The Absentee Father

tosca1 said:

Why did you lose faith in Christ? What's exactly your reason for it?

That's relativistic.

Some people pick and choose which religion they prefer - not because of the truth in it - but because it suits their needs.

You're talking about finding the true religion, right?

Click to expand...

I stopped being a christian because I realized that there's no way to prove any one religion right over the other. Your decision to choose christianity was relativistic. It is your opinion that it's the best, not because there's any evidence to support that. I keep asking for the objective evidence that christianity is right yet you refuse to give it. It just feels right to you, huh?

tosca1 said:

Christianity? Why do they tell a contradictory story? Ask them.

Usually, the reason behind it will be because they think "God didn't answer" their prayers (therefore, there is no God)......
.......or that they got disillusioned because of the "hypocrisy" of people who call themselves Christians.


Some people lose faith because of the evils and sufferings in this world.

Click to expand...

So when you use your opinion to choose christianity, you're a honest truth seeker, but when I use my opinion to choose Buddhism I'm relativistic and lying to myself?

At no point have you given ANY REASON AT ALL why someone should pick christianity over any other religion. Explain why you think all humans on earth would pick christianity if they earnestly searched for the truth.

Manny said:

Don't believe what those who have little education in theology might tell you, go with the real authorities on Christianity. Pope Francis reached out to Islam. He does not believe that muslims will go to hell for it.
Among several of his recent utterances-

Pope Francis To Followers: “Koran And Holy Bible Are The Same”

On Monday the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith."

Click to expand...

If Francis is saying something like that, then it's VERY different from the past 2000 years of Catholic teaching. Catholics have spent the past 2000 years believing in a literal hell and that non-believers are sent there. Even if you want to say that Islam and Christianity are the same (super odd), the other hundred religions in the world aren't.

How are we supposed to objectively identify christianity as the "correct" religion, and why is the punishment for choosing the wrong one eternal hellfire? If there is no hellfire and all religions are the same, why should I be christian? It's a lot of work and if I get into heaven anyway why should I care? Why send missionaries into the world if we're all going to be fine anyway?

tosca1 said:

Why did you lose faith in Christ? What's exactly your reason for it?

Click to expand...

Because it's a childish fairy tale that's on par with believing in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy. So, I guess, the short answer is I grew up.

That's relativistic.

Some people pick and choose which religion they prefer - not because of the truth in it - but because it suits their needs.

You're talking about finding the true religion, right?

Click to expand...

The only true religion is manning up and admitting we do not know what the hell is going on beyond that which we know is going on.

RabidAlpaca said:

I stopped being a christian because I realized that there's no way to prove any one religion right over the other. Your decision to choose christianity was relativistic.

Click to expand...

I was raised into it, Rabid. But like so many others, I strayed away from it. Then life became meaningless....

It is your opinion that it's the best, not because there's any evidence to support that. I keep asking for the objective evidence that christianity is right yet you refuse to give it. It just feels right to you, huh?

Click to expand...

My main UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that makes ME, unambiguously believe.....has been my personal experience.

So when you use your opinion to choose christianity, you're a honest truth seeker, but when I use my opinion to choose Buddhism I'm relativistic and lying to myself?

At no point have you given ANY REASON AT ALL why someone should pick christianity over any other religion. Explain why you think all humans on earth would pick christianity if they earnestly searched for the truth.

Click to expand...

That's a matter of opinion, isn't it?

Apparently....for quite a lot of atheist sceintists/intellectuals - there are unambiguous evidences that made them to convert to Christianity!

calamity said:

Because it's a childish fairy tale that's on par with believing in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy. So, I guess, the short answer is I grew up.

Click to expand...

That's merely an ignorant opinion of an atheist, Calamity. It even lack originality! In fact, it's so cliched.
If this were a sitcom - that would be the equivalent to a "laugh track." :lol:

I say "ignorant"....because there are so many logical evidences that support Christianity.

