discovery institute is full of shat

discovery institute is full of shat

Category:

Education

Tags:

• discovery
• institute
• is
• full
• of
• shat

[cristoballs]

furthermore, you assertion that atheism has no robust model for morality is hilarious. as if christianity or any any other religion does? your holy which your moral code is derived from says parents should stone to death their disobedient children, gays should be put death,  women should marry the men who rape them. sorry, i think i'll stick with atheism when it comes to morality.

[cristoballs]

incontrovertible evidence? such as what?  a book which claims to be the word of god? a compilation of books written over 2000 years ago which is in contradiction to what science has already demonstrated to be false. the earth is not 6000 yrs. old, mad did not coexist with the dinosaurs, and a worldwide flood never took place. to suggest that any of these thngs are true, despite all the scientific evidence which proves otherwise, is the epitome of arrogance.

[biggingeryeti]

What they are basically saying is that no, we do not want bananas served in schools, we want curved yellow fruit on the menu.

[BeauLeeman]

"Steven Meyer is the author of a book, "How to get Intelligent Design into public school curriculum."

Really. Meyes has co-written two books on ID, neither of which is a tactical book advocating teaching ID, or of that title.

According to AGI (not AIG ;-)), David DeWolf wrote a 'legal brief' with that title. Wrong again. AGI was referring to a paper entitled, "Teaching the Origins Controversy: Science, Religion or Speech?" which was co-authored by Meyer and Mark Edward DeForrest.

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

Ah, no. You clearly don't understand the difference between atheism and nihilism.

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

Actually christians and religious types have no robust model for morality.

If you're doing it to attain eternal reward, or belay eternal punishment, you don't have morality, you have fear of authority.

Atheists, who believe no such thing, are moral by definition.

[adg1017]

...you everything, and then when you get what i would consider to be incontrovertible evidence, you ignore it because it points to something outside of science.

[adg1017]

how is it arrogant? and instead of saying i just make claims you disagree with, assert your own views. you're hardly arguing here... just more ad hominem attacks. my claims hold water, and are backed up by history and present reality. atheism has no robust model for morality. that obviously does not mean atheists cannot be moral. naturalism cannot account for so much of our human experience. but you stake everything on some ridiculous idea that science can tell...

[cristoballs]

how about not making jackass claims like saying the logical ends of atheism are depravity and utter sadness? think you can swing that? that's the problem with people like you. it is that you will make a statement like that, and think you're completely justified in saying something so blatantly arrogant and ignorant.

[adg1017]

how about just being nice. good way to live. and every word of what I said was truth, NOT some attempt to insult you. and i never cried persecution. i could not care less about what you think of me or any other believer. i just want you to think about the logic of your positions, and to understand there is peace in knowing God. so... i don't think you're an idiot, and I never said anything to incite you to anger. i was simply sharing truths i have come to understand.