Religions > Atheism > TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind.
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sudoku" |
| Date: |
29 Apr 2006 02:46:20 PM |
| Object: |
TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
.
|
|
| User: "Hagar" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 10:13:36 AM |
|
|
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
Perhaps you could start by stating your above referenced "Question" to which
you seek an answer. Your link presented a comment of the very dedicated
Seth Shostak, regarding the total insanity of the religious crowd and their
insistence on the fable of Spontaneous Creation (because it says so in the
Bibble) and/or its halfwit cousin, Intelligent Design.
Mr. Shostak is an intelligent person, who has dedicated his life to SETI, in
an attempt to find signs of extraterrestrial intelligent life in our
galactic neighborhood. The reason you don't find many Xistians involved in
this endeavor is because a certain minimum level of intelligence is a
prerequisite and the Fundies just haven't gotten there as yet.
They prefer to bellow from the pulpit, veins straining on their foreheads
and fists pounding their scientific reference book called the Bibble. "It
saws raght chere: An gawd created the heavens and the earth in seven days
and rested on the eighth !! an don yoh forgat it, boi !! We caint see him,
aint got no fucking clue whare he is, but we knows hes the creator of all
what moves, because it say so in this here bibble"
Amen, you dumb fuckers ... now back into your cave.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sudoku" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comesto mind. |
30 Apr 2006 12:43:41 PM |
|
|
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
Perhaps you could start by stating your above referenced "Question" to which
you seek an answer.
It is in the subject title.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hagar" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 06:55:49 PM |
|
|
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:hH65g.7784$t_2.809@trnddc07...
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
Snip drivel ..
It is in the subject title.
Sorry Sudoku, I did not understand the word "Whay".
Either install a spell checker, or go back and seed your trolling grounds in
whichever NG you claim as your primary playground.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lucky Luciano" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 09:31:58 PM |
|
|
"Hagar" <hagen@sahm.name> wrote in message
news:2aydnfvQTvLs08jZnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@giganews.com...
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> JABRIOL wrote in message
news:hH65g.7784$t_2.809@trnddc07...
Snip drivel ..
It is in the subject title.
Sorry Sudoku, I did not understand the word "Whay".
Either install a spell checker, or go back and seed your trolling grounds
in
whichever NG you claim as your primary playground.
It's not the fish and pond groups he's TROLLING because his victim Carol
posts to those groups. His home group is the Jehovah's Witness NG. And
these guys wonder why people slam doors in their faces. Lets not help
Jabriol kill and harass other NGs by removing them when replying to yet
another of his boring cross-posted troll threads.
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sudoku" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Why Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes tomind. |
01 May 2006 04:33:23 AM |
|
|
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:hH65g.7784$t_2.809@trnddc07...
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
Snip drivel ..
It is in the subject title.
Sorry Sudoku, I did not understand the word "Whay".
Either install a spell checker, or go back and seed your trolling grounds in
whichever NG you claim as your primary playground.
Typos.. but ad-hom noted. Now do you have an answer, or you're just
around to correct people spelling on the net?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Gilligan Horry" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Why Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
01 May 2006 06:55:52 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 01 May 2006 09:33:23 GMT, Sudoku <boring@game.org> wrote:
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:hH65g.7784$t_2.809@trnddc07...
Hagar wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
Snip drivel ..
It is in the subject title.
Sorry Sudoku, I did not understand the word "Whay".
Either install a spell checker, or go back and seed your trolling grounds in
whichever NG you claim as your primary playground.
Typos.. but ad-hom noted. Now do you have an answer, or you're just
around to correct people spelling on the net?
All 57
+
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Koi-Lo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? CROSS-POST TROLL ALERT |
29 Apr 2006 11:41:47 PM |
|
|
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
And please don't reply to the Aquarium group since it's OFF-TOPIC there!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sudoku" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? CROSS-POST TROLL ALERT |
30 Apr 2006 07:13:53 AM |
|
|
Koi-Lo wrote:
"Sudoku" <boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08...
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
And please don't reply to the Aquarium group since it's OFF-TOPIC there!
That what them aliens want you to believe. Where do you think Life on
this planet started? In a Big Aquarium. So it is on topic.
Sorry Carol, But you are a Liar and you can't speak for everyone. Unless
you assume that people don't know how to delete a subject that they are
not interested in.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 05:05:55 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:46:20 GMT, Sudoku <boring@game.org> wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
Shut the ***** up, Jabbers.
<PLONK!>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Koi-Lo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 05:13:47 PM |
|
|
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:05:55 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
<>On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:46:20 GMT, Sudoku <boring@game.org> wrote:
<>
<>>http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
<>>
<>>A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
<>>censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
<>>don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
<>>rational answer?
<>>
<>>Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
<>
<>Shut the ***** up, Jabbers.
