What's your point anyway? Hillary's private server has nothing to do with the conversation (and once again, it wasn't illegal, just dumb).
Just for kicks let's give the Left their argument...
- Thread starter atlkvb
- Start date
It was illegal (otherwise why did she attempt to hide it?) and the Russians along with several other players most likely hacked it because it was unsecured and contained highly classified information according to the FBI Director. Yet there was not a peep from the Left about either. Both the illegal server, and the fact that it was most likely compromised with classified information on it! No one on the Left cares about any of that!
Moreover, there is no unilateral consensus between the CIA and FBI that the Russians actually leaked the damaging DNC e-mails that were leaked about the Democrats who are now complaining about the hacking as a reason for Clinton losing the election.
They're more upset about a hacking they can't prove by the Russians, yet they ignore one that did happen on an illegal server.
Rather than get upset about the corrupt activities revealed in the e-mails that were leaked by whoever hacked the DNC, or the classified information that is likely still floating around out there in the hands of who knows who, they're only upset over an alleged Russian hacking but not the information revealed which showed they were cheating on the entire election process.
It's not only convoluted, but downright comical.
Last edited:
Ever heard of a molecule of H2O? That's probably one of the most basic elements in Creation, yet we can't even make one molecule of it!
Simple water. Oh, but we're going the reverse "climate change".
Yeah, right.
Last edited:
I'm not trying to be insulting, but you really aren't very bright. Surely you know that we can create water? Have you ever started your car in the morning and stood behind the tail pipe and watched to see what happens?
http://witcombe.sbc.edu/water/chemistryelectrolysis.html
Life must be very difficult in the bubble.
How are "we" creating that? That's a by product of a chemical interaction Mr Science.
So tell me, just exactly how do we "create" a single molecule of water from scratch...huh Mr. Einstein? (since I'm not so bright please explain this process to me)
As a matter of fact you are, because the thread discussion I was having with WhiteTailEER was over how there is design in all things organically found in nature. By design I mean an observable pattern which cannot be copied by Man in an exact replica like it is naturally formed or created or found organically.
Can we manipulate that which exits? Yes. Can we create the natural elements themselves using nothing else to reproduce those elements?
No.
You give an example of what can happen when certain existing elements in created nature are combined, and then insult me for pointing out that their design is the very proof you refuse to accept as their creation!
Then you call me "not very bright" using my own examples of created design in nature to ignore your own stupidity.
Last edited:
I read it (copied it for my files cause it's interesting) but it explained nothing.
Tell me how Men (created beings) create a single molecule of water that has a design in your own example. That design is 2 molecules of Hydrogen and 1 molecule of Oxygen. How do we make those individual molecules to form one water molecule? (since the elements used in your example to make water already exist?) So how did we make the individual molecules to make the molecule of Water?
I'll wait for your step-by-step response.
Last edited:
I added an addendum to this thread I hope all of my challengers will take the time to read. I think it's pretty good if I say so myself. (It's more for the creation disbelievers) but it's in the response to WhitetailEER's charge claiming that 'design' does not prove 'creation' or you can't "prove intelligent design" as proof of creation by an "intelligent creator".
Please read my addendum, and then judge for yourselves.
I linked to the portion of the thread to help get you up to speed on the dialogue. Please read it if you were interested in this discussion thread. As a believer in a Creator, I thought it was a pretty strong argument for creation by design...something my opponents claimed was not possible to know or even prove.
Here's the link: https://westvirginia.forums.rivals....ts-give-the-left-their-argument.132399/page-3
Please read my addendum, and then judge for yourselves.
I linked to the portion of the thread to help get you up to speed on the dialogue. Please read it if you were interested in this discussion thread. As a believer in a Creator, I thought it was a pretty strong argument for creation by design...something my opponents claimed was not possible to know or even prove.
Here's the link: https://westvirginia.forums.rivals....ts-give-the-left-their-argument.132399/page-3
Last edited:
