It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
What did I say about understanding? The obvious thing this nonsensical creationist argument fails utterly to grasp is time. Nobody theorises that a T Rex turned into a chicken within a short enough time span to be described as "macro evolution". The point is in fact a non sequitur. However, we do know that quite different animals have common ancestors because they share whole chunks of DNA.
Oh NO, not this tired old macro/micro evolution dribble again.
So a finch turning in to a finch is evidence for evolution. I dont go to pre school fella, go feed your nonsense to the kiddies.
Dawkins does not accept "space boogeymen" at all. He has posited that life on earth may have come from elsewhere. The point however, which you ignored last time so let's draw full attention to it so you cannot continue without addressing it (well, assuming you have any self respect anyway), is that this hypothesis, despite being highly speculative, can be considered scientific BECAUSE IT CAN BE DISPROVED. There is no "ID theory", there is simply a claim which cannot be tested scientifically, therefore it cannot be taught in a science class.
Dawkins tentative hypothesis is no more defendable than ID theory. In fact it one of the same, thats the whole point, Dawkins just accepts space boogeymen where Christians accept God.
Originally posted by Bunken Drum
reply to post by borntowatch
What did I say about understanding? The obvious thing this nonsensical creationist argument fails utterly to grasp is time. Nobody theorises that a T Rex turned into a chicken within a short enough time span to be described as "macro evolution". The point is in fact a non sequitur. However, we do know that quite different animals have common ancestors because they share whole chunks of DNA.
Oh NO, not this tired old macro/micro evolution dribble again.
So a finch turning in to a finch is evidence for evolution. I dont go to pre school fella, go feed your nonsense to the kiddies.
Dawkins does not accept "space boogeymen" at all. He has posited that life on earth may have come from elsewhere. The point however, which you ignored last time so let's draw full attention to it so you cannot continue without addressing it (well, assuming you have any self respect anyway), is that this hypothesis, despite being highly speculative, can be considered scientific BECAUSE IT CAN BE DISPROVED. There is no "ID theory", there is simply a claim which cannot be tested scientifically, therefore it cannot be taught in a science class.
Dawkins tentative hypothesis is no more defendable than ID theory. In fact it one of the same, thats the whole point, Dawkins just accepts space boogeymen where Christians accept God.
Hey, since your attitude seems to suggest you are claiming to understand this subject fully, perhaps you can address this previously ignored question and tell us how we might design a scientific experiment that can prove or disprove the god of Abraham as a creator?
Originally posted by borntowatch
My questions stand
As I stated ever so clearly in English, capische?? My belief in God like yours in evolution is a faith. I will prove that beyond a shadow.
Now onwards we plough.
Cut the crap and prove your faith a science....or cantya do that
Creationism should stay out of the Science class room and evolution out of the Comparative Religions'. Teach what should be taught in it's proper place.
*
I sent sympathy to Hitchens near the end and asked him to try belief as an experiment. What do you have to lose? I asked him.
*
Dawkins is just selling popular books ... he has not been taken seriously by any real scientists and none of his books have gained favourable reviews.
I have read all of Dawkins books...
(Dawkins) is a scientist by profession who has failed to seriously address real philosphical and religious issues.
Dawkins popularity and influence will not outlive him for long.
*
I'm a Dawkins fanatic actually.
How about you explain abiogenesis so I have a foundation of the ground rules, but before that I want evidence of the of the BIG BANG, or at least some explanation with evidence as to how the universe came about.
How about explaining the causation of the different elements within periodic table of elements, then I will happily explain how we can use science to expl.... oh wait a sec. Christianity is faith based....
Just like the foundations of evolution.
Cheers ears
Oh and hurry up with the answer,
Yours is a faith as much as mine is, your lack of an answer proves it
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Sigh... another ego driven " i believe this over you" argument.
Realize mr xyz that your intelligence is no greater than a bus driver, garbage man or child. If you get insulted by this, that would only prove your lack of intelligence. sharing what you think is knowledge is redundant. 6 billion people in this world and you are no more knowledgeable then my 6 year old nephew. Again, if you take offense to this it only proves your intelligence is far less then what is required for a conversation of this magnitude.
A truly intelligent person would not say this exists or not for his knowledge and faculties limit him so greatly that humans need 5 million years of brain development to even scratch the surface of understanding. but what ever entertains the weak mind and ego.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
I didn't say god doesn't exist, I said there's zero proof for it/him/her. And we HAVE proof for evolution. So it would be silly to teach something we have no proof of in science class.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure I'm more intelligent than the average child
Never said I know everything, but you seem to apply this god creature exists. So please, entertain us, present your evidence. Because if you can't, you simply have to accept that there's no evidence in support of your claims...and you're essentially here to preach
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Originally posted by MrXYZ
I didn't say god doesn't exist, I said there's zero proof for it/him/her. And we HAVE proof for evolution. So it would be silly to teach something we have no proof of in science class.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure I'm more intelligent than the average child
Never said I know everything, but you seem to apply this god creature exists. So please, entertain us, present your evidence. Because if you can't, you simply have to accept that there's no evidence in support of your claims...and you're essentially here to preach
Ergo, you revealed your knowledge in your last post or should I say lack.
Proof is all around us. Its the inadequacies of the human mind as you have proven that constructs such absurdities then points his finger at it saying ' Look how absurd this is". Sigh.
You said " God creature" This pretty much sums up the very low level of understanding you have of the real world. Dont worry. The world does not care or require you to think of things out of your grasp of understanding.