Search results

I voted yes, although it's a dubious one. Science does not exclude creation because the universe could have been created to look like it evolved. It's really a plea to rational and good sense.

I say this is an alternate profile. The "scientists say we're Martians" thing seems a bit far, even for a Creationiost.

Biblical creationism is a belief in a magic event. I know you're only being facetious, but you can't really bring a point against it any more than you can the idea that the universe was created - as it is - yesterday.

Yes, I let my LT (a Creationist) read it after me and he thought that Dawkins had used a lot of rhetoric (he liked what little of it he read). I quipped that this is the only logical method he could have used, because any good writer has analyzed his audience, thus any good writer would have...

That's really odd. I read it in two days while I was back at Kuwait. I loved it; granted, there wasn't anything else to do, but I sincerely enjoyed the book.

Is your wife Carico?

See! I've been saying for YEARS that he's a con man! It's like everything he does - even his Creation Science Ministry - is done merely to make money.

To the OP: I've never been too impressed with Dawkins, either.

I'm sorry you feel that it's a waste of time here; most of us feel it's a waste of time talking to you.

It's faith; I believe through strong, really passionate faith you can make yourself believe anything. So, no, I don't think it's dishonest.

Well, no, not from here. I became an apostate in my personal life. Really, the only change in me has been a generally more mature and realistic view of believers. It's too easy, as a child, to pretend they're all blithering idiots.

You are mind-numbing - utterly mind-numbing.

Fighting for truth and the disassembling of lies have never been a waste of time.

I'm a (party) animal.

If you want the discussion to continue, open that question up to everyone. We, in the ARMY, wake up very early. Good night.

You must have hit reply on the wrong post, because I didn't accuse you of quote mining. I merely pointed out your huge error in mistaking your post for something scientific; it was a bunch of quotes. I know you put a lot of work into all those fonts and finding all those quotes, but to prance...

Were we talking about real science? All I saw is you quoting people. If you actually have something scientific to say, then please do so; or do you misunderstand what science is? Have you ever read a scientific journal? It isn't a whole lot of quoting people, is it?

Oh, it was so lucid I nearly puked.

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created. The old thread automatically closed is here: "Misquote the previous poster! (6)"

Sometimes it's good to take a moment and let someone remind you of everything you hate.