PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
RULES
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
Offline 
Why are you bringing this up now?
That thing in the other thread I have been trying to discuss with you? That is philosophy, not science.
[Get them to come here if you want debate. I hate cross-forum posting].
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
What's with creationists always throwing around the term Darwinist or Darwinism. Is there some sort of Darwin religion I'm not aware of? I believe in evolution just like I believe in genetics but that doesn't make me a Darwinist or a Menelist, nor does believing in calculus make me a Newtonist. Or is it a case of religion on the brain so creationists have to relay everything in religious terminology?
I went to the myspace page. All I saw there were creationists, I didn't see that any scientists actually ran the page.
Exactly!
What is this creationist fetishism with Charles Darwin?
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
What's this? Starting a new thread? But you said in the other thread you had no time to answer, but here you are starting a new thread!
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Maybe I'm just not good at the Internets, but I can't seem to find any content to disagree with on the site at the other end of this link.
It's just a big collection of copy-pasted quotes, Bible verses and links to old clips made by other people. There don't appear to be any original opinions.
"After Jesus was born, the Old Testament basically became a way for Bible publishers to keep their word count up." -Stephen Colbert
I really couldn't find much content either. I must admit, though, that I only spent about two or three minutes there...the flashing lights and harsh colors nearly sent me into an epileptic seizure.
You can't rationally argue out something that was not rationally argued in.
So instead of posting a single argument that is of his own opinion, we've been linked to a crappy Myspace page that has all kinds of links to other pages?
So... is the suggestion that in order to refute you, we need to debunk all of these websites and make fun of the crappy Myspace page?
I mean, we probably could, but it would be better if you just stopped being lazy and gave us one thing to work with at a time.
But for the record, the two things I saw immediately when I opened the page:
1) A picture of Kent Hovind
2) A picture of a monkey with the phrase "Did Charlie make a monkey out of you?"
Two clear indications that there is probably nothing here that hasn't already been covered.
A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.