137
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 451:
Line 451: + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Extraterrestrial life (view source)
Revision as of 20:34, September 3, 2008
, 20:34, September 3, 2008→Salvation rules out extra-terrestrial life?
:"''It seems that you think it is sound to reject an argument if you just don't agree with what it implies.''": And yet here I am giving ''reasoned'' answers, not simply rejection.
:"''It seems that you think it is sound to reject an argument if you just don't agree with what it implies.''": And yet here I am giving ''reasoned'' answers, not simply rejection.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:54, 2 September 2008 (EDT)
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:54, 2 September 2008 (EDT)
''"Do you reject that we claim that?"'' Of course I don't. Does the fact that you claim it give in any merit? No. I specifically claim my assertions as well. You don't reject that I ''claim'' them. Ridiculous.
''"I invoked the Christian claim about God."'' Whilst I invoke the naturalistic explanation for whatever ''you'' present.
''"You won't accept that my explanation is correct, but you should accept that my view can explain it."'' You're right. The same should be said for my view.
''"I didn't say that there must be a true [God]; I said that it suggests that there is a true one."'' Just as the many claims of Bigfoot around the world suggest there must be a real Bigfoot. Basically, this line of logic allows you to "imply" the existence of whatever you can imagine.
''"But if there was no real God, where did the idea of gods come from in the first place?"'' You are right that I have a "''semi-plausible story to explain that''," but should I even bother typing it since you will reject it?
''"Believing evolution gives them an excuse to reject God."'' This statement is disgusting. Do you honestly believe that the theory, and the hundreds of years of research associated with it, exists solely to inflate the egos of atheists? What do you make of the 30-40 percent of biologists who are theistic, who are somehow able to reconcile the hard physical evidence with their personal faiths? Darwin himself was Anglican as he wrote the ''Origin of Species''. He became agnostic later. Do you think he ''wanted'' to lose his faith? Do you think he ''set out'' to fool everyone? It is grotesque, the level of paranoia it takes to honestly and sincerely believe that an entire branch of science with literally millions upon millions of researchers and individuals exists only to trumpet atheism; It is grotesque, the lack of imagination it requires for a believer to be unable to imagine that perhaps God is behind the very real and very hard evolutionary evidence that scientists uncover. Conservapedia needs to move away from fundamentalist values and toward conservative values. Secular conservatives should not feel downtrodden on this site.
--[[User:Stirlatez|Stirlatez]] 16:34, 3 September 2008 (EDT)
== ??? ==
== ??? ==