Archaeologica.org

archaeologist wrote:unable to be worthy of its ivory pedestal.

hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha

"Sim sala bim"......

if that is the best you can do then.... i expected something more, something better, something qualifying you to represent your side of the argument

archaeologist wrote: i expected something more, something better

The second coming, no doubt. hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha

why should evolution be forced down people's throats

Because it is the best explanation yet developed for how we got here and where we are going.


Besides, it has the advantage of not picking one version of magic over another and so having the religious types murdering each other in the streets because their version of mythology wasn't chosen.

Religious people are dangerous when their belief systems are challenged. Probably comes from deep seated feelings of inadequacy.

This explains all religion quite nicely.

Because it is the best explanation yet developed for how we got here and where we are going.

it is the best theory with the most loopholes which do not require one to provide proof of their declarations. how convenient.

Religious people are dangerous when their belief systems are challenged. Probably comes from deep seated feelings of inadequacy

have you ever seen evolutionists at work when someone disagrees with them?/ apparently not.

the cartoon was funny but sad. though it does display one thing, freedom of choice and you don't have to join if you don't want to. but it doesn't allow you to censor other people's opinions or beliefs which many of you try to do here.

archaeologist wrote:the cartoon was funny but sad.

You got that right!

have you ever seen evolutionists at work when someone disagrees with them?/ apparently not.

Somehow I doubt that a gang of evolutionists with froth flying from their mouths has ever tied someone to a stake and set them on fire for not believing in evolution.

That sort of thing is left to the 'religious.'


BTW, let's not confuse 'god' with 'religion.' One has nothing to do with the other.

If there were a god I am sure he (or she) would be ashamed of what you people have done in his/her name.

and you don't have to join if you don't want to.

But, then keep your creationist drivel in church where it belongs and do not stain our schools and court houses with such stupidity.

You have freedom of religion but the exercise of that freedom carries some risks.

Not too long ago, in California, some crazy-ass bible thumping school got all upset because some science foundation refused to certify their biology program because they taught creationism. Those kid's degrees are essentially worthless....except for a divinity school or some such other pointless purpose.

Everyone has rights. Just because you exercise your's does not mean that everyone else has to give up their's.

Everytime I went to some assembly for my kid's school and they brought in some Holy Joe to give a benediction, I kept wondering where the ACLU was when I needed them.

You have freedom of religion but the exercise of that freedom carries some risks.

but we also have freedom of speech just like you and it is not limited to the church, just as yours is not limited to the laboratory. you do not get a monopoly just because you say you are scientific and everyone else isn't.

i have proven how unscientific your side is, when are you going to be honest and admit your side is very fallible and corrupt?

Somehow I doubt that a gang of evolutionists with froth flying from their mouths has ever tied someone to a stake and set them on fire for not believing in evolution

if someone gave them a match, i am sure the idea would cross their minds. it is amazing how low and cruel evolutionists can be, if left to their own ideas.

archaeologist wrote:[...] when are you going to be honest and admit your side is very fallible and corrupt?

Of course it is fallible and corrupt. It has a great role-model!

your hatred towards religion is well documented by your argument with RK. my question to you is if you think it is a foul role model, why didn't you do something to change it? or follow that which is a good role model?

p.s. as to your condemnation of 'the church' in its role with condems, you say that all churches are guilty if they don't provide those accessories, my question to you is,when you heard of the problem, did you go out and buy the neccessary amount to help stem the tide? if not, then you have no right to accuse the church of inactivity.

archaeologist wrote:your hatred towards religion is well documented by your argument with RK. my question to you is if you think it is a foul role model, why didn't you do something to change it? or follow that which is a good role model?

"Why didn't you..."?
So I didn't? How would you know?
You've provided another fine example of bias, Arch.

if someone gave them a match, i am sure the idea would cross their minds. it is amazing how low and cruel evolutionists can be, if left to their own ideas.

You are weighing a speculation against a certainty, arch. The god-fearing heroes of the Inquisition lit lots of fires. The evolutionists l see sign petitions.

but we also have freedom of speech just like you and it is not limited to the church,

However, we have a constitution which bars the use of public property or any government facility to promote any religion.

If we are smart we will keep it that way but based on recent elections I don't think we are that smart.