Posted on 02/03/2008 12:58:53 PM PST by KayEyeDoubleDee
...For most of my life, I believed the answers to these questions were fairly straightforward. Everything that exists is created by a Loving God. That includes rocks, trees, animals, people, really everything. All along I had been well aware that other people, very smart people, believe otherwise. Rather than God's handiwork, they see the universe as the product of random particle collisions and chemical reactions. And rather than regard humankind as carrying the spark of the divine, they believe we are nothing more than mud animated by lightning...
Trailer requires Shockwave Flash:
Super TrailerMore trailers here:
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playgroundvideo3.swf
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/video.phpIMDB page:
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091617/
(Excerpt) Read more at expelledthemovie.com ...
By discussion of origins from “both sides,” I assume you mean Darwin and Ron Hubbard.
You've just reaffirmed that you are a fool.
Stein, an actor, writer and economist, has contributed $2,000 to Franken’s Minnesota Senate campaign. The two men have known each other for about 30 years.
“I’m struck by what an incredibly capable, hard-working guy he is,” Stein told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Thursday. “He’s a very smart liberal, he’s a thoroughgoing patriot, and I would feel better with him in the Senate.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303383,00.html
That is called Hinduism Mr. ignorance.
Taking God at his word does not contain him.
He went to great lengths in his word to tell us that evolution didn’t happen. (more tham 100 places)
Given the time, no... ;)
That’s all right. Some biologists figured it out right away. No one from the ID camp, however.
And yet it does happen, even as we speak.
We keep hearing that song. If it's true, it ought to be easy enough to back it up.
You can start with Newton, who believed in creation, and go through all the rest of the great scientists of the centuries who were deeply religious men and believed that God did it.
Let's see the evidence to back that up.
I am a fool. I am ignorant. But I know a DAMN sight more than you. That makes you a fool’s fool and ignorant even of your own ignorance.
Ben Stein IS an Al Frankin supporter.
Nothing I said was Hinduism, it was well in line with the theology of Thomas Aquinas and Pope John Paul II.
But apparently you think you can read the Bible better than Pope John Paul II who saw no conflict between evolution and faith; and better than Thomas Aquinas who saw no conflict between Science and faith.
I guess when ignorance and hatred is all you have to back up your beliefs it spills over into calling those you disagree with ignorant and fools. This is especially idiotic when what I said was such an easily confirmed fact (Al Frankin supporter Ben Stein).
You are right, js1138. There is so much ridiculusness coming from creationists, it’s not only hard to categorize their nuttiness, but also a waste of time. They just form this blurr of burning stupidity.
............................crickets.................
I don’t want to know why you looked up that information.
Your positions mis-represent themselves, as well documented by others. Like I said, you are a geocentrist. That, alone, speaks volumes to your credibility.
What does naturalism explain? And what does naturalism produce that can’t be produced by science with a different philosophical basis?
The scientific method is a method for the logical, rational study of the world. How does the philosophical basis for science affect the use of that method?
You keep ignoring the fact that for hundreds of years, science did have a different philosophical basis and looking back, it was the time of the greatest advances scientifically, known to man. I just don’t see as many scientists of that caliber these days.
Mr. Coffee has entered the room, however.
:-) You assume wrong, but I think you know what I mean. Have a good day.
ID is a philosophical idea.
I am glad there are scientists who are willing to say so. I think it is wrong if others try to shut them up.
They are free to think and say what they wish. But pushing ID as science clearly indicates they cannot perform their function as scientists. There is nothing scientific about it. No testable hypothesis. The best they can do is look at 'gaps' in science and say 'goddidit' rather than actually doing research. Right now, there is no research being conducted in ID because it is not researchable.
Yeah, the more familiar you are with the particular code in question, the quicker a resolution.
Everything that science has produced. Period.
Name an exception. Name something produced by science using anything other than the assumption that phenomena are regular and lawful over time.
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.