Favorite TOL post of the day.

[Tambora]

Post a TOL quote made today (and each day) that tickled your fancy for whatever reason.

Here's mine:

You are wrong because you are wrong.

[patrick jane]

Post a TOL quote made today (and each day) that tickled your fancy for whatever reason.

Here's mine:

musty

Good idea for a thread. It will give us something to look out for. So can everybody have their own favorite post of the day?

[Tambora]

musty

Good idea for a thread. It will give us something to look out for. So can everybody have their own favorite post of the day?

Yes.
Anyone can post their favorite post of the day.

[Ktoyou]

I didn't misspell anything, you pervert.

Go to H E L L!

One of TOLs funniest troublesome truthsmackers. Known by several name Sozo, Mystery, ghost, SOZO II, SOZO III, and SOZO return. Did is miss any name?

[Ask Mr. Religion]

One of TOLs funniest troublesome truthsmackers. Known by several name Sozo, Mystery, ghost, SOZO II, SOZO III, and SOZO return. Did is miss any name?

Door

AMR

[Ktoyou]

Door

AMR

Right Door. He had so many different names.

AMR remember this little part?
Door
"Go straight to hell."

"YOU took 7 FREAKING days (1 FULL WEEK) to respond to my post, and have still not done so in either one of these pieces of crap you have now posted, and then you act like a you are doing me a favor." [even too insulting to copy here]

[glorydaz]

A classic Clete.

Oh would you please give me a break. Are you gonna cry or what?

Spoiler

I explained what I meant. Get over it or else explain how my explanation doesn't fit you.


I already specifically explained that this isn't my thinking. Did you not read my post or should are start dropping the 'intellectual' part off my accusations of dishonesty?


In that case (assuming its even true) you are flatly without excuse. You are indeed, at the very least, intellectually dishonest.


This stupid comment comes from my being willing to discuss alternative cosmologies that I REPEATEDLY state as clearly as can be stated that I don't buy into on a thread where I specifically asked people to simply debate the topic without name calling and where you couldn't control yourself for half a dozen posts.

You're not just intellectually dishonest.


I understand what a formal proof is. I also have common sense and an ability to think critically and with discernment.

Guess what? This is not a formal debate, nor is anyone here formulating a formal scientific or mathematical proof of anything. It isn't merely unlikely in the normal sense. Winning the lottery is unlikely. Dying in a car accident today is unlikely. Having a hurricane dump water in one place for four straight days is unlikely.

And yes, in a mathematical sense the evolution of DNA is indeed "unlikely" but it takes unlikelihood to an entirely different place. It isn't merely that it is such an occurrence would be rare, it would never ever ever happen. If the universe were 100,000 times older than even the wildest claims that evolutionist's make, it still would never have happened. An ape accidentally typing out a complete Shakespearean play is FAR more likely but no matter how long an ape types, it would NEVER EVER EVER NEVER type even one single sentence of a Shakespearean play, never mind a whole one.
If you understand the numbers involved the way you claim to, then you know that even the so called Drake Equation doesn't even come close to giving life enough opportunity to happen by accident - not even remotely close. In fact, the Drake Equation may be one of the most brilliant examples of mass delusion and propaganda that has existed in human history. It completely ignores the incomprehensible and ineffably wild complexity of even the simplest forms of life and doesn't come within many of orders of magnitude of giving the universe enough opportunity to accidentally produce life and yet even most Christians have bought into it. The F(l) term in the equation is effectively zero or at least hundreds of orders of magnitude closer to it than the "1" that was originally used. And that's just one of the terms, the F(i) term is nearly as close to zero as well. If you want to know what an argument from incredulity looks like, the way the Drake Equation typically gets used is it.

So, I was about to put you back on ignore but I've decided instead to keep on grinding you into powder for everyone to watch. If you want to continue whining like a baby, fine. Have at it. If you want to make whatever feeble attempt to refute a word I've said that you think you're capable of then fine and dandy. Either way, you're the best thing that ever happened to a debate on evolution that any creationist could hope for.

Clete

[SaulToPaul]

One of TOLs funniest troublesome truthsmackers. Known by several name Sozo, Mystery, ghost, SOZO II, SOZO III, and SOZO return. Did is miss any name?

Elyon, briefly.
Also, Outlaw.

[Clete]

A classic Clete.

Thanks glorydaz!

Too many typos though!

[john w]

I'm waiting....Fess up...Release yourself...Let go.....TOL audience.

[patrick jane]

Originally Posted by john w
Oh, you're TOL's self appointed, resident Paul Harvey, are you now, Mayor?What's next? How about quipping, "Ever since I made tomorrow my favorite day, I've been uncomfortable looking back?" You beat everything, Clyde!

Classic john w -

[Ktoyou]

Elyon, briefly.
Also, Outlaw.

I do remember Elyon; maybe I was absent when he returned as Outlaw?

[meshak]

Isn't John W sozo's sock?

[Ktoyou]

Anyone remember this POD?

"No - you are wrong! You are from the United States of Colorado! Colorado is your Nation. Jeff co is your State and Littleton is your County! Your neighborhood is your city and your household is your whole subdivision now. You are your whole family! And your big toe is your whole body. This is the new anti-neocon, pro-every conspiracy / prophecy / anti Israel code. You need to get with the program Fred."

[Ktoyou]

Anyone know this one?

" it's all about strategy.

I understand your confusion.... you see ARTL fighting against Ron Paul because he supports states rights, yet you also see ARTL trying to get abortion outlawed in CO.

Keep in mind, it's all about strategy. (how to get from here... to there.)

In other words....
It isn't a good strategy to strive for states rights because you inherently approve of a state legalizing abortion (or keeping abortion legal as the case may be - know what I mean?). Then you have to go in and try to overturn that law in each state.

Yet during the battle if a state can successfully outlaw abortion (say Colorado) then you have a precedent to fight abortion at the federal level. (think of it as the reverse of what happened to make abortion legal in the first place.)

Said another way...
Nobody is against a state outlawing abortion. Instead what we are against is allowing states to make that decision and being "ok" with whatever that state might choose.

At least that's the way I see it. "