| | :::::::::::Sorry, atheism is on the decline in the world because of its irrelevance. Please see: [[Atheism]] and [[Evolution]]. Liberalism is under duress too via austerity budgets. Unlike evolutionists/atheists/liberals, I try to have relevant material. Not voodoo "science". [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 14:43, 28 June 2011 (EDT) | | :::::::::::Sorry, atheism is on the decline in the world because of its irrelevance. Please see: [[Atheism]] and [[Evolution]]. Liberalism is under duress too via austerity budgets. Unlike evolutionists/atheists/liberals, I try to have relevant material. Not voodoo "science". [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 14:43, 28 June 2011 (EDT) |
| | ::::::::::::Again, I am not concerned with atheism, liberalism, conservatism, or any other "-ism". My only issue is the truth. I understand that you disagree with the facts (or perhaps my presentation), but how you can relegate a century's-worth of work to "voodoo" science is beyond me. What exactly makes this "voodoo" science? Is it my not providing you with original data? I think not, as I doubt you can present the ORIGINAL ten commandments. Not the "voodoo", copied version found in a book that was printed in the 50s. The REAL tablets. Is it that the theory cannot be adequately tested? Again, doubtful; there is no conceivable way (in my narrow-minded, scientific view) of testing God's existence. What, then, can it be? What makes certain evidence "true science", while other facts are labeled "voodoo, pseudoscience"? I can think of only one explanation: "voodoo" science is any piece of evidence not in accordance with your world view. Humbly waiting your reply, [[User:Professor|Professor]] 15:19, 28 June 2011 (EDT). | | ::::::::::::Again, I am not concerned with atheism, liberalism, conservatism, or any other "-ism". My only issue is the truth. I understand that you disagree with the facts (or perhaps my presentation), but how you can relegate a century's-worth of work to "voodoo" science is beyond me. What exactly makes this "voodoo" science? Is it my not providing you with original data? I think not, as I doubt you can present the ORIGINAL ten commandments. Not the "voodoo", copied version found in a book that was printed in the 50s. The REAL tablets. Is it that the theory cannot be adequately tested? Again, doubtful; there is no conceivable way (in my narrow-minded, scientific view) of testing God's existence. What, then, can it be? What makes certain evidence "true science", while other facts are labeled "voodoo, pseudoscience"? I can think of only one explanation: "voodoo" science is any piece of evidence not in accordance with your world view. Humbly waiting your reply, [[User:Professor|Professor]] 15:19, 28 June 2011 (EDT). |
| − | See: [[Christian apologetics]][[User:Conservative|conservative]] 23:34, 29 June 2011 (EDT) | + | See: [[Christian apologetics]] - particularly the external link section. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 23:34, 29 June 2011 (EDT) |