Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

@fresco,

Quote:

At his request....Frank's Belief System.

1. A belief in "naive realism" including "objective facts" and "truth".
2. A belief that traditional "logic" is sufficient for debating ontological and epistemological issues.
3. A belief in the unity and consistency of "himself" .
4. A belief that "barber-shop one-liners" coupled with occasional expletives constitute acceptable or intelligent answers.

Numbers 1, 2, and 3 are simply examples of you projecting that silly belief system of yours into the world.

Number 4 claims that what I know to be true...is a belief. I know that “"barber-shop one-liners" coupled with occasional expletives constitute acceptable or intelligent answers”...no matter that you think otherwise.

I am accomplishing my objectives perfectly here...and I am doing it through acceptable and intelligent responses.

I have no belief system, Fresco. Go back and wallow in yours.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Quote:

Nice! That's almost worthy of a new sig line

I like the line myself, Rosborne. When it came to me...I laughed my butt off. Twisted Evil

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

There's no real mystery to one of the Discovery ID advocate's claim that, for instance, the eye is too complex to be formed by the evolutionary process.

99.99% of all IDer claims or assertions are nothing but horseshit, LW.

We agree on that.

I am not defending anything the IDers are saying. I am defending what I have said...that ID (not the horseshit the IDers are peddling) is one possibility.

I have also defended...in like logic...that I am not defending what theists (the horseshit they are peddling) have to say about the existence of "a god"...but rather defending my position that one possible component of Reality is a GOD.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Frank has, frankly, got me mystified. While I respect his right to think any way he wants, the logic thing eludes me.

If that is so, Edgar...you are either NOT actually reading what I have argued...or the notion of "IF there is a GOD..." is so uncomfortable to your atheistic mind that you cannot comprehend anything that follows.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

That seems to be the only "logical" conclusion. Don't wish to anger god and get sent to hell; better to play it safe.

You are a ******* moron...so I won't even bother with you other than to remind you that you are a ******* moron.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank is one really nasty little guy. His attempts at logic are impaired by his volatility.
However, I get a huge kick out of his name calling , and yet he seems to be the only one acting the fool.
Try some sublimation Franky. Engaging in trying to convince people of the logic behind your case, and then shouting at them like a moron, doesnt do your case any good.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Bite me!

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Sorry, but this is the epitome of epistemological ignorance. The ground is easily "assailable" by those who are less epistemologically ignorant (perhaps not being hampered by a personal animosity to that "expensive educational process"). One only need to consider the origin of the word "fact" from the Latin facare "to do" or "to construct" to begin the "assault".

Spendius....this is the way Fresco says: But if you would just believe what I believe...you'd see!

0 Replies

This thread certainly seems to be a window into human nature.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

CAnt you just feel the love in this room?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Dear Frank
I don't mind your saying "if there is a god." I have argued that one with you enough to know you are a stuck record in that regard. I am secure in my atheism and cannot be disturbed by what you say about it. To me, these days, agnostics are mostly tolerable so long as they use their brains in other regards. Something I have not seen from you in this thread. It disturbs me that you can't seem to see that the way evolution is working it could not possibly have a guiding intelligence behind it. Why you think one can't know for sure is silly.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Yeah, and it's Valentine's Day.

There's been a lot of caustic sarcasm thrown around, some of it funny, some of it not funny (I could without the constant Nixon/Tony Soprano epithets), so besides your romantic other (or not, it's good to be happy with oneself), let's all put out some love vibes out for (broken) humanity and the (helpless) animal, even lions and bears who, after all, can be shot by that dick, Cheney or Sarah Palindrome (especially if it's one of her pet dog's ancestors), or maybe more appropriately, -drone, and all of our worldly possessions (I wouldn't say it's bad to love your flat screen TV).

Now that's a boxcar sentence complete with a caboose.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

I don't mind your saying "if there is a god." I have argued that one with you enough to know you are a stuck record in that regard.

A lot better than being stuck, as you are, pretending to KNOW there are no gods.

But to each his own.

Quote:

I am secure in my atheism and cannot be disturbed by what you say about it.

If you feel comfortable with your blind guesses about reality...great!

Quote:

To me, these days, agnostics are mostly tolerable so long as they use their brains in other regards.

Whew...what a relief to the agnostic community.

Quote:

Something I have not seen from you in this thread.

Yeah sure! I have offered arguments that are completely logical...and by their nature, are unassailable. But for close minds like yours, I guess that qualifies as “not using the brain.”

Pathetic close-mindedness on your part. But consistent with the way you usually are.

Quote:

It disturbs me that you can't seem to see that the way evolution is working it could not possibly have a guiding intelligence behind it.

I ******* see the way it is working, you asshole. I've mentioned that a dozen ******* times. But if there is a GOD...THAT COULD EASILY BE THE WAY THE GOD WANTED THINGS TO WORK"IN FACT IT WOULD BE THE WAY THE GOD WOULD HAVE IT WORK.

You ******* people are brain dead.

Quote:

Why you think one can't know for sure is silly.

Why you cannot see the argument I am making is much, much, much more silly.

But I really should give you some slack...you obviously are not very bright.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

I'm only really more in an agnostic state-of-mind in trying to put as much empathy and compassion for their physical and mental state towards stalwart agnostics (like those successfully in AA) and also devout, or not-so-devout, believers in faith. I think there are more people trapped in Pascal's conundrum than can be comprehended. It's that they cannot put total faith in the politicians, statesman, friends, relatives, and the general population (too often, just the mob) to organize some of the randomness. Right, I've got to be kidding -- one (or a group) cannot organize randomness. They can feel solace in sharing body heat in a building with steeples (I've always admired the early European church architecture and also the religious architecture of India, China, Japan, et al). This is comforting to them even if it really does nothing about randomness but allows them to ignore it.

It's just that agnosticism is a fickle state-of-mind and if one isn't bouncing back and forth from atheism to theism, I don't see how they stay being human. It would certainly be tranquilizing to stay put and block out any ideas coming from either side. But I can't. I can reject the notion of only one god created by the Christian faith, based a lot on their egotistical "everyone else is going to hell but them" BS, so Pascal is also BS. You might as well jump off a cliff because you can.

1 Reply

Just a reminder that ALL CAPS on the Internet is shouting. There's no need to shout unless you're worried you are wrong, or you are just plain drunk.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

Just a reminder that ALL CAPS on the Internet is shouting.

That is correct.

Quote:

Just a reminder that ALL CAPS on the Internet is shouting. There's no need to shout unless you're worried you are wrong, or you are just plain drunk.

That is NOT correct. Sometimes you just want to shout.

0 Replies

Sorry, Frank. You are the intransigent one, and calling others brain dead does not make it so.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I am accomplishing my objectives perfectly here...and I am doing it through acceptable and intelligent responses.

Be honest ... Wink

...what "objectives" ? Some sort of "mental work-out" in an attempt to keep senility at bay ?

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Not sure why some atheists, like Edgar, think agnostics are trying to hedge their bets with their agnosticism...but I suspect it has to do with trying to rationalize their blind guesses about what the Reality is.

Agnosticism is simply an acknowledgement of the truth...I do not know the unknown.

My personal agnosticism includes the factor: I do not have enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess.

Edgar claims to KNOW that there are no GODS.

Some other atheists here claim they have enough evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess that there are no gods.

MY GUESS: Both types of atheists are full of ****.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

ID by any other name is still ID; it must have a god or creator.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know