The only true religion is manning up and admitting we do not know what the hell is going on beyond that which we know is going on.

Click to expand...

Well, Christians do know some of what's going on, and some knowledge of what's going to happen.

tosca1 said:

I was raised into it, Rabid. But like so many others, I strayed away from it. Then life became meaningless....

My main UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that makes ME, unambiguously believe.....has been my personal experience.

That's a matter of opinion, isn't it?

Apparently....for quite a lot of atheist sceintists/intellectuals - there are unambiguous evidences that made them to convert to Christianity!

Click to expand...

So how do I get tosca's personal experience? My personal experience tells me that Buddhism is right and Christianity is wrong. What advice do you have for someone who has sincerely searched for god and has come to a completely different conclusion than you?

RabidAlpaca said:

So how do I get tosca's personal experience? My personal experience tells me that Buddhism is right and Christianity is wrong. What advice do you have for someone who has sincerely searched for god and has come to a completely different conclusion than you?

Click to expand...

How will you get it, unless you experience it yourself?

If you atheists can refuse to accept what science had said - based on scientific observation -about theism.......why should you even listen to my claim, which is based purely on my personal experience alone?

Surely, my word isn't good enough for you.

tosca1 said:

How will you get it, unless you experience it yourself?

If you atheists can refuse to accept what science had said - based on scientific observation -about theism.......why should you even listen to my claim, which is based purely on my personal experience alone?

Surely, my word isn't good enough for you.

Click to expand...

Now you're claiming that science has proven that christianity is the one true religion? You know that's a complete lie, tosca. Also, evidence for god is not evidence for christianity. (which you also don't have)

You're butthurt because you don't believe that other people can come to any other conclusion other than yours. You are incredibly arrogant and you think the universe revolves around you and that anyone who isn't christian is lying to themselves.

tosca1 said:

How will you get it, unless you experience it yourself?

If you atheists can refuse to accept what science had said - based on scientific observation -about theism.......why should you even listen to my claim, which is based purely on my personal experience alone?

Surely, my word isn't good enough for you.

Click to expand...

Science has very clearly debunked the majority of Biblical stories and after 2000= years been unable to find ANY data to support a God. Creating personal interpretations of scientific data to further imagined and unsupported theories that match Scriptural texts does not science make.

RabidAlpaca said:

Now you're claiming that science has proven that christianity is the one true religion?

Click to expand...

No....that's talking about theism. That, creation does not disagree with scientific observation in the various, and many disciplines of science!



But the evidences provided in the thread, "God of Abraham," points to the Biblical God, as the One and Only True God.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/232428-god-abraham-creator-designer.html

You know that's a complete lie, tosca. Also, evidence for god is not evidence for christianity. (which you also don't have)

Click to expand...

I didn't say it is.

But I did lead you to that premise.....and had given logical evidence(s) to support my claim.

You have got to review that thread....otherwise, you're merely spouting off the same lame atheist talking points.
And since THINKING viewers can easily check for themselves what I've been saying.....you put yourself in an unflattering, if not embarassing, light.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/232428-god-abraham-creator-designer.html

You're butthurt because you don't believe that other people can come to any other conclusion other than yours. You are incredibly arrogant and you think the universe revolves around you and that anyone who isn't christian is lying to themselves.

Click to expand...

Eh? Do those two threads that are intertwined even remotely show anything that I'm losing the argument here? :lol:

Just listen to your tone....who's hurting?


I'm not being arrogant, Rabid. I'm just confident.

tosca1 said:

No....that's talking about theism. That creation does not disagree with scientific observation in the various, and many disciplines of science!



But the evidences provided in the thread, "God of Abraham," points to the Biblical God, as the One and Only True God.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/232428-god-abraham-creator-designer.html

Click to expand...

More lies from the liar tosca. That's not very Christ-like, you know.

1) Evolution is a fact, and it directly disproves creationism.

