sci.astro
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Intelligent Design Invading Liberal Classrooms (was: South Park tau

Subject: Re: Intelligent Design Invading Liberal Classrooms was: South Park taunting Scientology
From: Seppo Renfors
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:36:55 GMT
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.skeptic, sci.archaeology

mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> In article <4392C6FB.C25EE368@xxxxxxxxxx>, Seppo Renfors <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> writes:
> >
> >
> >mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <439219B4.45101D6@xxxxxxxxxx>, Seppo Renfors 
> >> <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >[..]
> >> >>
> >> >> What science interferes with (and vice versa) is naive
> >> >> literalism and zeal.  But nothing special about faith here.  I've
> >> >> seen zealous theists objecting to evolution based on scripture, and
> >> >> I've seen zealous atheists objecting to the Big Bang model because it
> >> >> sounds to much like "creation".  The difference between the two?  None
> >> >> that I can see.
> >> >
> >> >Oh but the difference is enormous. You need to look at the starting
> >> >points for each. The "big bang" is merely a term for one particular
> >> >theory that can be supported to a degree, not a claim of fact. In
> >> >other words, they start with reasoning and some known condition to
> >> >find a probably cause.
> >> >       Conclusion - They start with a question to arrive at an answer.
> >> >
> >> >The "Theist" starting point is the "word of god" in the manner their
> >> >particular scripture as it is written today (it will change tomorrow,
> >> >and it was also different yesterday). From that "truth" they then
> >> >attempt make all things fit that truth - in other words, the massage
> >> >the "evidence" to fit a predetermined outcome.
> >> >       Conclusion - They start with an answer to arrive at the question.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> You were not reading.  Your supposed "response" has *nothing* to do
> >> with the issue I brought.  The issue (for your education, if such a
> >> thing is possible) was not:
> >>
> >> A)  What is the difference between the Big Bang model and the story of
> >> creation?
> >>
> >> but:
> >>
> >> B)  What is the difference between a theist objecting to evolution
> >> because it disagrees with scripture and an atheist objecting to the
> >> Big Bang model because it sounds like "creation".
> >>
> >> Kindly work on your reading comprehension skills before attempting to
> >> respond again.
> >
> >If you had any skill at all of the kind you refer to, you would be
> >well aware I dealt with the issue you point to in (B). Your
> >"declaration" to the question in (B) was "None that I can see." - and
> >I pointed out how wrong you were and explained to you the enormous
> >difference there is. You know, like the difference between day and
> >night. My apologies for making the error of believing you to be
> >intelligent.
> >
> >BTW do you often talk you yourself? How do you manage the
> >disagreements you have with yourself? Does it result in a punch up,
> >considering your ill-tempered nature?
> >
> Well, you convinced me that you're a waste of time.  I do not like to
> waste my time.  Good bye.


Oh, it really is a nice white flag you are waving there :-)

-- 
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>