ChatterBank4 mins ago
Atheism, Agnosticism, Belief.
260 Answers
Nine and a half minutes. Very interesting.
Presented by Dinesh D'Souza, featuring Neo de Grasses Tyson.
https:/
Presented by Dinesh D'Souza, featuring Neo de Grasses Tyson.
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi, credit to you, you are consistent in that in every post you have nothing meaningful to say. Nothing to contribute, no ideas, just the same old nitpicking, sniping from the sidelines, nothing substantively scientific, theological or philosophical, not even sensible to spice up your monotonous criticisms.
Come on Naomi! Heres your big chance to shine!
At least post something , anything, with new information, a new way of looking at things, some new idea!
Climb the hills, don't wander around the valleys in perpetuity!
Come on Naomi! Heres your big chance to shine!
At least post something , anything, with new information, a new way of looking at things, some new idea!
Climb the hills, don't wander around the valleys in perpetuity!
Theland; I'm afraid that my view of you is that you are thick beyond belief. You are incapable of logical discussion. You think you know it all, but you know nothing. You can never defend your point of view apart from asserting your opinion without any supporting evidence. There is respect and there is politeness; I try to remain polite to you, but I have no longer any respect. Adios, old friend.
Atheist - Just before you go, on the question of evidence.
I consistently refer to the latest science, albeit translated into layman's terms but valid nevertheless.
And do I claim to know it all? Not one bit!
But hey! A man's gotta do what a mans gotta do :-)
Naomi - the problem with your, '' faith '', in science, is that it has been knocked to shreds, but you don't accept it.
Your pride blinds you.
I consistently refer to the latest science, albeit translated into layman's terms but valid nevertheless.
And do I claim to know it all? Not one bit!
But hey! A man's gotta do what a mans gotta do :-)
Naomi - the problem with your, '' faith '', in science, is that it has been knocked to shreds, but you don't accept it.
Your pride blinds you.
//How on earth is evolution in crisis? Please explain//
I'll do my best
Evolution is an ongoing thing that changes day from day, thankfully.
.Unlike AB Society, Culture, News and/or Religion, topics that never change, according to some.
Even though evolution maybe in crisis, I'm happy evolution happens
I'll do my best
Evolution is an ongoing thing that changes day from day, thankfully.
.Unlike AB Society, Culture, News and/or Religion, topics that never change, according to some.
Even though evolution maybe in crisis, I'm happy evolution happens
Theland, I have two questions (one, I can't find the post, so maybe wrong thread).
One here, is //Physical laws suggest a lawgiver,//
They don't. Maybe something doesn't survive if it outside "physical laws", which would be evolution, not intent. Noticing patterns, and calling them "laws" is a human thing.
One here, is //Physical laws suggest a lawgiver,//
They don't. Maybe something doesn't survive if it outside "physical laws", which would be evolution, not intent. Noticing patterns, and calling them "laws" is a human thing.
I believe it was in 2016, (I'll try find a link), the worlds top evolutionary scientists held a conference precisely because they were not happy with their current theory of evolution and were looking for new thinking to modify it to suit their latest research in the light of new scientific advances in dating etc.
After a few days of discussion, the conference broke up, none the wiser, and still in crisis.
Crisis?
Why?
Because it is a pseudo science!
After a few days of discussion, the conference broke up, none the wiser, and still in crisis.
Crisis?
Why?
Because it is a pseudo science!
