Pip,
On your apparent view that the bible is the best thing since sliced bread I have to say that others (of different religions) would claim the same about their tomes and that there are some fairly horrendous tings in your bible (the utter destruction of all life except 1 boatload being one of them,
On being different ... you're entitled to believe what you want about yourself but to me you're just one of a groups of theists who advances the kind of arguments you do. None of you are specifically bad but you're all a bit flaky to me and in some ways I find the style of argument s they & you advance far more frustrating than others ... it isn't because you're right, more because you hide behind claims that themselves are as unsupportable as your base arguments.
On Dawkins yes, he goes for the "underbelly" and I have no problem at all with that, there are many who do and I have no problem with them either ... I have a huge problem with those (like Gould) who offer an olive branch to religions. It comes down to this simple point ... astrology/reflexology/Feng Shui/acupuncture/homeopathy/naturopathy are all for flakes, they are not science, they offer no real value ... religion is different only in the claims it makes and should be treated exactly the same.
On musical scales yes I accept the sounds were there but the definition of the notes (the scales themselves) are human inventions.
Species is quite simply a biological classification concept, a categorisation system based on taxonomy that allows us to observe and determine the relationships between various life forms.
Some things are in the realm of HYPOTHESIS not theory (theories represent the highest form of scientific explanation, they are full explanation complete with huge amounts of evidence and detailed mechanisms and in no way equate to the common idea that they represent a guess or a wizard wheeze) ... yes the formation of the universe (inasmuch as how the universe came to start) is highly speculative but everything from 10-43 (Planck Time where everything that is was compressed into a sphere 100th of a millimetre across) has been at least partially explained. Granted those explanations may be wrong but that's science.
The umlaut is got by using Word ... I note you didn't actually answer the question.
Kyu
On your apparent view that the bible is the best thing since sliced bread I have to say that others (of different religions) would claim the same about their tomes and that there are some fairly horrendous tings in your bible (the utter destruction of all life except 1 boatload being one of them,
On being different ... you're entitled to believe what you want about yourself but to me you're just one of a groups of theists who advances the kind of arguments you do. None of you are specifically bad but you're all a bit flaky to me and in some ways I find the style of argument s they & you advance far more frustrating than others ... it isn't because you're right, more because you hide behind claims that themselves are as unsupportable as your base arguments.
On Dawkins yes, he goes for the "underbelly" and I have no problem at all with that, there are many who do and I have no problem with them either ... I have a huge problem with those (like Gould) who offer an olive branch to religions. It comes down to this simple point ... astrology/reflexology/Feng Shui/acupuncture/homeopathy/naturopathy are all for flakes, they are not science, they offer no real value ... religion is different only in the claims it makes and should be treated exactly the same.
On musical scales yes I accept the sounds were there but the definition of the notes (the scales themselves) are human inventions.
Species is quite simply a biological classification concept, a categorisation system based on taxonomy that allows us to observe and determine the relationships between various life forms.
Some things are in the realm of HYPOTHESIS not theory (theories represent the highest form of scientific explanation, they are full explanation complete with huge amounts of evidence and detailed mechanisms and in no way equate to the common idea that they represent a guess or a wizard wheeze) ... yes the formation of the universe (inasmuch as how the universe came to start) is highly speculative but everything from 10-43 (Planck Time where everything that is was compressed into a sphere 100th of a millimetre across) has been at least partially explained. Granted those explanations may be wrong but that's science.
The umlaut is got by using Word ... I note you didn't actually answer the question.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
