28 Feb 13
Originally posted by finneganWell, you haven't given any if you know of them. 😏
William Paley remains the classic source of the argument for design. He was well known in the Nineteenth Century and indeed Charles Darwin occupied his rooms at university. There is nothing in Paley's writing that was not considered at the time when alternative views were developed.
[quote]If anything is true about nature, it is that plants and animals se ...[text shortened]... all. That is one of many good scientific reasons that the intelligent design argument fails.
28 Feb 13
Originally posted by RJHindsWhat is wrong with you reading up on the issue and stop spoiling our science forum? You could read a couple of books all the way through and see the logic of it but you have to go beyond just reading the foreward or intro.
Well, you haven't given any if you know of them. 😏
It is clear you don't WANT your mind polluted with real science backed up by centuries of research, you just want to keep going "I'm covering up my ears, I can't hear you, NYA, NYA, NYA", wiggling fingers over your covered ears like a spoiled child. That is what your are, you know, a spoiled child refusing to learn about the real world but instead believing in a religion originally meant for primitives with zero knowledge of the real world and would believe anything anyone makes up. Wake up and smell the coffee, it is the 21st century, much as you hate to admit it, solid science goes on in spite of your disbelief and in spite of the fact that you would shove us back to the 10th century if it was in your power. You are a nihilist, pure and simple.
28 Feb 13
Originally posted by sonhouseAnd as Moses was hauling the tablets down from the mountain, God looked down at his notes and saith "Bugger, I missed one. Oh well, they won't invent internets and such like for a few thousand years so I don't suppose they will need number 11 until then". Unfortunately He was distracted by a rowdy party in the heaven next door and never did pass on the eleventh commandment.
What is wrong with you reading up on the issue and stop spoiling our science forum? You could read a couple of books all the way through and see the logic of it but you have to go beyond just reading the foreward or intro.
It is clear you don't WANT your mind polluted with real science backed up by centuries of research, you just want to keep going "I'm ...[text shortened]... e us back to the 10th century if it was in your power. You are a nihilist, pure and simple.
11. Feed ye not the troll.
01 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseFor one thing, there are not centuries of research on evil-lution. There are only a few decades and most of that was begun with primative equipment. Now research has show that the cell is more than just a simple blob of matter as Darwin thought. The more recently discovered complexity, design, and information available within the cell has greatly increased the doubt in the possiblitiy of Darwin's theory and to some, has collapsed that theory to a myth.
What is wrong with you reading up on the issue and stop spoiling our science forum? You could read a couple of books all the way through and see the logic of it but you have to go beyond just reading the foreward or intro.
It is clear you don't WANT your mind polluted with real science backed up by centuries of research, you just want to keep going "I'm e us back to the 10th century if it was in your power. You are a nihilist, pure and simple.
02 Mar 13
1 edit
As a much more enlightened poster than yourself has already written:
"you just want to keep going "I'm covering up my ears, I can't hear you, NYA, NYA, NYA", wiggling fingers over your covered ears like a spoiled child. That is what your are, you know, a spoiled child refusing to learn about the real world but instead believing in a religion originally meant for primitives with zero knowledge of the real world and would believe anything anyone makes up. Wake up and smell the coffee, it is the 21st century, much as you hate to admit it."