Spirituality
06 May 05
08 May 05
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettRWillis, as a strong advocate of weak atheism, and as one who invests much effort promoting socialism, which would you say is the greater scourge upon humanity: religion or capitalism?
Your mistake lies in assuming that creationism counts as viable evidence. It is not. Creationism is nothing but a pathetic joke. A rather unfunny one at that. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together came to that conclusion at least 150 ...[text shortened]... is a source for grave concern about the future of the human race.
08 May 05
Originally posted by frogstompi think now might be a nice time to say that i don't actually know what i beleive with crationism and i resent you calling me/inferring that i am an idiot. re-read my posts. my limit of saying that crationism is true is pointing out that evolution does not complement God. indeed, darwins great-grandson, when asked if he was a christain, replied with "how can i be after what my great-grandad said".
Got a question for you:
How do you keep an idiot waiting?
don't call me an idiot, my argument has not been for evolution, but that you should at least look at it.
08 May 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesAny socialist will tell you that capitalism was a necessary development in the economic trajectory of mankind. Religion, on the other hand, may have been an inevitable development, but was not necessary. So the greatest scourge has to go to religion.
RWillis, as a strong advocate of weak atheism, and as one who invests much effort promoting socialism, which would you say is the greater scourge upon humanity: religion or capitalism?
08 May 05
Originally posted by geniusI told you to merely imagine that I had written something to make you angry. But you persisted in forcing me to actually go to the trouble of typing it out.
i think now might be a nice time to say that i don't actually know what i beleive with crationism and i resent you calling me/inferring that i am an idiot. re-read my posts. my limit of saying that crationism is true is pointing out that evolution does not complement God. indeed, darwins great-grandson, when asked if he was a christain, replied with "how ca ...[text shortened]... ll me an idiot, my argument has not been for evolution, but that you should at least look at it.
If you are not a creationist then nothing I said applies to you. But if you are a creationist then you are an idiot. I can make it no simpler than that.
08 May 05
Originally posted by rwingetti would laugh if creationism turned out to be correct...🙂
I told you to merely imagine that I had written something to make you angry. But you persisted in forcing me to actually go to the trouble of typing it out.
If you are not a creationist then nothing I said applies to you. But if you are a creationist then you are an idiot. I can make it no simpler than that.
08 May 05
Originally posted by geniusI'm still trying to figure out why people think crackpot "creation" scienctists are creditable enough to bother with.
i would laugh if creationism turned out to be correct...🙂
Bear in mind, crank scientists know more about the field they pick than the average person, but that doesnt amount to squat if they can't make people that study the field agree.
It's a very simple concept >> If "creationism" means God is as the OT depicts.. you will have an eternity to deal with a God that created suffering.
08 May 05
Originally posted by geniusAn intelligent, 21st century christian would just make peace with Darwin and claim that evolution was god's plan, or that it was the hand of god that set the process in motion. I do not agree with that position, but it is one that deserves a proper rebuttal. Unlike creationism, which is nothing but a laughingstock that should be contemptuously dismissed.
i would laugh if creationism turned out to be correct...🙂
09 May 05
Originally posted by rwingettSo should Naziism been dismissed, yet it wasn't ...
An intelligent, 21st century christian would just make peace with Darwin and claim that evolution was god's plan, or that it was the hand of god that set the process in motion. I do not agree with that position, but it is one that deserves a proper rebuttal. Unlike creationism, which is nothing but a laughingstock that should be contemptuously dismissed.
Ya ya ya you creationists don't want to throw anybody in the oven, just create a crackpot atmosphere.
09 May 05
Originally posted by rwingettthink is, now you've got me really intrested in this. why is creationism seen as so crazy? i mean, yeah some guy creating the world in 6 days is a bit mad...but these people claiming it aren;t stupid. they are credible, or if your gonna be stupidly picky about it "were credible until they started on creationism".
An intelligent, 21st century christian would just make peace with Darwin and claim that evolution was god's plan, or that it was the hand of god that set the process in motion. I do not agree with that position, but it is one that deserves a proper rebuttal. Unlike creationism, which is nothing but a laughingstock that should be contemptuously dismissed.
so from that i figure there is evidence against evolution and for creationism., but there is also evidence for the contrary. hmm. project no.1 for after the exams is looming, methinks...
09 May 05
Originally posted by geniusthere is no scientific evidence for "creationism" , only junk science, period.
think is, now you've got me really intrested in this. why is creationism seen as so crazy? i mean, yeah some guy creating the world in 6 days is a bit mad...but these people claiming it aren;t stupid. they are credible, or if your gonna be stupidly picky about it "were credible until they started on creationism".
so from that i figure there is ev ...[text shortened]... is also evidence for the contrary. hmm. project no.1 for after the exams is looming, methinks...