[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>> charges the second time with papal involvement.  The other two sources   
   >>>>>> noted that it was only claimed to have been a heresy in the sentencing,   
   >>>>>> and the word formal had been omitted.  The anti-geocentric site claimed   
   >>>>>> that the 1616 inquisition judgement had not been accepted by the later   
   >>>>>> court, but then they also tried to claim that the sentencing had been   
   >>>>>> 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   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)