where did you find that information? Do you have a link for me to check out?
I've always dreamed of creating my own planet.

QTB,

If you ever get your own planet, I'd invade it and make you my sex slave. I'll be the Emperor of QTB planet which I will re-name Uranus II and you shall be my concubine...!

Every one is invited to my new thread in the creative writing section under "lets create a planet." I especially want you intellectual types to critic some of the physics. For example say I had an animal that looks somewhat like a scared puffer fish who floated though the air how dense do you suppose the atmosphere would be?

Jeanie, I know I'll see you there!

I must confess I didn't look into the site that you have provided. Just commenting on the title of the thread.

Curious and totally offtopic:
I remember when I was about 8 years old and had a GI-Joe action figure named Bushido. Was my favorite, while the other kids wanted Storm Shadow and Snakeyes. I guess the name was the reason why I like the action figure because it has a foreign sounding name to it. I did later (when in Junior High) look it up in a dictionary and found out what it mean. Have you ever read "Hagakure?" I can recite many passages from that book. ;)

none of you jerks has provide one idea for my planet and I"m very disapointed. And JEANIE I was very positive about "attracting" you there. Stop breaking the law jeannie!

I have read parts of it. I should really do the name justice and read the whole of it.

A friend of mine actually came up with this name for me. I am always talking about honor, and how some people don't have any and should be beat about the head and shoulders.

So when he illustrated that in this, IMHO, wonderful name I had to keep it.

I replied! I mentioned that if I had the power to create a planet then I would only want humantarians, naturlists, and pacifist roaming on it.

HAY I am all three!!!!!!!!

Its NICE to be welcome!

Now that is what I am talking about! That is one of the reasons you are a friend of mine

My favorite Naturlist is Henry David Thoreau

My favorite Humanatarian is Mahatma Gandhi

My favorite Pacifist is Albert Einstein

but I like all who follow these idealogies.

Thank you Smileyface

what about an ARMY too... im mean look at the abortion docter that was killed.. people who hate people who kill... so they kill them.. so dumb sh1ts out there

yes and on mine i would be one of three men...

only 3 men, you talking about a homo threesome.

want to come along??? i dont know you but your funny... and hottie in the mind(looks too) i like how your on the stoner topics tonight

I haven't been to this thread in a while but I'd like to comment on this post from the first page.

First off, science isn't in the business of dismissing things because they have been suggested by Christians. However, Christians are often in the business of suggesting anything that supports their doctrine.

The idea of Intelligent Design doesn't even make any sense. First off, what's intelligent about designing a world to be dog-eat-dog?

That should be the first clue that the world wasn't designed by an intelligent being. Even as a mere mortal man I know better than to create a world where living things need to eat each other for survival. Surely an intelligent surpreme being would be smarter than me?

At the very least, at intelligent designer would design foodstuffs (i.e. plants) and animals to be quite different from each other so there would be no benefit from any animals attempting to eat another animals to survive. In fact, an intelligent designer would make that scenario impossible.

So the mere fact that the world is indeed dog-eat-dog pretty much rules out an intelligent creator. Unless it's a very sadistic creator who's up to no good.

In order to believe in an Intelligent Designing God, a person must also buy into the idea that man's fall from grace is what brought about the dog-eat-dog nature of the world. However, it's already a well-established scientific fact that the world was dog-eat-dog long before mankind came onto the scene. So the idea that mankind could be responsible for this has already been proven false.

Therefore, in a very real way it is prefectly correct to say that science has indeed considered Intelligent Design and found it to be false by evidence. It's simply been disproved. It can't be true because the designer that is supposed to be intelligent would necessarily need to be an idiot to begin with. That's a contradiction, so Intelligent Design must be dismissed as false.

Also, the mere fact that you've made this into a "Christian" issue makes it perfectly clear that your only goal is to support a dogmatic pictuer of God using a doctrine that is absolutely riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions. The whole idea of "Intelligent Design" is really nothing more than a religious ploy to attempt to bring superstition and dogma into the realm of science.

All this truly says is that Christians have recognized that Science carries weight whilst superstition does not. So the Christians are desperate to give their superstitions 'scientific' weight.

