***HAPPY NEW YEAR***

Originally posted by Nicksten
No disrespect, but I do not have friends that are evolutionists or satanists as they could be a stumble block for me and my family.

Edit: I want to point out that I am not done fighting with Dasa yet...

No disrespect from me either, but if you don't have evolutionst friends to discuss matters with, and I have creationsist friends that I can discuss matters with respect and mutual benefit, then I humbly and honestly can say that I know more about the 'enemy philosophy' than you do. I feel myself more openminded than the fundamentalistic creationists on this forum are. 'Thinking outside the box' for them means only thinking 'within their narrow box'.

Dasa never gives respect. He is open prey.

Originally posted by Nicksten
[b]Just because you happen to believe in Christianity is no reason for me to give it special treatment.

What about respect?
You have no respect to any theist and if I can quickly think of one to mention is by referring to God as "it". A bit lame for someone that can sometimes keep nagging to other people about using the right words/terms. It a blata ...[text shortened]... cial treatments from any side, but what we (me included) have failed to do is keeping respect.[/b]

I think that religions are a major cause of harm and that to believe in a god shows a dangerous lack of reason.

I may or may not respect a particular theist, but I will be damned if I am going to show respect for religion.

I am certainly not going to show respect for the imaginary boogie men that theists worship.

If you find my lack of belief, or attacks on your religion insulting... tough.

Plus, given that I have said many times that if the god of the bible exists then it is probably the most evil and
despicable being to have ever existed you probably don't want to get too hung up on the fact that I sometimes
refer to god as it.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
I try to give everyone respect who gives me respect. Whenever someone disrespect me, like calling me ignorant for not blindly believe in the religious creational theories (or worse), then he gives me the right to give him the same kind of disrespect.

There shouldn't be disrespect between the two theories, creation and evolution, because one is religiou ...[text shortened]... ct of the two theories, having a good time. We don't give eachother disrespect, why should we?

I am sorry to bust in on your message of peace and understanding but there is definitely reason
for disrespect between evolution and creationism.

Creationism is for starters NOT a theory, it doesn't even pass the test for a scientific hypothesis.

Evolution is backed up by more evidence than almost any other theory in history, it is not just the
best description of how the diversity of life developed on earth but the ONLY description of how the
diversity of life came to be.

Creationism, on the other hand is not just wrong but useless. It has precisely zero predictive power
and zero supporting evidence.

So I am sorry but there is ample reason for disrespect for creationism.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I think that religions are a major cause of harm and that to believe in a god shows a dangerous lack of reason.

I may or may not respect a particular theist, but I will be damned if I am going to show respect for religion.

I am certainly not going to show respect for the imaginary boogie men that theists worship.

If you find my lack of belief, o ...[text shortened]... d you probably don't want to get too hung up on the fact that I sometimes
refer to god as it.

I respect your right to believe what you want to believe. However, I
want to make it clear to you that those of us who believe in the God
of the Holy Bible and creation are not intellectual morons any more
than you are. You see overwhelming evidence for evolution and that
God does not exist. For those of us who believe in God and creation
we see just the opposite. You think I am wrong and I think you are
wrong. Neither one of us have the proof that the other will accept,
so this debate appears futile and not worthy to continue with. So
why don't we just end it with respect for the right of the other to
believe as he or she wishes and discontinue our name calling, which
I have found does not help my cause at all. May we all have a happy
new year.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I respect your right to believe what you want to believe. However, I
want to make it clear to you that those of us who believe in the God
of the Holy Bible and creation are not intellectual morans any more
than you are. You see overwhelming evidence for evolution and that
God does not exist. For those of us who believe in God and creation
we see jus calling, which
I have found does not help my cause at all. May we all have a happy
new year.

he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways! Its morons, not morans. The Moran is a chess defence played against
the queen pawn, just saying.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways! Its morons, not morans. The Moran is a chess defence played against
the queen pawn, just saying.

Good job catching that. That was just a test. You passed. 😀

Originally posted by RJHinds
Good job catching that. That was just a test. You passed. 😀

If i pass your other tests do i get to go to heaven?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
If i pass your other tests do i get to go to heaven?

