Satann Coulter
- Started
- Last post
- 261 Responses
- gramme0
I wonder which one will get here first. The second coming of Jesus or science supporting creationism. My money is on neither, ever happening.
Mimio
(Jun 15 06, 12:24)It always goes this direction...
- jevad0
what other direction is there?!
show me some science supporting creationism - some rock solid FACTS and I'll fucking walking down 16th street mall naked with a placard and a megaphone mate....
- Mimio0
Well, we are talking about a book about Godless liberals, that masquerades as politcal discourse. Gramme, are we really off topic?
- mrdobolina0
I'd like to throw that woman off of a fire escape.
- gramme0
what other direction is there?!
show me some science supporting creationism - some rock solid FACTS and I'll fucking walking down 16th street mall naked with a placard and a megaphone mate....
jevad
(Jun 15 06, 12:33)Both sides claim to have facts. What it really comes down to , IMHO, is faith. What people are willing or not willing to believe. Darwinism is a belief system like any other.
- gramme0
Well, we are talking about a book about Godless liberals, that masquerades as politcal discourse. Gramme, are we really off topic?
Mimio
(Jun 15 06, 12:33)I don't think we're off topic, I just think the pattern of arguments are predictable. That's all. It's usually the same group of people in these discussions.
- mrdobolina0
do you think the earth is 6000 years old?
Do you think T Rex's were around during the early Iranian civilizations 6-7000 years ago?
- Mimio0
If the science was actually there, most scientists would change their tune. Most scientists believe in God, or a prime mover already. I don't think the overwhelming majority of scientists are ready to throw out over 150 years of research supporting evolution and common descent over some biochemists fringe opinions and "observations".
- johndiggity0
to interject, there is a lot of work being done by astro-physicists and cosmologists with m-theory and the propostion of an infinite number of parallel universes, where every conceivable outcome has, is, and will occur for every event that ever has, is, and will, all at the same time.
why this is relevant, is that unlike intelligent design, m-theory is AN ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC THEORY.
just thinking about it boggles the mind and puts in perspective how small we really are.
- gramme0
do you think the earth is 6000 years old?
Do you think T Rex's were around during the early Iranian civilizations 6-7000 years ago?
mrdobolina
(Jun 15 06, 12:38)Actually I do, partially since carbon dating has been proven to be a faulty method of determining the age of a fossil or anything embedded in the earth for that matter. Two test with the same carbon dating method often yield wildly varying results.
Again though, as I said, the big deal here is belief. People either want to believe in Darwinism, or they want to believe in Creationism. Personal affinity seems to usually trump facts in people's process of developping beliefs.
- flagellum0
Who said anything about Creationism? You guys are still conflating ID with creationism which of course demonstrates why ID will ultimately be recognized as truth... nobody understands what it is. I have no idea what digital code in the cell, cellular machinery, the abrupt appearance of novel cell, tissue, & body plans, etc... etc... has to do with the Biblical book of Genesis. Do you, mimio? Why not explain how that works for me.
- ********0
zzzzzzzzzzz
- Mimio0
Alright gramme, I'm done talking to you about actual reality now.
Good luck in life.
- Mimio0
Discipler, why don't you explain why you changed your screen name. That is your answer.
- mrdobolina0
do you believe in santy claus?
- kyl30
how 'bout them lakers?
- mrdobolina0
when I was a kid I believed in santa claus. I had faith that he existed, then I realized it was just my parents using it to make me behave.
- flagellum0
I'm glad that Coulter's book is number one because that means that millions of people are becoming privy to the truth that Darwinism is merely 19th century steamboat era materialistic philosophy (which was fashionable at the time) pretending to be science. We have new data now. Data which goes beyond the machinery and code that Biochemists are discovering. It's the data being uncovered by the hard sciences: Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry. It's an exciting time, really. Mimio, your mention of descent with modification again demonstrates your blissful ignorance of ID. Few ID supporters deny some degree of descent within certain phyla. The issue is the mechanism.
- brandelec0
100!