1. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    18 Mar '14 15:45
    in denying evolution?

    http://www.whatstheharm.net/evolutiondenial.html
  2. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    18 Mar '14 15:47
    in following christian science?
    http://www.whatstheharm.net/christianscience.html
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    20 Mar '14 18:15
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    in denying evolution?

    http://www.whatstheharm.net/evolutiondenial.html
    It sounds like that site which purports to espouse critical thinking, seems to be saying in the episodes listed more that they are interested in politically correct thinking. For instance the first dude, listed as a scientist, which would indicate he is the evolution believer and the other dude a creationist, would indicate that the scientist should have realized the other dude was not civilized by his first foray into the subject at hand, creationism V evolution and not continued to argue with a person who thinks with his fists or worse.
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    20 Mar '14 23:09
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    in denying evolution?

    http://www.whatstheharm.net/evolutiondenial.html
    It appears to me that in your examples the harm is in denying creation.
  5. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    22 Mar '14 00:30
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    It appears to me that in your examples the harm is in denying creation.
    Evolution does NOT deny creation.
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    22 Mar '14 00:51
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    Evolution does NOT deny creation.
    Well, evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. Is that better?
  7. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    22 Mar '14 12:01
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Well, evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. Is that better?
    No, they do not necessarily deny God's role in creation, either. For example, I believe God created the universe, but that modern cosmological theory, aka the 'Big Bang', was how he did it. Evolution, similarly, was his tool to create all the life on our planet. So, neither evolution nor the Big Bang deny God.
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    23 Mar '14 02:56
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    No, they do not necessarily deny God's role in creation, either. For example, I believe God created the universe, but that modern cosmological theory, aka the 'Big Bang', was how he did it. Evolution, similarly, was his tool to create all the life on our planet. So, neither evolution nor the Big Bang deny God.
    I believe you would be called a theistic evolutionist. However, there are the atheist evolutionists that I was really referring to.
  9. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    23 Mar '14 03:24
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I believe you would be called a theistic evolutionist. However, there are the atheist evolutionists that I was really referring to.
    So when you said
    "Well, evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. "
    You really meant to say;
    "Well, atheist evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. "

    Which doesn't add much to the debate.
  10. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    23 Mar '14 03:27
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    So when you said
    "Well, evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. "
    You really meant to say;
    "Well, atheist evolutionists deny that creation was an act of God. "

    Which doesn't add much to the debate.
    Well, at least we got that clear.
  11. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140206
    23 Mar '14 04:43
    I think the classic Big Bang model is dead ........some atheist/evolutionist are militant against the idea of a god doing anything. However the key word I would say is some. To be fair there are also militant creationists who totally dismiss anything and evolutionist would say.

    Manny
  12. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    23 Mar '14 05:351 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Well, at least we got that clear.
    This has to be one of the top ten moments on this forum.

    Alas, it will be forgotten.
  13. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    23 Mar '14 06:06
    Originally posted by JS357
    This has to be one of the top ten moments on this forum.

    Alas, it will be forgotten.
    If it were an uncharacteristic slip-up, I would agree.

    I'm a much bigger fan of RBHILL. He has a similar inane spiritual outlook, but he is far more entertaining to read.
  14. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    23 Mar '14 06:11
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    If it were an uncharacteristic slip-up, I would agree.

    I'm a much bigger fan of RBHILL. He has a similar inane spiritual outlook, but he is far more entertaining to read.
    RB has at present my vote for most entertaining theist, I grant you that.
  15. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    24 Mar '14 08:35
    Originally posted by menace71
    I think the classic Big Bang model is dead ...
    How would you like to define "classic Big Bang model"?
Back to Top