I provide you evidence and where to go to find it but you REFUSE to go look for yourself. I can change my mind to whatever I see fit, does not mean that I would ever want to. What I have makes me very happy. Why would I want anything else? As I stated before. You have no idea at all. I have the "truth" and I have the evidence to support it. If you refuse to find that out for yourself, then there's no more to say. You can blabber on about scientific terms all your life. It's not going to change what will happen soon. Nothing will change that and nothing will thwart this organization form continuing to do what it does best. To teach the "truth". Gotta love those words you use "the religious are primitive brainwashed imbeciles". ROFL!!! That just shows how silly you really are, pointing fingers and name-calling people you have no idea about. Are you still on your soap box?? Feeling a bit "short" are we?? You don't have evidence. You have theory and philosophy. Col
Do you want me to embarrass you by posting the definition of evidence? If you don't accept sciences evidence for evolution how on earth can you expect us to accept your evidence, Evidence which basically consists of pointing at the bible and shouting "it's true because it says it is!" No you don't. You have a belief completely void of evidence, That's what makes it a faith. A faith is a belief without evidence. There's simply no way to have a serious discussion with an adult who believes in something as silly as Santa. I'm ashamed that we, Technically, Are the same species. I feel let down that i am forced to share genetics with people like you.
You still don't get it. You are so built up of your own ideas, you have no idea at all what I am saying. You think I am saying "this", but really I am saying "that". Take a step back an analyse everything I have said in regards to my evidence. Have a good think about it. You never know, that little light globe in your head might just have a little glimmer. Talk about one-directional thinking. Hey...hang on...isn't that what you are accusing me of?? LOL You couldn't embarrass me if you tried.....hmmm...well...maybe...but let's not go there BTW. I don't believe in Santa. Another pagan belief. Col
This is the thing, You don't have any evidence, You just keep saying you do. And then you ask people to go look for it. You have to be an especially nutty religious nut to claim that there is evidence of god. You may, In your tiny mind, Be able to find a reason for believing it, But that isn't evidence. That's just you not understanding reality and science so have to find something a lot simpler to explain the world around you. It's probably due to the religious being generally dumber than atheists, They need things "dumbed down" to the level where every question can be answered with "god done it".
Are you on a hill by chance? You know the Doobies had a song "Fool on the Hill". That would be you. Making claims about someone you know NOTHING about is nothing but FOOLISH. You know this discussion is on the net don't you? You can't see me face to face. If I walked by you down the street, you would not even blink. Now, that says something does it not? About the ridiculousness of your statements about me? You act like you know me. But, in REALITY (one of your words here) you do not. This one sided conversation makes me laugh. I can only imagine the expression on your face right now. It's not a good look mate! You need a good cuppa to calm down a bit. Sit back, and think about the reality of this discussion. Do you honestly believe I discard all scientific evidence? Do you honestly believe I act on faith alone? Do you not think even remotely the possibility that I have seen, heard and experienced things that you simply could not explain no matter what scientific instruments you have? Are you really that biased that you completely ignore other forms of evidence? No, wait! That's right. I forgot you are SO smart you know exactly the evidence that I have. Of course. That's right. Your "GUESSTIMATION" factor. Silly me. Uh-Oh! You know what that means???? That means you "ASSUME" things about me. Two words to you Stox. GET REAL!!!
I say you discard all scientific evidence which doesn't support something you already believe, An assumption which is supported by your posts here. No doubt you do the same thing with your "religion" too. You pick out the parts which you like the sound of and use them for your agenda, Then you completely ignore the rest. The bits that support what you already believe are "the word of god" the rest is "open to interpretation" or "not meant to be taken literally".
My agenda?? Oh please do tell what YOU think MY agenda is. Also, what parts do I pick out? This ought to be good Col
Yes these are miracles, but miracles of nature and science, not of God, as many of you would like to suggest. People believe in God because the world is very complicated and they think it is very unlikely that anything as complicated as a flying squirrel or the human eye or a brain could happen by chance. But they should think logically and if they thought logically they would see that they can only ask this question because it has already happened and they exist. And there are billions of planets where there is no life, but there is no one on those planets with brains to notice. And it is like if everyone in the world was tossing coins eventually someone would get 5,698 heads in a row and they would think they were very special. But they wouldn't be because there would be millions of people who didn't get 5,698 heads - Christopher Francis Boone.
There have been so many cases where prayer and miracles dont work, but they are conveniently forgotten, and never documented. On the other hand, one seemingly miraculous incident is spread around like wildfire. PS: I have nothing against you or Islam, just those who propagate false propaganda. Best Wishes, AnIons.
That just takes us around to the debate on evolution in another thread. Evidence and experience show us that for every effect there is a cause, what causes the 'miracle of nature and science'? The bible answers that the cause to the effect is God, the alternative is that there is no cause, it all happened by chance. Logical thinking dictates that nothing happens of its own, that it does is against all human logic. It may be possible to get someone in the world to get 5,698 heads up in a row but I'm certainly not going to hold my breath to see if that single possibility happens. But replace that one act of 'chance' with the 'chance' appearance of the whole universe, coupled with the chance appearance of life on earth and the provisions to sustain it. Then add the 'chance' of all of the other things about that life, the self-focusing colour camera that is the eye, the reproductive process of life, the nerve and hormonal system, the sun for light in day and the moon and stars at night, the water cycle, the ..... I could go on but I guess you get my point. If belief in God requires faith, the alternative requires it in some large measure.
