Gabrielle Gifford’s Husband Expresses Newfound Faith

posted at 9:30 am on February 4, 2011 by John Sexton

Gabrielle Gifford’s husband Mark Kelly spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday. In his brief speech he expressed his own turn to faith to support him during the most difficult time of his life:

I was telling Gabby just the other night, two nights ago, that you know maybe this event, this terrible event, maybe it was fate. I hadn’t been a big believer in fate until recently. I thought the world just spins and the clock just ticks and things happen for no particular reason. But from space, far above that traffic on the New Jersey turnpike, you have an entirely different perspective of life on our planet. It’s humbling to see the earth as God created it in the context of God’s vast universe…

He closed his talk with an appeal to prayer. Although the words were a bit jumbled his meaning and sincerity were clear:

God bless you and please, please, please continue to keep Gabby’s thoughts and prayers in your heart. It is really helping.

Gabrielle Giffords condition continues to improve at a rehab center in Houston.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Yep, when you rid the world of us,

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 3:36 PM

The phrase, “rid the world of us” sure seemed to imply it. Either way, it was a silly, paranoid notion worthy only of ridicule.

MJBrutus on February 5, 2011 at 3:42 PM

The phrase, “rid the world of us” sure seemed to imply it. Either way, it was a silly, paranoid notion worthy only of ridicule.

MJBrutus on February 5, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Paranoid and worthy of ridicule. What an arrogant ass. Let’s see now. You paid one conciliatory comment to Kelly as a segway to get into the thread and then spent the rest of your time faith bashing.

From your buddy.

The REAL reason we care what religious people think is because there are religious people on this planet, your more fundamentalist neighbors and enemies, who work towards this final conflagration called Armageddon.

What of those who survive this Armageddon?

THEY’RE the ones who have to pick up the pieces when the fundamentalists of this planet drag the rest of us down into the pits of suffering that will be once the nuclear bombs start going off.

This is where, and why, I decided that I’m not just gonna shrug it off and say its god’s will anymore…

SauerKraut537 on February 5, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Talk about paranoid. He’s like a character from “12 Monkeys”.

And also from your buddy…

I seek, through discussion, to dissuade people of the notion that there is even ONE right religion because what if the real answer is that ALL religions are wrong?

SauerKraut537 on February 5, 2011 at 12:16 PM

And my favorite.

It’s high time we grow up as a species and relegate these few remaining gods to the dustbin of history.

SauerKraut537 on February 5, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Oh sorry, I guess that was my imagination that the objectives of atheists was to rid the world of faith. I guess I’m a paranoid fruit cake.

You should really read the threads for the entire content FF before you go spouting off and judging other people. I’ll tell you something else. Talk like to me in my presence, you’ll get a drink in your face and a dare to do anything about it.

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 8:12 PM

talk like “that”…

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 8:14 PM

You paid one conciliatory comment to Kelly as a segway (sic) to get into the thread and then spent the rest of your time faith bashing.

Because, you know, an atheist couldn’t possibly be sincere or anything. And because one can’t just say what they want on H/A, one must work his way in to saying what he really thinks.

Oh sorry, I guess that was my imagination that the objectives of atheists was to rid the world of faith. I guess I’m a paranoid fruit cake.

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 8:12 PM

I would be astonished if I were to learn that you could tie your own shoes. Let’s see, one atheist says he would like to see gods relegated to the dustbins of history and you conclude that all atheists must also want that. So I guess its fair game for me to go ahead and hold you responsible for every thing any Christian says. That would, BTW make more sense, since one atheist has nothing in common with another aside from their rejection of theism whereas Christians share an entire dogma of good and evil and sin and damnation and all the rest.

Sorry, but just because SK has made it his hobby to try to dissuade people of their foolish beliefs doesn’t it make it one of my pass times. I told you, I didn’t give a crap what you believe.

MJBrutus on February 5, 2011 at 11:02 PM

You paid one conciliatory comment to Kelly as a segway (sic) to get into the thread and then spent the rest of your time faith bashing.

Because, you know, an atheist couldn’t possibly be sincere or anything. And (sic) because one can’t just say what they want on H/A, one must work his way in to saying what he really thinks.

Sure one could have been, but you weren’t.

I would be astonished if I were to learn that you could tie your own shoes.

I’d be astonished if you could make it through one comment without an insult.

Let’s see, one atheist says he would like to see gods relegated to the dustbins of history and you conclude that all atheists must also want that. So I guess its (sic) fair game for me to go ahead and hold you responsible for every thing any Christian says. (Will I get credit for the good stuff too) That would, BTW make more sense, since one atheist has nothing in common with another aside from their rejection of theism whereas Christians share an entire dogma of good and evil and sin and damnation and all the rest.

So, you’re very different than SK I see. You would prefer for us Christians to multiply in numbers then? Again, my bad. I thought you came here for three solid pages posting point after point after point as to why you thought Christians were stupid to believe what they do. But you didn’t actually recommend they stop being Christians like SK did. Oh…I get it.

Sorry, but just because SK has made it his hobby to try to dissuade people of their foolish beliefs doesn’t it make it one of my pass times. I told you, I didn’t give a crap what you believe.

MJBrutus on February 5, 2011 at 11:02 PM

lol, you’re a cartoon of a man. I’d be surprised if got “your” shoes on the right feet. BTW, your comments need to be perfect if you’re going to play that editor crap. Learn to punctuate.

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Oh quick fix it Hawk..

I’d be surprised if you got “your” shoes….

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 11:28 PM

I told you, I didn’t give a crap what you believe.

MJBrutus on February 5, 2011 at 11:02 PM

Page after page after page of posts about those ignorant ‘god-people’, and you say you don’t give a crap what they believe.

It would be embarrassing to debate you. I’d feel so bad I’d probably give you your lunch money back.

