The closing of the political threads is really becoming annoying

[bumblebee]

Prove he doesnt exist.

 

[Bannister]

Prove he doesnt exist.

Easy, why would God make a Barbelith?

 

[bumblebee]

Easy, why would God make a Barbelith?

He wants to really,REALLY test our patience.

 

[Bannister]

He wants to really,REALLY test our patience.

I thought you were going to say "God works in mysterious ways."

 

[monkeydad16]

But that's just it. Creationism is in the realm of fairies and gnomes. You can insist otherwise as loudly and often as you want but at the end of the day there's not even the first piece of evidence that God exists at all, let alone created the universe a few thousand years ago.

Our democratic nature and fierce anti-intellectualism has led to a cultural belief that all ideas are equal. But that's just not true, I'm sorry. The idea that triangles have four sides does not have merit. The idea that the Earth is flat does not need to be treated with respect.

But this all depends on your point of view. Creationists see design, therefore we assume there must be a designer. Evolutionists see order from chaos. Your ideas seem wacky to me, my ideas seem wacky to you. But when you relegate creationists to being anti-intellectual, you put those who hold to those views on the defense.

 

[RJMacReady16]

Again, I'll refer to the genius of Gary Larson:

 

[bumblebee]

I thought you were going to say "God works in mysterious ways."

I was at first actually gonna say that.

 

[barbelith]

And in 100 years there will be a new form of pseudo-science floating around which will cause people to regard today's evolution as the flat earth theory.

The flat earth was never put forward as a scientific theory. Once again it seems we're coming up against a common misunderstanding. The word "theory" does not mean the same thing in science as it does in daily life. Evolution is not a hypothesis.

Prove he doesnt exist.

Science doesn't work that way.
https://juanfont.eu/logica.html

But this all depends on your point of view.

No. It depends on whether one chooses to accept facts or put religious doctrine first. There is a reason the vast majority of religious people have no problem integrating the theory of evolution by natural selection into their world view. ID is a uniquely American fundamentalist tenet. It's a bill of goods designed as a wedge issue to get Christianity in schools. It has nothing whatsoever to do with science or observable evidence or testable hypotheses.

If you guys want to have a Creationist thread we could start one, but maybe this isn't the place.

 

[Bannister]

If you guys want to have a Creationist thread we could start one, but maybe this isn't the place.

I am sure that would go over well.

 

[Spartan Rex]

Again, I'll refer to the genius of Gary Larson:

Not canon scripturally speaking but it would explain alot.

 

[monkeydad16]

The flat earth was never put forward as a scientific theory. Once again it seems we're coming up against a common misunderstanding. The word "theory" does not mean the same thing in science as it does in daily life. Evolution is not a hypothesis.



Science doesn't work that way.
https://juanfont.eu/logica.html



No. It depends on whether one chooses to accept facts or put religious doctrine first. There is a reason the vast majority of religious people have no problem integrating the theory of evolution by natural selection into their world view. ID is a uniquely American fundamentalist tenet. It's a bill of goods designed as a wedge issue to get Christianity in schools. It has nothing whatsoever to do with science or observable evidence or testable hypotheses.

If you guys want to have a Creationist thread we could start one, but maybe this isn't the place.

No, there are no facts to support evolution. What you call microevolution, referred to as adaptation, mutation, minor variations, still remains the only form to be observed. The other five forms were and still are theories and have never been observed. And, the vast majority of religious people do not believe in evolution:
https://www.christianpost.com/artic...ieve-in-god-nearly-half-rejects-evolution.htm

 

[barbelith]

No, there are no facts to support evolution.

Your layman's opinion is contradicted by every relevant branch of science. There's no point in us continuing a conversation if you lack the basic grounding to have one.

Your link describes Americans and thus does not contradict what I wrote.

 

[barbelith]

Again, I'll refer to the genius of Gary Larson:

You've really got the hang of that "no personal attacks" rule, don't you?

 

[monkeydad16]

Your layman's opinion is contradicted by every relevant branch of science. There's no point in us continuing a conversation if you lack the basic grounding to have one.

And some said you were not offensive..

 

[barbelith]

And some said you were not offensive.

There's no point in discussing quantum physics with someone who denies the overwhelming proof atoms exist. There's really no way around that, and if you want to get offended then go right ahead.

 

[RJMacReady16]

You've really got the hang of that "no personal attacks" rule, don't you?

Your layman's opinion is contradicted by every relevant branch of science. There's no point in us continuing a conversation if you lack the basic grounding to have one.

Trust me. You don't want me digging any further back.

 

[barbelith]

Trust me. You don't want me digging any further back.

You seem to be confused about what actually constitutes an attack. His opinion by definition is a layman's opinion (indeed contradicted by the consensus of experts in their fields). Holding that opinion demonstrates a lack of basic grounding in the subject and there really is no point in having a conversation with someone like that. That's an observation; you'll note I didn't include a judgment call.

 

[RJMacReady16]

You seem to be confused about what actually constitutes an attack. His opinion by definition is a layman's opinion (indeed contradicted by the consensus of experts in their fields). Holding that opinion demonstrates a lack of basic grounding in the subject and there really is no point in having a conversation with someone like that. That's an observation; you'll note I didn't include a judgment call.

Just in case you missed it:

Trust me. You don't want me digging any further back.

 

[barbelith]

Just in case you missed it:

I didn't miss anything. You quoted something that wasn't a personal attack. If you want an exercise in mudslinging I'm sure Dave can just reopen your social group.

 

[RJMacReady16]

I didn't miss anything. You quoted something that wasn't a personal attack. If you want an exercise in mudslinging I'm sure Dave can just reopen your social group.

Don't call Dave in. You're a big boy.

You've already had several slams in this thread, so be cautious of where you throw your stones.

Try to stay focused. Take more time on your posts if you need to.