inconsistancies that the 'self -proclaimed Phd' has stated... it is so humorous to see an claimed PhD atheist make so so many blunders ..but atheism is itself a pretty obvious blunder ( hint they don't believe in truth yet they claim to know truth)
Martin makes all these claims, but at the end of the day, they are devoid of substance.

Why does Martin no longer present any arguments? Because he knows they will be ripped to shreds like every other argument he presented.


SETI Is Not Science​

Exposing The Pixie again...and again... and...
Let's just take a closer look at the brilliance that the Pix ( a self claimed PhD) comes up with when 'claiming' that they presented an argument to debunk the science behind SETI.. the Pix thinks it's not science. IN FACT...here is what the PIx comes up with about SETI :
Why is Martin obsessing on SETI? And again, there is nothing here but vacuous bluster.

On the other hand, not only do I stand by my position, but I can present a case for it.

Why can Martin not make a case for his position? Because he knows it will be ripped to shreds like every other argument he presented.

So for all to see - the PIXIE wasted $$ on a PhD...and what ever school gave out that 'claimed' PhD is embarrased. "looking for something does not make it science" wow.tell that to all the biologists.... chemists.... virologists. ..etc.. TOO DANG funny Pix... looking for something does not make it science
How about unless it uses science in its endeavors and fully employs the scientific method. Sadly The PIX can't grasp what real science is (as proven by darwinism).
Apparently Martin thinks that if he lost his keys, looking for them would be science.

He is, of course, wrong. What he has missed is while looking for something does not make it science, looking for something can still be science. This is, undoubtedly, way over Martin's head, but really is not that difficult to grasp. Looking for your keys is not science, looking for the Higgs boson is science. They are both looking for something, but only one is science.


I Win, You Lose​

LOL in your mind Pixie you always think you win by default...
When you fail to present a counter argument, I do. And that happens a lot in this discussion.

Remember when you brought up plant galls as supposedly evidence for ID? I ripped your argument to shreds, and you never mentioned plant galls again. I won by default.

Remember when you listed all those recent books on ID? I ripped your argument to shreds, and you never mentioned plant galls again. I won by default.


ID Is Creationism In Disguise​

Eventually the atheistic falshoods all get exposed (like above)
Given this is based on Martin's apparent belief that looking for your keys is science, and think no more need be said here!

one can see the desperate fasle claims like ID = Creatioinism... sadly it is just a ploy used by the un-educated in ID.
ID is creationism in disguise. I agree they are not the same - the difference is the disguise.

Of course, under the disguise they are the same.

ID makes no claim as to the designer - it cannot so for Pixie to make such a silly comment just exposes the inabiliity for the Pixie to even intellectually challenge it.
That is the disguise.

Under the disguise, all IDists think God is the designer.


Does Martin Understand Front-loading Yet?​

One needs to understand what they comment on before they embarrass themseves further....but we have seen many slip-ups by this 'self-procliamed PhD' before ...whats one more?
Have you found out what front-loading is yet Martin?

No?

Perhaps you should stop commenting on that before you embarrass yourself further.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member

Making Stuff Up​

Why is The Pixie so untruthful about their own comments?
It seems like the Pix can't defend Darwinism as well as the 'self proclaimed PhD' thought they could.
Firs they lost all points on transitional fossils
Next the Pix tried to claim evolution is still happening (trying to ploy macro evo ) into a plant the goatsbeard evolving into ..well um... just another goatsbeard... what brilliance
Next the Pix tried to cliam they knew abotu SETI and it is not science... even going so far as making such an absurd claim about SETI "I agree that looking is part of science, but looking for something does not make it science" YIKEs... The Pixie fails the first and most importan step in the scientific process - and I bet they don't even know what that is.
Next the Pix tried to claim that the claissic definition of a species is something that can't interbreed w/ another. ...the The Pix was educated on Wolves, dogs and cyotes all interbreeding.... (and yet called different species) the embarrasment did not end there but this post ends here.
Martin accuses me of being untruthful, but every example he presents is where we have a difference of opinion. There is a big difference between disagreeing and lying. If you want examples of lying...

Here is a selection of times Martin has been dishonest. I have posted this about five times, but Martin has yet to address any of them. This, despite promising to do exactly that: You show me where once something was made up and I'll be glad to address your (self proclaimed PhD concerns)...

I sure he will ignore it again; I post it purely to expose him for what he is.

How many times did he pretend I said SETI does not use science?

"The Pixie can't bring himself to admit what scientists believe that SETI is using sound science to try to detect non-earthly signals / intelligence for the last 70+ years.....and applying more and more better science behind it's efforts."

He pretended I said goatsbeard proves evolution. It was not true.

"The Pixie thinks that evolution is proven by a plant changing color or size... or reproduction capabilities... but it just remains the same type of plant it always was.. 'goatsbeard'"

He pretended I said not finding mermaids proves evolution. It was not true.

"The Pixie makes a failed attempt at logic to show that mermaids not being found prove evolution ..."

He pretended I misrepresented him by saying hundreds, when the truth is he had said hundreds and I was repeating what he had said
"wrong again.. my post clearly stated Thousands (not 100) but maybe you did not read it ... figures...
do you often misrepresent other's posts? if so why do you misrepresent what others clearly post?"

These are all documented examples of Martin saying things that were demonstrably not true.


