Do you believe in God?

Do you believe in God?

  • Yes

    Votes: 71 34.6%
  • No

    Votes: 122 59.5%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 12 5.9%

  • Total voters
    205

callitgood

Member
Here again I will point out how you are close minded.
There are many scientists who dissent from Darwins theory, that is fact.
Whether or not the website that cites these scientists are religeous or not does not discredit the scientist, unless of course you have undeniable proof the data is incorrect, then I would agree with you.
So, do you have that undeniable proof, if so please provide it or admit you are opining.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Here again I will point out how you are close minded.
There are many scientists who dissent from Darwins theory, that is fact.
Whether or not the website that cites these scientists are religeous or not does not discredit the scientist, unless of course you have undeniable proof the data is incorrect, then I would agree with you.
So, do you have that undeniable proof, if so please provide it or admit you are opining.
Who said a scientists religious beliefs discredit them?

There are many scientists who believe in Christianity who accept evolution as fact



This is hilarious!
 

callitgood

Member
Who said a scientists religious beliefs discredit them?

There are many scientists who believe in Christianity who accept evolution as fact



This is hilarious!
Who said a scientists religious beliefs discredit them?

There are many scientists who believe in Christianity who accept evolution as fact



This is hilarious!
What's hilarious is the fact you cannot comprehend what you read.
I said don't discredit the scientist because of website that cited them.

This is hilarious, you throw out an insult because you misread my post, now what does that say about you. I told you that you are a hack, now you've proved it.
It humors me that people like you consider themselves intelligent.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
What's hilarious is the fact you cannot comprehend what you read.
I said don't discredit the scientist because of website that cited them.

This is hilarious, you throw out an insult because you misread my post, now what does that say about you. I told you that you are a hack, now you've proved it.
It humors me that people like you consider themselves intelligent.
You don't even know what you're saying at this point..

Trolls live under the bridge, not on marijuana forums. Get back to the bridge, son


:D
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
So lets see that science degree you have? LOL
So you're saying that unless you have an advanced degree in science, you're not qualified to talk about it..

Interesting, I'm willing to bet a person who doesn't know the difference between 'accept' and 'except', cites the Discovery Institute as evidence against evolution, and couldn't answer for some of the easiest questions in biology doesn't have an advanced science degree, but yet, here you are, talking... well, trying to talk about science...
 

CC Dobbs

Well-Known Member
Fuck that lil' Sky Fairy.

Or at least what everybody pretends he/she/it is.

Fuck that lil' pretend Sky-Fairy
 

callitgood

Member
So you're saying that unless you have an advanced degree in science, you're not qualified to talk about it..

Interesting, I'm willing to bet a person who doesn't know the difference between 'accept' and 'except', cites the Discovery Institute as evidence against evolution, and couldn't answer for some of the easiest questions in biology doesn't have an advanced science degree, but yet, here you are, talking... well, trying to talk about science...
Funny thing, Albert Einstein and JFK were both horrific spellers, I'll gladly keep company with that crowd, thank you.

btw, were you a spelling bee champion in grade school padawhatever, is that what made you the brilliant man you are today? LOL



Being bilingual, one could hardly blame Einstein for being a bad speller in English. Yet it wasn’t just in English that Einstein struggled. He also was a pretty bad speller in his native German, and got even worse when he began using English more regularly. Of course, Einstein didn’t make those same errors when it came to writing mathematical equations, a fact that helped to make his name synonymous with genius today.



JFK is a figure that has fascinated the American public for decades, but what many may not know is just how bad of a speller the famous president was. He was outed for his poor spelling by his wife, Jackie, though she was a French literature major in college and would later become a book editor, so she may have been a pretty harsh critic.
 

callitgood

Member
believing in JC is a ploy in order to keep people alive and give them hope when everyone was getting stoned and killed, impoverished 2000+yrs ago. even now, it gives people something to live for and to feel better about themselves even in this day and age. with out hope and religion, this world would crumble in Anarchy as people wouldn't know what to do with themselves. I knew from a very young age that I didn't believe in God. I even went to vacation bible school for years and my daycare was at a church when I was a little tike. I believe in the scientific aspect of things. JC been around for what 2014 years (+/-). ok, who made the damn dinosaurs, who made the planets, who make the fossils that have been carbon dated (PROOF!!!!) from 1.5 MILLION years ago. there is NO proof of JC 1.5 million yrs ago. show me a fossil of his and ill believe.

I now have a 7mo old boy. I WILL have him baptized (as was I and his mom(who believes in god)), and I will let my son make up his own mind about God. its his choice, and no one elses.
I suppose I'm one of the odd ones who believe that god could possibly be extraterrestrials who came here thousands of years ago.
To me, it makes more sense than coming from adam an eve or an ape.

