1. After Bibles seized, U.S. group won't leave Chinese airport

Comment #232542 by Opti-mystic on August 18, 2008 at 10:37 am

Of course, being stopped at customs was the last thing they expected.

Yeah, right.
As transparent as the most transparent thing you can think of.

2. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #200631 by Opti-mystic on June 28, 2008 at 2:19 am

Dembski creates a herring of his chosen hue and sets it swimming free.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/first-paragraph-of-lenski-paper-contains-an-error/

And then his followers lap it up like flies on shit.

3. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #199898 by Opti-mystic on June 26, 2008 at 1:24 pm

That's what make the site so good. Some links are real, some spoofs. Brilliant Poeism. And you have to remember that Dr. Paley has pwned Schlafly too. Internally.

4. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #199895 by Opti-mystic on June 26, 2008 at 1:17 pm

You do all realise that Objective Ministries is an absolutely top class Poe, don't you?

You know, like Landover.

It's like, satire

Ffs, he's a professor of THEOBIOLOGY!!!!!!

5. Creationist critics get their comeuppance

Comment #199875 by Opti-mystic on June 26, 2008 at 12:56 pm

The real data that we need are not in the paper. Rather they are in the bacteria used in the experiments themselves. Prof. Lenski claims that these bacteria 'evolved' novel traits and that these were preceded by the evolution of 'potentiated genotypes', from which the traits could be 'reevolved' using preserved colonies from those generations. But how are we to know if these traits weren't 'potentiated' by the Creator when He designed the bacteria thousands of years ago, such that they would eventually reveal themselves when the time was right?

6. Atheism's Wrong Turn

Comment #93168 by Opti-mystic on December 2, 2007 at 11:06 am

"They view the patient back and forth of dialogue--the way of Socrates--as a waste of time."

That may be because some of us have found that reason, a cornerstone of useful dialogue, is most often absent in debate with religious apologists.
A dialogue with the 'deaf to reason' is a waste of time. Well mine anyway.