arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
Vidqun - You really are the stereotypical ignorant creationist aren't you?
Be what you want, do what you want, just don't get caught.
Why do you think that believing in evolution results in a loss of ethics?
Millions of christians accept the fact of evolution and are good people. Many fundies who reject evolution are moral reprobates.
As an atheist/anti-theist I have a reason to be moral that doesn't involve false promises about eternal rewards and punishments.
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
Thanks Phizzy.
Vidqun. You perfectly illustrate the point of the OP. By the way I have shared my knowledge of evolution with both my children and they have turned out fantastic thanks.
On a previous thread you claimed to be a retired professional scientist with a wide range of qualifications. Its a puzzle that you seem to have forgotten absolutely everything.
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
Defending deep will not prevent a good team from scoring. USA are just not very good.
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
"A recurring theme in antievolution literature is that if science cannot account for the origin of life, evolution is false, and that "spontaneous generation" was disproven, so therefore evolution is false. This syllogism fails, because evolution (that is, common descent and transmutation of species) occurs whether or not life arose by chance, law or design, but there is another more insidious mistake here. It is not true that "spontaneous generation" has been ruled out in all cases by science; the claims disproven were more restricted than that...."
most people will consider the noblood doctrine as being something that affects only the jws involved and they rarely consider the medical professionals who have to deal with them and the tremendous emotional and mental toll the medical professionals are forced to deal with when confronting senseless death.. the following is an excerpt from a medical doctor's blog: .
i do not worry much about being dead although the process of getting there gives me pause.
i have witnessed a few unpleasant deaths and i hope to never see the grim reaper coming my way.. one of the more awful and pointless deaths occurred early in my career.
Very good article thank you.
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
Arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.
hi new to forum and first post!
i have been reading posts on and off for years.
still fighting my "doubts" and struggling internally, my family is active and the wife knows nothing of my late night website reads here.
Welcome to the forum. The blood issue was a major factor in my exit from the organisation as well
If you ever need to discuss the principles with anybody you might find this helpful...
is everyone familiar with dr. hugh ross and his organization reasons to believe?
i have learned much from this ministry.. hugh ross is a trained scientist and pastor who specialises in marrying the bible with science (both of which are records of truth).
he has an msc and phd in astronomy and was a post-doctoral fellow with the california institute of technology.
The OP is 15 years old!
okay cut to the chase.
the united states has got a problem.
hillary clinton is so unpopular that practically any republican who ran against her would probably have beaten her.
Nerd - Why do you keep making blank posts?
every time isis commit one of their atrocities, well-meaning folks mumble self-loathing apologies on behalf of "the west".
noam chomsky and his sort lead a chorus of masochistic confessions.
apparently everybody is to blame for islamic terrorism (according to bill nye global warming causes isis) - apart from islamic terrorists of course.
Sam Harris' latest podcast reviews this article in ISIS' magazine Dabiq.
It is 48 minutes well spent.
