(March 18, 2015 at 7:53 am)Huggy74 Wrote: According to "science" a meteor hit the planet and caused an extinction level event, and also according to scientific calculations, the hydrogen bomb was supposed to do the same thing, except it didn't. Must I go through all the cases where science has proven to be wrong?
If the Bible backtracked as much as "science" does, I defiantly wouldn't believe in it.
So what you are saying is that we should all read each of your sentences as a singular entity that has no relation to the sentences around it? When we read that quote of yours above, we should ignore all of the bold stuff when digesting the unbolded part?
Are we to take it that when you included that sentence right in the middle of all those other sentences that made it seem like you meant Teller's calculations were an example of scientific consensus later proven wrong, what you meant was that Teller's hypothesis was a good example of an assertion that was tested and proven false?
Because, once again, you dishonest shit, that point would not help your message in the least.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
