Search results

This is one example. It's an example where the two collide, not where they are proven to be intertwined. If anything this example exemplifies racism and not sexism.

It's relevant because of what news headlines are feeding you? If you'd have read my post, you'd have seen that: 1. In-species transitional fossils are largely meaningless, as evolution doesn't predict them. (except in special cases where a species is terminated) 2. If you would look at the...

Yes, kinda. It's possible to be racist without favoring your own race. Sexism: Women shouldn't be allowed to become exposed to X. Racism: African americans are all X. Just because the two happened at the same time doesn't make them intertwined. You still aren't making much sense, so another...

How many times do we have to explain this to you guys? "Species" is arbitrary and has limited usefulness. Since fossils are rare and constitute a snapshot in time, we can group them into categories based on their characteristics. Humans have also only been sufficiently intelligent for a snapshot...

That's not racism. Racism is discrimination based on one's race, not focus on the human race in general.

I'll take a secular morality over a dogmatic, "infallible", and outdated religious one any day.

Well, i don't think the example in the OP was an attempt to disprove God. It was exposing how ridiculous it is...

Please, for your own good, stop posting topics.

I'm not sure what good that would do. I know plenty about creationist beliefs. Most of the questions I would ask couldn't be answered honestly (or couldn't be answered) unless they are bringing some new evidence forward, (or anything new) in which case I would be interested to see what they have.

I always acknowledge that I could be wrong, it's always possible that there is something that I don't know. I just don't find the label "agnostic" useful because most circumspect people are agnostic about everything in their lives.

:doh:

No. First off, the confusion you're having is because of the different classifications of atheism. There are different systems of classification, and they don't always match up. "Atheist" pretty much always means one that doesn't believe in God. But agnostic changes. Under some definitions, you...

You mean prove beyond a reasonable doubt? Anyway, I have absolutely none. (assuming you meant positive evidence?) Although on the other hand, I don't need any. You should know that. Given the assumptions imbedded in this question, you need to read the following: Philosophic burden of proof -...

You don't know what appeal to authority is do you? The Argument from Authority is when you point to someone with authority in on subject matter and claim that that particular figure's opinion has a greater truth value than your opponent's because of their qualifications. It has nothing to do...

Yeah. Common sense is regular reasoning and understanding which is universal enough to become "common". That doesn't mean it can't be wrong. If your statement's only qualifying attribute is "common sense" than it's far from substantiated. Not to mention that it's a subjective, narrowly useful term.

My two cents: The majority of self described atheists describe their belief as something like: "We don't have enough evidence to conclude that there is a God." The reasoning is as follows: When you hear a claim that hasn't met it's burden of proof, you disbelieve it and don't assimilate it...

Predictions about the contents of a future event are hardly meant to be objective. Given the overwhelming record creationist's lack of ability to give good answers to questions regarding their beliefs, I think it's a pretty safe bet. (unless they are here to unveil some new evidence, or the...

Yes... Their job is to investigate reality, so they'll likely be the ones to find out. (of course someone else could bring forward the evidence...)

Uh, what? You mean in a "ivory tower, lost touch with reality" sense right? I can see that, but education generally leads to much more harm than good. (in every way, including morally)

So what does subjection of women have to do with racism? (besides the fact that a society that has one will often have the other)