religion
religion
Out of context: Reply #1432
- Started
- Last post
- 3,175 Responses
- moldero4
- This is retarded. The article carries on like Creationism is a valid debate, constantly referring to the common arguments. Are there any creationists on here?Morning_star
- A long time ago there was a guy on here who would do nothing but argue about creationism.yuekit
- I guess he's not around any more. Shame ;)Morning_star
- the scientific process does'nt work in terms of disproof. prove the validity of a theory and is precludes other theories. disproving things is a waste of timegilgamush
- makes no sense to try to prove the absence of something. similar to a double negative, its not a productive line of reasoninggilgamush
- I think Gramme believes in creationism.iCanHazQBN
- Great... Not another friggin salad...pango
- lolinteliboy
- Science did prove the validity of the theory that the planet is very old. Not a waste of time at all, especially when disproving religious nut job theories.monospaced
- I agree that creationism has zero scientific merit and evolution is basicly fact. My disagreement with your theological stance mono is that you are invested ingilgamush
- Debunking other peoples faith. Leave them alone bro, ignorance is bliss. They can have a perfectly full life without ever considering ceolacanths etcgilgamush
- first, I have no theological stance since I don't believe in god(s), and I am certainly not invested in debunking anyone's myths.monospaced
- you seem to think I was the one who is posting these thingsmonospaced
- you clearly have me mistaken for someone else around heremonospaced
- OK, that's fine. My original point being that science has no need to react to the folks who are speaking from a place of faith as apose to a position of evidencgilgamush
- Science and faith go wonderfully hand in hand.breadlegz
- All the animosity towards organized religion I see in here is very misplaced. People have done alotta nasty shit in gods name, blah blah, that's irrelevant.gilgamush
- Bottom line is that if someone out there derives personal strength from a belief you view as irrational, you have no business trying to sway them otherwisegilgamush
- dude, you were the one who posted the article about the nigerian, and don't even try to imply that wasn't supposed to be ridiculing.monospaced
- but I agree, the scientific community should never have to defend itself against myth-based agendas and ideas.monospaced
- Evolution is still a theory right? It hasn't been proven nor disproven. We are presented with findings and reasoning, but no facts. Just sayin.robthelad
- Evolution is a scientific theory, which is as close to proof as can be achieved. The evidence is overwhelming, and almost nothing exists to disprove it.monospaced
- The facts supporting it fill entire rooms of papers and physical evidence all around the world. It's a staggeringly huge amount of facts.monospaced
- Do you know how the first organism evolved from rain on rock, billions and billions of years ago? And how "nothing" exploded to make a big bang?robthelad
- P.S. I'm not a Troll. I like the idea of creationism, and evolution, and how churches have "incorporated" the theory into the bible teachings.robthelad
- Nobody knows for certain the exact process of how life began, but there are some very strong scientific models that aim at a real understanding of its origins.monospaced
- and i think it's admirable that mankind seeks the answer, and doesn't give up and just say, "ah, some omnipotent invisible power made it, so no bother looking."monospaced
- Ha, I've seen that banned TED talk that seemed quite convincing, but of course, Psychedelics were involved in the revelation. I like questions.robthelad
- what was that banned ted talk about?moldero
- this one?
https://www.youtube.…moldero - Yep. TED looked proper dicks after banning that.Morning_star
- cool thanks MS :)moldero
- have you watched it Moldero?Morning_star
- not yet, though i did download it to watch latermoldero
