I don't see Atheism and Evolution having anything to do with each other. I also don't see evolution disputing the "Creation Myth" stOx was referring to. Evolution proposes no answers to the WHY and WHO questions on the origin of life, and for that reason, I find it hard see how it is tied to spirituality. Conversely it also fits in very nicely with creationism, if you choose to believe that.
No, they call it a theory because in science a theory is an explanation of the facts. Or are you saying gravity, knots and chess also don't exist on the grounds that there is a "theory" explaining them? Yeah that could be argued... But not until words no longer have meanings.
So you oppose Britain teaching atheism in it's religious studies classes? How do you rectify the paradox in your quote above, stating that atheists are different than the religious, when in fact Atheists including yourself ARE religious? Your claim. The claim of Francis Bacon, creator of the Scientific Method, "a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion." At least you both agree logic and reason should be taught in schools, though you clearly disagree on where that path leads to. Why do you evangelize Atheism? You've never answered my question?
Sorry, do you not speak English? I clearly said i don't agree with teaching children atheism. should they know what the word means, of course, just like they should be taught what christianity and islam mean, as words, but they shouldn't be taught it as something they should adhere to. Are you going to ask me the same facile quetion again in the vain hope that my repeated answer will morph into soemthing which you can argue against? Francis bacon was most certainly not the creator of the scientific method. It's important to expose the irrational, unsupported, invariably bloodthirsty and oppressive opinions of those who believe in mythology. It's no more "evangelizing" than arguing against astrology would be. isn't it funny how the religious always like to claim atheism is the same as what they believe. You would never have an evolutionist claim creation is "just another science" or that theism is "just another belief grounded in logic and reason" as a criticism of it. I think it says a lot about how ridiculous even the religious think their "beliefs" are, because if they didn't think it was ridiculous, drawing the comparison between what i believe and what you believe wouldn't be a criticism of it.
I appreciate the direct and final answer. If you had answered the question the first time in place of the anti-religious bile, I wouldn't have asked it twice. Not that it is relevant, but from your link,
The theory that say that human has evaluated has started by Darwen and he had no proof then and it was rejected by the scientist then and there is still no proof and it just a theory not based on anything. About theory, any one can make a theory from scientist to a child these days, if your theory doesn't depend on basics and is not at leat logical then ts more like guessing, that's why Darwen theory was rejected then and still rejected and its supporter are only people who do not believe in god or do not want to believe in god.
He certainly contributed a lot. He still wasn't the creator of the scientific method though, which was the claim you made. regardless what my contributions to science have been, though i have worked in many labs and participated in many trials, it isn't going to change the reality of the fact that what you said was factually incorrect, That says more about how many people possess logic and reasoning than anything. I don't need your permission. Feel free to take whatever emotion you want from my words. You are an atheist then, As is anyone who lacks a belief in god. a = without theism = belief in god. there are two types of people. those who believe in god, and atheists.
I said I'm an agnostic, but I'm sure its just a typo on your part. Do you make your own definitions for everything? When you cant use the English dictionary as a starting point of common truth, you really cant have a sane discussion. That said, I'll leave you with this bit of wisdom. They don't teach donkeys to sing for two reasons. It frustrates you and annoys the donkey.
No, no,it goes like this: there are 10 kinds of people, those who know binary notation and those who don't.
You can call yourself whatever you like. But by definition you are an atheist, without (A) a belief in god (theist).
Like I said stOx, you have my permission to believe whatever you like. Jesus loves you all the same. I apologize for being unwilling to discuss philosophy with you, but you lack a very basic command of the English language, it's nuances, and vocabulary required to carry on such a discussion. When you have mastered the understanding of the difference between an agnostic and an atheist, perhaps we can further this conversation. To talk further about religion or philosophy with you without you having that very basic understanding would be like discussing algebra with someone who can't count to 10. @cientificoloco: Wouldn't that be 16 types of people? or just two?
again not being able to refute a single thing i have said, how so very typical. It must be so frustrating for you to feel the need to express an opinion yet lacking the capacity to participate in discussion where actual points are addressed.
A single thing you have written. No more frustrating than teaching a donkey to sing my friend Have you looked up the difference between an Agnostic and an Atheist yet?
And Agnostic? Let me guess? A= Without gnostic = knowledge Wheeee! I get it! Here I got one for you. Shake n' Bake...... hah! what are you going to write to refute that? I just blew your mind.. didn't I!? Shake .... /\/\/\/\/\/ N' Bake ()()()(()()
lol well that certainly sounds like you. But let me ask you again, you appear to have accidentally failed to answer the simple question i asked you, And we all know how willing you usually are to answer questions a = without theism = belief in god is that correct or incorrect?
stOx, you need to re-read the post where I said I won't debate philosophy or religion with you until you can identify the difference between an agnostic and an atheist. Its like having a battle of wits with the unarmed. My recommendation to you, which will also answer many of your questions including this one, is to open this book they call the English dictionary. You can also find a copy of many versions of that book online at www.dictionary.com. Good reading, and happy enlightenment. Shake N' Bake!!!!
I already told you, those who call themselves "agnostic" are "atheists", because "atheist" describes someone who lacks a belief in god. a = without theism = belief in god. sorry if you don't like that FACT, but tough, that's the way it is.