-
Posts
-
Well.. for the record, I’m Roman Catholic.
Not a very good one, not a very bad one.Also for the record, I am (and always have been) in agreement with Pete as to the broader issue of “Man Warpeth the Religion” as it were.
Though that’s not to say the opposite doesn’t apply at times.Anyway, some very good input on this thread
My own contribution shall be (blissfully) brief, but for a curiously interesting take on it all, you may like to cast your eye over This wee article?
The choice of course is entirely yours
Very good `wee article` i am at this time reading through some material regarding the cambrian explosion……btw …any views on my point regarding the rule of celibacy in the catholic denomination ?
Let me get this straight……..someone who smokes pot, ogles women, professes to be perfect and always right………has doubts about my likkle ole mind?
How the mighty fall……….lol :wink:
@pete wrote:
No other law is more fundamental to nature than the second law of thermodynamics. The most fatal objection towards the theory of evolution is that it completely contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. This law is central to every aspect of modern science. Nothing ever breaks and nothing has ever been known to break this fundamental law. It can be stated in many different ways. For our purpose, it essentially means that natural processes always tend towards disorder. Another expression of the same process is entropy. That is, all ordered matter will eventually approach disorder.
This is a very poor position for a Bachelor of Science to hold. Very poor.
@pete wrote:
@Bad Manners wrote:
Frankly I dont care if you’ve got a science degree Pete. If you’re only gonna use to sit on the goddam fence then it dosent really impress me, and what’s the point in it in that case?
You might think it’s noble to respect all opinions, but I dont. I’ve got my opinion, and if anyone gives me any solid evidence to retract my opinion, I’ll think about retracting it ok? My opinion is not set where evidence is concerned, but I know what I believe.
And if anyone doesnt share the same views well you damn well wont listen to their side and if they supply you solid evidence you’ll think of retracting it.. thats big of you… go fuck yourself. Unlike you i dont claim to know what i cant possibly know with 100% certainty. Nobility has nothing to do with it and for the last time i am not interested in a debate where the other party is a fool which you clearly are. You’re far better off getting pissed and pleading for peoples phone numbers, ok it’s another pass time you wont succeed at but its way better than being a bigot
Bigot? :roll: Who am I a “bigot” towards? I havent claimed anywhere that im 100% certain about anything, perhaps you could point me towards where I’ve ever said that, and if someone’s got another opinion to mine I’ll certainly listen to it.
Keep saying these silly lies though, If it makes you feel better.
not (nt)
adv.
In no way; to no degree. Used to express negation, denial, refusal, or prohibition
in·ter·est·ed, in·ter·est·ing, in·ter·ests
1. To arouse the curiosity or hold the attention of: Your opinions interest me.
2. To cause to become involved or concerned withAny clearer now ?
It appears the dust has settled….over 100 replies in this post and they are largely taken up with the subject of evolution together with science of one sort or another, it also appears we have very few faithful here or perhaps for one reason or another they choose not to give response….. :lol: It would seem that any serious debate relating to faith, religion and evolution cannot advance at all as generally speaking, it tends to reduce to offence and insult…
My own personal view as an agnostic is that whatever the scientific outcomes of evolution and abiogenesis etc provide, i hold to the view that the very first element, be it vapour, gas, matter inanimate or animate…..it had to be created…the incredible diversity in molecular structure together with DNA and its combination and set motions lead me to believe that this was no act of chance…the main religions describe to an extent some of this in their contents and this provides the basis for the faithful….i have also noticed large amounts of people who continue to claim to be part of a faith yet cannot follow the scriptures of that faith, these people i would put in the same catergory as the hypocrite.
Their can be no ` sitting on the fence ` in my opinion, you either hold to your beliefs and practice them as they are set out or….. give yourself the title of the agnostic…or of course athiest
and an aganostic is someone who is sitting on the fence to all intents and purposes
and an aganostic is someone who is sitting on the fence to all intents and purposes
An agnostic, holds to no scripture therefore cannot deviate….it is a belief in a Creator not a system of beliefs. This cannot be sitting on the fence, it is a decision to believe…
Likewise with the athiest…..it is a position to disbeleive in a God….they cannot be given the title hypocrite in terms of religion…
Its ok…because i think you missed mine…..
intelligent life…..thought…..energy……collective conscience…created by what????????
I didn’t miss yours, i answered it……. evolution caused humans to evolve into superbeings with the power to create universes. Ergo… humans became god and created the universe!
Its a paradox you see…… but i guess you have to be able to forget about time being linear….. and look at the bigger picture, which is that if there is a god, then that god would certainly not be restricted by time or place, but would be able to be everywhere and everywhen. If humans evolve until they are god…. then they could create the universe!!
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!