2) I've been to that thread and it's hundreds of posts of you pulling things out of your ass and everyone else telling you that's not evidence.

You're one of the most dishonest posters on DP and I have absolutely no respect for you. You think that your religion is objectively true and that all humans will come to the same conclusion as you if they just tried. You're essentially telling every non-Christian that they've never sincerely searched for god.

I don't have any interest in continuing the tosca-game with you, which is just going back and forth with you claiming there's evidence but never presenting it, and us all calling you a liar. Goodbye.

RabidAlpaca said:

More lies from the liar tosca. That's not very Christ-like, you know.

1) Evolution is a fact, and it directly disproves creationism.

2) I've been to that thread and it's hundreds of posts of you pulling things out of your ass and everyone else telling you that's not evidence.

You're one of the most dishonest posters on DP and I have absolutely no respect for you. You think that your religion is objectively true and that all humans will come to the same conclusion as you if they just tried. You're essentially telling every non-Christian that they've never sincerely searched for god.

I don't have any interest in continuing the tosca-game with you, which is just going back and forth with you claiming there's evidence but never presenting it, and us all calling you a liar. Goodbye.

Click to expand...

Oh my. Now, you're reduced to name-calling. :roll:


Who's hurting, Rabid?

Anyway....bye-bye.

RabidAlpaca said:

More lies from the liar tosca. That's not very Christ-like, you know.

1) Evolution is a fact, and it directly disproves creationism.

2) I've been to that thread and it's hundreds of posts of you pulling things out of your ass and everyone else telling you that's not evidence.

You're one of the most dishonest posters on DP and I have absolutely no respect for you. You think that your religion is objectively true and that all humans will come to the same conclusion as you if they just tried. You're essentially telling every non-Christian that they've never sincerely searched for god.

I don't have any interest in continuing the tosca-game with you, which is just going back and forth with you claiming there's evidence but never presenting it, and us all calling you a liar. Goodbye.

Click to expand...

Correction: Evolution disproves Genesis. It doesn't touch upon creationism.

calamity said:

Correction: Evolution disproves Genesis. It doesn't touch upon creationism.

Click to expand...

Where did you get that idea?

Hello?

In case you haven't seen this:



From the National Academy of Sciences:


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.
This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."


You'll find that on the faq site of NASA.

WMAP Site FAQs




Should evolution be proven true.....it still goes with the Bible.

tosca1 said:

Where did you get that idea?

Hello?

In case you haven't seen this:



From the National Academy of Sciences:


Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.
This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.
Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."


You'll find that on the faq site of NASA.

WMAP Site FAQs




Should evolution be proven true.....it still goes with the Bible.

Click to expand...

The national academy of sciences used purple ink?

Genesis debunked:

http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/genesis.html

RabidAlpaca said:

Once again, I don't really care about whatever goodies you feel you've been promised as a christian

Click to expand...

Nor did I ever say you should care about that. You are either failing to grasp my point or else being deliberately obtuse.

The point is that your analogy fails to properly model the situation in question. Thus it fails as an analogy.

RabidAlpaca said:

we're talking about the giant threat christians use to manipulate people into believing using fear. If I place a gun to your head and tell you I'll blow your brains out either A) If you don't do what I tell you, or B) You reject my invitation to do what I tell you, there is no difference.

Click to expand...

This would actually have been a better analogy to use. This analogy is clearly limited to the question at hand and would have forced the focus to be on the question of whether being placed in such a position would be fair or just.

The analogy you actually used, on the other hand, went beyond that. It attempted to model the situation prospective believers are in and argue that choosing to give up on all religions and throw away the "rules" because you don't know which one to follow is a rational response. That's where the analogy went wrong and failed completely. The fact is that the situation prospective believers are in does not in any way resemble that scenario.

RabidAlpaca said:

You've nitpicked from the very beginning

Click to expand...

Challenging the appropriateness of your analogy isn't nitpicking, it's getting to the core of the issue.

