Religulous/Expelled (Part 2)
Uploader Comments (standinstann)
All Comments (272)
-
@Embassadorkingofpeac Get back to me on that when the world actually ends
-
Peace Be Unto All 22 Nations Of Humanity In 2012 I Bring Blessing From The King Of Kings A Must See The Only Real Revelation Bible In History.. This Is the Year Of Change For All... To The Powers To Be Fee All 22 Nations Of Humanity Now Before Its Too Late For You You Have Bin Warned By St John The Divine Yahya Watchman And Embassador Of Peace To The King Of Kings High Council Of The Unseen Ones.. A Must See For All At My Site Tku And May God Bless Us All In 2012.. World Peace For All In 2012.
-
@standinstann About the statistically impossible idea, Thunderf00t makes a good video that explains the fallacy of "statistical improbability" better than I can. watch?v=p3nvH6gfrTc
-
Lol, doesn't Stein lose the argument, because he mentioned Nazis? Because according to some retarded idea, mentioning Nazis in any argument means you've lost the argument. I find that crap funny, but the holocaust? No. That was a terrible time that should be remembered as a warning as much as an atrocity (a warning of what kinds of mistakes and intentionally cruel things to avoid).
-
According to you logic Einstein should have been expelled from scientific circles for going beyond the confines of physics at that time (and he actually was and he was relentlessly attacked)... But i don't think he should have been.
Intelligent design might be different from creationism, but it's still based in religion rather than science. Also doesn't help that the proponents of intelligent design are often Christian creationists.
I support the Supreme Court decision to make the teaching of intelligent design illegal in public schools. You might as well also teach alchemy, phrenology, witchcraft, eugenics, etc.
CrazyCheeseMagee 4 months ago
@CrazyCheeseMagee I support the same ruling but i have to add, it actually isn't based on religion; it's actually based on LESS. It's based on the proposition that statistical improbability necessitates an intelligent cause.
standinstann 4 months ago
The separate magesteria argument isn't sensible. A universe created by a god is necessarily different from a universe that created itself, through the scientific principles expounded by Einstein, Hawkins etc. Therefore a discussion about God creating the universe or not IS scientific and there's no evidence for it.
FerretBob 11 months ago
@FerretBob If the agent responsible for exnhilating the cosmos is necessarily a non-material one, then it can't be a scientific question. If we're talking about a really powerful "organism" (which the ID people are; then yes, that theory is subject to scientific inquiry. The mistake here is thinking that if it doesn't fall into the domain of science then it automatically falls into the domain of "religion". It doesn't.
standinstann 11 months ago