But I'll have to say, I'm touched by your post, the part where you are being unselfish and open minded by letting your son make up his own mind, the world needs more fathers like you.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Funny thing, Albert Einstein and JFK were both horrific spellers, I'll gladly keep company with that crowd, thank you.

btw, were you a spelling bee champion in grade school padawhatever, is that what made you the brilliant man you are today? LOL

Being bilingual, one could hardly blame Einstein for being a bad speller in English. Yet it wasn’t just in English that Einstein struggled. He also was a pretty bad speller in his native German, and got even worse when he began using English more regularly. Of course, Einstein didn’t make those same errors when it came to writing mathematical equations, a fact that helped to make his name synonymous with genius today.

JFK is a figure that has fascinated the American public for decades, but what many may not know is just how bad of a speller the famous president was. He was outed for his poor spelling by his wife, Jackie, though she was a French literature major in college and would later become a book editor, so she may have been a pretty harsh critic.
Why are you discussing science when you don't have an advanced science degree?
 

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Here again I will point out how you are close minded.
There are many scientists who dissent from Darwins theory, that is fact.
Whether or not the website that cites these scientists are religeous or not does not discredit the scientist, unless of course you have undeniable proof the data is incorrect, then I would agree with you.
So, do you have that undeniable proof, if so please provide it or admit you are opining.
You are consistently using common logical fallacies, which may explain the errors in your thinking process. I will create a thread on this topic because they are so pervasive, but I suggest you become familiar with them before that - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
I suggest starting with the informal fallacies. This entire subject that there are scientists that cannot understand evolution is a red herring, meaning that it is A point that is serving to distract from THE point, which is the fact of evolution by natural selection. If you look around, you will be able to find dissenters from every theory, or every fact. The dissension means nothing to these theories and facts, they have not been overturned and the overwhelming majority of scientists in their respective fields still go on to employ them to describe reality. The very fact that you need to use numbers like 800 to support your position shows that you have already lost, as our position has so much backing that we have no need to speak of numbers. The fact is that evolutionary theory could possibly be overturned and falsified in many different ways, it is just that not a single person has ever come close to doing this. Not even the ones of which you speak.

But, if you insist, let's go through the exercise. We've already begun, as you've offered up material which I've picked apart for you (you're welcome) to show how science was not applied in order to reach it's major claims, and I've showed exactly where their misinformation lay, and I corrected its deception. Now another of your fallacies needs addressing, The Burden of Proof - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
It is up to the one making the positive claim to provide proof for their position, it is not up to their audience to disprove them. We can easily see why this is so: their are SO many whacky claims in the world that it would be a full time job for anyone to attempt to disprove them all. But with each party providing proof of their own claims for others, it is possible for every claim to be supported or not through such proof. I assume (because I could not open your file) you recently threw a list of 800 scientists that dissent from EBNS, and stated that they are not necessarily creationists or christians, nor display any bias or agenda toward the evidence for evolution.
Why don't you go through that list, choose the scientists that you verify as credible, and explain why you agree with them about their reasons for not understanding EBNS. We can then go on a case by case basis and see if they are justified in their dissent. I’ve showed how each of those scientists in your video were not justified in their dissent, and I showed exactly where and how they were wrong. I then went on to post the correct answers. I look forward to the opportunity to look over the scientists and their reasons you post from that (or any) list, unless you won’t do this and possibly be accused of being lazy, or even worse, close-minded…
 

GreenLogician

Well-Known Member
Here again I will point out how you are close minded.
There are many scientists who dissent from Darwins theory, that is fact.
Whether or not the website that cites these scientists are religeous or not does not discredit the scientist, unless of course you have undeniable proof the data is incorrect, then I would agree with you.
So, do you have that undeniable proof, if so please provide it or admit you are opining.
Firstly, most scientists on that infamous list are not in biology or evolution-related fields. There are a lot of 'electrical engineer's and 'dental technician's and the like.
Secondly, the statement they signed is phrased such that you can agree with it even if you utterly accept evolution. As long as you think we should keep an eye out for mechanisms other than natural selection, you'd sign it. And because of this,
Thirdly, they were disingenuously asked to sign, and many scientists who found out that what they signed was anti-evolution, requested to have their names removed, again and again - but their names were kept on the list.

Here's someone who goes through the list and emails those from fields actually related to evolution. Only a couple actually reject evolution.
p.s. The maker of this video was a Christian, but a biology major who had no patience for creationist lies giving Christianity a bad name.
 

Bubblegum31

Well-Known Member
There are people who feel the same way about your beliefs as you do about atheists, so how do you know which religion is right without any evidence?

My religion has its evidence

I could give this to you if you have time to watch 3 hours lecture which I doubt you will!
 
Top