Squiggy on February 6, 2011 at 7:09 AM

So, you’re very different than SK I see. You would prefer for us Christians to multiply in numbers then?

hawkdriver on February 5, 2011 at 11:26 PM

The first correct thing you said. Too bad you were being sarcastic.

You see, while I find all religion to be rather foolish, of the major ones out there, Christianity is a fairly benign one. As noted in my very first post (which you insist is some evil atheist ruse to some achieve some unknown evil end) for example it can be comforting to one who is grieving. So yeah, I am happy to see Christianity spread at the expense of less benign religions such as Islam.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 7:45 AM

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 7:45 AM

After reading your comments for at least the last year, I doubt many could have even imagined that you could want that. You let few political discussions go by without sooner or later injecting it somehow. I will certainly take your word for it and say my bad to think otherwise. I will also apologize if you really offered a first comment just for the purpose of wishing Kelly the best.

If you’ll consider looking at the issue from my point of view. Consider what and how you express your beliefs. You’ve called our faith “magic”, equated it to pulling rabbits out of a hat and on previous occasions I recall threads where you stated we had candidates in the field you would not vote for because of their religious beliefs. The terms you use to describe Christians are at times the worst form of insult and frankly, if you didn’t understand how those lyrics or a joke about Jesus being beat up wouldn’t somehow be offensive, then I’m not sure what else to tell you.

I never come on a thread about faith (or really any thread) and tell people my beliefs about their chances in the hereafter; out of respect for intelligent people who might not believe. I don’t see it as outside the scope of fairness that Conservative Atheists avoid using the political threads as a platform for expressing or advancing their opinions either.

I mean, if you want to come after I’ve said something like, “God has given me strength in very dangerous times in my life”. I wouldn’t care if you expressed a comment like, “Well Hawk, I don’t believe that was really God doing that.” I might answer something like, “Well, I believe it was.”

Then we could just agree to disagree.

Doesn’t that sound like more reasoned debate between Conservatives?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 8:39 AM

After reading your comments for at least the last year, I doubt many could have even imagined that you could want that. You let few political discussions go by without sooner or later injecting it somehow. I will certainly take your word for it and say my bad to think otherwise. I will also apologize if you really offered a first comment just for the purpose of wishing Kelly the best.

Thank you, my words were indeed sincere.

If you review your first response to me in this thread, it was basically, “go away atheists this thread is for Christians.” That more or less set the tone for most or our interaction from my perspective. Quite frankly I don’t see the offense in that lyric I posted. It’s a very popular song with Christians and others, slightly edgy, but generally not enough to offend most people.

Agreeing to disagree is fine. In fact it has been my stance all along although you’ve refused to believe that I really am content to leave you to your own religious beliefs. However, I call ‘em as I see ‘em and when I see beliefs that seem silly to me, I say so.

Getting to the subject of “magic,” I stand by that analogy with all my heart. I see absolutely no difference between saying the universe was originated by magic and saying it was created by some god. Both answers are non-answers in that they provide no new knowledge or understanding, they simply furnish our ignorance with a label.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Getting to the subject of “magic,” I stand by that analogy with all my heart. I see absolutely no difference between saying the universe was originated by magic and saying it was created by some god. Both answers are non-answers in that they provide no new knowledge or understanding, they simply furnish our ignorance with a label.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:07 AM

instead of the word magic, you could just use the word evolution…same thing.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 9:17 AM

MJBrutus on February 4, 2011 at 7:31 PM

Why do people like you even come to threads about faith? Your only goal, it seems, is to try to turn believers from “their” faith. Why and what is it to you? If you don’t want to consider God as an explanation to life, fine. But I’m confused as to why it’s so important for atheists to spread their belief system while almost forbidding a person who believes in a deity to even talk about theirs.

The subject of this thread was a man of faith talking to others about his faith in a time of life crisis. Not whether or not God exists.

hawkdriver on February 4, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Well, I’ve reposted it here. Asking why you come to a thread is not the same as telling you to go away. You read more into that thread comment than I even know how to address. Your tone is set by yourself in most every exchange you engage in to include kidding about you own abrasive form of debate. That you stand by your posting of those lyrics after the apologetic tone of my comment is, I’m sorry, but telling. I don’t know of a Christian who would think that song “edgy”; which is just liberal-speak for “let me insult you out of some contrived notion that I’m just expanding our thinking horizon”.

Perhaps you took my sincere attempt at a little Christian/Atheist detente as a sign of issue weakness. Maybe my last comment was a mistake.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:26 AM

Brutus, can I tell you something, honestly, as a fellow Conservative and as someone who potentially could be a friend?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 8:39 AM

Oh, I just wanted to add a few more words about the song, “She left me for Jesus.” The song, of course is about a man who, upon hearing the title imagines that Jesus is a romantic rival rather than the religious figure. The humor comes both from this confusion and also the notion that one could live in a cave deep enough not to know who Jesus was. I referenced it as my own subtle way of letting you know that I can find out all I want to know about your religion 24×7 from any number of places.

I find most Christians have wildly inaccurate ideas about who atheists are and what being an atheist means. One reason is that there aren’t many of us and we don’t continually broadcast on 3 cable channels in most markets. Another being that we atheists share only one idea in common and that doesn’t define us, it simply sets apart from theists. So when you say SK thinks X therefore other atheists must also think X you are greatly mistaken.

There, no need for even a Christian to be all offended by it :-)

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Brutus, can I tell you something, honestly, as a fellow Conservative and as someone who potentially could be a friend?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

I love honesty and would be glad to hear whatever you have to say :-)

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 9:17 AM

I had to be at least 25 years old before I met my first real live Creationist. I was sure the guy was pulling my leg for the longest time, but he eventually convinced me that he meant it. It was an astonishing experience. I felt like I had discovered some lost tribe of Pacific islanders who had never heard of the wheel.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM

I love honesty and would be glad to hear whatever you have to say :-)

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

It’s just that one day, you’re going to have to concede that you’re a dick.