Arguments Martin Has Lost​

It seems like the Pix can't defend Darwinism as well as the 'self proclaimed PhD' thought they could.
And yet at every turn your arguments have been ripped to shreds and you have had to abandon them.

You want to talk about the vitamin C pseudogene again? Of how dogs are descended from wolves? Or what front-loading actually is? Of the fact that well over 99% of biologists accept evolution? Or plant galls - you dropped that one very fast? Or what falsification actually means? Or the definition of species - still waiting for yours, Martin? Or the definition of macro- and micro-evolution - again, still waiting for your definition? Or what ID has produced in the last five years - what a joke your reply to that was? Or how about your nonsense claim that a proof in maths has been used to prove science?

Again and again you are obliged to just drop these topics because you lost the argument. I won, you lost.

Or do you want to revisit them. Martin?


Transitional Fossils Are As Vital To Front-Loading As Evolution​

Firs they lost all points on transitional fossils
And yet all the fossils every discovered fit evolution!

Plus, those transitional fossils are just as vital for your front-loading theory as they are for evolution.


Putting Words In My Mouth​

Next the Pix tried to claim evolution is still happening (trying to ploy macro evo ) into a plant the goatsbeard evolving into ..well um... just another goatsbeard... what brilliance
I never said that that was macro-evolution. As usual, you are putting words in my mouth. You know you have no hope of defeating me, so you are obliged to pretend to yourself I said something else. This is so sad, Martin.


That SETI Obsession​

Next the Pix tried to cliam they knew abotu SETI and it is not science... even going so far as making such an absurd claim about SETI "I agree that looking is part of science, but looking for something does not make it science" YIKEs... The Pixie fails the first and most importan step in the scientific process - and I bet they don't even know what that is.
I find it fascination that the SETI issue is the only one you seem to be interested in. It come up in every post without fail. I am guessing that is because you know you will lose if you start talking biology. Or ID, come to that!

I never claimed to have any particular knowledge about SETI. However I think it is clear I know way more about science than you do, given you apparently think looking for keys is science.


On Species​

Next the Pix tried to claim that the claissic definition of a species is something that can't interbreed w/ another. ...the The Pix was educated on Wolves, dogs and cyotes all interbreeding.... (and yet called different species) the embarrasment did not end there but this post ends here.
Obviously Martin cannot present a definition of species because, well, I think we all know at this stage!

Here is a web page at Berkeley University.

A species is often defined as a group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed in nature. In this sense, a species is the biggest gene pool possible under natural conditions.
For example, these happy face spiders look different, but since they can interbreed, they are considered the same species: Theridion grallator.
That definition of a species might seem cut and dried, but it is not — in nature, there are lots of places where it is difficult to apply this definition. ...

So, yes, Martin, the classic definition is that they can interbreed, but the reality - because of evolution - is that the definition is fuzzy, as I have said all along.
 

Algor

Well-known member
Too sad the the lefty liberal atheistic Mats can't stick to their own science. and the silly false claims being made are just more desperation. Goal posts remained where they have always have been.... and yet A-mats can't even show how darwinian evolution works... such deep faith they hold...and such horrible attempts that they make to defend it w/o real evidence.

Looks like you dipped into the beer but not the paper, Senator. You are changing tenses, messing up grammar, capitlization and punctuation. It doesn't help that you can't defend your position to begin with, but the alcohol isn't helping.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Suppose the Resurrection was proven false, what would explain the Gospels?
The same thing that explains the Koran or the stories in the Vedas or stories of Zeus throwing lightning or Horus rising from the dead. Humans seem to have a universal need to create myths to explain away the unknown. We have done it in every culture we have discovered.

Humans create gods to ease fear of the unknown. Disproving the resurrections will not even dent that need.
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
The same thing that explains the Koran or the stories in the Vedas or stories of Zeus throwing lightning or Horus rising from the dead. Humans seem to have a universal need to create myths to explain away the unknown. We have done it in every culture we have discovered.

Humans create gods to ease fear of the unknown. Disproving the resurrections will not even dent that need.
Thanks for one of the few straightforward answers this thread has received.
 

Lighthearted Atheist

Well-known member
Thanks for one of the few straightforward answers this thread has received.
This seems to staggeringly, astoundingly, obviously true that I cannot believe the entire planet is not atheist. To be a Christian, or a theist in general, you have to believe that man invented the stories of Zeus and Allah and Osiris and the other tens of thousands of gods.

But my religion is real and was not made up.

Its absurd.
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
This seems to staggeringly, astoundingly, obviously true that I cannot believe the entire planet is not atheist. To be a Christian, or a theist in general, you have to believe that man invented the stories of Zeus and Allah and Osiris and the other tens of thousands of gods.

But my religion is real and was not made up.

Its absurd.

Don't ever take a job with the Secret Service, Counterfeit Currency Division. You'll never trust the real stuff for your grocery purchases, and you'll starve to death.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
This seems to staggeringly, astoundingly, obviously true that I cannot believe the entire planet is not atheist. To be a Christian, or a theist in general, you have to believe that man invented the stories of Zeus and Allah and Osiris and the other tens of thousands of gods.

But my religion is real and was not made up.

Its absurd.
They are conditioned to believe it is true as young children, so blindly accept it. This is why Christian parents have Christian kids, Hindu parents have Hindu kids, Muslim parents have Muslim kids, etc.
 
Top