tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post113708227849321700..comments2024-03-28T03:54:21.932-04:00Comments on Canadian Cynic: If there were any more "evidence," I could beat you to death with it.CChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137189954051022432006-01-13T17:05:00.000-05:002006-01-13T17:05:00.000-05:00Pete;For the record, there is a tremendous differe...Pete;<BR/><BR/>For the record, there is a tremendous difference between Creationism and "(belief) in a god that created the world".<BR/><BR/>The former is directly contradicted by scientific evidence from many fields. The latter is unfalsifiable and open to debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137189555008551342006-01-13T16:59:00.000-05:002006-01-13T16:59:00.000-05:00By the way, Pete, the Greeks were aware the world ...By the way, Pete, the Greeks were aware the world was round some 2500 years ago, and people were already aware that the Earth was <I>really</I> old quite some time before Darwin.<BR/><BR/>So, again, if someone <I>today</I> is still a young-earth creationist, then, yes, they really are too stupid for words.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137189364733036802006-01-13T16:56:00.000-05:002006-01-13T16:56:00.000-05:00Pete writes:Does this mean that you consider yours...Pete writes:<BR/><BR/><I>Does this mean that you consider yourself smarter than every single person in history who has believed in a god that created the world? 'Cause that roster includes some pretty bright lights.</I><BR/><BR/>Careful, Pete. If you're talking historical figures, then there's nothing wrong with <I>very</I> clever people a long time ago believing stuff like that. They didn't know any better and they didn't have the tools to figure it out.<BR/><BR/>Nowadays, it's different. For someone today to be, for example, a young-earth creationist is inexcusable. Just as, with the evidence available, it's inexcusable to claim there's no evidence for evolution.<BR/><BR/>Don't be mixing apples and chainsaws here.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137109196925972692006-01-12T18:39:00.000-05:002006-01-12T18:39:00.000-05:00Or, you could just ask Little StephenOr, you could just ask <A HREF="http://www.pogge.ca/archives/000941.shtml" REL="nofollow">Little Stephen</A>RossKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677239332112652522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137108636527119822006-01-12T18:30:00.000-05:002006-01-12T18:30:00.000-05:00People who deny evolution should simply be denied ...People who deny evolution should simply be denied access to drugs for anti-biotic resistant bacteria. You're a creationist? Here have some plain old penicilin. Since those bacteria can't possibly have evolved, it will still work, right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137102328704263362006-01-12T16:45:00.000-05:002006-01-12T16:45:00.000-05:00Oh, no. If they were to say something like that, y...<I>Oh, no. If they were to say something like that, you'd take them to task for being unable (or too lazy) to provide proof of God.</I><BR/><BR/>Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The hard-line religious argument is that there is no incontrovertible proof for evolution. (In other words, there are unknowns - gee - big surprise there)<BR/><BR/>If religion can claim a scientific model is invalid on the basis of the unknowns (and therefore the absence of absolute proof), is it not perfectly unsurprising that the counter question would be the equally unanswerable "prove that God exists" question?<BR/><BR/>The problem that the Bible Beaters(tm) have is that on one hand, they want us to treat the bible metaphorically or literally as they see fit, but conversely, they seem to see rationalism - and especially sciences - as being obliged to provide "concrete" proofs - failing to realize that absolutes don't exist in science.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137099612576698512006-01-12T16:00:00.000-05:002006-01-12T16:00:00.000-05:00Anyone who believes in Creationism is too stupid t...Anyone who believes in Creationism is too stupid to understand all the books in the U of T library.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137091920470754022006-01-12T13:52:00.000-05:002006-01-12T13:52:00.000-05:00Others would give the same argument about God, CC....Others would give the same argument about God, CC. I don't see you defending them when they say something like, "The evidence is all around you, and it's readily accessible. Stop being so lazy and look at some of it, OK?" Oh, no. If they were to say something like that, you'd take them to task for being unable (or too lazy) to provide proof of God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137089696955867842006-01-12T13:14:00.000-05:002006-01-12T13:14:00.000-05:00anonymous #1 writes:The problem with your assertio...anonymous #1 writes:<BR/><BR/><I>The problem with your assertion is this:<BR/>How do you how you discuss your perception of those features of reality with someone who sees obvious evidence of divinity?</I><BR/><BR/>If this person sees, as you put it, "obvious evidence of divinity," then it's totally pointless for them to be asking <I>you</I> for evidence.<BR/><BR/>If they've already made up their mind, then all the evidence in the world is not going to change their mind and they're just wasting your time.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137088874297942472006-01-12T13:01:00.000-05:002006-01-12T13:01:00.000-05:00'they was gathering'. pardon me, I ought to proofr...'they was gathering'. pardon me, I ought to proofread my writing more closely. Yep, graduating UofT student here!! only the best go to Toronto.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137087994140080462006-01-12T12:46:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:46:00.000-05:00friend here: actually, the guy yelling about needi...friend here: actually, the guy yelling about needing 'proof' was holding a rather large and ornate bible, and was accompanied by a number of others with bibles in hand. It really struck me that it was a purposeful religious demonstration (or an attempt anyway) literally 100 meters from the Anthropology department. I'm fairly certain they were baiting secular humanists, and it appeared to be working from the crowd they was gathering, one of whom I know to be an Anthro TA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137087575984757992006-01-12T12:39:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:39:00.000-05:00The problem with your assertion is this:How do you...The problem with your assertion is this:<BR/>How do you how <I>you</I> discuss <I>your perception</I> of those features of reality with someone who sees obvious evidence of divinity?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com