(March 31, 2016 at 5:40 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(March 31, 2016 at 5:22 pm)athrock Wrote: You're right on two counts...I'm cute and it's not relevant.![]()
Because, as you say, let's not appeal to numbers...whether they represent the majority or the minority. Instead, I appealed to the sterling reputations of several towering giants of modern cosmology and astrophysics who agree that there appears to be far more in favor of Intelligent Design that you acknowledged when you tossed out your "convoluted reasoning" comment.
See, Lady, I've basically backed you into this corner, there is no escape from it, and you simply need to admit that you fucked up in your exuberance to trash the views of a believer.![]()
What would be even BETTER, however, would be for you to put aside your prejudices and presuppositions and actually THINK about the arguments rather than merely reacting to them emotionally. The truth is what it is whether you like it or not.
Thank you, lay-person, for your opinion. However, in some matters, it makes more sense to pay attention to the opinions of recognized experts.
This is one of those times.
This corner you imagine you've backed me into exists only in your mind, athrock. Right next to your God. It doesn't matter how many times you say it: quoting scientists who believe in ID does not make ID true. There is still that pesky business of evidence for God and evidence for design that you (or anyone else) have, as of yet, failed to produce.
That was not what I said, LC.
I said that the fact that serious scientists see a case for ID suggests that it is not based on "convoluted reasoning". Unless, of course, you wish to ascribe "convoluted thinking" to some folks who have proven themselves to be pretty well-stocked in the "little grey cells" department.