I mean, I’m really trying here and you’re, I’m sure, sitting at your computer thinking, I’m stringing this stupid Bible-Thumper along in conversation and hitting him with back-handed insults right and left. You cannot control your need to assert your opinion of Christians for a single comment.

After my comment above almost taking back my apology, you have the nuts to post a detailed explanation about your song. News flash, I don’t a rat’s netherlands about the song. It’s offensive. It’s “In your face.” You’re either pushing it because you’re clueless or outright trying to push my buttons. I’m guessing the last. My buttons aren’t that easily pushed, but I’m no sap either. I tried Dude. You are really no different that SK at all.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Now go have a laugh at my expense.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:46 AM

What evs.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:48 AM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:46 AM

What evs.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:48 AM

Thought so. Dick.

Wow, this insult stuff is fun.

More?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 9:53 AM

Hawk,
Like MJBrutus, I’d rather have Christianity take hold of the world than Islam but ultimately both religions are as wrong as wrong can be. If you think it’s right then we will have to disagree (which is apparent).

Like you, when I was a Christian, I used to argue against atheists and people of other faiths, and as adamantly as you do.

You know, I don’t fault you for it but most people just take what their parents feed them, one of those things being religion. We look up to our parents, they are our protectors. They wouldn’t lie to us would they? So we take it and accept it, then we internalize it (the story and the claims) and it becomes a part of us, but that doesn’t change the fact that the majority of it is just plain wrong. The fact is that we all have our lives, and we’ve been taught to look to JEsus/god for strength and answers to the tough questions in life. Most of us never give it a second thought except to compare the religion of our birth to the others that are out there.

That’s why I said earlier that people like you use evidence and rational thought to choose not to follow these other religions (once you’re exposed to them) but you fail to use the same reasoning and rational thought on your own religion, and when most people do they secretly know they aren’t.

Look, these gods that we find being worshiped these days… They’re just childish. It’s as simple as someone, ANYONE, making a claim about something and specially pleading that they’re right about it because they have some imaginary god standing behind them. We primarily use religion to try to codify good and bad behavior, and religion served its purpose as an engine for change in how we humans interact with each other, but it’s high time we grew up and shed these monotheistic gods that do more to divide us, than unite us. In fact, they drive us to kill each other as we see flare-ups from time to time. Are there OTHER reasons for us to kill each other? Sure, getting rid of theistic gods won’t solve all our problems as a species but shedding the belief in these gods that we follow will do more good than harm.

It’s one less reason to disagree, and once you come to the realization that I now know, you’ll have an ever more respectful outlook on life and other people. Once you free yourself from the shackles of a celestial dictator, like Yahweh or Allah, you will THEN know real freedom. It doesn’t mean you do whatever you want of course. We still work to get along and make sure we don’t infringe on other people’s freedoms, but you will THEN understand true freedom. We need to grow up as a species and quit believing in make believe stories and myths that sooth our, as of yet, still unproven soul.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Hawk, just go read the bible cover to cover several times, not piecemeal studying this or that part. Just read it like a book. Then tell me it makes sense.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 11:44 AM

I had to be at least 25 years old before I met my first real live Creationist. I was sure the guy was pulling my leg for the longest time, but he eventually convinced me that he meant it. It was an astonishing experience. I felt like I had discovered some lost tribe of Pacific islanders who had never heard of the wheel.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM

you’ve never heard of logic, common sense, or science. you think your religion, atheism is science…too funny.

you think all this just ‘evolved’ right…takes much more faith to think that, than to think that God Almighty made this universe, and all life in it.

and of course the evidence, such as the fossil record, points to creation, not to evolution. but then you darwiniacs never let facts get in the way of your faith.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Hawk, just go read the bible cover to cover several times, not piecemeal studying this or that part. Just read it like a book. Then tell me it makes sense.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 11:44 AM

I did, it does, we’re done.

PS, I wasn’t taken to church as a child. I was saved at 17 when I joined the Army. Never looked back.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Meant to quote of course, not strike. Off to services.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 11:52 AM

We need to grow up as a species and quit believing in make believe stories and myths that sooth our, as of yet, still unproven soul.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

I may have quoted this before, but its a very interesting article…

Today, there’s also an Arland D. Williams Jr. Bridge, in Washington, D.C.; an Arland D. Williams Jr. Elementary School, in Mattoon, Illinois; and an Arland D. Williams, Jr. Endowed Professorship of Heroism at the Citadel. There’s an Arland Williams folk song and a made-for-TV movie. There’s even an Arland Williams shrine created by a woman in Japan. But as Darwin predicted, there is no Arland Williams IV.

And there never will be.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21902983/page/4/

you may find this whole series of articles very interesting

1) Why is there anything?
2) What caused the Universe?
3) Why is there regularity (Law) in nature?
4) Of the Four Causes in nature proposed by Aristotle (material, formal, efficient, and final), which of them are real? Do final causes exist?
5) Why do we have subjective experience, and not merely objective existence?
6) Why is the human mind intentional, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the referral to something besides itself? How can mental states be about something?
7) Does Moral Law exist in itself, or is it an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.)
8) Why is there evil?

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/10/what_do_new_atheists_actually039571.html

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/10/what_i_really_believe039671.html

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/unlike_egnor_i_am_interested_i040071.html

the questions, and the answers from the new atheists, are interesting.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 11:55 AM

but you will THEN understand true freedom. We need to grow up as a species and quit believing in make believe stories and myths that sooth our, as of yet, still unproven soul.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

you may find this interesting…

1) Why is there anything?
2) What caused the Universe?
3) Why is there regularity (Law) in nature?
4) Of the Four Causes in nature proposed by Aristotle (material, formal, efficient, and final), which of them are real? Do final causes exist?
5) Why do we have subjective experience, and not merely objective existence?
6) Why is the human mind intentional, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the referral to something besides itself? How can mental states be about something?
7) Does Moral Law exist in itself, or is it an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.)
8) Why is there evil?

