Welcome to Jesusland Part 3
Uploader Comments (bubbamickmac)
Top Comments
-
Religion is a disease.
-
When Dr. Eugenie Scott says steve she means douchebag, hey douchebag, shut the fuck up and let me talk! I love her!!!
All Comments (68)
-
Religion just got its ass handed to it. LOLOLOL religion
-
The wedge was not supposed to be a scientific paper in the first place. It was a political and social article to increase their funding. But meh, whatever...
-
"Do you really think he does not understand DNA?"
No, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He either doesn't understand DNA or he is deliberately lying about it. The former makes him merely wrong. The latter makes him a fraud.
-
You sound like a fool. The author of Signature in the Cell sounds like someone who knows what he's talking about.
-
The theory of intelligent design? Please excuse me while I throw up.
-
Just because one says the dna was intelligently designed, does not mean it has to be God, and it does not mean that science class will turn into bible reading prayer time. Also you were saying, in the part where the illustration of DNA was at work, that look, theres no creationist at work guiding the DNA... no theres no hand of god moving the DNA around-.- You're so clever. However that has nothing to do with the fact that an intelligent being may created the DNA to do what it does WITHOUT HELP!
-
@frankielee77 Science has only the material world to work with, your God doesn't deign to make himself available for study or testing. Science doesn't say that there is no god, just that there is no evidence for it. You might as well say that science is intolerant to the idea of dragons, unicorns, magic and such.
-
We study nature,but how on earth can Science be so closed minded as to the possibility of a God who may have created us all?Science study all possibilities,and experiments with all matters,and matter.If God is not in the picture,then all studies of science cannot hold waters because on the outset they defeat the meaning of Science.
-
@bubbamickmac isnt he using pretty much the same method as the evolutionists, ie beginning with an assumption and then finding evidence? The evidence DOES point to intelligent design.I think it is extremely arrogant to scoff at Meyer's argument. Having read and researched the subject myself, I find he presents a strong case. Schoolchildren should be presented with BOTH theories and allowed to make their OWN informed choice. Anything less is dishonest, both scientifically and morally.
-
This video proves nothing and the author's prejudice/bias is blantantly obvious. Also, the mediator from MSNBC is terribly biased, prejudicial, bullying and rude. He is no journalist.
dude, that was weak and I mean way weak, You sound ignorant.
TodaysThought 2 years ago
todaysthought,
weak? weak as in what weak? are you referring to Stephen C. Meyer's ignorance on the knowledge of DNA, or my video?
thanks for the comment and cheers;)
-king mike
bubbamickmac 2 years ago
I mean weak, like weak in the knees. Do you even know this guy/ Do you really think he does not understand DNA? Truth is, I'm not sure about the ID arguments but I have read his books, Dawkins and the lot...Meyer's knows his shit. Give me a video or clip where he shows his lack of understanding of the information in the gene?
TodaysThought 2 years ago
TodaysThought,
the discovery institute, that's the hub of the intelligent design creationism movement, is a propaganda front to push religion in the classroom. I've read Meyer's work. Signature in the Cell is pretty much an enlongated strawman. The way it works is that he begins with an assumption (there had to be a designer) and then finds evidence. It's a creationist tactic.
MOREOVER,
his latest book is a philosophy book, NOT science.
thanks for the comment and cheers;)
-king mike
bubbamickmac 2 years ago