Huge hurdle for atheistic evolution to overcome.
Life was created by an intelligent agent. The ID'ers were correct.
Posted on 04/25/2008 11:30:50 AM PDT by lainie
I took the implication to mean that I intentionally posted this thread to create trouble, like some sort of troll. Not true. This story appears on the front page of my local paper and I thought it was worth sharing. That’s all.
And it does belong in the religion forum. It’s not “news.” The topic “Religion & Science” is for articles concerning “Creation, evolution, ethical issues posed by scientific advances.”
Yep, I feel the same way.
Thank you. Believe me, I’ll never post in this forum again. I can’t believe the ridiculous secret-handshake nonsense that goes on. Talk about close minded individuals.
We know you didn’t.. people just get all hot and bothered over these threads, so no matter where you post it, someone will say something. :->
You know, the religion/science forum topic may be a good idea. I’ll ping a mod on it.
Don’t stop just because some have attitude here. Just roll with the flow.. :->
Ummm, sorry, but no. Even the Judeo-Christian God asserts the existence of other gods/pantheons but limits His followers to one specific God, Him. That does not preclude the existence of other gods.
You might try reading some of Ross' material. He is not a young earth guy and he does make an effort to present the empirical data accurately. Some feel that he sometimes doesn't succeed, but then no one always does.
Huge hurdle for atheistic evolution to overcome.
Life was created by an intelligent agent. The ID'ers were correct.
Not that it's not entertaining, of course.
Additionally, they have a SERIOUS problem... Apparently according to them God was wrong when He revealed the books Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, and the Catholic and Orthodox churches included those books well in advance of Martin Luther.
“straw man”
also: Argumentum ad logicam (argument to logic). This is the fallacy of assuming that something is false simply because a proof or argument that someone has offered for it is invalid; this reasoning is fallacious because there may be another proof or argument that successfully supports the proposition. This fallacy often appears in the context of a straw man argument.
This article is welcome in the FReligion Forum.
You have FReepmail.
No need to be offended.
But I do object to the deliberate attempt to blur the lines between religion and science by doing what can only be described as belief-driven science, which has a particular goal (in this case, support of the bible) rather than true scientific inquiry. The two are antithetical.
That articles ostensibly dealing with science are routinely posted in the Religion Forum doesn't help. We end up with a preponderance of people who operate from belief, rather than the scientific method, contributing scientifically uninformed opinions based largely or solely on religious belief.
I can't help but feel that this is good for neither religion nor science.
It’s clear that you are impressed with your own ideas, but the fact is, some people presented a show, and the paper wrote an article, and it has to do with religious themes and scientific ones at the same time.
So it’s posted in the religion forum under the specific topic designed to carry such articles. Get over it.
whiskey tango foxtrot?
The irony for Stephen J. Gould is that Darwin was inspired by Adam Smith, specifically his The Wealth of Nations, not by Karl Marx.
The irony for Stephen Jay Gould is that Darwin was inspired by Adam Smith, specifically his The Wealth of Nations, not by Karl Marx.
I thought it kind of ironic that in a thread on an article that links an evolutionist to a biblical research group, whe get an article linking an evolutionist to Karl Marx. Are we supposed to connect those dots?
‘You are not even masters of this planet. What about Eurasia and Eastasia? You have not conquered them yet.’
‘Unimportant. We shall conquer them when it suits us. And if we did not, what difference would it make? We can shut them out of existence. Oceania is the world.’
‘But the world itself is only a speck of dust. And man is tiny helpless! How long has he been in existence? For millions of years the earth was uninhabited.’
‘Nonsense. The earth is as old as we are, no older. How could it be older? Nothing exists except through human consciousness.’
‘But the rocks are full of the bones of extinct animals — mammoths and mastodons and enormous reptiles which lived here long before man was ever heard of.’
‘Have you ever seen those bones, Winston? Of course not. Nineteenth-century biologists invented them. Before man there was nothing. After man, if he could come to an end, there would be nothing. Outside man there is nothing.’
‘But the whole universe is outside us. Look at the stars! Some of them are a million light-years away. They are out of our reach for ever.’
‘What are the stars?’ said O’Brien indifferently. ‘They are bits of fire a few kilometres away. We could reach them if we wanted to. Or we could blot them out. The earth is the centre of the universe. The sun and the stars go round it.’
So it’s posted in the religion forum under the specific topic designed to carry such articles. Get over it.
Sorry you were offended by my comments. I certainly would not wish you to stop posting articles.
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.