A Book?

[Edwardo Piet]

Then that firmly places you with the nutters Evie

No, it places him firmly in the Dawkinsian camp of reality.

Kyu

w00t

It actually feels more like an awesome PARTY than a camp to me these last few weeks

Ever since I read TGD I came here...it was a blast of rationality - and then the more time I spend here the more the party continues lol! The party of rationality LOL.

EvF

---

Then that firmly places you with the nutters Evie

A nutter for wanting evidence before he believes something.
Yeah, wow, that's insane, who'd be so ridiculous.... *ahem*


You say we have no grasp of the subject of faith, but it isn't a subject at all.

No Phil. This subject has no evidence. You'd have to be a pratt to demand evidence of it. How simple can I make this?

If there can be no evidence that doesn't mean you should believe WITHOUT it. It's still ridiculous to believe in something without evidence! I mean; The Flying Spaghetti Monster is unprovable and you could just as easily said there can be no evidence of IT as of "God". Should we believe in the FSM because there can be no evidence of IT either?

Well I think that would be ridiculous. To believe in the FSM you need evidence regardless of if there CAN be or not. If there CAN'T be evidence then we STILL don't have any to believe!

No evidence of FSM; no evidence of God. So we don't believe in the FSM, wtf should we believe in God?



Watch the "Did Darwin kill God" video I posted for info.

---

Then that firmly places you with the nutters Evie

No, it places him firmly in the Dawkinsian camp of reality.

Kyu

Also in the theology = science camp are Creationists and ID'ers. All nutters IMO.

Evidence is rational; Faith isn't. Science is based on Evidence; religion is based on Faith.

EvF