| User | Post |
alte Hexe
Posts: 3898/5458 |
That is one of my favourite websites, leg. |
Legion
Posts: 3940/5657 |
A good source of information from a very fair point of view is http://www.religioustolerance.org/
The best part about it is that you can find information on practically ever religion practiced these days but in a non-promotional way.
|
drjayphd
Posts: 1057/1477 |
Originally posted by Randy53215
||bass did you even listen to him or give him a chance to answer your questions? I never said he was 100% correct.
Except the name "Truth Radio" implies that it IS. (Yes, I KNOW you didn't give it that name, but they certainly seem full of themselves.)
Originally posted by Randy53215
I made this thread for people who think they have proof on whatever they believe call or IM him stating their opinion and him giving them his...
...which is why talk radio is in the state it's in (read: shitty). It's all about who can scream the loudest before the host cuts any disagreeing callers off. I don't know how this guy runs his show, but the description and association with Hovind REALLY aren't going to convince me to listen to it.
Originally posted by Randy53215
Now let me ask something how do you know the guy that made the "Kent Hovinds theory sucks" site isnt bias? Did you even look all that information up?
Everyone has bias. It's a matter of letting it get in the way. And if you ask me, the guy making the site pulled from enough resources and used enough unbiased logic to show he's kind of on higher ground than Hovind. |
||bass
Posts: 400/817 |
Originally posted by Randy53215
Did you even look all that information up?
Yes. |
Sandy53215
Posts: 550/948 |
||bass did you even listen to him or give him a chance to answer your questions? I never said he was 100% correct. I made this thread for people who think they have proof on whatever they believe call or IM him stating their opinion and him giving them his...
That is also a flamitory remarkmark...
"This guy is either a total sleeze liar or another nutty fundie."
Now let me ask something how do you know the guy that made the "Kent Hovinds theory sucks" site isnt bias? Did you even look all that information up? |
||bass
Posts: 397/817 |
Originally posted by Narf Vader
I only scratched the surface of why that prize is bogus. Here is a more detailed analysis.
Wow. Just read the article and I couldn't agree more. This guy is either a total sleeze liar or another nutty fundie. Then again, that tends to be the standard for those fanatic radio show hosts. |
Rydain
Posts: 573/738 |
Originally posted by Randy53215
Because they wanna know what his answers are. ||bass a lot of names can be offensive. Hell Acmlm's name could be offensive for the game company Acclaim's. All I am saying is you should try it out and WW if you think you can proove "evolution" call him and win your $250,000. Winnar!
That would be nice if that $250,000 challenge weren't a complete and utter sham. First off, it sets up a monstrous strawman by using a definition of "evolution" that has very little to do with the actual definition of evolutionary theory as accepted by mainstream science. Evolutionary theory deals only with how life diversified once it appeared on earth. It doesn't give a rat's ass how said life got here to begin with, much less concern itself with the origin of the universe itself.
Furthermore, he insists that a challenger prove that all of these dissimilar events took place without the influence of God. Again, this is a strawman. Evolutionary theory (and Big Bang theory, for that matter) never claim that changes happened without any help from a deity. They cannot use a deity as an explanation for observed evidence because there is no way to test whether or not the deity was actually involved. An important criterion in scientific hypotheses is falsifiability - that is, the ability to be shown wrong by some piece of evidence or another. Evolutionary theory could be falsified by, for instance, showing that genetic mutations are not inherited by the offspring of an organism. How do you falsify God? Is there something you can point to that God could not have done?
With that said, "not using a deity as an explanation for observed evidence" does not mean that no deity could ever be involved at all. In fact, many mainstream scientists are religious, and many feel that we are simply learning about the mechanisms God used to create the universe and life on our planet.
I only scratched the surface of why that prize is bogus. Here is a more detailed analysis. |
Dracoon
Posts: 3003/3727 |
(Don't keep count for me, I don't keep it for myself   plus 3000 isn't a real marker.)
Hmm, I wonder who was on, people called in and talked about stuff. Most of it was about government actions and things, and he was kinda religious about it. See what assuming does? |
Sandy53215
Posts: 549/948 |
Dracoon im glad you at least listened to it. But the person I am talking about comes on this radio station at 4:30 PM - 6:00 PM (CST) This is the radio station he broadcasts on. You can ask him questions too and he will answer them (The way he believes, or the way its stated in the bible.)