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/10/what_do_new_atheists_actually039571.html

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/unlike_egnor_i_am_interested_i040071.html

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/10/what_i_really_believe039671.html

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Right4life

I understand the arguments for the existence of a god perfectly well but what you fail to realize is that these arguments only get you as far as a Deistic god and that’s as far as I’m willing to go anymore.

As I’ve said many times before, there MAY be a god, and I actually lean more towards that being the case, but the theistic gods that we find being worshiped these days most certainly aren’t it.

As for the Theory of Evolution… Give it a rest. As I said in another thread here on Hot Air. The Discovery Institute put out a list of around 800 scientists several years back where these scientists said they disagreed with the Theory of Evolution and essentially said it wasn’t true.

Not too long after that, Project Steve was started (a response to the Discovery Institutes list). As of 2011, the list of scientists with the name Steve that publicly agree with the Theory of Evolution is larger than the Discovery Institutes list of scientists with any name who disagree.

It’s not a controversy

Why is it that religious people are so against the Theory of Evolution, but not any of the other theories of science out there?

Its rather telling to me the selective nature of the objection… It should be to you as well.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Why is it that religious people are so against the Theory of Evolution, but not any of the other theories of science out there?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:26 PM

You talk about religious people in very abstract forms for one who used to be with The Holy Spirit. I mean, all these questions you ask about “Religious People” are just rhetorical, right? Having been one, you have the insights to answer your own questions, right? You must still have “some” common ground in understanding with your former brethren, right?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 12:33 PM

You talk about religious people in very abstract forms for one who used to be with The Holy Spirit. I mean, all these questions you ask about “Religious People” are just rhetorical, right? Having been one, you have the insights to answer your own questions, right? You must still have “some” common ground in understanding with your former brethren, right?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 12:33 PM

What does it mean to be with the holy spirit Hawk?

And yes, I have insights to the questions and I know what my answer used to be, but I’ve come to a new understanding in answer to these questions.

For me, my objection to the theory was that it ran counter to my religious beliefs, mainly that god created us in the form that we now find ourselves in. That god created all the flora and fauna that we see around us.

As an aside, if it was true that he did do this, doesn’t it strike you as looking like we’re a rat in a maze? That this is just some proving ground where we have to jump through the hoops that this god puts up for us?

If you’re good and just believe that Jesus was sacrificed for us, you’re a winner and get to spend an eternity in heaven with the others in life that were so fortunate. If you don’t, well, then you’re either sent to hell (depending on which Christian you ask) or you’re kept “separate” from Him but in some kind of limbo (its a place not of torture but more like a detention cell maybe?)

None of it makes sense.

I posted this video the other day in another Hot Air thread but it’s a great video…

Science saved my soul.

Go watch it… It’s a good one

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:59 PM

What does it mean to be with the holy spirit Hawk?

Really?

And yes, I have insights to the questions and I know what my answer used to be, but I’ve come to a new understanding in answer to these questions.

You sound confused as if the whole thing were just a mental execise and not based at all on your Christian experinces. You were a Christian a long time, no?

For me, my objection to the theory was that it ran counter to my religious beliefs, mainly that god created us in the form that we now find ourselves in. That god created all the flora and fauna that we see around us.

What theory, you slipped a track here.

As an aside, if it was true that he did do this, doesn’t it strike you as looking like we’re a rat in a maze? That this is just some proving ground where we have to jump through the hoops that this god puts up for us?

You should already know the answer.

If you’re good and just believe that Jesus was sacrificed for us, you’re a winner and get to spend an eternity in heaven with the others in life that were so fortunate. If you don’t, well, then you’re either sent to hell (depending on which Christian you ask) or you’re kept “separate” from Him but in some kind of limbo (its a place not of torture but more like a detention cell maybe?)

Yep, sublimely simple in understanding for those who believe, or at least had believed at one this.

None of it makes sense.

And it never made sense, my former Christian brother?

I posted this video the other day in another Hot Air thread but it’s a great video…

Science saved my soul.

Go watch it… It’s a good one

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:59 PM

I’ll watch it if you come to church with me, otherwise, pass.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM

oops, at one “time”…

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM

How old were your little ones when they died Sauerkraut if I may ask?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:11 PM

LOL@Hawk… OK, set an unachievable goal for me like going to church with you before watching the video and then that frees you from having to watch it. That’s intelligent.

Open your mind a little and pull your fingers from your ears.

You’re obviously not being level with me because you evade all my points with comments like “really?” to my question of “what does it mean to be with the Holy Spirit?”

What it means to me now, when I think back to my days when I said the holy spirit was with me, is this. That I was having an emotional group get together with people of like mind. I had a numinous moment, a transcendent experience… There are countless psychological studies which show that this is a very common experience. Muslims experience it, Hindus as well, Jews just the same, etc. Your experience of the holy spirit was just a physical reaction to the stimuli around you and your own thought.

It’s like when you’re at a concert with thousands of people and your favorite song comes on, EVERYONE’s favorite song comes on… The rumble of the crowd gets to you, you feel the rumble of cheers and sound, it’s a rush as you feel a tingle up your spine… You experience jubilation.

Come on man! You know I’m right and that all it was was YOU making it happen. It was YOU working yourself up into a tizzy… Who knows, maybe you spoke in tongues?

I was talking about the Theory of Evolution which tells us that we’re not above all the other animals. That they are there for our pleasure and care.

There can be no doubt about our close relationship to the Chimps and other great apes. Our bodies are so similar, the proportions of our limbs or our faces may differ, but otherwise we are very very similar. The arrangement of our internal organs, the chemistry of our blood, the way our bodies work, and DNA has proved it to be true (that we are cousins with the Chimpanzees)

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 1:31 PM

LOL@Hawk… OK, set an unachievable goal for me like going to church with you before watching the video and then that frees you from having to watch it. That’s intelligent.

