File: BANANA_GOD.swf-(7.26 MB, 480x360, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 05/05/15(Tue)23:34 No.2772054
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/15(Tue)23:37 No.2772057
>guaranteed replies
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/15(Tue)23:54 No.2772074
>>2772054
>boring_horse_shit.swf
>> [_] Anonymous 05/05/15(Tue)23:58 No.2772077
>>2772054
Do creationists even still use this argument anymore?
>> [_] Anonymous !TA0T5gpKEQ 05/06/15(Wed)01:19 No.2772143
>>2772077
No. Not anymore.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)01:46 No.2772156
Dicks fit perfectly in mouths, and it feels really good.
Logically, God must support sodomy.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)01:49 No.2772158
>>2772143
That's even more stupid than the banana story in the first one.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)02:10 No.2772168
"Modern day bananas are genetically engineered mutants that are also made by humans, much like
the soda can you just showed us. You can't use that in your argument because it wasn't a product
of nature.
What's more, that wasn't the entire quote from Darwin, just an excerpt.
He goes on to say 'The difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by
natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered subversive of
the theory.'
Meaning that although it sounds absolutely ridiculous to a god-fearing moron, it's just the way
it is."
Is something similar to what I would say to these fools.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)03:15 No.2772220
>>2772077
Much like some athiests, some creationist (Or some humans in any debate) use extremely poor
arguments against others of apposing thought.
This video, the other video with peanutbutter is extremely under wealming stuff.
If you look to the highest, most important figures in the creationist community they have more
presentable cases.
Now you can choose to believe me, take heed that the creationist side if growing stronger with
time, or you can ignore and mock me and be unprepared and unaware when you thought something was
laughably silly comes to seriously challenge your preconceptions.
You might wonder 'where it is' and the truth is you have to look for it, as american and british
media favor evolution and thus present things according to this position.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)03:21 No.2772224
>>2772156
Actually the dick doesn't fit perfectly, after all the teeth are a constant hazard and with a
powerful biting motion could cause the penis to be severed. It feels good because the mouth
shares many features of the vagina, being both moist and soft.
Finally, despite what you think you know, no serious modern aged Christian church or theologian
is against Oral Sex, and you are freely allowed to preform such with you're wife. In fact you are
free to do a lot things as long as retains to a married partner, even masturbation as long as
your loved one is the person focused on.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)03:31 No.2772234
>>2772224
Are you aware bananas dont actually occur in nature?
They are a hybrid of a plant yielding small sweet fruits with annoying hard pits and a plant with
a fruit that has tough flesh but without the annoying pits and large in size.
All bananas of one variety were up until recently literally one single genetic individual,
regrown from shoots.
Today, the most eaten banana is the cavendish, but until like 50 years ago it was another
variety, which was completely wiped out by one single fungal disease.
To prevent this from happening to the cavendish, people have been trying to artificially create
variety. This was done by high tech GM methods in Leuven and by low tech techniques involving
hand pollenation and seeving the seeds out of tons and tons of bananas in Honduras.
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-unfortunate-sex-life-of-the-banana/
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)03:41 No.2772240
>>2772234
Yes I am quite aware that Banana are not natural occurring.
I never did say I believed in that, and the argument was always wrong and under researched.
People made mistakes.
No group is ever a completely unified mass that agrees and confers with itself completely and the
same applies with research groups.
If I recall right the whole 'banana' debate at the time wasn't even a debating point at it's
creation but more of light-hearted joke then a fully researched and documented comparison.
My point remains I was never speaking about the bananas, but rather talking about oral sex.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)05:37 No.2772297
http://vocaroo.com/i/s1uVBVRw0m1y
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)06:56 No.2772339
>>2772220
Are you serious?
>If you look to the highest, most important figures in the creationist community they have more
presentable cases.
No they don't. They're just better at putting makeup on the pig. Their arguments still just boil
down the argument from ignorance, or obfuscated wordplay.
>take heed that the creationist side if growing stronger with time
What?
Practically no-one in academia takes creationists seriously, and that hasn't changed. The
political power of creationists waxes and wanes with the role of fundamentalist Christianity in
US politics, but as far as biology is concerned it's a utterly dead idea.
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)08:37 No.2772388
>>2772054
>there are six ridges to the human hand
>he opens the banana on the wrong end
>> [_] Anonymous 05/06/15(Wed)08:55 No.2772398
>>2772234
banana scientist
