Satann Coulter
Out of context: Reply #204
- Started
- Last post
- 261 Responses
- gramme0
i win.
pavlovs_dog
(Jun 15 06, 18:36)Haha. Ok buddy, if you think so...
Notice how I don't sling around any slanderous names like 'fundy' or 'idiot' or what have you. That shit doesn't make your argument any stronger, it just makes you sound angrier.
And Johndiggity....
Are you sure we've actually found the FARTHEST stars in this universe? Let's suppose you're correct, and that the universe appears to be 13 billion years old, give or take. Does that automatically disclude the posibility of a universe being called spontaneously into existence by a supreme being (call it/him/her whatever you will), and that universe being called into existence at a certain level of completion, that is to say fully formed planets & stars that appear to be very, very old?? IS it completely impossible? What I say is impossible and untenable is the notion that there is an infinite regression of events with no original Author. Things do not move unless acted upon, that is a basic law of the universe that science embraces readily enough. I have no scientific proof for the existence of the biblical God, but the best efforts of Nietzche & co. have not been able to convince me otherwise.
The trouble with all these 'scientific' notions we're discussing here is that science, by definition, is based on direct observation. Theories of evolution are based almost entirely on speculation and theorizing (in a philosophical, not a scientific sense).
So (not necessarily to JD but to people like mr. dobs, etc.) there is really no sensible reason to slam people who happen to disagree with you, especially when they have said nothing rude or slanderous.
Good day.