Challenge: name one instance when Science was wrong and Religion was right.
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.
A scientist says, "I think the awe people have as respects what I teach is sooooooo great, a million people would be willing to sacrifice their lives for it".
To which Awk replied "Could you point to which 'Scientist' said "I think the awe people have as respects what I teach is sooooooo great, a million people would be willing to sacrifice their lives for it". Or something like it?" (You don't count)
If the point is serious then it should have some basis other than what is in your own head.
As to the pre-emptive strikes, I am merely being playing a few moves ahead of you and am blocking possible gambits by you, even if I am far from sure that you would even have seen them.
As I said...I wasn't kidding, I was serious about the point I was making. The contrived exchange between the Scientist and the Religious Leader that I used to segue into it was, of course, in my usual style that I use for self-amusement (why I was laughing as I typed it) during late-night gaps of action at the club. Though it would be reasonable to assume with fair certainty that "something like it" has occurred somewhere at sometime.
And com'on Man...you weren't "playing a few moves ahead"...you were just trying to shield yourself from my arguments using things like the impregnable ADDDDDDD POP-U-LUUUUUUUM...which is well known to easily vanquish truth, proof, logic, and reason. LOL!
As I said...I wasn't kidding, I was serious about the point I was making. The contrived exchange between the Scientist and the Religious Leader that I used to segue into it was, of course, in my usual style that I use for self-amusement (why I was laughing as I typed it) during late-night gaps of action at the club. Though it would be reasonable to assume with fair certainty that "something like it" has occurred somewhere at sometime.
And com'on Man...you weren't "playing a few moves ahead"...you were just trying to shield yourself from my arguments using things like the impregnable ADDDDDDD POP-U-LUUUUUUUM...which is well known to easily vanquish truth, proof, logic, and reason. LOL!
Then if your were serious about the point you were making it should have been based on something better than an unfounded accusation that a scientist is claiming that people are so awed by what he teaches that people would die for it or you were just indulging in a bit of dishonest polemic.
And, shielding myself against your irrelevant ad pop. argument is the same as anticipating a response from you, which is legitimate and you have no legitimate basis for complaining about it.
The only reason I'm troubling to respond is to show that, in pursuing the lumbering Theosarus in scientists' clothing which is our worthy quarry, we can snap up the Rodentus babbleramus which trots it without breaking stride.
Then if your were serious about the point you were making it should have been based on something better than an unfounded accusation that a scientist is claiming that people are so awed by what he teaches that people would die for it or you were just indulging in a bit of dishonest polemic.
And, shielding myself against your irrelevant ad pop. argument is the same as anticipating a response from you, which is legitimate and you have no legitimate basis for complaining about it.
The only reason I'm troubling to respond is to show that, in pursuing the lumbering Theosarus in scientists' clothing which is our worthy quarry, we can snap up the Rodentus babbleramus which trots it without breaking stride.
"Troubling to respond"? Yeah, right! The guy with TEN THOUSAND posts is "troubling to respond". Okay, whatever you say!
Lighten up Man...it's not that big a deal.
Oh, and...ad pop is NOT irrelevant...except as respects "Pedigree Logic". Otherwise...it's just about as powerful and dominating a position as you can get...and in the REAL WORLD will typically come out on top and lay waste to anything put up against it.
"Troubling to respond"? Yeah, right! The guy with TEN THOUSAND posts is "troubling to respond". Okay, whatever you say!
Lighten up Man...it's not that big a deal.
Oh, and...ad pop is NOT irrelevant...except as respects "Pedigree Logic". Otherwise...it's just about as powerful and dominating a position as you can get...and in the REAL WORLD will typically come out on top and lay waste to anything put up against it.
This brute strength argument shows up the intellectual poverty of the generality of your posting, chum.
A.. I don't see how you are following the point....science is what it is, but its the translation of science which refuse's GR's well explained point. Its just not possible nor can it be. Science on its own is handcuffed in offering substance to the most important value for progress man has.
Typical. Attention paid. Antitheist gets all desingenions and huffy. I'll use capital letters. IF PEOPLE FOLLOWED RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS ON SEX, STDS WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE
A.. I don't see how you are following the point....science is what it is, but its the translation of science which refuse's GR's well explained point. Its just not possible nor can it be. Science on its own is handcuffed in offering substance to the most important value for progress man has.
The thread is about what religion has got right that science got wrong. Goldenrule's brokenrecord response is irrelevant in all respects and you do yourself no credit by whoopeeing it.
And speaking of relevant responses....Originally Posted by Mr5150
Quote:
Typical. Attention paid. Antitheist gets all desingenions and huffy. I'll use capital letters. IF PEOPLE FOLLOWED RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS ON SEX, STDS WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
This is a valid argument...in a way...Religion (or the Bible) in its advice about sexual matters was right since following the instructions would avoid STD problems and the rest.
While science has not been able to do much about it despite its' best efforts, if not 'science' (alias the secular worldwiew) has, by advocating ignoring the Bible, pretty much caused the problem or at least let it happen.
Thus Religion had it right and science has it wrong.
Before I go on, Mr5150, is that the point (assuming you intended to be on -topic) or not? (waits for the nervous theiopologetic wabbling while trying to anticipate possible atheist figleaf-covered pits, booby traps and rhetorical pungee sticks )
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.
replied "Could you point to which 'Scientist' said "I think the awe people have as respects what I teach is sooooooo great, a million people would be willing to sacrifice their lives for it". Or something like it?" (You don't count)
