[asformeandformyhouse]

Speaking for myself, I cannot possibly be wrong concerning God's existence, since I don't have an opinion on it.

Thanks for making my point again. It takes religion to say "There is a God", just as it takes religion to say "There is no God". Religion is not dependant on a diety. Most people don't understand this simple point. Yet the majority of evolutionists react to refuted arguments with the same 'religious condemnation' as does the creationist.

It's actually quite funny.

[Right Wing Professor]

Thanks for making my point again.

I have no idea what you think your point is. You haven't answered my question; when you say 'evolutionary scientists' are dogmatic about the existence of a God, are you referring to the evolutionary scientists who are Christians, the ones who are atheists, or the ones who are agnostics? And, with reference to the last, how can someone who says he does not know whether or not God exists be called dogmatic on the subject?

And finally, since you have yet again failed to provide a specific example of a piece of evidence for a deity, can I take it that you have withdrawn your claim that such evidence exists?

[whattajoke]

Religion is not dependant on a diety [sic].

Creationists and religionists keep telling us this, but we here at Darwin Central continue to pay our taxes. Why is that?
It's easy to state that "religion is everywhere," as it makes your worldview more relevant. But I can assure you, religion (as defined by the majority of the world) plays no part in my life. Morals? yes. Appeals to the supernatural? No.

If you mean to include my rabid fanaticism for Philadelphia sports teams under the "religion" umbrella well, then... ya caught me.