If I created an analogy that grossly misrepresented the libertarian position, I would expect a libertarian to correct me even if the fact I grossly misrepresented their position was not relevant to the particular detail I was wanting to explore within that analogy. My response would likely be to either fix the analogy or scrap it and pick a new one.

RabidAlpaca said:

even going so far as to pretend that most christians don't believe in hell.

Click to expand...

This is a blatant lie. I did no such thing.

RabidAlpaca said:

If you're not interested in talking about the fallacy of believing in punishment for non-believers then start your own thread about how awesome your relationship with jesus is.

Click to expand...

You may have meant to make a certain point and take the discussion in a certain direction, but you titled this thread "The Absentee Father" and presented that analogy as the foundation of the discussion. Showing that this analogy makes absolutely no sense because it fails to model the situation in question is a perfectly natural response upon discovering that to be the case.

tosca1 said:

Oh my. Now, you're reduced to name-calling. :roll:


Who's hurting, Rabid?

Anyway....bye-bye.

Click to expand...

Called a bald-faced liar a liar is not name calling. If you're ashamed of the title liar you should stop making things up and manipulating the truth. The world does not revolve around you. Not every human on the planet is going to come to the same conclusion about god as you.

CrabCake said:

Nor did I ever say you should care about that. You are either failing to grasp my point or else being deliberately obtuse.

The point is that your analogy fails to properly model the situation in question. Thus it fails as an analogy.

This would actually have been a better analogy to use. This analogy is clearly limited to the question at hand and would have forced the focus to be on the question of whether being placed in such a position would be fair or just.
The analogy you actually used, on the other hand, went beyond that. It attempted to model the situation prospective believers are in and argue that choosing to give up on all religions and throw away the "rules" because you don't know which one to follow is a rational response. That's where the analogy went wrong and failed completely. The fact is that the situation prospective believers are in does not in any way resemble that scenario.

Challenging the appropriateness of your analogy isn't nitpicking, it's getting to the core of the issue.

If I created an analogy that grossly misrepresented the libertarian position, I would expect a libertarian to correct me even if the fact I grossly misrepresented their position was not relevant to the particular detail I was wanting to explore within that analogy. My response would likely be to either fix the analogy or scrap it and pick a new one.
This is a blatant lie. I did no such thing.

You may have meant to make a certain point and take the discussion in a certain direction, but you titled this thread "The Absentee Father" and presented that analogy as the foundation of the discussion. Showing that this analogy makes absolutely no sense because it fails to model the situation in question is a perfectly natural response upon discovering that to be the case.

Click to expand...

If god isn't an absentee father, show the evidence of him. Let's see it. Until you do, we only have his prophets (the friend and alleged friends in the analogy) who all swear up and down theirs is the true path, and we all just have to take their word for it. You still can't get past the fact that most christians and muslims do believe in hell for non-believers. No, it doesn't matter if the prophet invites you with a threat or commands you with a threat, it's still a "do this or be tortured" situation. If you're ready to actually address that instead of just whining about insignificant details, I'll be here.

RabidAlpaca said:

If god isn't an absentee father, show the evidence of him. Let's see it. Until you do, we only have his prophets (the friend and alleged friends in the analogy) who all swear up and down theirs is the true path, and we all just have to take their word for it.

Click to expand...

And there we have it, you do claim that the analogy properly models the situation.

But the fact is that it doesn't. The prophets don't swear that we need to take their word for it. They invite us to come meet the father. If we accept the invitation then we will have our own experiences with the father and be able to decide for ourselves if the prophets are right or are full of it; either that or we won't experience anything at all, and will quickly realize that the prophets were wrong (or lying). This is very different from your analogy which pretends that we are being invited to follow commands when in fact we are being invited to enter into a relationship with the father. Using your scenario, we are being invited to blindly follow a bunch of rules. Using the scenario that more closely matches Christianity, we are being invited to have our own experience, establish our own relationship, and decide based on what we have experienced.

