movement to atheism

@kellyjay said
Yes good for you someone else spoke up with the guts to express their opinions! Crying shame you don’t have the guts to look at some of the things you repentedly asked for, for yourself. Maybe you can tell others to share with you what is acceptable to think about the links, and by way if want those links in the science forum you put them there.

"Guts"?

@kellyjay said
You have no mind of your own so that another must tell you what your allowed to think?

"Allowed to think"?

@kellyjay said
Applying science to view an idea, process, or whatever
doesn’t automatically change science into something less than, simply due to the
preconceived ideas the researcher has.

So it's your contention that a Young Earth Creationist and believer in Intelligent Design like yourself approaches evolutionary science without preconceived ideas?

@fmf said
So it's your contention that a Young Earth Creationist and believer in Intelligent Design like yourself approaches evolutionary science without preconceived ideas?

Never said that!

@fmf said
"Allowed to think"?

You need someone else to tell you how to respond to those links, you cannot look
at them and come up with your own opinion after badgered me? I assume you don't
know what to do, you refuse not to view the links, but want others to tell you what
they think. You don't have a mind of your own?

@kellyjay said
I believe in a young earth, you don't follow along well.

Didn't you say that you think the earth is 6,000 years old?

@kellyjay said
You don't have a mind of your own?

This is nonsense. I simply agree with what other posters have said when they have responded to your religious-"science" stuff on this forum ~ stretching back years. And now I am interested to see if you are willing to subject them to scrutiny on the Science Forum.

@kellyjay said
I assume you don't
know what to do, you refuse not to view the links, but want others to tell you what
they think.

Clips like the Stephen C. Meyer one have been debated here umpteen times. I don't have anything to add. Is it the only "science" that you find compatible with your religious beliefs and therefore the only "science" you will accept? Yes, I think so (judging by your posting record). If Stephen C. Meyer was demonstrated to be wrong, would you lose your faith? No, I don't think so (again, judging by your posting record). This is the aspect of this topic that interests me. You can debate Stephen C. Meyer with moonbus, Ghost of a Duke, Kazetnagorra et al along with the folks on the Science Forum.

@fmf said
Clips like the Stephen C. Meyer one have been debated here umpteen times. I don't have anything to add. Is it the only "science" that you find compatible with your religious beliefs and therefore the only "science" you will accept? Yes, I think so (judging by your posting record). If Stephen C. Meyer was demonstrated to be wrong, would you lose your faith? No, I don't think so (a ...[text shortened]... . Meyer with moonbus, Ghost of a Duke, Kazetnagorra et al along with the folks on the Science Forum.

Okay, well the next time you repeat a question over and over I will not take you
seriously.

@kellyjay said
Okay, well the next time you repeat a question over and over I will not take you
seriously.

You could have just answered it the first time instead of all the contortions and deflections. Why is your "faith" in supernatural things not enough for you? Why do you feel the need to enlist the support of "science" when "science" - by definition - is not about supernatural things? Talking about how I am supposedly "scared" and have "no guts" and "no mind" etc. was just evasion.

@kellyjay said
and by way if want those links in the science forum you put them there.

It's surely you, and not me, who is seeking to establish the scientific validity of a 6,000-year-old earth, intelligent design, the flaws of evolutionary science and all the rest of it? It's surely you who should want to post those links in the Science Forum, not me.

@fmf said
You could have just answered it the first time instead of all the contortions and deflections. Why is your "faith" in supernatural things not enough for you? Why do you feel the need to enlist the support of "science" when "science" - by definition - is not about supernatural things? Talking about how I am supposedly "scared" and have "no guts" and "no mind" etc. was just evasion.

I do think you are a coward, your goal is strife a little here and there. You've
asked for reasons I gave them to you repeatedly. You slithered away from
addressing them, now you want to tell me where I should post and what I should
post about. Why don't you just take care of your own posts and let others take
care of themselves. Your judgment on what I should and shouldn't post about
is meaningless to me, as are your opinions on science and the faith.

Now we can both talk about each other or a topic, but if you are going to demand
we discuss something I suggest you carefully pick something you are willing to
talk about, without dragging each other's motives into the discussion.

@kellyjay said
I do think you are a coward, your goal is strife a little here and there. You've
asked for reasons I gave them to you repeatedly. You slithered away from
addressing them, now you want to tell me where I should post and what I should
post about. Why don't you just take care of your own posts and let others take
care of themselves. Your judgment on what I should and should ...[text shortened]... something you are willing to
talk about, without dragging each other's motives into the discussion.

Thanks for the 'banter'. But the on topic questions remain: Why is your "faith" in supernatural things not enough for you? Why do you feel the need to enlist the support of "science" when "science" - by definition - is not about supernatural things?

@fmf said
Thanks for the 'banter'. But the on topic questions remain: Why is your "faith" in supernatural things not enough for you? Why do you feel the need to enlist the support of "science" when "science" - by definition - is not about supernatural things?

If I thought you cared I would go into the details with you, but you have made it clear you don’t. So unless you want to engage in the answers already given there is no going forward with you and me on this.