[Conservative Texan Mom]

For something that almost nobody on these threads believes, It's brought up pretty much "every time" we start a new thread. If no one believes it, then what purpose does it serve other than to denigrate the intelligence of those who believe in a Creator, Designer, Maker, Source of intelligence, or so on?

With the exception of a few, I haven't read many posts that advocate replacing HARD FACTS with superstition.


(Why? Should I also debate the germ theory of disease philosophically rather than scientifically? How about the theory of relativity? How about the theory of gravity? How about the historical theories that hold that the Nazis tried to exterminate Europe's Jews? In philosophy, there is no "wrong" answer. In science, there is.)

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I did not suggest debating germ theory of disease, or the theory of gravity, or any other scientific theory philosophically. If someone wished to debate those theories they should do so following the epistemology of science, not philosophy. To apply an inappropriate epistemology in defense of either would be "stupid". Since, I believe that evolution does occur, I'm not even suggesting that we debate that. I am asking you to defend your philosophical belief that life could not have been designed, and that those of us who think it could have been are a bunch of superstitious toilet bowel cleaners.

If I am wrong, and this is not your position, then I recant.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Time to clean a toilet bowel placemarker

[balrog666]

With the exception of a few, I haven't read many posts that advocate replacing HARD FACTS with superstition.

How 'bout simply replacing belief in superstition with uncertainty, especially in the absence of any contrary facts? Is that too big a leap for you?

[orionblamblam]

> If no one believes it, then what purpose does it serve other than to denigrate the intelligence of those who believe in a Creator, Designer, Maker, Source of intelligence, or so on?

It's brought up by True Believers In YEC as a strawman arguement agaisn those of us who understand the facts regarding evolution. *WHERE* do you see anyone suggesting that belief in some god or other is automatically stupid? What you see is people who believe that replacing the understood with Mystery is stupid. What would you say to someone who didn't understand the internal combustion engine and who therefore concludes that magical elves make the cars go?

> I am asking you to defend your philosophical belief that life could not have been designed

Another strawman. Please debate honestly, please.