<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins</id>
  <title type="text">talk.origins Google Group</title>
  <subtitle type="text">
  Evolution versus creationism (sometimes hot!). (Moderated)
  </subtitle>
  <link href="/group/talk.origins/feed/atom_v1_0_msgs.xml" rel="self" title="talk.origins feed"/>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:18:26Z</updated>
  <generator uri="http://groups.google.co.uk" version="1.99">Google Groups</generator>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Tim DeLaney</name>
  <email>delaney.timo...@comcast.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:17:45Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/83f4b59f2cb13a4b/f3d00dde1c5c90d6?show_docid=f3d00dde1c5c90d6</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/83f4b59f2cb13a4b/f3d00dde1c5c90d6?show_docid=f3d00dde1c5c90d6"/>
  <title type="text">Re: A few serious questions for YEC&#39;s</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Please re-read the question I asked, this &lt;br&gt; time for comprehension. I did not ask you &lt;br&gt; to provide scientific evidence for &lt;br&gt; creationism -- I&#39;m aware that you cannot &lt;br&gt; do so. &lt;br&gt; Let me rephrase the question: &lt;br&gt; Is there any conceivable set of observations &lt;br&gt; of the natural world that would lead you to &lt;br&gt; believe that God used evolution as His tool to
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>nando_ronteltap@yahoo.com</name>
  <email>nando_rontel...@yahoo.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:18:26Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/53a80a9b6b877568/308dae774c3c684c?show_docid=308dae774c3c684c</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/53a80a9b6b877568/308dae774c3c684c?show_docid=308dae774c3c684c"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Aristotle rejects natural selection, and dislikes it&#39;s adherents</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Your judgement on Islamists is meaningless statistics of some &lt;br&gt; objective standards of good and evil. We can feed the objective &lt;br&gt; criteria into a computer, and then the computerscreen will state &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;Evil!, Guilty!&amp;quot; when you feed the data into it. Justice is &lt;br&gt; meaningless without freedom.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>spintronic</name>
  <email>spintro...@hotmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:14:02Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/846cd4543f2f17a7/a4a39e1769373d42?show_docid=a4a39e1769373d42</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/846cd4543f2f17a7/a4a39e1769373d42?show_docid=a4a39e1769373d42"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Weirdo&#39;s square of negative mass.</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  The only 3 retards digging holes here, are *YOU*, *WEIRDO*, and now &lt;br&gt; *SHIT4BRAINS AKA Y.O.O AKA P.O.O-Head*. &lt;br&gt; And he&#39;s only chirped up, since the math stopped. &lt;br&gt; *ALL* photons that reflect off mirrors do so with either *LESS &lt;br&gt; ENERGY*, *MORE ENERGY*, or the *SAME ENERGY*. &lt;br&gt; The reflected *ENERGY* depends on 4 things.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Caranx latus</name>
  <email>kar...@sympatico.ca</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:17:23Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/b231c3c51b63473e?show_docid=b231c3c51b63473e</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/b231c3c51b63473e?show_docid=b231c3c51b63473e"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Evidence for Creationism</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  &amp;lt;snip&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; It could also be pointed out that the monitor that Starmaker is looking &lt;br&gt; at when he reads this uses red, green, and blue. &lt;br&gt; From &amp;lt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_color&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt;&amp;gt;: &lt;br&gt; Media that combine emitted lights to create the sensation of a range of &lt;br&gt; colors are using the additive color system. ... Media that use reflected
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Desertphile</name>
  <email>desertph...@invalid-address.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:14:18Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/e8d70b0a20d3963b/ab97f0dd39ed18d7?show_docid=ab97f0dd39ed18d7</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/e8d70b0a20d3963b/ab97f0dd39ed18d7?show_docid=ab97f0dd39ed18d7"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Dana Tweedy: Registered offender?</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:06:57 +0000, Burkhard &amp;lt;b.scha...@ed.ac.uk&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; wrote: &lt;br&gt; Sorry: I was angered at all this stupid shit. Martinez has claimed &lt;br&gt; that Tweedy &amp;quot;admits it,&amp;quot; when Tweedy not only consistently denies &lt;br&gt; the fraudulent and libelous claim, but has pointed out there is no &lt;br&gt; basis for the claim. Martinez is a despicable, evil bastard.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>VoiceOfReason</name>
  <email>papa_...@cybertown.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:09:09Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/0ea6a4a6bd7b3125/3de38a12710ed7ac?show_docid=3de38a12710ed7ac</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/0ea6a4a6bd7b3125/3de38a12710ed7ac?show_docid=3de38a12710ed7ac"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Independent Hard Evidence: From Adam to Noah</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Hence creationists and their childish view of reality. &lt;br&gt; Hence the world of science. &lt;br&gt; Seen any Cambrian mammals lately? &lt;br&gt; Says Mr. Science-Ignorant.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Roaming Rider</name>
  <email>interested.reade...@live.se</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:11:37Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/5394782ae56e501e/3cbf6e6ec164b2a3?show_docid=3cbf6e6ec164b2a3</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/5394782ae56e501e/3cbf6e6ec164b2a3?show_docid=3cbf6e6ec164b2a3"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Macroevolution is inevitable.</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  All-seeing-I! &lt;br&gt; Do you agree? &lt;br&gt; /RR