Edit: Congrats on 3,000 posts. |
Dracoon
Posts: 3000/3727 |
After listening to it, and I'm probably the only one who has, it isn't really only about religion. Obviously he is biased about religion and he tries to bring some things into religion, but he does speak about quite a few other things. It is kind of... meh to listen to, a little interesting, but I don't like only being able to hear someones views and I don't feel like calling in to start a huge argument. |
alte Hexe
Posts: 3851/5458 |
*bashes head off of desk*
Look, this thread has been teetering from the beginning. Talk about your stupid little eRadio station, or otherwise, please...Just don't post. I can close this thread. Because YOU brought up evrolution. And you brought up the validity of God before anyone else. Either you go with the flow, or you shut up and let Ziff close. |
Sandy53215
Posts: 548/948 |
Let me just add a note here... I didnt start this thread to debate weither or not christianity or evolution are correct. I was just giving a chance for anyone to ask questions to him and hear what his "knowledgable facts" are. From what I see everyone is basically coming at me like "fuck you Randy." I respect your belief nor do I think of you differently. Was just giving you a chance to voice your thoughts and see what "his" answers are. |
The SomerZ
Posts: 754/862 |
What the fuck does evolution matter? If evolution was proven to be false, what does that have to do with anything? Tell me how you can make the logical jump from "evolution theory is wrong" to "God exists". They are two things that have nothing to do with each other. Also, if evolution was proven to be correct, would that somehow prove that God doesn't exist? Bah, you don't even have to have the slightest of interest in dialectics to realize that proving one thing doesn't disprove something else.
(and yes, I'm using the words prove, fact, and false quite losely here. Sorry for not putting what I wrote in a more sophisticated manner) |
alte Hexe
Posts: 3850/5458 |
It has if you accept micro-evolution as the proof of cellular change in DNA. And if you believe that cells make up the body, ergo as cells change so too does the body have the capacity to change and adapt.
But this isn't necessarily advertising. Most websites we allow to be discussed. But when you or any other user posts "OMG N000EW MASSEGE BOAREDS! U JIN IT WILLLLL B BIGGR THAN RON JEREMEES COK!"...That's when we have to step in.
Ziff: Lord of the FAQ. |
Slay
Posts: 93/339 |
Isn't this spam? I thought you're not supposed to advertise websites (outside of your own signiture)...and for the record, evolution hasn't been proven to be the method through which the creatures of today got how they were. The fact of the matter is that no one alive today was alive at the begining of the universe, so nothing anybody says can be anything more than conjecture, regardeless of how educated the reasoning behind it is. I believe you are reffering to the case of a flower observed in Britain which has changed in function or form (I forget which) between the 1940's when it was discovered, and present day. Fatalistically, this proves that a flower changed between 1940 and today. It does not prove the overall theory of evolution, which is the theory that all life stems from one or a few simple organisms billions of years ago, which progressed to all the life forms we observe today by changing subtly with each generation.
Choose your words more carefully, on both sides. I agree that "Truth Radio" is quite arrogant and off-putting. I associate such nomenclature with anti-homosexual and anti-gay-marraige rallies, and I think most people do as well. |
||bass
Posts: 396/817 |
Originally posted by Randy53215
||bass a lot of names can be offensive. Hell Acmlm's name could be offensive for the game company Acclaim's. All I am saying is you should try it out and WW if you think you can proove "evolution" call him and win your $250,000. Winnar!
Wow....
I'm almost to make fun of that post. But I'll keep this atleast somewhat cool and logical.
Saying that the name Acmlm is offensive to the Acclaim corperation is both completely asanine and untrue. That would be like me (J. Franco) being offended by the holocaust author Victor Frankl. Yes, offended by a marginal similarity in spelling and very little similarity in pronounciation.
The point that you totally missed here is that a name like Truth Radio implies that the religious viewpoint is somehow an intrinsic truth. Since most traditional religions require the belief that other religions are misguided or false, it would logically follow that just the very name of the radio show implies the falsehood of all nonchristian beliefs.
That seems to display a QUITE DRASTIC lack of respect for, oh, about 80% of the global population at best, 99.9% at worst.
Also: If anyone can prove that Truth Radio contains any "religious truth" (whatever). I'll pay up a $250,000 prize. |
Legion
Posts: 3798/5657 |
Originally posted by windwaker
Um. Evolution has been proven. Whether humans evolve or not (hah) hasn't.
What he said. I can't stress this enough. |
windwaker
Posts: 1566/1797 |
Um. Evolution has been proven. Whether humans evolve or not (hah) hasn't. |
Sandy53215
Posts: 547/948 |
Because they wanna know what his answers are. ||bass a lot of names can be offensive. Hell Acmlm's name could be offensive for the game company Acclaim's. All I am saying is you should try it out and WW if you think you can proove "evolution" call him and win your $250,000. Winnar! |
windwaker
Posts: 1563/1797 |
Originally posted by Randy53215
These people (John and Kent) show absolute respect to everyone.
Keyword in your statement... "I know plenty of people of all religions that don't respect me." Exactly, YOU know plenty of people. Do you know them?
Who are you to say truth radio is bad. Did you even listen to it? Evolution is technicaly a belief too... These are people who are very inteligent and know things relating to both christianity and evolution. They have authority to do so because they know what they are talking about. And he states that these are HIS beliefs. Wheither you wanna accept that or not is your problem.
No, evolution has been proven. And, I thought you were referring to Christians in general.
And, if these are HIS beliefs, why is he answering OTHER'S questions? |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. |
