I am a theist

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
as i stated and thank you for demonstrating the fact, resistance is futile! no one may question the chief chef and everyone reads from the same recipe book!

I said you CAN question it (for what good it would do ).

In this case, there is no “chief chef” Unless you are not talking about a person but rather than a thing in which case the “chief chef” would be 'scientific method'.

The “recipe book” in this case would be the list of proven scientific facts; as I said, you can question it until you are blue in the face.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I said you CAN question it. In this case, there is no “chief chef”. The “recipe book” in this case would be the list of proven scientific facts; as I said, you can question it until you are blue in the face.

list of scientific facts? fossil record?, transitionary beings?, mutations?, life from mindless matter, I dont think so!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
list of scientific facts? fossil record?, transitionary beings?, mutations?, life from mindless matter, I dont think so!

“..list of scientific facts? fossil record? ...”

Do you deny the existence of fossils? Or do you deny that they show a record of what once lived?

“...transitionary beings? ...”

You mean missing links? Some exist today; do you deny this? Also, we can deduce that many once existed but are now extinct.

“...mutations?, ...”

Oh came on. Do you deny that mutations occur?

“...life from mindless matter, ...”

We can deduce that this must have occurred because if it hadn't then, logically, life never had a beginning but always existed but there is good evidence that life could not have always existed (for example, conditions would have surely been impossible for life before star and planet formation).

Sorry, these are the facts.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“..list of scientific facts? fossil record? ...”

Do you deny the existence of fossils? Or do you deny that they show a record of what once lived?

“...transitionary beings? ...”

You mean missing links? Some exist today; do you deny this? Also, we can deduce that many once existed but are now extinct.

“...mutations?, ...”

Oh came on. Do rely been impossible for life before star and planet formation).

Sorry, these are the facts.

if you think for one moment that i am going to get involved in another fruitless argument pointing out the deficiencies of the evolutionary hypothesis, then my dear Mr Hamilton, think again, believe what you want. While far from being an expert I have read enough to know the difference between science and postulation, truth and dogma! The fossil record does not support a gradual transition from one species to another, mutations in almost every instance produce inferior characteristics and DNA is designed to not only stabilise but rectify aberrations and its not only highly illogical, but improbable that life originated from mindless matter, and the so called missing links are just that, missing! I am saying no more, we have been through this at great length you and i in the past, i see no point in traversing the same old ground. I am sorry these are also facts. You are correct, it will do no good! 🙂

Originally posted by josephw
Do you live differently believing there is a God from how you would live if you didn't?

How would I know the answer to that?

Originally posted by John W Booth
I believe there is a God.

I can't prove He (She/It) exists.

I feel no need to.

I contemplate it from time to time.

He hasn't communicated with me.

He hasn't issued me with any instructions.

I have no idea what happens after death.

I leave speculation about that to others.

Because I have no interest in religion.

I feel no onus on me to 'spread' any 'word' about anything to anyone.

I am a theist.

Maybe I can help a bit.

1. God has not communicated with you yet he exists. Why?

2. God has not given you any instructions? Would you say that your innate conscience should be disregarded?

3. When you die you die. You then need to be made alive again if you are to live again.

4. You have no interest in religion yet you post in the spirituality forum about your beliefs? Hmmm. Methinks what you are saying is that you have no interest in organized religion. Am I right?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if you think for one moment that i am going to get involved in another fruitless argument pointing out the deficiencies of the evolutionary hypothesis, then my dear Mr Hamilton, think again, believe what you want. While far from being an expert I have read enough to know the difference between science and postulation, truth and dogma! The fossil rec ...[text shortened]... ng the same old ground. I am sorry these are also facts. You are correct, it will do no good! 🙂

(*) The fossil record does not support a gradual transition from one species to another - been explained to you.
(*) Mutations in almost every instance produce inferior characteristics - been explained to you.
(*) DNA is designed to not only stabilise but rectify aberrations - been explained to you.
(*) Improbable that life originated from mindless matter - been explained to you.
(*) The so called missing links are just that, missing - been explained to you.
Of you haven't understood the explanations, or just don't accept the science behind, or perhaps don't want to know, then it's not science that fail, but you.

You have to understand, that the science behind every technical thing you use is also behind the scientific methods used to show the that evolution is a fact, not just a mere guessing. It's a well founded theory!

Do you believe in atomic theory? It make internet work as well as make the dating the fossils reliably. Deny fossil dating and you have to deny internet as well becaues it is based on the same atomic theory.

Creationism has not ever scientifically showed anything reliably. Science has.
Creationism is a part of a religion. Don't try to use science to prove religious things. You will fail.

Originally posted by whodey
Maybe I can help a bit.

1. God has not communicated with you yet he exists. Why?

I don't know. I don't speculate about it.

2. God has not given you any instructions? Would you say that your innate conscience should be disregarded?

Your two questions are non-sequitur as far as I am concerned.

3. When you die you die. You then need to be made alive again if you are to live again.

I am not really interested in your imagination or in the things you were told by your parents when you were a little child.

4. You have no interest in religion yet you post in the spirituality forum about your beliefs? Hmmm. Methinks what you are saying is that you have no interest in organized religion. Am I right?

