See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #401
   On July 13th, 2009 at 4:55 pm, zeroangel said:

   R4L:

   You just made my point and don’t even realize it. OK, have fun with James.

2. #402
   On July 13th, 2009 at 4:58 pm, James Felix said:

   Sorry Zero, it’s five o’clock and fun time’s over. If it’s slow tomorrow maybe I’ll pick back up

3. #403
   On July 13th, 2009 at 5:01 pm, right4life said:

   On July 13th, 2009 at 4:55 pm, zeroangel said

   only in your deluded little mind…

4. #404
   On July 13th, 2009 at 5:04 pm, right4life said:

   On July 13th, 2009 at 4:55 pm, James Felix said:
   The prophecies from the Bible didn’t come true…

   so Israel isn’t a nation??? and Alexander didn’t really live?? uh sure…
   You keep answering questions I didn’t ask.

   that was responding to zero…try reading comprehesion 101

   The laws of probability dictate that if you make a bunch of predictions and wait 2,000 years some of them are going to come tru

   which specific one(s)? post your mathematical proof. just more atheist BS

   What I’m trying to make you see is that everything you say to prove your religion can be used to prove every other religion man has ever had.

   list the prophecies of islam..and their fulfillment then….

   But you won’t see that, because within your mind there was a cage match between faith and reason, and reason got its butt kicked a long time ago

   whats funny is you cannot defend your ‘reason’ you cannot defend evolution, and you cannot defend the claims you make ‘physics disproves the bible’

   and you think you’re ‘rational’

5. #405
   On July 13th, 2009 at 9:55 pm, jangar said:

   Man this thread had legs!

   R4L – take a breath…it may be one of those strong delusion things.

6. #406
   On July 14th, 2009 at 7:22 am, right4life said:

   R4L – take a breath…it may be one of those strong delusion things.

   I think this thread is funny! these atheists throw out statements like ‘physics disprove God’ when in fact its just the opposite. it shows how shallow their intellect is, while they proclaim themselves the smartest people in the room.

   I guess they’ve never heard that physics is down to 2 options: the multi-verse, which is total science fiction, or the anthropic principle…which looks at all of the ‘coincidences’ in the fundamental forces of physics, like magenetism, strong nuclear force, etc…and says that if any of these forces were slightly different, then the universe would either not exist, or life would be possible….

   so the anthropic principle is the design principle….the universe was designed for life like ours…ie God did it….and alternative the multiverse…is there a innumerable universes, and this one just happens to be right….sure…its the desperate atheist way of ignoring the obvious…

   but all these atheists can do is throw out talking points…too funny…their desperation, and hatred of any other viewpoint is telling.

7. #407
   On July 14th, 2009 at 9:02 am, zeroangel said:

   R4L:

   Wrong. It’s entirely possible that all cosmic ratios could have turned out only one way; like Pi. You misunderstand the anthropic principle, it doesn’t have to imply design.

   I’ll agree, the multiverse is a bit silly (no evidence), but no more silly then surmising a creator (no evidence).

   In any case, it’s one thing to surmise a creator, it’s a huge step further to surmise that it’s your particular version of creator (your version).

8. #408
   On July 14th, 2009 at 9:29 am, right4life said:

   Wrong. It’s entirely possible that all cosmic ratios could have turned out only one way; like Pi. You misunderstand the anthropic principle, it doesn’t have to imply design

   obviously it does. of course its just a ‘coincidence’ that all these factors just ‘happen’ to make life possible in our universe…

   this is like saying, the eye evolved because evolution is true.

   but no more silly then surmising a creator (no evidence).

   the evidence is huge, you just refuse to consider it, because you’re an atheist, and you think you are your own god…and you can’t stand the thought that you may not be.

   of course all these things ‘just happened’ in the of course exactly the correct parameters to support life…

   In any case, it’s one thing to surmise a creator, it’s a huge step further to surmise that it’s your particular version of creator (your version).

   The Bible has proved itself over and over again..the prophecy alone would convince most people…then the internal consistency, the historical and archeological accuracy….its tough to beat.