Open your mind a little and pull your fingers from your ears.

I’m 52, don’t you think by now I’ve heard all the Atheistic dogma I need to make my decision. You’ve made yours to the contrary. You’ve obviously heard all you needed to hear.

You’re obviously not being level with me because you evade all my points with comments like “really?” to my question of “what does it mean to be with the Holy Spirit?”

Are you accusing me of lying? You as a former Christian shouldn’t have to ask another what it means to be with The Holy Spirit.

What it means to me now, when I think back to my days when I said the holy spirit was with me, is this. That I was having an emotional group get together with people of like mind. I had a numinous moment, a transcendent experience… There are countless psychological studies which show that this is a very common experience. Muslims experience it, Hindus as well, Jews just the same, etc. Your experience of the holy spirit was just a physical reaction to the stimuli around you and your own thought.

It’s like when you’re at a concert with thousands of people and your favorite song comes on, EVERYONE’s favorite song comes on… The rumble of the crowd gets to you, you feel the rumble of cheers and sound, it’s a rush as you feel a tingle up your spine… You experience jubilation.

That’s not anything like receiving The Holy Spirit. Again, you sound like you’re talking in a college classroom about hypotheticals. And not from experiences.

Come on man! You know I’m right and that all it was was YOU making it happen. It was YOU working yourself up into a tizzy… Who knows, maybe you spoke in tongues?

I only know you sound less and less like someone who actually once really knew God.

There can be no doubt about our close relationship to the Chimps and other great apes. Our bodies are so similar, the proportions of our limbs or our faces may differ, but otherwise we are very very similar. The arrangement of our internal organs, the chemistry of our blood, the way our bodies work, and DNA has proved it to be true (that we are cousins with the Chimpanzees)

We are also so very unlike them (ape) in many ways and very much like swine in our internal organs. Are we also evolved from pigs? And no “animal” comes close to human intelligence after all these years to “evolve”.

Did you see my question about your children?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 1:31 PM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:48 PM

The last question got caught in the quotes. Did you see my question about your children. After you told us, I was very curious how old the little ones were.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:49 PM

There can be no doubt about our close relationship to the Chimps and other great apes. Our bodies are so similar, the proportions of our limbs or our faces may differ, but otherwise we are very very similar. The arrangement of our internal organs, the chemistry of our blood, the way our bodies work, and DNA has proved it to be true (that we are cousins with the Chimpanzees)

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 1:31 PM

We are also so very unlike them (apes) in many ways and very much like swine in our internal organs. Are we also evolved from pigs? And no “animal” comes close to human intelligence after all these years to “evolve”.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:51 PM

LOL, ok, whatever.

I’m not accusing you of lying, I accused you of evading my questions and such. That’s completely different than accusing you of lying. Of course, subterfuge is a form of lying so take it as it is…

I asked you what it means to be with the holy spirit and then recounted a small part of my understanding of it. You can belittle it all you like as that’s a common strategy of religious folk when they encounter a former believer of their faith. It’s call the No True Scotsman fallacy.

We all want to believe that there is something after this life… Go ahead, wish all you want, it doesn’t change the facts because facts aren’t bothered by our feelings about them.

Have you ever heard of DMT? DMT stands for Dimethyltriptamine. It is a substance that all animals enjoy, and readily available to be made/had in the environment all around you. You can create it from grass, leaves, pretty much anything plant based.

It’s the dreaming drug; and your Pineal gland, located at the base of your brain behind your eyes, is where it’s created. The composition of the substance is one molecule away from being Serotonin which is one of the “happy” neurotransmitters that your brain uses in your every day life.

There are two “times” in your life where you get to experience it, other than as a drug taken illicitly (it’s a schedule 1 banned substance by the Federal govt).

When you’re dreaming and when you die.

When you dream every night, your brain kicks out small doses of it and it is the key ingredient in deciding how “trippy” your dream turns out to be. One of the by products of the usage of the drug is that it’s effects fade away very quickly and you soon forget what happened when you were on it (unless you write it down or otherwise memorize it).

I’m sure you’re familiar with how hard it is to recollect dreams (the much much finer details of the dreams/we all have vague recollections of them), both when you immediately wake up, and later on after you’ve been awake for a bit.

Now, the other time that we humans experience a DMT experience, and the ONLY time that you experience it whilst being awake, is when you’re dieing. Your brain kicks out copious amounts of the stuff to help “ease” your passing, and you are immersed in a waking dream. Your perception of the world around you is completely transformed…

DMT is known as the spirit molecule and is actually used by a Christian sect down in South America called the Church of Santo Daime (or something like that)

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:04 PM

What about your children?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:05 PM

accidentally click submit before… The point of my DMT information is this… Religious people who have been close to death often claim that they saw a light at the end of “tunnel”… DMT causes this “trip” when they die where they are immersed in a waking dream. The events that people experience in near death experiences is simply their mind going into overdrive as they ease into death.

There is a natural explanation for everything, including events previously claimed by the religious as “supernatural”.

Hasn’t that been the way of things since science began?

Look, in a world still filled with SOOOOOO much mystery, why do you think it is that humans believe with ABSOLUTE certainty that they have DEFINITIVELY answered the question of the ORIGIN of ALL things? Does it NOT strain credibility to actually believe that though we don’t possess a complete understanding of our own brain function, let alone millions of other things, that we have somehow MASTERED the maintenance of our immortal souls (which are as of yet still unprovable)?

Does that even SEEM logical?

Yet here we are, with a majority of the world’s population believing in one doctrine of faith or another, because they think that they are SO complex that there just HAS to be something more. Because there is SO much in the world, AND in the universe that has yet to EVEN be discovered, let alone UNDERSTOOD… Religious folk would rather have these mysteries remain, because it’s much easier to observe a tree than it is to discover photosynthesis, chlorophyll and the life cycle of individual types of trees.

