Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221024 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
I will be honest. I don't know.
You, on the other hand, are not honest and make sh*t up.
Like the "shit" you made up about Michael Behe? David Barton? Casey Luskin? Lonnig?

//////////

Darwin's Stepchild wrote:

"And, yes, Behe admitted that ID is not science"
__________

Kitzmiller, Day 10, Trial Transcript:

Q. Sir, do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design is science?

Behe: Yes, I do.

Q. And what is that opinion?

Behe: Yes, it is.

Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design makes testable scientific claims?

Behe: Yes, I do.

Q. What is that opinion?

Behe: Yes, it does.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221025 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I mean your God-of-the-Gaps.
Afraid of competition with your Darwin-of-the-Gaps?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221026 Mar 24, 2014
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the definition of a funny-mentalist.
:-)
Your posts portray a completely empty-headed idiot.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221027 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Pointing at Barton doesn't help your case one whit.
The last time you ended up convincing most of the posters that he was a lying hack.
Behe is another horse you have hitched your wagon to that fails you. Yes, Behe said under testimony that ID is science, and then was forced to clarify under cross-examination that you had to redefine what is science to make that statement. You dishonestly ignore that last part.
Which puts you in the same category as Barton...a liar.
The discussion was of what constitutes a "scientific theory", not what is science.

You lied about that, too, and repeated the lie just now.

Here is another of your lies, when you doctored Behe's quotation:

Dagwood's version:

Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?

Behe: Yes, that's correct. END QUOTE

Trial Transcript:

Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?

Behe: Yes, that's correct. And let me explain under my definition of the word "theory," it is -- a sense of the word "theory" does not include the theory being true, it means a proposition based on physical evidence to explain some facts by logical inferences. There have been many theories throughout the history of science which looked good at the time which further progress has shown to be incorrect. Nonetheless, we can't go back and say that because they were incorrect they were not theories. So many many things that we now realized to be incorrect, incorrect theories, are nonetheless theories.

Do these instances of me catching you lying embarrass you?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221028 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Pointing at Barton doesn't help your case one whit.
My case needs no help. Yours obviously does, as you repeat your habit again here, which is to call someone names in substitution for having an argument against them.

I have now caught you lying about Behe (twice), lying about Barton, lying about Casey Luskin, lying about Lonnig.

It's quite a record you're piling up. Are you aware that nobody now can take anything you say as credible?

Even more so than when you argued for the infinite donut.

In taking me on, and being such an insulting asshole, your mouth has overloaded your ass.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221029 Mar 24, 2014
IPSEC wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
The ID is non-falsifiable, and therefore, useless.
You Darwinists have told me it is both non-falsifiable and falsified.

Seems you have it covered.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221030 Mar 24, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
We see this a lot with our theist posters. Not all, but most. RR, KiMare, Buck etal.
We do see it also with some of our non-believer fellows as well, sadly. It is a human trait to vilify "the other". But we see much more civility among the non-believers. At least, that's the way I see it.
I like the civility of you non-believers, like here, when you totally made up a lie:

Darwin's Stepchild wrote:

"And, yes, Behe admitted that ID is not science"
__________

Kitzmiller, Day 10, Trial Transcript:

Q. Sir, do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design is science?

Behe: Yes, I do.

Q. And what is that opinion?

Behe: Yes, it is.

Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design makes testable scientific claims?

Behe: Yes, I do.

Q. What is that opinion?

Behe: Yes, it does.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#221031 Mar 24, 2014
Based on the 'science' of ID, crystal formation can only be accomplish with divine intervention.

"Complex and orderly structures can only be the result of an intelligent creator." - Prime assumption of ID Cosmology.

That assumption had been proven incorrect by the formation of crystals.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221032 Mar 24, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. Atheism is the belief that deities do not exist.
Now, where do you see atheists imposing this belief with intimidation or laws ?
“As scientists, we must toil and labor and toil again to silence God.”

-BSU honors course textbook (taxpayer subsidized)
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#221033 Mar 24, 2014
7 dumb posts in a row gets Puck Frick a "cuntard of the day" award.

Way to go, cuntard.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221034 Mar 24, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
Based on the 'science' of ID, crystal formation can only be accomplish with divine intervention.
"Complex and orderly structures can only be the result of an intelligent creator." - Prime assumption of ID Cosmology.
That assumption had been proven incorrect by the formation of crystals.
That is not an ID assumption. You made it up.

The lattice structure of crystals is determined by the chemical ionic attraction among elements. No specified information is required.

The same force cannot be invoked to explain the combinations of amino acids and bases in DNA or RNA., so the self-organizational model fails as an analogy.

I can link you to thorough refutations of your claim if interested.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#221035 Mar 24, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
We know how big the observable universe is , and most calculations are based on this figure.
But with with the WMAP sat. The curvature of the universe was calculated to within 1% of being flat.Surprisingly they have also been able to map the entire observable universe, so you see the amount of stars and matter is only a calculation using this information.
While it may not be 100% accurate it has to be with a reasonable tolerance.
Fame is elusive here as you don't hear the names of those who do these things in a quest for knowledge. Fame has nothing to do with it.
I think fame has a lot to do with it. I think many scientists want to be the next Brian Green, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Albert Einstein, Galileo or Hubble. They want their name plastered in history.
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#221036 Mar 24, 2014
intelligent design is far from intelligent.
BenAdam wrote:
Based on the 'science' of ID, crystal formation can only be accomplish with divine intervention.
"Complex and orderly structures can only be the result of an intelligent creator." - Prime assumption of ID Cosmology.
That assumption had been proven incorrect by the formation of crystals.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#221037 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
.....
The lattice structure of crystals is determined by the chemical ionic attraction among elements. No specified information is required.....
Exactly like DNA.

Thank you for disproving ID.

You may now stick your head back up your ass.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#221038 Mar 24, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not an ID assumption.....
Nope. Read your own Discovery Institutes website, moron.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221039 Mar 24, 2014
Thinking wrote:
intelligent design is far from intelligent.
<quoted text>
You don't know what it is.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#221040 Mar 24, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I must have missed them.
No, you simply scoffed at them.

You have no excuse.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#221041 Mar 24, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I think fame has a lot to do with it. I think many scientists want to be the next Brian Green, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Albert Einstein, Galileo or Hubble. They want their name plastered in history.
Yet you who can't even combine velocities think you are smarter than everyone on Earth.

You are a disgrace to humanity.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221042 Mar 24, 2014
Thinking wrote:
7 dumb posts in a row gets Puck Frick a "cuntard of the day" award.
Way to go, cuntard.
Are you the Duck of Windsor?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#221043 Mar 24, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Science: "We don't know but we have a few logical thoughts on the matter based on what we know and have observed."
Religion: "We know it is God because our magic book says so!"
Note the difference please.
What are the logical thoughts specifically?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 28 min Leo 1,190,231
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 40 min adamski 4,121
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 6 hr HitMan 201,368
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 9 hr Pearl Jam 308,914
NCSU vs UNC from the Coach's Perspective by Jam... 17 hr IdeasandTruth 1
Kecoughtan High teacher resigns after drug charges (Nov '07) Fri KHS Alumni 69
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Fri Trojan 29,057
More from around the web