Sure enough. You want have to just stay hear on the earth like the
Watchtower Society says you must. There are a lot more rooms in heaven
than they realize.
😉

Originally posted by RJHinds
Sure enough. You want have to just stay hear on the earth like the
Watchtower Society says you must. There are a lot more rooms in heaven
than they realize.
😉

yes, i want to live on a paradise earth, this is our beautiful message, the earth will
become a paradise, ....ride on.....brutha.....ride on.....

Originally posted by RJHinds
I respect your right to believe what you want to believe. However, I
want to make it clear to you that those of us who believe in the God
of the Holy Bible and creation are not intellectual morons any more
than you are. You see overwhelming evidence for evolution and that
God does not exist. For those of us who believe in God and creation
we see jus ...[text shortened]... calling, which
I have found does not help my cause at all. May we all have a happy
new year.

"I respect your right to believe what you want to believe."

Well you blatantly don't because you perpetually lie about what I believe and
assert I believe things I don't simply to make your argument easier.

You have precisely zero respect for my position on this subject and you know it.

I don't claim everyone who believes in god is a moron (although I would happily
claim you are) I claim that the belief itself is moronic.
Really smart people can and indeed do think and do really stupid things on occasion.
And while I may respect them, I don't have to and wont respect anything they do
that's stupid.

You still fail to comprehend that I DON'T HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING to not believe in
god. Not believing in things until there is evidence FOR their existence is the default
position from which you move IF evidence arises that justifies such a move.

No atheist I know claims to KNOW that there is no god, and in general most wont even
claim to believe that there is no god (although there may well be specific god concepts
for which some would be happy to believe don't exist if we could be bothered) we simply
don't believe in god.

And I will never respect someone's decision to believe anything on faith.
That's the point.

Whether I can respect a person or not is complicated and based on many things, but I
will never respect religious faith.

Why would I respect that which I rail against?
Why would I look at all the evidence of the dangers of blind faith and the damage it causes
and respect someone for basing their world view on it?

Reason and logic, and scientific skepticism will never be at peace with blind faith and irrationality
and it would be hypocritical in the extreme for anyone claiming to be rational or a skeptic to
'respect' the abandonment of rationality for blind faith.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways! Its morons, not morans. The Moran is a chess defence played against
the queen pawn, just saying.

"he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways!"

Really, please elaborate on what I do or do not understand about science.

I would remind you that if you are talking about belief in god my stated position is one
of absence of belief, from which I need clear evidence to move from.
So stating that evidence can be interpreted different ways would imply that it isn't clear,
which backs my position.

So do explain how your unclear evidence means anything.

Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]"he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways!"

Really, please elaborate on what I do or do not understand about science.

I would remind you that if you are talking about belief in god my stated position is one
of absence of belief, from which I need clear evidence to move from. ...[text shortened]... t clear,
which backs my position.

So do explain how your unclear evidence means anything.[/b]

yawn, i never said that you do not understand anything about science, are you have
a little moment there? a bad hairdo day? reading comprehension at an all time
low? what i stated is and i shall repeat it , for sometimes it takes one or two passes
to sink in,

the very same scientific data can be interpreted in different ways, and i shall give
the example of the fossil record, which does not demonstrate a gradual transition
from one species to another, thus to account for this anomaly, the theory of
punctuated equilibrium was invented, Now a creationist may look at this very same
data and claim that certain species appear without precedent, vertebrates for
example, and draws inferences about his God, a materialist on the other hand, looks
at the very same data and draws inferences about his theories, thus different
interpretations of the same data are being formed.

what this means with respect to your understanding or clarity of thought i cannot
say, indeed, its not about you, why you should presume to make it about you i can
only assigning to your gargantuan megalomania, you total atheist (spit ding!)

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yawn, i never said that you do not understand anything about science, are you have
a little moment there? a bad hairdo day? reading comprehension at an all time
low? what i stated is and i shall repeat it , for sometimes it takes one or two passes
to sink in,

the very same scientific data can be interpreted in different ways, and i shall g ...[text shortened]... about you i can
only assigning to your gargantuan megalomania, you total atheist (spit ding!)

