Evolution and Religion

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by loseyourname The available evidence pretty much completely discredits traditional creationism,

I find it funny that you're an evolutionist and you say that.

[Anonymouse]

By confirming that you believe in evolution you have only validated the religious essence to it. Evolution shouldn't even be considered a scientific hypothesis since there is no way it can be tested, thus it remains a belief. Science should be knowledge, not something one believes, as loser so adamantly has stated in other threads, most notably the God and Soul threads, yet now he seems to contradict himself.

[sleuth]

How is proclaiming intelligent design supreme treating all theories the same? I have already posted numerous examples of evidence against intelligent design. You have failed to address even one of them.

The idea that nonliving material could come to life by chance,by some haphazard accident,is so remote as to be impossible.
I illustrate the matter in this way....

when we see a painting,we accept it as evidence that a painter exist.When we read a book,we accept that an author exist.When we see a traffic light,we know that a law_making body exist.All those things were made with purpose by those who made them.And while we may not understand everything about the ppl who designed them,we don't doubt that the ppl exist.Similarly the evidence of the existance of supreme designer can be seen in the design,order,and comlexity of living things on earth.they all bear the marks of suprime intelligence.
DR. wernher von braun stated:""The natural laws of the univers are so precise that we have no difficulties building a space ship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of fraction of a second.These laws must have been set by somebody"".
my question to you loser...Can there be law without a lawmaker????

[dusken]

The difference is that a painting shows the intent of making a painting. A book shows the intent of making a book. Et cetera. Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins or "The Creation" by Paul Atkins or "Atheism: A Philosophical Justification" by Michael Martin.

[dusken]

And please people, stop resurrecting this thread. I am sorry I ever started it. It is the most boring one to date.

[sleuth]

And please people, stop resurrecting this thread. I am sorry I ever started it. It is the most boring one to date.

then why u read it??

[Anonymouse]

And please people, stop resurrecting this thread. I am sorry I ever started it. It is the most boring one to date.

Don't tell others what to do. If they want to discuss in this thread, they will. If you don't like it, don't read. It's quite simple, really.

As far as evolution is concerned, my only goal is to expose it for what it is, a naturalistic philosophy, a worldview, a belief, a metaphysical assumption. Call it what you will. Essentially, it's okay if people adhere or believe in it, but let's call it exactly that, a belief, and not "fact".

[dusken]

Don't tell others what to do. If they want to discuss in this thread, they will. If you don't like it, don't read. It's quite simple, really.

As far as evolution is concerned, my only goal is to expose it for what it is, a naturalistic philosophy, a worldview, a belief, a metaphysical assumption. Call it what you will. Essentially, it's okay if people adhere or believe in it, but let's call it exactly that, a belief, and not "fact".

This has nothing to do with what I posted so re-phuckin-lax, buddy.

You must be on your rag. Wait about five days so you will not bleed all over the forum.

[Anonymouse]

This has nothing to do with what I posted so re-phuckin-lax, buddy.

You must be on your rag. Wait about five days so you will not bleed all over the forum.

More from the good satanist as he discharges his fluent gibberish which fortunately I am not fluent in.

[dusken]

Yes, I am a genius. Thank you.