Throughout history, EVERY mystery that has EVER been solved has turned out to be… NOT magic (which is the default claim of all miracle witnessing proponents)… Science has PULLED back the curtains on the Wizard of Oz COUNTLESS times, and MUCH that the world claimed used to belong to the supernatural, and by extension god, has been shown to have more natural explanations… Yet faith is still a virtue, except when it’s faith associated with people like the Muslims who flew the planes into the buildings in NYC and Washington…

Faith is the denial of observation, so that BELIEF can be preserved.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:10 PM

What about my children?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:10 PM

What about my children?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Above I thought we had hit about the end of the debate and was just asking how old they were when you lost them.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Whats it got to do with anything we’re talking about here?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Whats it got to do with anything we’re talking about here?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Nothing I guess, but you talked about it yesterday. If you caught my comment, I lost a child very young also. An infant actually. I can’t imagine two at the same time. I was just curious is all. If they were with you when it happened or if you had time to tell them that you loved them once before they past.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Is this your cryptic way of trying to answer my question?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Sauerkraut, I don’t think anyone else is coming to the thread. You won’t talk me out of my faith in God. I was considering a chance to talk about our kids a way to make the meeting worthwhile.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:40 PM

No, just a riddle I still don’t have a good answer to.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:41 PM

No, just a riddle I still don’t have a good answer to.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:41 PM

I understand if you don’t want to talk about your kids.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Dakine

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 2:59 PM

??? Whats that?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Man, I must have cut and paste that blogging on my other site. My bad.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:05 PM

SauerKraut, did you cut out?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:20 PM

We are also so very unlike them (apes) in many ways and very much like swine in our internal organs. Are we also evolved from pigs? And no “animal” comes close to human intelligence after all these years to “evolve”.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:51 PM

I would be glad to answer this question. However, before I do, I want to hear what right4life thinks the answer according to the ToE would be. The answer should include not just a yes or no but an explanation of why the ToE would say so. The reason I say that is that he thinks he understands the theory well enough to say that it is wrong. Let him prove that he understands what he is so busy arguing against well enough to answer this basic question about it correctly.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:30 PM

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:30 PM

If you’re answering for me, you’re wasting your time. I was just trying to comment with SK a bit before the game. And it was rhetorical anyways. So thanks but not necessary.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:44 PM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Psst. Truth is a don’t give a sh-t about you, so carry on.

I just want to show r4l that he doesn’t know squat about the theory he pretends to know well enough to dispute.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Psst, then quit responding to my comments to someone else.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:53 PM

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Make me.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Make me.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:55 PM

You answered my comment as if you were talking to me.

I politely said you didn’t need to. Politely.

You said you weren’t talking to me anyways, but to r4l.

I said to quit responding then and now you’re being almost hostilely aggressive in making…me…accept…that you’re still talking to me? You’re kind of spooky, Dude.

Brutus, take a tonic and watch the game. Act like you like the Steelers so when Green Bay loses it doesn’t make you fly off the handle too.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 4:07 PM

It’s tuff being gracious on the thread when you’ve done so poorly, huh?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 4:41 PM

We are also so very unlike them (apes) in many ways and very much like swine in our internal organs. Are we also evolved from pigs? And no “animal” comes close to human intelligence after all these years to “evolve”.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Hawk, we are most definitely the most advanced intellectually, I don’t doubt that… But you can watch a chimp agonize over the death of her child, you can see chimpanzees war between clans, not much unlike we humans were a few thousand years ago.

You can see the Indelible Stamp of our Lowly Origin clearly if you just open your eyes…

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Hawk, we are most definitely the most advanced intellectually, I don’t doubt that… But you can watch a chimp agonize over the death of her child, you can see chimpanzees war between clans, not much unlike we humans were a few thousand years ago.

You can see the Indelible Stamp of our Lowly Origin clearly if you just open your eyes…

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 4:42 PM

True, “animals” are very interesting. Sometimes almost humanlike.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Hey Hawk, what do you have to fear? Watch it and learn a little something.

Perhaps if we accepted the fact that we “came from a monkey”, we would find it easier to suppress those destructive primate urges that have caused so much trouble throughout history.

Just a thought.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Just a thought.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Well, like I said, I was really just hanging around thinking we’d talk about our families. You were getting a bit evasive there, so I thought it was too hard. I’ve watched all the same types of Atheistic dogma in adult Bible study. So really, unless you wanted to talk family, I’m on a Christian site with some friends mostly. Till the game starts.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Why is it that religious people are so against the Theory of Evolution, but not any of the other theories of science out there?

Its rather telling to me the selective nature of the objection… It should be to you as well.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:26 PM

its very simple, the theory of evolution is atheism posing as science…and its the evolutionists who acknowledge this….

Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.”

Provine, William B. [Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University], “, “Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life”, Abstract of Will Provine’s 1998 Darwin Day Keynote Address.

“Darwin knew that accepting his theory required believing in philosophical materialism, the conviction that matter is the stuff of all existence and that all mental and spiritual phenomena are its by-products. Darwinian evolution was not only purposeless but also heartless–a process in which the rigors of nature ruthlessly eliminate the unfit. Suddenly, humanity was reduced to just one more species in a world that cared nothing for us. The great human mind was no more than a mass of evolving neurons. Worst of all, there was no divine plan to guide us.” (Biology: Discovering Life, by Joseph S. Levine & Kenneth R. Miller (1st edition, D.C. Heath and Co., 1992), pg. 152; emphasis in original)

especially this last one really gets me…how can a scientist state ‘there is no divine plan to guide us’ when they cannot prove, or disprove that using science.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:02 PM

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 12:26 PM

I thought you might find those questions, and the answers, rather telling…they really have nothing to do with evolution and more to do with philosphy…and rather deep questions, for which the new atheist have no answers for…these questions go back to aristotle and probably before him….just the shallow dismissal from the atheists is rather striking.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM

these are such simple questions, surely you have thought of these before. If God does not allow evil, then He is a dictator, who gives no choice to His creation. He allows evil, so we, and the angels, can have choice…the day will come when He ends that though…when He has shown how profound and deep evil really is?

haven’t you ever wondered why Satan is bond for millenium, and then released? and how people who no longer live under the curse, and have Jesus in the flesh(? of some sort) ruling, will turn to satan?