<>
<><PLONK!>
<>
Koi-Lo....
Frugal ponding since 1982.
Aquariums since 1956.
Some assholes Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
*Note: There are several *Koi-Lo's* on rec.ponds.
But, I am the one and only original Koi-Lo.
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?My_2_=A2?=" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. AB0000000596240 |
01 May 2006 12:33:03 AM |
|
|
Impersonation by ROY from rec.ponds:
Path:
authen.yellow.readfreenews.net!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!0731b46b!not-for-mail
From: invalid@invalid.invalid (Koi-Lo) - - > ROY
Newsgroups:
talk.religion.christian.jehovah-witness,alt.atheism,alt.alien.research,rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc,sci.anthropology
Subject: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to
mind.
Organization: The Trailer Dālmāniō©
Reply-To: invalid@invalid.invalid
Message-ID: <44573555.13313802@news.west.earthlink.net>
References: <goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08>
<o1da52d7mfd7cjkbj67i5fbc6dib2pb462@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 34
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:13:47 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.255.246.149
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net 1146435227 4.255.246.149 (Sun, 30
Apr 2006 15:13:47 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:13:47 PDT
Xref: authen.yellow.readfreenews.net alt.atheism:4284936
alt.alien.research:409439 rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc:219667
sci.anthropology:154343
"Koi-Lo" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:44573555.13313802@news.west.earthlink.net...
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:05:55 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
<>On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:46:20 GMT, Sudoku <boring@game.org> wrote:
<>
<>>http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
<>>
<>>A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature
of
<>>censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
<>>don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
<>>rational answer?
<>>
<>>Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
<>
<>Shut the ***** up, Jabbers.
<>
<><PLONK!>
<>
Koi-Lo....
Frugal ponding since 1982.
Aquariums since 1956.
Some assholes Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
*Note: There are several *Koi-Lo's* on rec.ponds.
But, I am the one and only original Koi-Lo.
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sudoku" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comesto mind. |
30 Apr 2006 05:20:38 PM |
|
|
Koi-Lo wrote:
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
He is the example of atheism. John can't present a valid argument ever.
So he just curses in fuustration.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lupinus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
01 May 2006 05:22:28 AM |
|
|
Sudoku wrote:
Koi-Lo wrote:
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
He is the example of atheism.
Please explain what you are implying by this statement. ('the' example)
Lupinus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lupinus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
03 May 2006 04:15:18 AM |
|
|
Lupinus wrote:
Sudoku wrote:
Koi-Lo wrote:
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
He is the example of atheism.
Please explain what you are implying by this statement. ('the' example)
I'll explain.
By using 'the' rather than 'an' you appear to be implying that this is
a particularly prime example, or in fact defining examples of atheism,
rather than simply an example of one particular atheist.
Is this what you intend?
Lupinus
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
03 May 2006 06:12:37 AM |
|
|
On 3 May 2006 02:15:18 -0700, "Lupinus" <lupinus@mail.com> wrote:
Lupinus wrote:
Sudoku wrote:
Koi-Lo wrote:
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
He is the example of atheism.
Please explain what you are implying by this statement. ('the' example)
I'll explain.
By using 'the' rather than 'an' you appear to be implying that this is
a particularly prime example, or in fact defining examples of atheism,
rather than simply an example of one particular atheist.
Is this what you intend?
Jabbers doesn't intend anything other than to start a flame war. That
usually ends up with Jabbers being the only one who gets flamed,
though. <G>
Lupinus
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kult Klobberer" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
01 May 2006 09:13:05 AM |
|
|
This IMPERSONATION by ROY from rec.ponds.
Path:
bigbe1.bellsouth.net!bigfeed.bellsouth.net!bigfeed2.bellsouth.net!news.bells
outh.net!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net
!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!0731
b46b!not-for-mail
From: invalid@invalid.invalid (Koi-Lo) - ROY
Newsgroups:
talk.religion.christian.jehovah-witness,alt.atheism,alt.alien.research,rec.a
quaria.freshwater.misc,sci.anthropology
Subject: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to
mind.
Organization: The Trailer Dālmāniō©
Reply-To: invalid@invalid.invalid
Message-ID: <44573555.13313802@news.west.earthlink.net>
References: <goP4g.2833$O_6.1056@trnddc08>
<o1da52d7mfd7cjkbj67i5fbc6dib2pb462@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 34
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:13:47 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.255.246.149
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net 1146435227 4.255.246.149 (Sun, 30
Apr 2006 15:13:47 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:13:47 PDT
Xref: bigfeed.bellsouth.net talk.religion.christian.jehovah-witness:111552
alt.atheism:4397584 alt.alien.research:398482
rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc:271950 sci.anthropology:210371
"Koi-Lo" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:44573555.13313802@news.west.earthlink.net...
what....usiing such foul mouthed language n this forum you ought to be
ashmed of yourself. Do you want to get Herr Passman all upset and
cause his kiddies to have a stroke when they read that
language.......Your insessant use of those type words are going to
make him very ill, when he has to miss his tea and crumpets and write
an admosnishing letter to you threatening your lifestyle.........