9. #409
   On July 14th, 2009 at 9:45 am, zeroangel said:

   R4L:

   The chances of anything happening after it happened is exactly 1.

   It’s been said countless times: I do not think I am my own god or anyone else’s.

   Despite the overwhemling “evidence” and fulfilled prophecies; huge swaths of very intelligent people remain unconvinced. Odd.

   This is getting so stupid. Prove it. Ask your god to set my computer on fire or something.

10. #410
    On July 14th, 2009 at 9:46 am, zeroangel said:

    BBL. Need to run an errand. When I get back I expect to see the fire dept. at my office.

11. #411
    On July 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am, right4life said:

    Despite the overwhemling “evidence” and fulfilled prophecies; huge swaths of very intelligent people remain unconvinced. Odd

    really? 2 billion christians..and even muslims say they believe the bible..of course with a few changes thrown in..so thats another 1.5 billion…compare that to the number of atheists…uh ok….

    This is getting so stupid. Prove it. Ask your god to set my computer on fire or something.

    atheist reasoning is stupid. you’ve been given all the proof you’re going to get..until you find out the HARD way..

    did you ever consider that the reason you may not believe in God is because He has rejected you?

12. #412
    On July 14th, 2009 at 10:58 am, right4life said:

    the bottom line is that there are 2 choices..either we were created by God, or somehow molecules become self-replicating….then somehow alive…and everything you see, this AWESOME complexity, just happened.

    which is more logical????

13. #413
    On July 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am, right4life said:

    of course how did the molecules get here in the first place…..

    yeah atheism is uh ‘rational’

14. #414
    On July 14th, 2009 at 11:34 am, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    How many Hindus are there? Is the Upanishads the word of Vishnu, the one true god? Furthermore, considering that many sects of Buddhism are less a religion and more a philosophy, there are many more atheists than you think.

    My computer still isn’t on fire. I wonder why that is. Your god can apparently flood the Earth, destroy entire cities, part seas, turn water into wine, turn rivers into blood, and so on and so forth, but a simple thing like setting a computer on fire seems to be beyond his power. Strange.

    did you ever consider that the reason you may not believe in God is because He has rejected you?

    Ummm what? So because god rejected me somehow I don’t believe in him? What the hell are you talking about now? My computer still isn’t on fire so I guess he isn’t really paying all that much attention one way or the other.

    I doubt it will do any good to explain that human minds are hard-wired to see complexity. It did just happen, by very defintion.

15. #415
    On July 14th, 2009 at 12:05 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    Presumably you believe prayer works. Also, no doubt you believe god has performed miracles in your own life. So why can’t he set my computer on fire?

    After all, your god is a kind and loving god, and you personally are a kind and loving person, right? You want to save my soul from eternal damnation, don’t you? Well, then, why can’t you pray to god to set my computer on fire and make me a believer? I mean it’s a relatively small task. Heck, it’s not even something so major, it’s no miracle. It could happen under normal circumstances.

    So, why isn’t your god capable of it? Is it that you don’t want to help me believe? Are you refusing to make this prayer? Or is it that your god doesn’t want to listen on this particular item?

16. #416
    On July 14th, 2009 at 1:09 pm, right4life said:

    How many Hindus are there? Is the Upanishads the word of Vishnu, the one true god?

    quite a few…play the game, make your choice…take your chances…thats the way it is…and there are winners and losers.

    Your god can apparently flood the Earth, destroy entire cities, part seas, turn water into wine, turn rivers into blood, and so on and so forth

    and reconstitute Israel as a nation, and bring His people back to their land…oh and bring persia, russia, and few other, now muslim, countries into a coalition to come against her…

    So because god rejected me somehow I don’t believe in him? What the hell are you talking about now?

    look at Esau….

    I doubt it will do any good to explain that human minds are hard-wired to see complexity. It did just happen, by very defintion.

    this is so funny…you think all this complexity can just happen…have you ever programmed a computer?? try banging on the keyboard with your fists…and see how well that programs runs….

