Explain this, if you can (Page 4): Where did you get that idea? That is just crazy, or S T U P I D.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PRM2014

alabuck wrote:

-----------------

Are you aware, too, that early-on in our development, we're all female in gender. Later-on, we change gender, based on our genetic code.

Where did you get that idea? That is just crazy, or S T U P I D.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kazudy

PRM2014 wrote:

Where did you get that idea? That is just crazy, or S T U P I D.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Prm, how come you got nipples? How come all mammals have nipples? Are YOU just crazy, or S T U P I D.!!!!!!!!!!!

PRM2014

Kazudy wrote:

Prm, how come you got nipples? How come all mammals have nipples? Are YOU just crazy, or S T U P I D.!!!!!!!!!!!

What does nipples have to do with it? Can you get milk out of your nipples? Because God made them that way.

Kazudy

PRM2014 wrote:

What does nipples have to do with it? Can you get milk out of your nipples? Because God made them that way.

You can't be that dumb! Really! I'll make it as simple so a 3rd grader can understand. The egg is capable of being either sex, the sperm determines which sex the egg will be. SOOOO before fertilization the egg is prepared to be either sex. NOW do you COMPRENDE??? If not please don't reproduce. We have enough morons already.

PRM2014

Kazudy wrote:

You can't be that dumb! Really! I'll make it as simple so a 3rd grader can understand. The egg is capable of being either sex, the sperm determines which sex the egg will be. SOOOO before fertilization the egg is prepared to be either sex. NOW do you COMPRENDE??? If not please don't reproduce. We have enough morons already.

You are the MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you make it to the 3rd. grade. By the way just what are you a male or female or both?

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Kazudy wrote:

Right now the score is Mr.Bomb 1 and evolutionist a big fat ZEROOOOO!!! You'all need to answer the question he posed to score, and get it 1 to 1, but I haven't heard a response yet, have you?

I think your score keeping is biased. The answer to the question he posed is actually pretty simple, though probably won't be accepted: the two life forms evolved together, each filling a need in the other. One for food and one for reproduction.

Mr Bombastic

working class stiff wrote:

I think your score keeping is biased. The answer to the question he posed is actually pretty simple, though probably won't be accepted: the two life forms evolved together, each filling a need in the other. One for food and one for reproduction.

And just where is your evidence for that? Oh. That's right. You have none. As usual.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Mr Bombastic wrote:

And just where is your evidence for that? Oh. That's right. You have none. As usual.

And where is your evidence that God must have done it?

Mr Bombastic

working class stiff wrote:

And where is your evidence that God must have done it?

Plenty of evidence. You know this, yet you refuse to admit it.

thinksense

Mr Bombastic wrote:

Plenty of evidence. You know this, yet you refuse to admit it.

Working Stiff said "EVIDENCE", not HEARSAY. So don't give us the "It's in the BOOK !" baloney. We know the various versions of the Book can give you any kind of stuff you want to believe. Well, we believe in real earthbound EVIDENCE. And you don't have any of that. (Or was you dere, Charley ? ......Old radio comedy.)

Mr Bombastic

thinksense wrote:

Working Stiff said "EVIDENCE", not HEARSAY. So don't give us the "It's in the BOOK !" baloney. We know the various versions of the Book can give you any kind of stuff you want to believe. Well, we believe in real earthbound EVIDENCE. And you don't have any of that. (Or was you dere, Charley ? ......Old radio comedy.)

I'm talking about historical evidence. Jesus of Nazareth is an actual historical figure. He was crucified and rose from the dead. There were many witnesses. Don't believe me? Where's his corpse? There isn't one. And you can bank on the fact that the Romans would have done everything in their power to produce one. But they couldn't. And it WAS in the BOOK. This BOOK is a historical record, written by real people. Witnesses to the events they wrote of. You can call them liars all you like, but you can't prove it. The simple fact is that the Bible is a historical record, and a very accurate one, at that. A record no one has ever been able to discredit.

thinksense

Mr Bombastic wrote:

I'm talking about historical evidence. Jesus of Na... (show quote)

For crying out loud, this character wasn't even the first who was supposed to have died and been resurrected.

As I said, "Was you dere Charley?"

Jesus is not an historical figure, he's a character in a book, Not an historical record, it was pieced together and written by people you never met, for reasons you refuse to admit.

This book was formed from a large number of myths and stories to firm up Roman control of an area, hundreds of years after the incidents that were decided to be used to write this book, were said to have occurred. A number of myths were evaluated and many discarded, and only certain ones were officially adopted by the Roman Catholic Church.

And since that time the book has been translated , and edited a number of times.

Only a person of desperate mental strain would claim the things described had really happened.

Wow!!!

pappadeux Loc: Phoenix AZ

thinksense wrote:

For crying out loud, this character wasn't even th... (show quote)

I don't know who's hootch you have been drinking,( would love some of that) but you cannot deny that there was a person called "Christ" and most of the events in his lifetime actually happened. However what remains in question is the belief that he was, in fact, the son of God. And that could never be proved and furthermore that in these times we sure could use a guy like him.

Kazudy

PRM2014 wrote:

You are the MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you make it to the 3rd. grade. By the way just what are you a male or female or both?

Aw,did I hurt your feelings? I am a male,if you want send your wife to spend the night with me, and she'll tell you, that I am not both.

Kazudy

working class stiff wrote:

I think your score keeping is biased. The answer to the question he posed is actually pretty simple, though probably won't be accepted: the two life forms evolved together, each filling a need in the other. One for food and one for reproduction.

Ha ha,that's funny. You're joking right?