I said "please elaborate on what I do or do not understand about science."
This doesn't imply that you claimed I know nothing about science.

You said "he has yet to understand that the very same scientific data can be interpreted in
different ways!"

Which implies i don't understand things about science and evidentiary interpretation which
prompted my response.

You are the one with the reading comprehension failure.


As for the meat...

You are talking bull about evolution which was not the topic at hand, and I am not going to debate it
here because it's not relevant to this discussion.
I would be an atheist even if evolution hadn't been discovered because it isn't why I don't believe in
a god or gods.
I don't believe in a god because there is no evidence that one exists, at all.

What we do or do not understand about the way the universe works is irrelevant to that.

And it was 'about me' because you posted "HE has yet to understand...." in response to a post talking to me.
you were talking about me and I responded. This isn't megalomania it's how conversations work.

Would you like to revise your total failure of a post?

QUOTE
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yawn, i never said that you do not understand anything about science, are you have
a little moment there? a bad hairdo day? reading comprehension at an all time
low? what i stated is and i shall repeat it , for sometimes it takes one or two passes
to sink in,

the very same scientific data can be interpreted in different ways, and i shall give
the example of the fossil record, which does not demonstrate a gradual transition
from one species to another, thus to account for this anomaly, the theory of
punctuated equilibrium was invented, Now a creationist may look at this very same
data and claim that certain species appear without precedent, vertebrates for
example, and draws inferences about his God, a materialist on the other hand, looks
at the very same data and draws inferences about his theories, thus different
interpretations of the same data are being formed.

what this means with respect to your understanding or clarity of thought i cannot
say, indeed, its not about you, why you should presume to make it about you i can
only assigning to your gargantuan megalomania, you total atheist (spit ding!)

Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]"I respect your right to believe what you want to believe."

Well you blatantly don't because you perpetually lie about what I believe and
assert I believe things I don't simply to make your argument easier.

You have precisely zero respect for my position on this subject and you know it.

I don't claim everyone who believes in god ...[text shortened]... tional or a skeptic to
'respect' the abandonment of rationality for blind faith.[/b]

I am sorry you still feel that way. By the way, you are not really an atheist
unless you believe, without doubt, that the God of the Holy Bible does not
exist. As an atheist you are free to believe in any other god or gods you
choose. That is my definition of an atheist. So I consider you an agnostic
who believes is the god of science and reason, which you have made up to
suit your need. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am sorry you still feel that way. By the way, you are not really an atheist
unless you believe, without doubt, that the God of the Holy Bible does not
exist. As an atheist you are free to believe in any other god or gods you
choose. That is my definition of an atheist. So I consider you an agnostic
who believes is the god of science and reason, which you have made up to
suit your need. 😏

Then you are redefining words to mean something different from what everyone else
uses them and are thus talking gibberish.

Atheist is the label for someone who doesn't believe in a god or gods.
This is what someone means if they call themselves an atheist.
This is what I mean when I call myself an atheist.

Agnostic is the label for someone who doesn't know if a god exists or not.
This is what someone means if they call themselves an agnostic.
This is what I mean when I call myself an agnostic.

Telling me that those labels mean I believe something else is pointless and stupid.
I believe what I say I believe and don't believe what I say I don't believe and Agnostic
and Atheist are the labels that describe my religious stance.

Also Science is not, and has no, god. Science is a process, and is not a being or deity.
Saying that there is a 'god of science' is idiotic and wrong.

Science doesn't conform to any definition of religion and I don't believe in it I apply it.
I don't worship anything or anyone.
I have no faith, nor want any.

You can't change my position by altering the meaning of the labels that apply,
You can't argue against or defeat my position by altering the meaning of the labels that apply
or by making up strawman fallacies or trying to make out that science is or has a god or is a religion.
All you do by this is render your own pronouncements gibberish by refusing to use the same
meaning as everyone else.

What you consider is irrelevant and wrong.

Use the words in their correct meaning or be relegated to the court jester spouting meaningless
gibberish for the amusement of the crowd.