17. #417
    On July 14th, 2009 at 1:12 pm, right4life said:

    So why can’t he set my computer on fire?

    why should He give you a sign? The pharisees asked Jesus for a sign…He would give them none…Satan asked Jesus for signs too…turn stone into bread…and of course Jesus told the pharisees that they were of their father, the devil….

    Well, then, why can’t you pray to god to set my computer on fire and make me a believer?

    as Jesus said in the story of Lazarus and the rich man, even if you saw a man rise from the dead, you would NOT believe.

18. #418
    On July 14th, 2009 at 1:19 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    have you ever programmed a computer??

    Yes. Many times, and if you take a million monkeys…

    even if you saw a man rise from the dead, you would NOT believe.

    Try me. So which is it, are you unwilling to ask your god to set my computer on fire, is he incapable, or is he unwilling to do so?

    Strangely, Jesus couldn’t provide a sign, but he could walk on water when in the presence of his believers.

19. #419
    On July 14th, 2009 at 1:57 pm, right4life said:

    Yes. Many times, and if you take a million monkeys…

    you get garbage.

    Strangely, Jesus couldn’t provide a sign, but he could walk on water when in the presence of his believers.

    He wouldn’t to people like you…He knew it would be a waste of time.

20. #420
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:10 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    you get garbage.

    BS. It’s just pure statistics and if you have one million monkeys and one million (or a billion) years eventually one of them will type:

    int main()
    {
    cout << “Hello World!”;
    }

    …and hit enter (yes, yes, they will eventually run the compiler as well).

    He wouldn’t to people like you…He knew it would be a waste of time.

    Yes, how convenient for your argument. He will destroy entire cities full of sinners but he won’t light one small computer on fire at your behest to save the soul of an Iraq war veteran. That makes perfect sense.

21. #421
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:23 pm, right4life said:

    BS. It’s just pure statistics and if you have one million monkeys and one million (or a billion) years eventually one of them will type

    BS.

    Let’s imagine a very simple typewriter that has only the 26 upper-case letters, a space bar and five punctuation characters (a total of 32 buttons). It doesn’t even have a carriage return — it does an automatic return when the required number of letters have been typed, and it has an infinite roll of paper being fed through it. We have a monkey that knows how to press the keys and will do so in a totally random manner indefinitely. All in all, we have a little bit of machinery, but no real intelligence in the system. We want our monkey to type the following snippet: “TO BE OR NOT TO BE, THAT IS THE QUESTION.”

    The probability of this happening is quite simple to calculate, and this will in turn give us some idea of how many monkeys and typewriters we need for a reasonable chance of success. Place your bets now — our monkeys are fast typists and can type the required number of characters in a single second (there are 41 keystrokes)! On average, how long will it be before one of our monkeys produces a line matching the above sentence?

    Well, there are 32 keys, so starting at any moment, the chances of our monkey getting the first keypress right are one in 32. Not good, but we have fast monkeys and lots of time. However, once it has got the first keystroke right, we also need the second keystroke to be right, otherwise we are back to square one. The chances of it getting the first and second keystrokes right are only one in (32*32 = 1024). Only one chance in 1024, but still lots of time to get it right. To get the first three characters right will be a one in (32*32*32 = 32768) chance. Each time it presses a key, there is a one in 32 chance that it will be correct. To get our little snippet of Hamlet, it will need a total of 41 consecutive “correct” keystrokes. This means that the chances are one in 32 to the power of 41. Let’s look at a table of values.

    link

    He will destroy entire cities full of sinners but he won’t light one small computer on fire at your behest to save the soul of an Iraq war veteran. That makes perfect sense.

