Prev: How small must the chance of error be before we accept something as true and certain?
Next: Moonless Night
From: Jimbo on 2 Aug 2010 22:18
On Aug 2, 9:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
> more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!


Did you even take a science class during your time in reform school?


From: Edmond H. Wollmann on 2 Aug 2010 23:02

"Jimbo" <ckdbigtoe(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:35d49815-ac94-4b41-8d64-001c0043dcc7(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 2, 9:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
> more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!


> Did you even take a science class during your time in reform school?

Did you ever figure out what's on God's mind?

sugar is part of it, it's The law of expansion.


From: livvy on 2 Aug 2010 23:22
On Aug 2, 11:02 pm, "Edmond H. Wollmann" <arcturian...(a)earthlink.net>
wrote:
> "Jimbo" <ckdbig...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:35d49815-ac94-4b41-8d64-001c0043dcc7(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 2, 9:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
> > more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!
> > Did you even take a science class during your time in reform school?
>
> Did you ever figure out what's on God's mind?
>
> sugar is part of it, it's The law of expansion.

God's fine....this is your discussion...you have some expectation?
What is it you want, what is it you want to end?
From: Edmond H. Wollmann on 3 Aug 2010 01:54

"livvy" <gode3(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:89fad588-869c-4982-b496-d7d64339a9bc(a)u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 2, 11:02 pm, "Edmond H. Wollmann" <arcturian...(a)earthlink.net>
wrote:
> "Jimbo" <ckdbig...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:35d49815-ac94-4b41-8d64-001c0043dcc7(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 2, 9:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
> > more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!
> > Did you even take a science class during your time in reform school?
>
> Did you ever figure out what's on God's mind?
>
> sugar is part of it, it's The law of expansion.

> God's fine....this is your discussion...you have some expectation?
> What is it you want, what is it you want to end?

What part of your confusion would you like me to help Dumbass?

Don't cha know Sugar is made for you to like it in order to gain energy.
All humans want energy, therefore this design is God's design to populate
human on earth dipshit, still don't get it?


From: Government Shill #2 on 3 Aug 2010 03:45
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:58:47 +1000, "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:

>According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
>more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!
>
>But that would mean chicken, lamb, mustard and every taste is purely
>manufactured by our brains to give it some functional relevance.
>
>Either that or it's a just a COINCIDENCE that the simplest most available
>food chemical has this wonderful sweet taste sensation.
>
>It's just one of MILLIONS of coincidences.
>
>Another example: If the Earth was 50% smaller, we would have no atmosphere
>like Mars. If Earth was 50% bigger our muscles would be too weak to carry a
>big brain, crabs would be the dominant lifeform and nobody would be able
>to ponder the existence of the Universe!
>
>Or water, H20. It's the only chemical of it's type that is liquid at around 300 Kelvin,
>It's unique Hydrogen bond giving the characteristic bend in the molecule alters it's
>properties so that there are liquid oceans on livable planets. No liquid water, no life!
>
>Speaking of water, osmosis! This function is absolutely critical for life to exist, except
>maybe phsophorous life forms. No osmosis, no life.
>
>There are THOUSANDS of narrow windows of opportunity and life depends on every
>single one. The best argument AGAINST a creator was written by Rich Dawk!
>
>Yet according to the atheist it's just a bit of luck! Wait a few billion years and the strongest
>survive QED.

Yeah dope. Wait a few billion years, on many billion planets, in many
billions of galaxies, and eventually one, or two, or a hundred, will
develop life in the way ours did.

On the other hand... there will be billions and billions of planets that
are, too small, too big, too far from their star, too close to their star,
not have the right gasses, elements, proteins...

No one lives on the failures to notice they are failures.

Are you really that dumb? You sometimes seem smarter.

--
Shill #2

Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
Henrik Tikkanen
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: How small must the chance of error be before we accept something as true and certain?
Next: Moonless Night