Originally posted by The17sss my blood started boiling at the part when he tried to use Darwin's (fake) racism to support his "dinosaurs and people walked the earth together 4000 years ago" world view.
Posted by yukii on Sep-27-2009 19:10:
LMFAO
Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Sep-27-2009 19:33:
quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Yes, that is why I put creationism and ID right alongside each other, as they are part of the same "divine intervention" continuum.
sorry i should have been more concise, my post was directed towards lira
Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Sep-27-2009 19:35:
it really bothers me when people say no "transitional fossils"
we have tons of transitional fossils! and even organisms that are living today that resemble what the transitional fossils would look like!
Posted by The17sss on Sep-27-2009 19:37:
quote:
Originally posted by Capitalizt
Posted by Lira on Sep-27-2009 19:37:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I did not say the two are mutually exclusive, I said that evolution takes out divine intervention as a necessary ingredient of the explanation. Sure, you can add God into the story like a cherry on top if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy, but there is no scientific reason to do so. The divine ingredient is decorative, it is no longer doing any explanatory work -- unless you are a creationist or IDer.
quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Freud and Marx just made religion look silly, they did not try to cut at the root of the factual claims made by religions. That work was done by science, history, and archeology.
Actually, excluding God as an explanatory entity has never been enough to undermine any belief in Him. Deism, for example, is jolly happy to state God created the world and then decided to watch what ensues from that, without any need to resort to divine revelation to believe He exists. And I live in an area where "Scientific Christianity" is widespread (it makes me cringe because it takes the worst of both worlds, but they don't mind saying that science is right and it can be used to show how awesome God is).
However, once you make religion look silly, not only it is useless to look for explanatory reasons based on faith, it also becomes pointless to postulate His existence. Can you find any way to get round that?
Posted by SuspicionVandit on Sep-28-2009 05:15:
full house was better
Posted by kramer333 on Oct-11-2009 12:26:
check out this debate between a well-argumented atheist and Ray Comfort saying god did it...
there was a documentary on this the other day on TV. Apparently the fossil was discovered around 20 years ago but only underwent reconstruction and computer analysis in the past couple of years.
More of these "transitional fossils" will continue to be found. It seems that they are linking this fossil and denoting it as oldest common ancestor since they can see more of a direct link to us from this species by going backwards from our most recent common ancestors.
Lucy would be like a cousin of this species as they outgroup from the same tribe (homini).
The similarity would be like comparing us to chimpanzee's seeing as we both come from different subtribes (pan and Hominina).
Pages (2): «1 [2]
my blood started boiling at the part when he tried to use Darwin's (fake) racism to support his "dinosaurs and people walked the earth together 4000 years ago" world view. 