I wonder if you have really thought through all these issues…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Hey right4life,

Why don’t you try looking for evidence outside of reading talking points on a creationists website?

Thanks

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 5:12 PM

I just want to show r4l that he doesn’t know squat about the theory he pretends to know well enough to dispute.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM

I know enough about it to make you look stupid. not that its very hard…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Hey right4life,

Why don’t you try looking for evidence outside of reading talking points on a creationists website?

Thanks

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 5:12 PM

so in other words you dismiss what he wrote because he believes in ID..nice.

its so typical…darwinists cannot dispute what ID says, so they just dismiss it…its much easier than dealing with it…

you were never a christian, were you?

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:17 PM

you know whats funny is that none of that had anything to do with ID or evolution….just philosophy.

and yet you just dismiss it out of hand….

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:18 PM

I know enough about it to make you look stupid. not that its very hard…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:15 PM

I’m fully acquainted with your self-congratulating bombast. But you haven’t answered the question to prove that you know the first thing about the ToE. Here it is again:

We are also so very unlike them (apes) in many ways and very much like swine in our internal organs. Are we also evolved from pigs?

Either you’ll answer it or have it shown that you’re full of it by not answering.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Either you’ll answer it or have it shown that you’re full of it by not answering.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:31 PM

I’ve already shown that you’re full of it…

you have common descent from lower live form obviously…LOL

now you answer my question…list the mutations that led to the eye, in order, or admit that evolution is a faith. not science.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:33 PM

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Thank you for having proven me correct. Don’t feel too bad, I have yet to meet the Creationist who could answer that question correctly. Each and every one claims to be able to disprove the ToE but their lack of understanding of the theory inevitably has them disproving straw men instead of the ToE.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Thank you for having proven me correct. Don’t feel too bad, I have yet to meet the Creationist who could answer that question correctly. Each and every one claims to be able to disprove the ToE but their lack of understanding of the theory inevitably has them disproving straw men instead of the ToE.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:36 PM

oh please…lets hear your answer then. laughable.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:37 PM

oh and please don’t say convergent evolution…

thats just another word for miracle…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:39 PM

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:36 PM

still waiting breathlessly for you display your uh ‘wisdom’

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:41 PM

Right4life,

Lets see what Darwin had to say about the evolution about the eye…

To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree. – Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st Ed., p. 186.

Whoa! Did he just say that?

Oh wait, he answered the rhetorical question in the following sentences…

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

Right4life,
We have many examples of differing levels of development of the eye. The bacteria have light sensitive patches, Nautilus have eyes that can barely see depth, we have creatures with varying levels of lens development and diversification, some with focusing abilities and some without, some with color vision and others with ultraviolet vision. The Octopus has an eye better than our own.

Just go google Evolution of the Eye and you’ll learn quite a bit about how it evolved.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 5:43 PM

oh please…lets hear your answer then. laughable.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:37 PM

According to the ToE one can look at the genetic distance between species to determine the order in which the common ancestors of different species existed. So, if the genetic distance between men and apes is closer than that between men and swine then there was a common ancestor between men and apes that appeared after the common ancestor among men, pigs and swine. The common ancestor of men, apes and swine was not a modern pig, it was not a modern ape and it was not a modern human. It was a species from which the all three of those modern species evolved.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:46 PM

that appeared after the common ancestor among men, pigs and swine.

That sentence should have ended with “men, apes and swine”

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:47 PM

Right4life,
We have many examples of differing levels of development of the eye. The bacteria have light sensitive patches, Nautilus have eyes that can barely see depth, we have creatures with varying levels of lens development and diversification, some with focusing abilities and some without, some with color vision and others with ultraviolet vision. The Octopus has an eye better than our own.

Just go google Evolution of the Eye and you’ll learn quite a bit about how it evolved.

SauerKraut537 on February 6, 2011 at 5:43 PM

LOL so you can’t list the mutations that led to the eye…all you can do is tell a fairy tale story.

here’s what mayr said about eyes…

It had been shown that by morphological-phylogenetic research that photoreceptor organs (eyes) had developed at least 40 times independently during the evolution of animal diversity. A developmental geneticist, however, showed that all animals with eyes have the same regulator gene, Pax 6, which organizes the construction of the eye. It was therefore at first concluded that all eyes were derived from a single ancestral eye with the Pax 6 gene. But then the geneticist also found Pax 6 in species without eyes, and proposed that they must have descended from ancestors with eyes. However, this scenario turned out to be quite improbable and the wide distribution of Pax 6 required a different explanation. It is now believed that Pax 6, even before the origin of eyes, had an unknown function in eyeless organisms, and was subsequently recruited for its role as an eye organizer.12

That a structure like the eye could originate numerous times independently in very different kinds of organisms is not unique in the living world. After photoreceptors had evolved in animals, bioluminescence originated at least 30 times independently among various kinds of organisms. In most cases, essentially similar biochemical mechanisms were used. Virtually scores of similar cases have been discovered in recent years, and they often make use of hidden potentials of the genotype inherited from early ancestors.13

hidden potentials?? please…common DESIGN is more like it.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:47 PM

According to the ToE one can look at the genetic distance between species to determine the order in which the common ancestors of different species existed. So, if the genetic distance between men and apes is closer than that between men and swine then there was a common ancestor between men and apes that appeared after the common ancestor among men, pigs and swine. The common ancestor of men, apes and swine was not a modern pig, it was not a modern ape and it was not a modern human. It was a species from which the all three of those modern species evolved.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:46 PM

so in other words, after saying my answer was wrong, now you’re saying its right…

actually the convergent evolution is a better answer…but its such a laughable concept…it comes down to

