Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You don't have valid points. Dawkins is not my god nor has he written any bibles.
Dawkins did not teach me about Evolution.
richrf makes outright misinformed statements about what Dawkins writes.
Get it now?
I kinda agree. But that's richrf's PHILOSOPHY in life. And we all know there is no wrong or right in someone's philosophy because it is their FACT. I may disagree with what he says but I find it futile to keep on arguing about it. You can't change his philosophy, you can't change mine and I sure as hell can't change yours.
Believe me, I LEARNED a LOT from debating those annoying atheist posters in religion forum to realize that. Most of whom are dead now actually. I hated the most was rifleman.
In fact they almost make me believe their (non)belief until I realize I just can't fathom NOT believing in MY Creator. Emphasis on MY. Not yours, LOL.
I kinda agree. But that's richrf's PHILOSOPHY in life. And we all know there is no wrong or right in someone's philosophy because it is their FACT.
This is where your misunderstanding lies. Evolution is not a philosophy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supergirlygirl
I may disagree with what he says but I find it futile to keep on arguing about it. You can't change his philosophy, you can't change mine and I sure as hell can't change yours.
I am not trying to change his mind. I am simply correcting the misinformation he keeps spouting with respect to Evolution...that is when he is on topic. He is usually derailing this tread with things that have nothing to do with Evolution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supergirlygirl
Believe me, I LEARNED a LOT from debating those annoying Atheist posters in religion forum to realize that. Most of whom are dead now actually. I hated the most was rifleman.
This sounds about right from a person who waves the god flag. They seem to hate a lot of people. This says a lot about who you are. BTW you will be dead one day as well.
Why are you bringing the topic of atheism and your hatred of a dead poster into this thread? I suggest you find another thread if you want to discuss hatred or atheism.
Evolution has nothing to do with hatred or atheism.
Believe me, I LEARNED a LOT from debating those annoying atheist posters in religion forum to realize that. Most of whom are dead now actually. I hated the most was rifleman.
I can understand why you hated him so much. Even dead, his posts are much more intelligently structured and articulately composed than yours. Must have been very frustrating for you.
Oh, I forgot to add "LOLOLOLOL." Sorry.
Last edited by Mr. In-Between; 10-01-2015 at 11:44 PM..
I can understand why you hated him so much. Even dead, his posts are much more intelligently structured and articulately composed than yours. Must have been very frustrating for you.
Oh, I forgot to add "LOLOLOLOL." Sorry.
I recall reading several posts by rifleman and I have to say he came across as a very wise soul. RIP Rifleman.
I kinda agree. But that's richrf's PHILOSOPHY in life. And we all know there is no wrong or right in someone's philosophy because it is their FACT. I may disagree with what he says but I find it futile to keep on arguing about it. You can't change his philosophy, you can't change mine and I sure as hell can't change yours.
Believe me, I LEARNED a LOT from debating those annoying atheist posters in religion forum to realize that. Most of whom are dead now actually. I hated the most was rifleman.
In fact they almost make me believe their (non)belief until I realize I just can't fathom NOT believing in MY Creator. Emphasis on MY. Not yours, LOL.
You do use the word 'hate' appropriately. Though I highly doubt that most of the atheist posters you debated in the religion forum are actually dead (this website is less than a decade old, after all), your clear satisfaction in the idea that they are is indeed hatred.
But particularly curious is that you single out rifleman for the focus of your admitted hatred. He was a calm poster. He did not engage in personal attacks. He posted long, detailed replies that addressed the myriad points that creationists threw at him in a futile attempt to overwhelm. All in all he was extraordinarily knowledgeable and competent.
You must have found that supremely frustrating. So much so that you hate him and are pleased that he is dead.
Now do tell us how the Theory of Evolution is completely contrived?
You have a lot of explaining to do as there is an enormous amount of Evolution evidence and not one ounce of it was contrived.
Evolution after all arose naturally and spontaneously.
Instead of repeating with the usual how about giving strong examples of what you are talking about.
We all know that Dawkins did not attribute conscious personalities to any DNA molecules. So what exactly are you talking about?
We see non-scientists all the time making grand accusations that are simply not accurate at all. This is the danger of non-scientists reading scientific material. They come away confused and then proceed to self-condition themselves with their own interpretation of what they read then turn around and spread this misinformation. This is what we have seen you do all throughout this thread.
So again Dawkins did not attribute conscious personalities to any DNA molecules. So what exactly are you talking about?
It was contrived because scientists desperately needed a counter-Genesis story for their "textbooks". So instead of God creating humans it was " Natural Selection" (as opposed to Unnatural Selection). Both phrases are meaningless, add nothing to our understanding of life, equally contrived, and both similarly perpetuated by their own brand of evangelism and faith.
Dawkin's had to use Selfish Chemicals (forget about genes which are just enormous concentrations of human attributes ) because he has no choice other than to magically make chemicals human. That is the bridge that science uses between dead chemicals and life - MAGIC!
yup, the rock record is completely contrived. No way does newer sediment lay on the older ground and animals die on top of older rocks. And when we line up all the living animals from sea to air, the transitions are not present in any way shape or form. get it ...lol ... shape or form
I think you won me over. Its best to base our best guess on what we don't know. That way silly facts will not get in the way of steadfast opinions. We have no idea what "quanta" is, so lets just start making sit ups.
So things change. Everything changes. And when they change they are more or less the same as they were before with a small difference. Ok. So what??
LOL. Richrf, you are making Matadora mad coz you are blaspheming her bible wrote by her god, Dawkins. Oh by the way, what else is new? That's ALL they (scientists) do say a 'fact' based on their careful observation and then later on when someone points out their BS, they think of a new clever way to weed out of it.... LOLOLOLOL. puhlease...
Who is blindly following who here? For serious.
Once in a while, maybe once in a century a new and profound idea is presented by a scientist/philosopher. The rest of what is said is merely to perpetuate a commercial industry. The tough part is to find that new idea or better yet, create it oneself.
The key to understanding Evolution is to attempt to understand the impetus behind Evolution. My observation is that the guiding impetus behind Evolution is Creative Intelligence (quanta). The perturbations in the Quantum Field which we observe as particles are Creative Intelligence at work. It is fundamental. And like the idea or not, it sits perfectly well within in all current Physics theories. The problem that some scientists may have with this, but not all, is that material is not fundamental, Intelligence is.
Moderator cut: Copyright
It was contrived because scientists desperately needed a counter-Genesis story for their "textbooks". So instead of God creating humans it was " Natural Selection" (as opposed to Unnatural Selection). Both phrases are meaningless, add nothing to our understanding of life, equally contrived, and both similarly perpetuated by their own brand of evangelism and faith.
Dawkin's had to use Selfish Chemicals (forget about genes which are just enormous concentrations of human attributes ) because he has no choice other than to magically make chemicals human. That is the bridge that science uses between dead chemicals and life - MAGIC!
Where do you get these oddly contrived stories from? Nothing you wrote is sensible or accurate.
Scientist could care less about non credible stories such as genesis. They have more important things to do with their time.
For the 3rd time as Dawkins said...no sane person would ever think that DNA molecules have conscious personalities.
You simply have no idea of what you're talking about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