RabidAlpaca said:

You still can't get past the fact that most christians and muslims do believe in hell for non-believers.

Click to expand...

I mentioned that I don't have the data for this once many posts ago and never revisited the issue. In fact, the one time I mentioned this, I began that statement with an acknowledgement that belief in hell may be the dominant belief. I did the forum equivalent of shrugging my shoulders and saying "maybe" in my one mention of this topic and never brought it up again. I'm at a loss as to how this can be interpreted as being "unable to get past" it.

RabidAlpaca said:

No, it doesn't matter if the prophet invites you with a threat or commands you with a threat, it's still a "do this or be tortured" situation. If you're ready to actually address that instead of just whining about insignificant details, I'll be here.

Click to expand...

No, how he tells you isn't what matters. What matters is what he is asking you to do. Your claim is that he is asking you to just follow some rules. The claim made by Christianity is that he is showing you how to establish a relationship with God. The former claim leads to a life of just blindly following a bunch of seemingly arbitrary rules with nothing to really go on except some vague hope that the prophet was right. The latter gives you something you can actually experiment with; it leads to either actually meeting God, establishing your own relationship with him separate from that the prophet may have had, and forming your own opinions based on that ongoing relationship; or not experiencing anything at all and thus concluding the prophet was wrong.

It's not about invitation vs command. It's about what you are being invited or commanded to actually do. It is not the claim of Christianity that you are being invited to follow rules. It's the claim of Christianity that you are being invited into a relationship with God. On top of that is also making claims about the changes you can expect in your life as a result of having that relationship.

The picture you paint is one of just following a bunch of instructions blindly by rote and hoping in the end you'll find out if they were correct. But the picture Christianity is painting is of entering into a relationship with God, experiencing his presence, being guided by him, and having your life changed. These are very different.

RabidAlpaca said:

If Francis is saying something like that, then it's VERY different from the past 2000 years of Catholic teaching. Catholics have spent the past 2000 years believing in a literal hell and that non-believers are sent there. Even if you want to say that Islam and Christianity are the same (super odd), the other hundred religions in the world aren't.

Click to expand...

If you read the link he elaborates by saying "we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by." That is a very progressive view, I think. The pope would look more at the societal merits of a religious belief, whether it falls in line with the core values that make Christianity special- mercy, forgiveness, fairness.

RabidAlpaca said:

How are we supposed to objectively identify christianity as the "correct" religion, and why is the punishment for choosing the wrong one eternal hellfire? If there is no hellfire and all religions are the same, why should I be christian? It's a lot of work and if I get into heaven anyway why should I care? Why send missionaries into the world if we're all going to be fine anyway?

Click to expand...

You're back-tracking now. I've shown that the pope disagrees with your definition of Christianity.
Why should you care? It's up to you of course. If you choose to adopt those core values I listed into your life, personally, I think you'll be fine. Embracing it as a religion that you promise to follow every day makes it stick, to change your personality in a positive way and so you won't forget these values when life gets tougher.

CrabCake said:

And there we have it, you do claim that the analogy properly models the situation.

But the fact is that it doesn't. The prophets don't swear that we need to take their word for it. They invite us to come meet the father. If we accept the invitation then we will have our own experiences with the father and be able to decide for ourselves if the prophets are right or are full of it; either that or we won't experience anything at all, and will quickly realize that the prophets were wrong (or lying). This is very different from your analogy which pretends that we are being invited to follow commands when in fact we are being invited to enter into a relationship with the father. Using your scenario, we are being invited to blindly follow a bunch of rules. Using the scenario that more closely matches Christianity, we are being invited to have our own experience, establish our own relationship, and decide based on what we have experienced.



I mentioned that I don't have the data for this once many posts ago and never revisited the issue. In fact, the one time I mentioned this, I began that statement with an acknowledgement that belief in hell may be the dominant belief. I did the forum equivalent of shrugging my shoulders and saying "maybe" in my one mention of this topic and never brought it up again. I'm at a loss as to how this can be interpreted as being "unable to get past" it.