I've said so about ten or twenty times on this thread so I don't know what kind of insight into me you think youve stumbled across here.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if you think for one moment that i am going to get involved in another fruitless argument pointing out the deficiencies of the evolutionary hypothesis, then my dear Mr Hamilton, think again, believe what you want. While far from being an expert I have read enough to know the difference between science and postulation, truth and dogma! The fossil rec ...[text shortened]... ng the same old ground. I am sorry these are also facts. You are correct, it will do no good! 🙂

mutations in almost every instance produce inferior characteristics and DNA is designed to not only stabilise but rectify aberrations and its not only highly illogical

I gave you a nice link that dealt with your misconceptions here, but no doubt you just put your hands over your ears closed your eyes and proceeded to 'la la la la la la la la la la' until the 'danger' had passed.

I also find it highly amusing that you should talk about 'scientific facts' when we have learnt that your 'evidence' for Adam & Eve is that clay, which is what the God of the Bible allegedly made us from, and us share the same common element oxygen. Maybe you could write that up and see if you could get it peer-reviewed?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
[b]mutations in almost every instance produce inferior characteristics and DNA is designed to not only stabilise but rectify aberrations and its not only highly illogical

I gave you a nice link that dealt with your misconceptions here, but no doubt you just put your hands over your ears closed your eyes and proceeded to 'la la la la la la la la la element oxygen. Maybe you could write that up and see if you could get it peer-reviewed?[/b]

As i stated to my friend Mr Hamilton, i have no further comment to make. I feel no threat from the evolutionary hypothesis any more than i feel a threat from other religious points of view. You and i have looked at this aspect before, my statement remains. The idea, that humans are made up of the same elements found in the earth is based on solid science, unassailable logic and irrefutable evidence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
As i stated to my friend Mr Hamilton, i have no further comment to make. I feel no threat from the evolutionary hypothesis any more than i feel a threat from other religious points of view. You and i have looked at this aspect before, my statement remains. The idea, that humans are made up of the same elements found in the earth is based on solid science, unassailable logic and irrefutable evidence.

I feel no threat from the evolutionary hypothesis any more than i feel a threat from other religious points of view.

That my well be the case. But whether you like it or not evolution is a scientific fact, now you can huff and puff all you like and you may even throw your toys out of your pram but that's the way it is. I think deep down you know this to be true also, that's why you don't engage in debate on the topic and also why you refuse to read any books on the subject from evolutionary biology. For goodness sake, even your beloved Prof Behe accepts evolutionary theory.

If it is all bunkum as you want to believe what do you think is taught on biology courses arcoss the globe? Do they just sit around all day for 3 years playing games doing a bit of knitting?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
[b]I feel no threat from the evolutionary hypothesis any more than i feel a threat from other religious points of view.

That my well be the case. But whether you like it or not evolution is a scientific fact, now you can huff and puff all you like and you may even throw your toys out of your pram but that's the way it is. I think deep down you kno the globe? Do they just sit around all day for 3 years playing games doing a bit of knitting?[/b]

dont engage in debate ????, my goodness man i have engaged in extensive debate over the last three or four years, enough is enough! No more! As far as i am concerned its a religious belief, science is one thing, the evolutionary hypothesis quite another. Yes they would be as well as taking up knitting, at least they would have a cosy hat and a pair of gloves at the end of it to show for their efforts rather than a string vest of a theory!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
dont engage in debate ????, my goodness man i have engaged in extensive debate over the last three or four years, enough is enough! No more! As far as i am concerned its a religious belief, science is one thing, the evolutionary hypothesis quite another. Yes they would be as well as taking up knitting, at least they would have a cosy hat and a pair of gloves at the end of it to show for their efforts rather than a string vest of a theory!

I forgot to put 'any more', in the sentence. We have engaged in debate on this topic, but that's what we do here is it not? We debate things.

What do you think is taught on all the evolutionary biology courses, lets say at Glasgow University? If it is all bunkum as you believe, what do students do for 3 years, and more if the wish to attain an MSc or even a Phd? What constitutes the syllabus?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I forgot to put 'any more', in the sentence. We have engaged in debate on this topic, but that's what we do here is it not? We debate things.

What do you think is taught on all the evolutionary biology courses, lets say at Glasgow University? If it is all bunkum as you believe, what do students do for 3 years, and more if the wish to attain an MSc or even a Phd? What constitutes the syllabus?

Oh yes the hallowed cathedrals of Atheism, the universities! Protectorates of all true knowledge and wisdom! your point is that of course if its taught at university it must be true? hardly the case is it. Shall we sight instances where persons who have been taught at university have declared profoundly erroneous statements even within the fields of their expertise? shall we compile a list of scientists who have been taught at university who deny the tenets of the evolutionary hypothesis? Yes we are free to debate anything we like, I myself am simply not prepared to get involved in another fruitless debate about it. Ask Vishy hes up for it, i want to discuss spirituality.

Originally posted by John W Booth
[b]1. God has not communicated with you yet he exists. Why?

I don't know. I don't speculate about it.

2. God has not given you any instructions? Would you say that your innate conscience should be disregarded?

Your two questions are non-sequitur as far as I am concerned.

3. When you die you die. You then need to be made a ...[text shortened]... is thread so I don't know what kind of insight into me you think youve stumbled across here.

Er....um.....nice talking to ya!!