- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hey Stu
More and more it appears your faith is being challenged with facts!
Enjoy!
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 31 2009,08:19) Hey Stu More and more it appears your faith is being challenged with facts!
Enjoy!
What facts?What faith?
If you have nothing more than creationists advertising their books, which are entirely devoid of facts, then I'm not sure what you think I should be concerned about.
Stuart
More and more it is becoming clear what a joke the claims of the Intelligent Design creationists are, as they desperately attempt to fulfill the religious agenda of their Wedge Document:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW_2lLG9EZM&feature=related
Stuart
Kenneth Miller again, this time telling folks why the Intelligent Design creationists' favourite attempt to baffle people with science is based on a lie. The 'trial' he mentions is the Dover trial during which most of the members of a school board that wanted creationism taught in its school was laughed out of court, then kicked off the board at the next election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_HVrjKcvrU
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 01 2009,18:26) What facts? What faith?
Yes, I can imagine that it is hard to see when your head is buried in the sand.Quote (t8 @ Aug. 02 2009,22:55) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 01 2009,18:26) What facts? What faith?
Yes, I can imagine that it is hard to see when your head is buried in the sand.
What facts? What faith?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 05 2009,21:40) Seen the vid already. Any new material, champ? Stuart
Greetings Stu…… Do you maintain your beliefs based on Darwin….I would be interested in knowing if you know why you believe what you do….I ask this question out of curiousity with no anamous intended…Thank you for asking theodorej. The fossil record needs explaining. Darwin explained it. The molecular evidence needs explaining. Darwin explains that too. Darwin's idea is powerful in its explanatory power, and is the central organising principle of biology. All evidence discovered since Darwin's time has turned out ultimately to be entirely consistent with his theory, and nothing contradicts it.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 06 2009,19:31) Thank you for asking theodorej. The fossil record needs explaining. Darwin explained it. The molecular evidence needs explaining. Darwin explains that too. Darwin's idea is powerful in its explanatory power, and is the central organising principle of biology. All evidence discovered since Darwin's time has turned out ultimately to be entirely consistent with his theory, and nothing contradicts it. Stuart
Except logic.If I think of nothing, then nothing will be the consequence. Nothing does nothing and makes nothing because it is nothing. Nothing doesn't even exist. It is simply a concept to explain the lack of something.
If I think of a cause then it will have an effect. If I think of a dead cause, then (without the difficulty of explaining its origin), I have the difficulty of explaining life from death. If I think of an intelligent cause, it answers everything logically. Nothing remains unexplained.
Scientists in the past thought that they could know about the universe because it was made by an intelligent cause. Intelligence of which they partook in which meant that they had the ability to work out how things came about.
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 04 2009,12:31) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 06 2009,19:31) Thank you for asking theodorej. The fossil record needs explaining. Darwin explained it. The molecular evidence needs explaining. Darwin explains that too. Darwin's idea is powerful in its explanatory power, and is the central organising principle of biology. All evidence discovered since Darwin's time has turned out ultimately to be entirely consistent with his theory, and nothing contradicts it. Stuart
Except logic.If I think of nothing, then nothing will be the consequence. Nothing does nothing and makes nothing because it is nothing. Nothing doesn't even exist. It is simply a concept to explain the lack of something.
If I think of a cause then it will have an effect. If I think of a dead cause, then (without the difficulty of explaining its origin), I have the difficulty of explaining life from death. If I think of an intelligent cause, it answers everything logically. Nothing remains unexplained.
Scientists in the past thought that they could know about the universe because it was made by an intelligent cause. Intelligence of which they partook in which meant that they had the ability to work out how things came about.
Would you care to explain what your response has to do with Darwin?Stuart
Ben Stein asked sophomoric questions.
If I had a chance to talk in person with Richard Dawkins,
I would certainly ask something more intelligent than,
” do you believe in any of the Hindu gods?”.Tim
A more general focus, but a better effort at interviewing Richard Dawkins here:
http://tvnz.co.nz/close-u….3420403
Stuart
Stuart,
You little Dawkins prophet you.
The interview with Stein I did not enjoy, it was well apparent Stein wanted to make him feel uncomfortable, this interview though was more relaxed and comfortable.
Really though Stuart, he stated nothing that you have not stated, so why did you post the video, just a slight overview of some sort.
Hope all is well Stuart, maybe Dawkins will title his book 'Stuart Little'
Quote (princess of the king @ May 01 2010,11:09) Stuart, You little Dawkins prophet you.
The interview with Stein I did not enjoy, it was well apparent Stein wanted to make him feel uncomfortable, this interview though was more relaxed and comfortable.
Really though Stuart, he stated nothing that you have not stated, so why did you post the video, just a slight overview of some sort.
Hope all is well Stuart, maybe Dawkins will title his book 'Stuart Little'
My point really was that if you wanted to find out what he really thinks, interview him properly.Stuart
It does seem his concerns of for the children. What I am noticing however, is what he is against he formats in his own teachings, you cannot study religions only not to come away with a learning of controling the masses, now can you.
The ones that buck and kick, use the same tatics as ones long ago have used to ensure their belief is bestowed upon everyone else, old tatics new day.
Dawkins is just rekindling an old practice, did you think he was bringing something new to the world.
Critical thinking will bring you to this conclusion anyhow.
If you can't beat them, join them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
