theQuincunx5
Well-Known Member
- Apr 7, 2018
- 1,626
- 1,392
- 61
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'll wait and see if science can produce a self-replicating organism. I'm betting they can't.
Of course they believe the designer is God, they just choose not to worship him.
My dad was not religious but believed in God.
That doesn't really remove ID from religion. If ID had somehow arisen independent of religion and the need to get religious thought buttoned into teaching of science I might consider this differently. But indeed it wasn't.
Oh, yeah, I forgot about how Christians have the "I believe in God, I'm not religious!" word game. Ugh. I wish we could move beyond simpleton word games to have a real conversation.
OK, I will grant you your special "usage" of the word Religious that you folks in the faiths like to trot out.
When I say "religion" in these cases I mean the less limiting sub-genre that you want to now discuss. I mean people who believe in supernatural things.
Again, you are perfectly and well within your rights to believe as you wish and I would never wish to remove that from you. I am glad you have your faith in supernatural things if it brings you happiness. But, indeed, it does not necessarily mean you have the right to call science with which you disagree precisely because it does not comport with your supernatural beliefs "absurd".
Just swinging the door back at you guys.
There is, I think, an interesting possibility (probably remote) that a species arising and evolving on another planet, some considerable time ago, could have involved itself, on multiple occassions, to alter, direct and further the evolution of terrestrial life.That doesn't really remove ID from religion. If ID had somehow arisen independent of religion and the need to get religious thought buttoned into teaching of science I might consider this differently. But indeed it wasn't.
Oh, yeah, I forgot about how Christians have the "I believe in God, I'm not religious!" word game. Ugh. I wish we could move beyond simpleton word games to have a real conversation.
Huh? How so?
-_- you mean like how it was done last year, producing an organism with a genome that contained 6 different nucleotide bases rather than 4? https://phys.org/news/2017-01-scientists-stable-semisynthetic.htmlI'll wait and see if science can produce a self-replicating organism. I'm betting they can't.
Evolutionists insult creationists much more often.
"I'm a spiritual person but I'm not religious" is a common statement found on dating sites around the world posted by millions of people. I believe these people are sincere.
We need to have a real (honest) conversation about much more important things than this.
-_- you mean like how it was done last year, producing an organism with a genome that contained 6 different nucleotide bases rather than 4? https://phys.org/news/2017-01-scientists-stable-semisynthetic.html
What...does...that have to do with anything????
Some form of "Evolutionists have insulted Creationists, so that means it's okay for me to insult you."?
As do I. But I think you knew what I was referring to when I used the word "religious" in this context. So please let us not act as if there's some key point to be made by this wordgame in the present case.
Well, certainly I believe that...but then I wasn't the one who tried to derail the conversation with some unrelated wordgame.
@OldWiseGuy, are you going to answer my questions:
Do you understand what those terms (assumption and speculation) mean in a scientific article? Hint: not what they mean in the laymen's terms.
And:
You have admitted that you have no understanding of evolution, so why do you think that you are in anyway educated to say that it is 'held together by speculation and assumption'?
Are you saying that evolution has crossed every t and dotted every i; that there are no important missing 'links' in the understanding of it? And if not, what holds the theory together?
Just answer the questions!
Do you understand what those terms (assumption and speculation) mean in a scientific article? Hint: not what they mean in the laymen's terms.
And:
You have admitted that you have no understanding of evolution, so why do you think that you are in anyway educated to say that it is 'held together by speculation and assumption'?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?