Posted on 12/01/2008 2:33:55 PM PST by Fichori
No, but that fact ought to give self-righteous vegans pause for thought, at least.
If you believed that, you would be given pause by the long list of hardcore evolutionists who have boosted eugenics. But you aren't, so...
On the contrary, sir.
I am a sceptic. Full stop.
Try to pay attention, as I said, I’ve said many times, including to you.
Now go lay down and rest it off or something.
I've been paying attentiion. You've never said exactly what it is you want taught or how you want the legislation written to enforce it, and you're trying to dismiss the question now because you don't want to answer it.
I’ve said more than once. And on at least one thread you were on.
[[Indeed, every astronomy book is, as you say, careful to point out that ‘the earth goes around the sun’ can never be proven.]]
There’s no biolgical proof that abstaining from food causes death- Cells aparently survive just fine without energy input because ‘there’s no proofs in science’ - Dying cells right before our eyes is just a hypothesis- can’t be proven- (Unless you count actual eyewitness as proof- but hten again- there’s nothign proving eyewitnesses exist- so there again- nothign in science can be proven- unless you set out a video tape recorder to record it- but then again, video tapes don’t exist either- so there again, no proofs i nscience- Sheesh- science is doomed.
Allmen, I think you don’t exist- therefore you don’t, and hterefore your statements are irrelevent, because there’s no scientific proof that you ever asked them or made hte claims in the first place. Nihilism- nothign exists- we’re all just figments of our own imaginations (which incidently must not exist either), so why carry on?
Got a link?
No, but there is a kindred soul of yours here on FR, a science-talking atheist evolutionist who says the sun's "actual" position leads its "apparent" position in the sky by 2.1 degrees--in other words--that the sun goes around the earth. (Do you remember him, Fichori?) This particular evolutionist believes, as you do, that nothing in science can be proven.
And yes, it is still called the Heliocentric Theory, not the Heliocentric Truth,
So then, according to you, it is not true that the earth goes around the sun.
So then, in your perverse view, the usual examples of design and intelligible order in nature do not in any way point to a designing mind, but gambling and random events do.
Say what? You cannot answer the question so you try to put words in my mouth?
I DO think that intelligible order in nature speaks to the majesty of our Lord God. I just don’t buy into the notion of those that think that because we observe that mutations happen randomly (like a dice roll) that it somehow means PERVERSLY (because you seem to like the word) that God is not in control of random events.
So I ask you again...
Is gambling non-teleological or do you think God is in control of who wins and who loses?
You were saying something about Catholic schools not teaching intelligent design, and when challenged on that, you opted for changing the topic to questions about gambling. So there's no real need to answer such questions.
I DO think that intelligible order in nature speaks to the majesty of our Lord God.
But you are careful to avoid saying that it points to the designing mind of God. And yet we are supposed to believe that gambling points to a designing mind.
Is gambling non-teleological or do you think God is in control of who wins and who loses?
You were saying something about Catholic schools. According to Aquinas chance events are not considered to be designed. That puts your evolutionary theology at odds--in toto caelo--with the thomistic theory of intelligent design. As if anyone really needed further proofs that evolutionism is incompatible with Catholic natural theology. But thanks for providing more anyway.
You're probably going to pretend to miss the point again and ask me a lot of dumb questions about gambling and theology. But if you don't like the Thomist take on it, you can write to the Vatican and urge them to chuck Aquinas and adopt atheism, deism, Calvinism, or whatever it is that your selling. You can even preface the letter with a little lecture about how 'nothing in science is ever proven' and then proceed to prove your points.
B.S.. Kids in Catholic school learn evolution and that God created everything. They do not learn “intelligent design” as put forth and popularized by the Discovery Institute.
Evolution is completely compatible with Catholic natural theology. What is “evolutionism”, a strawman you wish to knock over perchance?
But don’t take my word for it...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/
“This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.” Pope Benedict XVI
That is what I learned in Catholic school 50 years ago. I imagine it is no different today.
There is no conflict in my mind between evolution and creation. I accept in both.
Just go back and look at all the evo threads you’ve been on.
That has to be the grandaddy of all evasion tactics.
it depends on what the definition of is, is -is infact the grandaddy of all evasion techniques
It doesn't seem like it should have to be this hard to get someone to say exactly what it is they want.
No, I’m just not interested in your dead ends today.
“(Do you remember him, Fichori?)” [excerpt]LoL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.