    Romans 9:13
    Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

22. #422
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:26 pm, right4life said:

    a better one on the monkeys…

    Richard Dawkins also appeals to the monkeys to convince his readers that evolution by natural selection is plausible. He believes that a thousand such monkeys could type Shakespeare’s sentence, “Methinks it is like a weasel.” However, the probability of them typing this six-word sentence (including spaces), is one chance in 1039. (7)

    It has been calculated that it would be statistically impossible to randomly type even the first 100 characters in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”. If the monkeys typed only in lower case, including the 27 spaces in the first 100 characters, the chances are 27100 (ie. one chance in 10143). (8)

    “If each proton in the observable universe were a typing monkey (roughly 1080 in all), and they typed 500 characters per minute (faster than the fastest secretary), around the clock for 20 billion years, then all the monkeys together could make 5×1096 attempts at the characters. It would require an additional 3×1046 such universes to have an even chance at success.” (9)

    Recently, the reality of this last statement has been so damaging to the support for Darwinian evolution, that many evolutionists have taken up the “additional universes” scenario as a way out. They change the analogy and invent an unimaginably large number of universes that are all full of monkeys. They believe that under these new conditions, sooner or later one of the monkeys will succeed. This is the basis of the Anthropic Principle (see my lecture notes #8, “The Anthropic Principle”, for a refutation of this theory).

    There is a second counter-argument to the mathematical impossibility of evolution. It suggests that when a monkey types the correct key it stays, but when an incorrect key is hit it is ‘rubbed out’. This reasoning is based on the assumption that evolution has proceeded in a positive direction, always upwards. As evolution isn’t always positive (ie. devolution can also occur), this argument is not valid. (10)

    A third counter-argument considers what is called cumulative selection. In it, the monkeys type in stages, stopping to check their work, saving what is close to the target sentence. This process is repeated until the monkey’s random typing reproduces the sentence. (11)

    This description of evolution is also false because evolution never has anything to aim at. “Nature presents life with no targets. Life shambles forward, surging here, shuffling there, the small advantages accumulating on their own until something novel appears on the broad evolutionary screen – an arch or an eye, an intricate pattern of behaviour, the complexity characteristic of life.” (12)

    Returning to the mathematics, Michael Behe estimates the probability of just getting the 30,000 gene pieces required for blood clotting in the right sequence as 10-18. To get the genes plus the clotting activator working together by chance has the probability of 10-36. (13)

    Fred Hoyle estimates the following probabilities for chance, random arrangement of amino acids:- (14)

    10-19 for a ten amino acid polypeptide

    10-20 for a functional enzyme

    10-130 for the histone H4 molecule

    10-40,000 for all of life’s 2,000 enzymes

    This last value (10-40,000) shows the probability that a very, very tiny part of evolution could have happened. This probability is more unlikely than the monkey’s chance typing (viz 10-143) which have been used to ‘prove’ evolution.

    Bear in mind that Mathematical Zero is 10-50. Any value smaller than this is relegated by mathematicians to the realm of ‘never happening’.

    link

23. #423
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:32 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    Don’t be an idiot. The universe is a hell of a lot bigger and a hell of a lot older than a million monkeys and a million years. Not to mention the fact the evolution IS NOT a random process. A proper analogy would be everytime a monkey hit a correct key (a favorable trait) that correct digit / letter stayed in place.

    Romans 9:13
    Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

    So god hates me now? You are such a moron.

    My computer is still working fine, did you even try praying to god to set my computer on fire? Is it god that hates me or you?

24. #424
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_program

    Supposedly you write code. You should be able to grasp that.

25. #425
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:37 pm, right4life said:

    Not to mention the fact the evolution IS NOT a random process. A proper analogy would be everytime a monkey hit a correct key (a favorable trait) that correct digit / letter stayed in place.

    you assume life, a planet and solar system to support that life…again BS.

    and then of course evolution has to deal with haldane’s dilemma, and Nachman’s U paradox…mutational meltdown…

    but you darwiniacs assign intelligence to evolution routinely…

    “We found this mysterious unknown structure in the sponge, and it is clear that evolution was able to take this entire structure, and, with small modifications, direct its use toward a new function,” said Kosik. “Evolution can take these ‘off the shelf’ components and put them together in new and interesting ways.”

    link

    so evolution is the intelligent designer…you want it both ways…to be purposeless without foresight, yet to be clever enough to put things together in ‘new and interesting ways’ right.