However, once their doctrine is placed under the scientific microscope it fails every conscievable test. It's totally inconsistent and illogical. And the very idea that a supposedly all-wise God would design a dog-eat-dog world is ludicous to begin with. And, of course, the idea that mankind brought this into the world by falling from grace is equally ludicous because it has alreayd been scientificially shown that animals were eating other animals long before mankind ever came onto the scene on this planet.

So it's a lose/lose hypothesis.

There's just nothing there worthy of consideration. Especially in light of the fact of where this religious folklore arose and how similar it is to all the other deity myths that came from that region of the world. Not the least of which was Greek Mythology with their Gods that also were appeased by blood sacrifices and had big jealous egos as well.

There is so much going against that idea that it simply isn't plausible anymore. There's just nothing there worthy of serious consideration.

To claim that science won't consider it is silly. They have considered it and they already shown why it can't be true.

I think the fact that 99.999% of all species who have ever lived have now gone extinct would show that if there is a designer, he is terribly bad and wasteful at his job.

When you look through the designs, and the defects, you tend to get the idea that nature is not designed but indeed just happens, and then subsequently just happen to be successful . . . . or not . . . and joins the 99.999%. Or they where successful, but then something changes in the environment, they miss the evolutionary buss so to speak, and bam . . statistic.

Then when you start to grasp the amazing powers of evolution and can read the code and it maps perfectly to this powerful theory, you tend to say, well any theory worthy of consideration would need to have as much explanatory power.

Sadly ID just says wow look at that, must be designed . . . and that is where the research ends. I mean after all the only tenet of ID is that something be too complex to understand: irreducible complexity.

That is the only testable facet of ID, and its awash in ignorance. BTW its been defeated over and over again by showing how each example used was not designed but evolved.

That's absolutely right.

In fact, it's truly a fallacy to claim that science won't consider these things. Science does consider these ideas and simply shows why evolution is a far better explanation every time. To say that science won't consider these issues is simply incorrect. Science does consider them and they never pan out.

It's not so much that there is no evidence for Intelligent Design, but the simple fact that there actually exists a ton of evidence against it.

The whole thing just flies in the face of scientific reasoning.

Science looks at the facts and asks, "Where do these facts lead".

The religious desire for an Intelligent Designer works just the opposite, "Let's assume the conclusion of an Intelligent Designer and see if we can make the facts fit our conclusion".

Well, the fact of the matter is that the facts can't be made to fit that conclusion. That's all there is to it.

Even if we forget about any doctrines of creation myths. The very idea that this dog-eat-dog was methodically designed to be this way on purpose raises all sorts of question of why an intelligent designer would be so crude and unintelligent.

Like you say,



If this world was created by an intelligent designer the very notion of 'intelligence' comes into question.

Why even bother with dinosaurs at all if there was supposed to be an intelligent design from the get-go?

Also, why waste such a long period of time on the dinosaurs? A 300 million year reign is a long time to waste on lizards if that's not the goal of the intelligent designer.

I think the notion of an intelligent designer is basically untenable in light of the evidence.

Sad as that may seem.

Although in truth, on a personal note, I'm not impressed with a supposedly intelligent designer that is a appeased by blood scrifices and is so lame or desperate that he has to have himself nailed to a pole to save his creation from his own wrath.

I don't know about other people, but that picture of an Intelligent Designer just doesn't seem very intelligent to me. I would think that an intelligent designer should be far more intelligent than that.

So the idea of "Intelligent Designer" and "Biblical mythology" should never be in the same sentence unless it is expressing their extreme incompatiblity.

I'm watching that begining part on 2001:Space Oddyssey when its showing those ape people and when that one ape man uses the first tool and Im thinking hey man evolution is real and it is glorious

Mirror Mirror on the wall
who’s the weirdest of them all?
Cro magnon homosapien?
Or the dim Neanderthal?

Monkey see and monkey do
a human caveman overdue
Cro magnon makes his first début
an odyssey askew

Like chimpanzees upon their knees
but not to pray to god
they’re doing deeds to save their breeds
by passing on their wad

Acting on their instincts
unconscious to the truth
their behavior rather vulgar
as a species they’re uncouth

They later grew to rule the world
and be the monarchs of the land
but were they using intellect?
Or just hormones from a gland?

We’ll never know the truth of this
as the story’s quite amiss
unless we find the answer
on a cosmic obelisk

That's great Abra, i will put that on my profile