Recent content by AnEmpiricalAgnostic

Biblical Creationism, by definition, involves magic. It is based on supernatural assertions. As such, science can not ever support it. Keep your money... it's a sucker's bet ;)

Welcome to the debate. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but, if you stick around awhile, you'll find this is only the tip of tip of the iceberg.

Really? You've been a member ere for how long? ;)

Heh.. I've never heard it being this overt before ;) I think the usual MO is much more subtle. The two general paths are: 1) start going to social gatherings as early as possible (before you can walk, talk , or understand what's going on), listen to assertions over and over while surrounded...

Man... nothing can mix my emotions quite like this stuff. Laugh or cry... I just can't seem to decide.

This sounds entirely plausible. The question then becomes which conclusions do we lean toward when they are in conflict. Like geocentric vs heliocentric, when deciding between biblical creation and evolution I'll take the side of science. Evidence trumps supernatural assertions. If theism was...

I suspected as much. But then again you probably weren't given much of a choice and, at this point, change would be too difficult and risky for you. I simply enjoy the opportunity to stand in contrast to you for all to see. Giving others the opportunity to view the debate a little more...

Heh... newbie mistake.;)

That would indeed be nice. The first problem is that all that seems to exist are a bunch of different writings by men of antiquity. If I had to point to the first "modern" example it would probably be Zoroastrianism. Everything that followed seem to be variations on a theme. From Zoroastrianism...

Just because a cause is not yet know doesn't mean we should assign a deity to it. Gods are no longer needed to pull the sun across the sky. They no longer need to be appeased to prevent volcanic activity. Simply admitting ignorance and labeling the cause "dark" is far more intellectually honest.

...and here's the standard trump card. The last line of defense of all good faith based belief systems. When all else fails turn to good old threats and intimidation. A nice precursor to another dark age if we don't let calmer heads prevail. I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to...

GAP is one of those hybrid ideas I spoke about earlier. GAP is a good example of how biblical interpretations will be reworked when scientific knowledge can no longer be ignored. It's a transitional form that falls just before theistic evolution. It's a step in the historical process I've been...

While C&E isn't the venue for such things... it did get me thinking. Apparently, it's really really hard to figure out dates and time spans using biblical literature. It's interesting because so much of the creation belief stems from a time span derived from biblical literature. I mean...

Starting with a single unchangeable supernatural explanation and then surrounding it with pseudoscience while throwing out any contradictory evidence is about as far from actual science as it gets. It is a great example of the dishonest lengths supporters of biblical creation will go to try...

Science An inadequate way to evaluate biblical creation vs. evolution. Most of the evidence predates anything written. In your case it's even worse since the only "historical" document used as a basis for your belief has been shown to be at odds with evidence produced by the scientific method...