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Klaus Hellnick</name>
  <email>khelln...@sbcglobal.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:07:11Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/53a80a9b6b877568/839a39bc877520db?show_docid=839a39bc877520db</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/53a80a9b6b877568/839a39bc877520db?show_docid=839a39bc877520db"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Aristotle rejects natural selection, and dislikes it&#39;s adherents</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Even cloned cats have different patterns in their fur. The overall &lt;br&gt; balance of colors are the same, but the exact patterns differ. This is &lt;br&gt; especially clear with cloned calicos.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Frank J</name>
  <email>f...@verizon.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:04:42Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/1f634711b03cf496?show_docid=1f634711b03cf496</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/1f634711b03cf496?show_docid=1f634711b03cf496"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Evidence for Creationism</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Actually RBG are the additive primaries and magenta cyan and yellow &lt;br&gt; are the subtractive ones. I recall being puzzled at age 8 as to why &lt;br&gt; red and blue crayons gave a muddy gray instead of the violet I &lt;br&gt; expected. We can discuss wavelength, hue, value, chroma, tricolor &lt;br&gt; vision, etc. another time. &lt;br&gt; Well if you don&#39;t lie, you should have no problem sharing with us your
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Kent</name>
  <email>musquods...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T17:05:57Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/c5644d9265c12ad4?show_docid=c5644d9265c12ad4</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/c5644d9265c12ad4?show_docid=c5644d9265c12ad4"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Misconceptions</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Well. At least you have to admit that the post is well named. It is &lt;br&gt; indeed filled with misconceptions.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Boikat</name>
  <email>boi...@bellsouth.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T16:54:12Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/cbcddf3f23d37a13?show_docid=cbcddf3f23d37a13</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/cbcddf3f23d37a13?show_docid=cbcddf3f23d37a13"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Evidence for Creationism</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  It&#39;s always &amp;quot;spot the looney week&amp;quot; here. Hadn&#39;t you noticed? &lt;br&gt; Boikat
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Ron O</name>
  <email>rokim...@cox.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T16:54:22Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/ca4cafeeb21fbdab?show_docid=ca4cafeeb21fbdab</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/ca4cafeeb21fbdab?show_docid=ca4cafeeb21fbdab"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Misconceptions</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Why do you believe that the list above means what you think? Have you &lt;br&gt; been able to verify any of the junk? Really, why can&#39;t you do &lt;br&gt; something like that before claiming that these are the problems that &lt;br&gt; you think that they are? &lt;br&gt; What happened to scientific creationism? These are the same &lt;br&gt; obfuscationist arguments used by the failures that tried to foist
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>wf3h</name>
  <email>w...@vsswireless.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T16:53:21Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/3deeadc0942fb3bd?show_docid=3deeadc0942fb3bd</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/c9e1cfc819c2042f/3deeadc0942fb3bd?show_docid=3deeadc0942fb3bd"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Misconceptions</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  using the laws of nature. this is like saying that, since humans can &lt;br&gt; make lightening in a lab, god makes lightening and no laws of physics &lt;br&gt; are involved &lt;br&gt; The complexity of the experimental design, which &lt;br&gt; meaningless statement. human brains can make lightening, too. that &lt;br&gt; does not prove intelligence is required to make lightening.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Boikat</name>
  <email>boi...@bellsouth.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T16:51:30Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/d1bb32bf66dc950c?show_docid=d1bb32bf66dc950c</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/680b90da1da2fd07/d1bb32bf66dc950c?show_docid=d1bb32bf66dc950c"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Evidence for Creationism</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Not allowed. The Bible is inerrant the way it is. At least that&#39;s &lt;br&gt; what you lot keep claiming. &lt;br&gt; &amp;lt;snip blastpfamy&amp;gt;
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Boikat</name>
  <email>boi...@bellsouth.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2009-11-08T16:40:33Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/7d068a0442966cb9/c622ebccabc5086f?show_docid=c622ebccabc5086f</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.co.uk/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/7d068a0442966cb9/c622ebccabc5086f?show_docid=c622ebccabc5086f"/>
  <title type="text">Re: The Thumbprint Of God - Fractals...The Colors Of Infinity</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  You fools will fall for anything and everything, won&#39;t you? &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;Oh look, hot air rises, proof of God!&amp;quot; &lt;br&gt; (Creatotards) Ooooh! Aaaaah Yes it is! &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;Oh look, rocks all fall down! Proof of God!&amp;quot; &lt;br&gt; (creatotards) Ooohhh Aaahhh! Yes it is!. &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;Oh look! Shit stinks, proof of God!&amp;quot; &lt;br&gt; (Creatotards) Ooohhh Ahhhh! Yes it is!
  </summary>
  </entry>
</feed>
