[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>> poorly written, and that Galileo had actually been found guilty of   
   >>>>> breaking his oath to the 1616 inquisition.  This would mean that the   
   >>>>> later court had accepted the 1616 inquisition judgement.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The Catholic church still has geocentric creationists like Pagano   
   >>>>> because they claim that heliocentrism is still a heresy, and that it has   
   >>>>> never been negated as a heresy.  The anti-geocentric site put up the   
   >>>>> 1822 Papal decree that removed heliocentrism from all banned lists, and   
   >>>>> that it could be used to tell time and calculate celestial movements.   
   >>>>> The geocentric catholics claim is that heliocentrism did not stop being   
   >>>>> a heresy because there were still restrictions placed on what could be   
   >>>>> published about it.  These restrictions were not stated in the decree,   
   >>>>> just that you had to consult the proper church officer.  A site that I   
   >>>>> put up years ago claimed that this decree just set things back to what   
   >>>>> was in place due to the Council of Trent, before heliocentric   
   >>>>> publications were banned, and that heliocentrism could still not be used   
   >>>>> in relation to the beliefs of the church fathers.  After the Council of   
   >>>>> Trent heliocentrism became a heresy because all the church fathers were   
   >>>>> geocentrists.  The anti-geocentric Catholic site agrees with what the   
   >>>>> Council of trent did, and even admit that heliocentrism was s formal   
   >>>>> heresy when Galileo first faced the charge in 1616.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Your stupidity about geocentrism is likely directly related to your   
   >>>>> stupidity and lies about the current topic.  You just can't accept   
   >>>>> reality for what it is, even if you have to deny what your own trusted   
   >>>>> source told you.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The Biologos creationists just claim what they claim.  You have to keep   
   >>>>> lying about it for your own stupid reasons.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The Reason to   
   >>>>>>> Believe exIDiots claim that their designer only made it look like   
   >>>>>>> biological evolution happened and is still happening by "recreating"   
   new   
   >>>>>>> species just a little different from the previously existing species.   
   >>>>>>> It is so much like evolution that the new recreation can even   
   interbreed   
   >>>>>>> sometimes with the previously existing species.  None of the Biologos   
   >>>>>>> evolutionary creationists are likely that badly off, but they still   
   >>>>>>> claim that supernatural miracles were needed.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Just admit that you have been lying, and quit lying.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You really do need to grasp the idea that people disagreeing with your   
   >>>>>> ideas and opinions does not make them liars.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Just admit that you have been lying since you ran from the quotes the   
   >>>>> first time and started lying.  Nothing has changed.  The Biologos   
   >>>>> creationist claimed what they are quoted as claiming.  They are biblical   
   >>>>> literalists that beileve that evolution is a fact of nature, but they   
   >>>>> believe in Biblical claims like their god making man in his own image,   
   >>>>> and they believe that this god used supernatural miracles in the   
   >>>>> creation and is still using supernatural miracles today.  The use of   
   >>>>> supernatural mechanisms is a denial of using natural mechanisms in those   
   >>>>> cases by definition.  Natural mechanisms did not do what was   
   >>>>> accomplished by supernatural miracles.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You understood   
   >>>>>>> that you were lying when you ran from the quotes and started to lie,   
   and   
   >>>>>>> nothing has changed.  The quotes are what they are.  Just go up the   
   >>>>>>> thread and relive what you did.  Supernatural miracles are not natural   
   >>>>>>> mechanisms for evolution.  They are denying that biological evolution   
   is   
   >>>>>>> due to natural processes because they are claiming that unnatural   
   >>>>>>> processes (supernatural miracles) were needed to do specific biblical   
   >>>>>>> literalist interpretations of what had to happen to evolve man in the   
   >>>>>>> image of their god.  This is no different from Behe's tweeker designer   
   >>>>>>> claims.  Just because they understand that Behe's argument to support   
   >>>>>>> the tweeking is bogus, doesn't change the fact that they are tweekers   
   >>>>>>> too.  Behe needed supernatural miracles, but he wasn't as honest about   
   >>>>>>> it as these guys are.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> when you know that I was always claiming that it was not all   
   >>>>>>>>> natural with their claim about taking the Bible literally, their   
   belief   
   >>>>>>>>> in supernatural miracles, and their belief that their god was   
   >>>>>>>>> manipulating nature in the past and still is.  They deny natural   
   >>>>>>>>> mechanisms as much as Behe when he claims that his god was needed to   
   >>>>>>>>> evolve the flagellum, and these guys are claiming that their god made   
   >>>>>>>>> man in his own image, a claim that they make due to their literal   
   >>>>>>>>> interpretation of the Bible.  Behe has never claimed how his designer   
   >>>>>>>>> did it except for his off the cuff "puffs of smoke", but these guys   
   are   
   >>>>>>>>> outright claiming supernatural miracles.  Your lies were never   
   needed,   
   >>>>>>>>> and were only used because you couldn't deal with the reality that   
   some   
   >>>>>>>>> of these guys are tweekers like an ID perp such as Behe.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> [snip repetitive earlier posts]   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I knew your pathetic screeching about people who disagree with you   
   >>>> being stupid and liars reminded me of someone. I've just been reading   
   >>>> about Trump calling the judge who overruled him a ""a Radical Left   
   >>>> Lunatic Judge". That's exactly who you are like, Donald Trump and I   
   >>>> guess that trying to have a reasoned debate with you is just like   
   >>>> trying to have one with him, a totally stupid waste of time so I guess   
   >>>> I have been stupid in that regard.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> No counter to the fact that you have been lying about this issue since   
   >>> running from the quoted material.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> What's the point when everything I have asked you to give an example   
   >> of, you have just ignored or handwaved away.   
   >   
   >Just dodges to keep lying.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> I asked you for an example of Biologos denying natural causes of   
   >> evolution. No example. (You eventually tried to weasel-word your way   
   >> out of it by saying you didn't claim they *literally* said it.)   
   >   
   >This was unnecessary, and you know it because they were claiming that   
   >supernatural miracles were involved.  Supernatural miracles are not   
   >natural causes.  They are literally admitting that natural causes were   
   >not involved in their miracles.  Supernatural miracles are not natural   
   >causes.  You knew this because you ran from the quotes to start lying   
   >about the issue.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> I asked you for an example of Biologos trying to force biological   
   >> evolution into conforming with their Biblical interpretation. No   
   >> example.   
   >   
   >They claimed that their Biblical literal interpretation made them   
   >believe that their god created man in his own image.  This is no   
   >different than Behe claiming that a designer was needed for his IC   
   >systems.  They even claimed supernatural miracles were involved.  How is   
   >that not forcing biological evolution into conforming to their Biblical   
   >interpretations?  "In his image" is a Biblical literalist interpretation.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> I asked you to identify somebody in Biologos supporting tweaking like   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)