Why? What mechanism is lacking to allow accumulation of changes over time until a species becomes significantly different from one that lived millions of years earlier and in a different evironment? What's the genetic or other physical barrier against adaptations accumulating and readapting until major changes have occurred? Why not? What "proof" would satisfy you?
"Objective" is not the same as "informed." Anybody, particularly a lawyer, can make a plausible but completely bogus case for something that will sound very good to laymen. Evolution, both within and across species, is observed fact and should be taught as such. Schoolchildren should be taught science based on the consensus among the community of research scientists, and the consensus among biologists is that evolution happens. That's because many of them have seen it happen. Last time I looked, circles were flat. If they meant "sphere," I assume they could have said so. And back as far as Ancient Greece, the scientists of the time knew that the Earth was a sphere. The fact that other people didn't know it is another matter entirely. The Bible also had some rather weird things to say about inheritance of physical characteristics. I thought you didn't approve of cherry-picking. Creation and creationism are not the same thing. Many scientists and laymen who accept scientific findings about evolution, geology, and cosmology also accept the notion of divine creation. They simply believe that God has used the laws of nature to do the creating, not overriden the laws of nature to do something completely different. The idea that God would say one thing in Genesis and then proceed to do something completely different as far as physical evidence is concerned is one that sits badly with people who want to believe that God is honest rather than deceptive. I take it that you don't believe the current US president is a Christian, then, what with his condoning torture and all. On the other hand, some of history's great philosophical thinkers don't seem to have had a problem with using the New Testament to justify any amount of oppressive behaviour, so the scripture can't be as unequivocally pacificst as all that.
Well I don't believe in any religion I find it a load of crap but that is my view. I don't hate people if they have their own views and believe on religion I just find science proves most of it to be impossible to do.
Nope - just the scientific evidence that conflicts with your theology. Which means that your reasons for discarding it have precious little to do with science.
Who's saying that the appearance of the universe is due to chance? Apart from creationists, I mean. "We don't know how this happened, but here are some possible causes" isn't remotely the same as "Oh, this all occurred by chance." And, apart from creationists, who's saying that the start of life on earth is due to chance? Chemical and biochemical reactions don't occur by chanve. . One of the main points of the theory of evolution by variation and selection is "and selection." Selection isn't a chance process at all. Even variation doesn't happen as much by chance as creationists like to pretend.
A lawyer may also be able to provide the necessary objectivity to look beyond the restricted view of a single-minded person. A single-minded person may equally be able to make a totally incorrect but plausible case. Consensus agreement is not proven fact, just as I repeat that evolution is not proven fact. Your view about the way that children should be taught amounts to a forced indoctrination of the belief of the majority. As someone else posted earlier, science has been wrong many times before and had to change its stance! I don't think there were too many Greek scientists alive when Isaiah recorded the fact that the earth was a circle. Whether you choose to acknowledge 'circle' or 'sphere' does not change the significance of the record, though it might without the other evidence from the Mosaic Law. Such as what weird things? I am certainly not 'cherry-picking' I am stating the facts of the bible record - what is your explanation for the instructions on quarantine and hygiene? If God is the Creator it is up to Him how he accomplishes His purpose. Scientists discuss space and hypothesize on whether there are more than the normal three dimensions of length, breadth and height ... they talk of 'black holes', of time standing still and even of the possibility of being able to reverse time ... are these not 'overriding the laws of nature' as we know them currently? I accept that some would wish to placate their desire to fit their religious beliefs with the popular views by reasoning on how creation could be explained by evolution but that does not fit with the bible record. I don't really understand what you are trying to say here, but whatever it is God is not deceptive, that is a quality of man ... and woman of course. It is not for me to sit in judgment of any individual person, the bible clearly shows that it is not possible to follow Jesus Christ and practice torture or murder, or many other bad things ... it is the bible that sets the standard for a Christian. People all through time have used the scriptures to their own ends, as I have agreed several times and I have quoted Jesus' words on the consequences for them as a result. Their actions do not alter the bible's message, though it may well cloud the view others hold of both God and His Word - for that they will have to account to Him.
I take it you believe slavery and the killing of children are wrong? The bible allows these acts implicitly. But i guess we aren't supposed to take that "literally", Right? It's only the bits you quote which are the 'word of god'. Your agenda is to spread a lie as if it were true. To do this you aren't a stranger to twisting reality, spreading lies and misquoting the dead. it's truly a low that is unique to the religious, And what makes it worse is you do this evil with a smile on your face.
"There are some possible causes" is not the same as "In the begining God created the heavens and the earth", therefore they cannot be reconciled. In the view of those who believe the whole bible, there is no 'chance' or 'some possible causes' ... the 'cause' of creation is the Creator. But it does not allow for direct creation by God and the bible clearly states that God created each according to its kind:- So the bible record clearly shows that God created the vegetation and 'animal life' and after that created man and woman to look after them and to reproduce according to their kind. So evolution cannot be squared with the bible account of creation, which as I have already said, Jesus confirmed - hence evolution cannot be accepted by one who truly believes the bible and to be a true Christian that is a must.
It is not the bible, faith or religion .... it is the institution some of us hate ! I believe and follow christianity but I don't respect church as institution since I think it is just another political party and probably the most corrupted one that exists ! This same principal can be attached to other religions ...