No, how he tells you isn't what matters. What matters is what he is asking you to do. Your claim is that he is asking you to just follow some rules. The claim made by Christianity is that he is showing you how to establish a relationship with God. The former claim leads to a life of just blindly following a bunch of seemingly arbitrary rules with nothing to really go on except some vague hope that the prophet was right. The latter gives you something you can actually experiment with; it leads to either actually meeting God, establishing your own relationship with him separate from that the prophet may have had, and forming your own opinions based on that ongoing relationship; or not experiencing anything at all and thus concluding the prophet was wrong.

It's not about invitation vs command. It's about what you are being invited or commanded to actually do. It is not the claim of Christianity that you are being invited to follow rules. It's the claim of Christianity that you are being invited into a relationship with God. On top of that is also making claims about the changes you can expect in your life as a result of having that relationship.

The picture you paint is one of just following a bunch of instructions blindly by rote and hoping in the end you'll find out if they were correct. But the picture Christianity is painting is of entering into a relationship with God, experiencing his presence, being guided by him, and having your life changed. These are very different.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll change the scenario: "Accept the invitation to have a relationship with the christian god or burn in hell for all of eternity."

Feel better? According to most christians and muslims you're still going to hell for picking the wrong religion.

Manny said:

If you read the link he elaborates by saying "we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by." That is a very progressive view, I think. The pope would look more at the societal merits of a religious belief, whether it falls in line with the core values that make Christianity special- mercy, forgiveness, fairness.
You're back-tracking now. I've shown that the pope disagrees with your definition of Christianity.
Why should you care? It's up to you of course. If you choose to adopt those core values I listed into your life, personally, I think you'll be fine. Embracing it as a religion that you promise to follow every day makes it stick, to change your personality in a positive way and so you won't forget these values when life gets tougher.

Click to expand...

You're right, it's a VERY progressive view. Most Christians believe that the only path to heaven is through the father. If there are multiple paths to heaven, some without Jesus, I feel like it kind of makes what he allegedly did kind of pointless. I am glad that it's becoming more and more insane to believe in a literal hell, and honestly anyone who doesn't believe in a literal hell isn't really part of the contradiction mentioned in the OP.

calamity said:

The national academy of sciences used purple ink?

Genesis debunked:

http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/genesis.html

Click to expand...

Who is Lenny Flank? :lol:

Here.....from his own site....


" I'm interested in many areas of science, including astronomy and cosmology, evolutionary mechanism theories, and quantum mechanics. I love sci-fi movies (really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"!), Italian and Chinese food, and Guinness Stout.


I am a writer by profession, specializing in herpetology and the care of captive reptiles and amphibians. I have five books out right now on the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more.

My interest in evolutionary theory came about from my interest in fossil snakes and turtles (the recently-described Pachyrachis fossil is absolutely fascinating).
I did two years of college (majored in English), hated it and dropped out to devote more time to writing.

I don't have any academic credentials in biology or science. But there is a popular saying among freelance writers--"I don't need to know everything;
I only need to know where I can find out."


This creation "science" web page began life as a book manuscript.

I was unable to find any publisher who thought they could sell enough copies to earn back the printing costs,


http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/lenny.htm



He has 5 books! Ha-ha-ha-ha! 5 books!
On the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more.
And he has no credentials on biology and science! :lamo


really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"! Ha-ha-ha......he thinks he's a crow? ha-ha-ha.



What can I say.....I'm in tears....laughing my head off.....

Ha-ha-ha-ha



If you consider this guy to be "authoritative" at all - never mind more authoritative than the NATIONAL ACADEMY of SCIENCES......

........you guys must be so desperate......ha-ha-ha......that's sooooo pathetic. You'd cling to anything!




....and you expect people to believe anything you say? :lol:

tosca1 said:

Who is Lenny Flank? :lol:

Here.....from his own site....