‘yep things look the same in different animals gosh that evolution is clever’

right.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:49 PM

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:49 PM

That was probably the least coherent thing you’ve ever written. The bottom line is that I answered the question and you proved that you could not. It is one thing to not accept the ToE as being correct, it is another to not understand what it says. You don’t know the first thing about the ToE which renders your criticism of completely meaningless. Thanks for playing.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:53 PM

That was probably the least coherent thing you’ve ever written. The bottom line is that I answered the question and you proved that you could not. It is one thing to not accept the ToE as being correct, it is another to not understand what it says. You don’t know the first thing about the ToE which renders your criticism of completely meaningless. Thanks for playing.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:53 PM

you answered with my answer…after telling me I’m wrong…dumbass.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:54 PM

my answer:

Either you’ll answer it or have it shown that you’re full of it by not answering.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:31 PM

I’ve already shown that you’re full of it…

you have common descent from lower live form obviously…LOL

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:33 PM

your answer:

there was a common ancestor between men and apes that appeared after the common ancestor among men, pigs and swine. The common ancestor of men, apes and swine was not a modern pig, it was not a modern ape and it was not a modern human. It was a species from which the all three of those modern species evolved.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:46 PM

you do understand that common descent means common ancestor, right?

so you tell me I’m wrong, and give the same answer I do…

pathetically stupid

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:56 PM

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:54 PM

What in the world are you talking about? Show me where you said anything like that.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:57 PM

and actually convergent evolution is the best answer…but it derives from common descent…

but of course you knew that right? do you even know what convergent evolution is? and what parallel evolution is? without googling it?

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:58 PM

What in the world are you talking about? Show me where you said anything like that.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:57 PM

just did, in the preceding post…you’ve displayed a dazzling amount of ignorance.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM

you have common descent from lower live form obviously…LOL

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:33 PM

LMFAO! You think that this stupid attempt at an insult qualifies as an answer? You funny.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Common descent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In evolutionary biology, a group of organisms have common descent if they have a common ancestor. “There is strong quantitative support, by a formal test”[1] for the theory that all living organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor.[2]

maybe you should learn about the theory you say you love so…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:01 PM

LMFAO! You think that this stupid attempt at an insult qualifies as an answer? You funny.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM

I would definitely agree with the fat part…its all in your head…not your ass…

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:01 PM

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM

you know whats even funnier…is that convergent evolution is the best answer for that question…and you didn’t mention it…LOL

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM

but of course you knew that right? do you even know what convergent evolution is? and what parallel evolution is? without googling it?

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Sure, they’re Creationist attempts to argue against evolution by are really arguments against straw men instead. Just about every Creationist argument I’ve seen boils down to the same thing. An inaccurate claim about what the ToE says followed by a refutation of that flawed claim about the theory. They belong in the same class of bogus notions as “micro” and “macro” evolution.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:03 PM

parallel evolution could also be an answer…I guess it depends upon how far back you want to go with the common ancestor….

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:04 PM

Sure, they’re Creationist attempts to argue against evolution by are really arguments against straw men instead. Just about every Creationist argument I’ve seen boils down to the same thing. An inaccurate claim about what the ToE says followed by a refutation of that flawed claim about the theory. They belong in the same class of bogus notions as “micro” and “macro” evolution.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:03 PM

you don’t know the theory of evolution.

thanks for the laughs…pathetically stupid.

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:05 PM

but of course you knew that right? do you even know what convergent evolution is? and what parallel evolution is? without googling it?

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Sure, they’re Creationist attempts to argue against evolution by are really arguments against straw men instead. Just about every Creationist argument I’ve seen boils down to the same thing. An inaccurate claim about what the ToE says followed by a refutation of that flawed claim about the theory. They belong in the same class of bogus notions as “micro” and “macro” evolution.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:03 PM

this just classic!! oh yeah too funny…you darwiniacs don’t even understand your own theory…you have NO idea how stupid this is…wow..stunning ignorance…

thanks for the laughs..

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:04 PM

It’s a foregone conclusion that you won’t shut up or admit defeat, but as I said, your refusal to answer the question about the ToE proved beyond any doubt that you cannot possibly contribute to a discussion about it. Feel free to beclown yourself further my making all the silly noises you want though.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM

It’s a foregone conclusion that you won’t shut up or admit defeat, but as I said, your refusal to answer the question about the ToE proved beyond any doubt that you cannot possibly contribute to a discussion about it. Feel free to beclown yourself further my making all the silly noises you want though.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM

you’ve made a complete and utter ass of yourself…and you’re too stupid to even understand how stupid you are….wow.

I answered your question…you told me I was wrong, and then gave the same answer…I enhanced the answer with a more correct answer…deriving from common ancestry…and you don’t even understand what parallel and convergent evolution are….

stunning ignorance….and you keep digging yourself in deeper….ROLMAO (sorry I’m not fat)

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:09 PM

here…get a clue

Convergent evolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Convergent evolution describes the acquisition of the same biological trait in unrelated lineages.

The wing is a classic example of convergent evolution in action. Although their last common ancestor did not have wings, birds and bats do, and are capable of powered flight. The wings are similar in construction, due to the physical constraints imposed upon wing shape. Similarity can also be explained by shared ancestry, as evolution can only work with what is already there—thus wings were modified from limbs, as evidenced by their bone structure.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution

right4life on February 6, 2011 at 6:12 PM

It’s a foregone conclusion that you won’t shut up or admit defeat, but as I said, your refusal to answer the question about the ToE proved beyond any doubt that you cannot possibly contribute to a discussion about it. Feel free to beclown yourself further my making all the silly noises you want though.

MJBrutus on February 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Admit defeat, I thought you wanted Christians to thrive. What do you consider admitting defeat? It would appear Atheists are not what they seem. Or mean anything they say. WTF is with you guys?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6