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:05:55 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
<>On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:46:20 GMT, Sudoku <boring@game.org> wrote:
<>
<>>http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
<>>
<>>A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature
of
<>>censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
<>>don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
<>>rational answer?
<>>
<>>Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
<>
<>Shut the ***** up, Jabbers.
<>
<><PLONK!>
<>
Koi-Lo....
Frugal ponding since 1982.
Aquariums since 1956.
Some assholes Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
*Note: There are several *Koi-Lo's* on rec.ponds.
But, I am the one and only original Koi-Lo.
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sudoku" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comesto mind. |
01 May 2006 11:46:30 AM |
|
|
KOI-LO aka sock of the day Kult Klobberer wrote:
This IMPERSONATION by ROY from rec.ponds.
Nobody care.... go away Liar!
.
|
|
|
| User: "~ * KISS * ~" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 - TROLL ALERT |
01 May 2006 12:49:20 PM |
|
|
"Sudoku" JABRIOL<boring@game.org> wrote in message
news:GXq5g.11249$Un3.5882@trnddc05...
KOI-LO aka sock of the day Kult Klobberer wrote:
This IMPERSONATION by ROY from rec.ponds.
Nobody care.... go away Liar!
GET LOST YOU HOMICIDAL SOCIOPATH!
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
01 May 2006 01:21:48 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 1 May 2006 09:13:05 -0500, "Kult Klobberer"
<freedom@usenets.net> wrote:
This IMPERSONATION by ROY from rec.ponds.
STFU, Jabbers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ian Braidwood" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 11:19:49 AM |
|
|
Sudoku wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
If you want thoughtful replies, I suggest you ask thoughtful questions.
The whole point of the ID stance is that life - or some aspects of it -
are too complicated to have arisen through Darwinian selection. If that
is true on Earth, then what reason is there to believe it isn't true
elsewhere in the universe? None.
This of course does not prove ET has not visited Earth and played with
DNA, but there is no evidence to think such an outlandish thing.
In reality, there is not one sound instance of irriducible complexity
in nature. From Behe's examples, simpler versions of the bacterial
flagella having already been found in nature, the photosensitive
chemicals known as rhodopsins show a clear relationship to each other
and the evolution of vertebrate eyes has been well mapped out.
As complex as some things are in nature, there is no reason to think
Natural Selection incapable of generating any existant form or
biochemical process. Indeed, all Behe was able to do in his book was
state that in his opinion, these things were too complex to have arisen
naturally; he was never able to show that anything was too complex in
principle.
Intelligent Design has had its day. It has been shown to be
intellectually backrupt and its proponents shown to be actually
dishonest. It's time for you and other theists to learn about nature
from nature, not from some old book written by people who didn't know
about the world.
It's time for you to reconcile yourself to Darwinism and start working
out what it actually means for your world view.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS:Whay Can ET not be ID? Arthur C Clark 2001 series comes to mind. |
30 Apr 2006 05:06:52 PM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2006 09:19:49 -0700, "Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net>
wrote:
Sudoku wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/hwlue
A question I would like to ask in Talk.Origins, but due to the nature of
censorship and content moderation, I Would not be a good idea. They
don't appreciate in depth reasoning. Anyhow, Can some one give a
rational answer?
Ad-hom replies would be ignored.
If you want thoughtful replies, I suggest you ask thoughtful questions.
It's Jabriol. Thoughtful doesn't apply.
The whole point of the ID stance is that life - or some aspects of it -
are too complicated to have arisen through Darwinian selection. If that
is true on Earth, then what reason is there to believe it isn't true
elsewhere in the universe? None.
This of course does not prove ET has not visited Earth and played with
DNA, but there is no evidence to think such an outlandish thing.
In reality, there is not one sound instance of irriducible complexity
in nature. From Behe's examples, simpler versions of the bacterial
flagella having already been found in nature, the photosensitive
chemicals known as rhodopsins show a clear relationship to each other
and the evolution of vertebrate eyes has been well mapped out.
As complex as some things are in nature, there is no reason to think
Natural Selection incapable of generating any existant form or
biochemical process. Indeed, all Behe was able to do in his book was
state that in his opinion, these things were too complex to have arisen
naturally; he was never able to show that anything was too complex in
principle.
Intelligent Design has had its day. It has been shown to be
intellectually backrupt and its proponents shown to be actually
dishonest. It's time for you and other theists to learn about nature
from nature, not from some old book written by people who didn't know
about the world.
It's time for you to reconcile yourself to Darwinism and start working
out what it actually means for your world view.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