" I'm interested in many areas of science, including astronomy and cosmology, evolutionary mechanism theories, and quantum mechanics. I love sci-fi movies (really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"!), Italian and Chinese food, and Guinness Stout.


I am a writer by profession, specializing in herpetology and the care of captive reptiles and amphibians. I have five books out right now on the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more.

My interest in evolutionary theory came about from my interest in fossil snakes and turtles (the recently-described Pachyrachis fossil is absolutely fascinating).
I did two years of college (majored in English), hated it and dropped out to devote more time to writing.

I don't have any academic credentials in biology or science. But there is a popular saying among freelance writers--"I don't need to know everything;
I only need to know where I can find out."


http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/lenny.htm



He has 5 books! Ha-ha-ha-ha! 5 books! on the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more. :lamo


really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"! Ha-ha-ha......he thinks he's a crow? ha-ha-ha.



What can I say.....I'm in tears....laughing my head off.....

Ha-ha-ha-ha



If you consider this guy to be an "authoritative" at all - never mind more authoritative that the NATIONAL ACADEMY of SCIENCES......

........you guys must be so desperate......ha-ha-ha......that's sooooo pathetic. You'd cling to anything!




....and you expect people to believe anything you say? :lol:

Click to expand...

You must really like colors.

calamity said:

You must really like colors.

Click to expand...

:lol:

He really likes Mars Attack "Ack, ack, ack-ack"! :lamo

I can't get over that.....what was he thinking? "Ack, ack, ack-ack" :mrgreen:

tosca1 said:

Who is Lenny Flank? :lol:

Here.....from his own site....


" I'm interested in many areas of science, including astronomy and cosmology, evolutionary mechanism theories, and quantum mechanics. I love sci-fi movies (really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"!), Italian and Chinese food, and Guinness Stout.


I am a writer by profession, specializing in herpetology and the care of captive reptiles and amphibians. I have five books out right now on the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more.

My interest in evolutionary theory came about from my interest in fossil snakes and turtles (the recently-described Pachyrachis fossil is absolutely fascinating).
I did two years of college (majored in English), hated it and dropped out to devote more time to writing.

I don't have any academic credentials in biology or science. But there is a popular saying among freelance writers--"I don't need to know everything;
I only need to know where I can find out."


This creation "science" web page began life as a book manuscript.

I was unable to find any publisher who thought they could sell enough copies to earn back the printing costs,


http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/lenny.htm



He has 5 books! Ha-ha-ha-ha! 5 books!
On the biology, natural history, evolution and care of reptiles, amphibians and tarantulas, and am working on two more.
And he has no credentials on biology and science! :lamo


really liked Mars Attacks--"Ack, ack, ack-ack"! Ha-ha-ha......he thinks he's a crow? ha-ha-ha.



What can I say.....I'm in tears....laughing my head off.....

Ha-ha-ha-ha



If you consider this guy to be "authoritative" at all - never mind more authoritative than the NATIONAL ACADEMY of SCIENCES......

........you guys must be so desperate......ha-ha-ha......that's sooooo pathetic. You'd cling to anything!




....and you expect people to believe anything you say? :lol:

Click to expand...

Do you have a degree in biology or science?

Ikari said:

Do you have a degree in biology or science?

Click to expand...

What? You missed the point???? I'm surprised at you!

You say you've got a degree on physics.....will you use Lenny Flank as your reference to talk about science?

Apparently, he says, he does not have to know everything....he only has to know where to find. :lol:
How does he differentiate what is accurate information, or bull?
He's just like Calamity who'll be latching on and grabbing any information online!
Look how she ended up giving Lenny as a reference! :lol:



No, Ikari, I don't have any degree in biology or any science. But what are my sources? Who are my reference(s)?

You got any problem with the National Academy of Sciences? Francis Collins? James Tour?


I don't just give you anyone as my reference.