    So god hates me now? You are such a moron.

    doesn’t everyone?

26. #426
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:38 pm, right4life said:

    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm, zeroangel said:

    yes, an INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED computer program to prove evolution…laughable…

    even a brainless darwiniac like you should be able to see that.

27. #427
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    *yawn* same nonsense.

    My computer is still not on fire.

28. #428
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:51 pm, right4life said:

    proper analogy would be everytime a monkey hit a correct key (a favorable trait) that correct digit / letter stayed in place.

    an interesting paper was recently delivered…

    Two Mutations: With Applications to Regulatory Sequence Evolution and the Limits of Darwinian Evolution” (Durrett, R & Schmidt, D. 2008. Genetics 180: 1501-1509).

    which challenged Behe about his contentions in the edge of evolution about the extreme unlikelihood of getting 2 point mutations…Behe was vindicated..

    link

29. #429
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:53 pm, right4life said:

    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, zeroangel said

    don’t worry, we’ll all get to find out soon enough won’t we??

    if you’re right, I lose nothing..if I’m right…you lose everything, and suffer for an eternity…

    have a nice day!

30. #430
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:54 pm, zeroangel said:

    OH MY GOD!

    Jesus just road through my office on a dinosaur! He was carrying a torch and set my computer on fire!

    OH NOES! My computer is on fire!

    Not…

    Still waiting. What was that? Another link that you’ve given us about 4 or 5 times in the past? OK… whatever.

31. #431
    On July 14th, 2009 at 2:55 pm, zeroangel said:

    I lose nothing..if I’m right

    Unless the Muslims (or just about any one of countless others) are right, then we are both f*cked. GL!

32. #432
    On July 14th, 2009 at 3:00 pm, right4life said:

    glad there’s a hell for people like you!!

33. #433
    On July 14th, 2009 at 3:01 pm, zeroangel said:

    Holy sh|t, my computer just beeped! It must be on fire! Oh, never mind, that was just an email, it’s from Jesus, he works in personnel.

    Only a truly deranged mind would wish hell on another human being. That’s you, deranged.

34. #434
    On July 14th, 2009 at 3:17 pm, right4life said:

    Only a truly deranged mind would wish hell on another human being. That’s you, deranged.

    I’m all for people getting what they deserve, aren’t you??

    its called justice…you’ve decided to make yourself an enemy of the Lord…He will deal you very harshly…no mercy, no grace, no love…you have no idea…

    and those in hell belong there…and the Lord is just, righteous, and holy for putting people, and demons, there….

35. #435
    On July 14th, 2009 at 3:23 pm, zeroangel said:

    Wow! The Holy Spirit just opened up a window on my desktop, reached out, touched my desk and set everything on fire! I have to run and get a fire extinguisher!

    Ummm… no. Not yet, keep praying.

    Yes, yes, I deserve to suffer for eternity simply because I don’t buy the snake-oil you are selling. The only people I ever could call enemies were the ones I fought against in Iraq.

    Classic. R4L thinks war veterans that happen to be atheists should suffer for eternity. He calls that “justice.”

36. #436
    On July 14th, 2009 at 7:11 pm, Ignatius Reilly said:

    If eternal writing in agony from the righteous flames of hell pleases the Lord as “just” punishment for the lost of His flock, then the Lord is a Ass.

37. #437
    On July 14th, 2009 at 10:21 pm, zeroangel said:

    R4L:

    Wow! Yahweh is more or less a useless, impotent being these days isn’t he? In my zeal to leave the office today, I didn’t fully shut down my laptop and just threw it in my bag, I did this knowing full well it might not turn off completely.

    After I came home, I found myself busy with the wife and the newborn. When I finally got around to pulling out my laptop, Yahweh managed to make it fairly warm! I mean geez, I almost wanted to curl up in the bag and take a nap!

    Still no fire, but good effort on Yahweh’s part though. I was almost convinced! What a pity, from pillars of fire destroying cities to lukewarm laptops, you almost feel bad for the guy, that is, if it weren’t for all the murderous, evil mayhem in the OT.