Quote Search:
Fundie: Board:
Comment Search:
Author: Comment:
1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Quote# 25806

But our genomes are highly intelligent and are highly mutable and quite capable of responding and adjusting to environmental changes.

supersport, 4forums 24 Comments [5/29/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 25506

I don't think medicine is the cure for cancer -- so why should I be trained in it? I'll certainly never take any, outside of an aspirin or something.

supersport, CARM 51 Comments [5/21/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Phen

Quote# 25157

[after being presented with the fact that genes majorly control one's traits]

wrong... this is so far from fact you don't obviously don't know biology..

supersport, CARM Disussion Forums 29 Comments [5/11/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Salvador

Quote# 23316

(Supersport's take on nationalized medicine and charity)

I'm not against helping people who truly need help. The problem is there is no such thing as a "free" anything. I don't know about your country but THIS country promises its citizens JUSTICE. Justice means you get out of life what you put into otherwords no free lunches.

I don't believe in free lunches unless you are starving. If you are starving you should not look to the government. There are thousands churches in this country that will feed you directly or point you to the food banks they stock. Then after you get some food in your stomach you can GO GET A *******G JOB!!!

supersport, CARM 23 Comments [4/8/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 23311

(Supersport explains how animals in the wild never get sick. From three different comments in the thread)

Darwin, why do you think animals in the wild don't get diabetes? Why do they not get alzheimers? Why do they not get MS or or lupus or Depression? Why do they not get cancer? Why is it that dogs and cats start coming down with diseases such as cancer and diabetes only after they are in captivity....only after humans care for them and vaccinate them and give them all kinds of drugs, and processed food?

why is that?

[Mind-boggingly stupid statement. Animals in the wild do get various illnesses, but they don't usually survive long enough for us to find them while they are convalescing in a den or a nest, because they either starve or get eaten. In the wild getting sick is close to a death sentence.]

No they don't. Please show me where animals in the wild get diabetes, for example.

supersport, CARM 34 Comments [4/8/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 22575

Are you sure the vaccine for small pox isn't actually causing smallpox?

supersport, CARM 13 Comments [3/26/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 22573

Science has hardly cured a single thing to date....what makes you think they're going to start now?

supersport, CARM 37 Comments [3/26/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 22319

Evolutionists are obsessed with skulls. In particular they love sticking thier noses down into rotting skulls with tape measures. Then these self-absorbed thinkers very carefully analyze the shape, size and contour of these skulls because they think they can make judgements on how intelligent someone was based on these measurements and observations. Neanderthals, for instance, despite being genecally 99.9% the same as modern humans, have been labled brutes and savages because they had big skulls with thick bones. Not only that, but some evolutionists say they were unable to even speak, and instead, resorted to making high squeaking noises -- I guess like some sort of dolphin or hyena or something. Of course, it was because they were so darn dumb that us "real" humans supposedly overpowered them and drove them into extinction. Afterall, who wants dumb people around? (This is despite the fact that there's absolutely no evidence of widespread killings or savage murders of Neanderthals.)

Seriously....reading the words of these people is just laughable. Listening to them go on and on about the specific dimensions and sizes of skulls, like these things have anything to do with the intelligence of the individual is just insulting. In fact, I truly do feel insulted for the person who's skull they are sifting through. How would you evolutionists like someone in the future digging through your skull and calling you sub-human or incapable of intelligent thought -- or saying you didn't know how to talk?

But my question to you evolutionists is this: What in the world would make you think that because someone has a different shaped skull that they cannot think as good as you can? And what does size have to do with anything? Evolutionists keep searching for "intermediate" skulls -- skulls that lie somewhere in between an apes' and a humans' for years now.

But if skull size meant anything at all, then why aren't gorillas much more intelligent that we are? And elephants? And hippos? A human is a human is a human. The human brain is a human brain no matter what size it is. You can be a tiny person such as a pygmy or you can be a giant. A giant, despite his large brain, is no more intelligent than a small person.

School kids, even the class dunce, could get this logic -- but evolutionists can't.

supersport, CARM 25 Comments [3/21/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 22105

From supersport's Theory of Creation thread (OP worthy of an FSTDT quote itself ==>

We have this incredibly error-ridden post from supersport, showing his incredible ignorance of simple biology:

[Interesting claim, now support it. No links, no cut and paste, you explain it..]

supersport responds:
I actually can support it although it's a good topic for a new thread....but all you have to do is use your common sense.....cells have tiny parts called genes....those genes have tiny parts called nucleus...the nucleus breaks down into smaller parts...smaller parts break down into atoms...atoms break down into subatomic particals...subatomic particles break down even further. Try dividing a subatomic particle by 1 big do you think that part will be? Life is not a machine, wataru because all the tiny parts in the body work together as a whole unit.

supersport, CARM 32 Comments [3/15/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 22094

<supersport cunningly refutes the theory of plate tectonics>

I, of course, believe God Created the world in 6 days. One of the greatest questions creationists are faced with is how the animals spread out across the world after Noah's ark came to a rest.

Of course nobody knows what happened...but I think with a little investigation, one can put some pieces together that make a little sense.

Is it possible that the world was created much smaller than it is today? Is it possible that there were no oceans? Is it possible that, instead there were "fountains of the deep?" Is it possible that at some point the earth cracked open and these flood waters came pouring out?

Is it possible that the earth grew much like a balloon expands? Is it possible that when the ark came down that the continents were still one land mass, only to separate later?

<his proof>

supersport, CARM 35 Comments [3/14/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Ninja Monkey
1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16