Free Speech
FSA Ticket | Today | Join | Member | Search | Who's On | Help | Sign In | |
FSA > Theology and Spirtuality > This life and the after life Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Tomlapaz
  • From:USA

Date Posted:01-04-2018 06:27:08Copy HTML

A descendant of David was born in Bethlehem (as foretold by the Jewish prophet Micah), died for the sins of his people and raised from the dead (as foretold by the Jewish prophet Isaiah and Jewish King David), 2000 years ago (in the time as foretold by the Jewish prophet Daniel). And because of this descendant of David, men and women everywhere have the means of finding peace with the Creator of the heavens and the earth. The forgiveness of sins.

Jesus: For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words? Psalm 37:21 The wicked borrows and does not pay back, But the righteous is gracious and gives.
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #181
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:21-04-2018 03:24:32Copy HTML

Reply to wale63 [epithets highlighted.]

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Go read some books and learn to read before you do, then when you stop learning to write with crayons, come back and join the discussion

Crayons?  Really?  Wale, you need to take a closer look at my avatar pic.


No crayons for me.  LOL
I am greatly amused by your silly insults that assume I possess a low level of intelligence.  If you only knew the significance of those 4 well sharpened pencils in a Dundee marmalade jar.


You keep declaring yourself the winner, but since you are an inverse thinker, in reality that means you really lost, reinforced by your many epithets.

You are obviously confusing me with someone else, perhaps even yourself.  In the exchange between us, you are the only one using epithets.

  Additionally, I am not declaring myself the winner.  I was initially commenting on the exchange between you and skwanderer using your reasoning.
  You told him "keep using epithets, you lose."  Then, you continued to use epithets against skwanderer.  So, in other words and by your own logic, you lose.


More evidence of your confused mind. I didn't use epithets, YOU just can't read properly.

"Epithet" is commonly defined as "an adjective or descriptive phrase expressing a quality characteristic of the person or thing mentioned."  You most certainly did use epithets.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #182
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:21-04-2018 07:28:54Copy HTML

when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'Like Margulis, they face pushback from peers who feel they are betraying science: “We’ve been told by more than one of our colleagues that, even if Darwin was substantially wrong to claim that natural selection is the mechanism of evolution, nonetheless we shouldn’t say so. Not, anyhow, in public. To do that is, however inadvertently, to align oneself with the Forces of Darkness, whose goal is to bring Science into disrepute."  They observe that in the ivory tower, “neo-Darwinism is taken as axiomatic,” “literally goes unquestioned,” and contrary views are “ipso facto rejected.” 


So now you are saying that many scientists doubt evolution but have been bullied into publicly declaring their fealty to Darwin and those who followed?
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #183
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:21-04-2018 10:37:41Copy HTML

Reply to Yobbo

when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'Like Margulis, they face pushback from peers who feel they are betraying science: “We’ve been told by more than one of our colleagues that, even if Darwin was substantially wrong to claim that natural selection is the mechanism of evolution, nonetheless we shouldn’t say so. Not, anyhow, in public. To do that is, however inadvertently, to align oneself with the Forces of Darkness, whose goal is to bring Science into disrepute."  They observe that in the ivory tower, “neo-Darwinism is taken as axiomatic,” “literally goes unquestioned,” and contrary views are “ipso facto rejected.” 


So now you are saying that many scientists doubt evolution but have been bullied into publicly declaring their fealty to Darwin and those who followed?


Im not saying that, THEY have said it themselves.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #184
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:21-04-2018 10:39:11Copy HTML

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63 [epithets highlighted.]

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Go read some books and learn to read before you do, then when you stop learning to write with crayons, come back and join the discussion

Crayons?  Really?  Wale, you need to take a closer look at my avatar pic.


No crayons for me.  LOL
I am greatly amused by your silly insults that assume I possess a low level of intelligence.  If you only knew the significance of those 4 well sharpened pencils in a Dundee marmalade jar.


You keep declaring yourself the winner, but since you are an inverse thinker, in reality that means you really lost, reinforced by your many epithets.

You are obviously confusing me with someone else, perhaps even yourself.  In the exchange between us, you are the only one using epithets.

  Additionally, I am not declaring myself the winner.  I was initially commenting on the exchange between you and skwanderer using your reasoning.
  You told him "keep using epithets, you lose."  Then, you continued to use epithets against skwanderer.  So, in other words and by your own logic, you lose.


More evidence of your confused mind. I didn't use epithets, YOU just can't read properly.

"Epithet" is commonly defined as "an adjective or descriptive phrase expressing a quality characteristic of the person or thing mentioned."  You most certainly did use epithets.


The GENERAL understanding of epithets are FOUR LETTER WORDS and similar. I did NOT use epithets.
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #185
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 06:36:38Copy HTML

Well, wale, that's just bullshit.
I don't know if you sincerely believe what you are saying is the "general understanding" of the word, or if you are merely lying so that you can pat yourself on the back and proclaim (falsely) that you did not use epithets.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #186
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 07:25:51Copy HTML

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-to-talk-evangelicals-evolution-180968839/

If you aren’t caught on one side of the evolution debates, it can be hard to grasp what all the fuss is about. Here’s the short version: Charles Darwin’s crime wasn’t disproving God. Rather, the evolutionary theory he espoused in “On the Origin of Species” rendered God unnecessary. Darwin provided an explanation for life’s origins — and, more problematically, the origins of humanity — that didn’t require a creator.

What would Darwin think if he could see the evolution wars rage today? If he knew that, year after year, national polls find one-third of Americans believe that humans have always existed in their current form? (In many religious groups, that number is far higher.) That, among all Western nations, only Turkey is more likely than the United States to flat-out reject the notion of human evolution?

Those who research the topic call this paradigm the “conflict mode” because it pits religion and science against each other, with little room for discussion. And researchers are starting to realize that it does little to illuminate the science of evolution for those who need it most. “Acceptance is my goal,” says Jamie Jensen, an associate professor who teaches undergraduate biology at Brigham Young University. Nearly all Jensen’s students identify as Mormon. “By the end of Biology 101, they can answer all the questions really well, but they don’t believe a word I say,” she says. “If they don’t accept it as being real, then they’re not willing to make important decisions based on evolution — like whether or not to vaccinate their child or give them antibiotics.”


Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-to-talk-evangelicals-evolution-180968839/#sqBv2gDTl3L4mBUV.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #187
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 07:31:58Copy HTML

"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #188
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 07:49:54Copy HTML


I guess in YOUR inverted mind this proves something,
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #189
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 07:51:07Copy HTML

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Well, wale, that's just bullshit.
I don't know if you sincerely believe what you are saying is the "general understanding" of the word, or if you are merely lying so that you can pat yourself on the back and proclaim (falsely) that you did not use epithets.


You really must get over taking yourself , AND your idiotic pronouncements, so seriously. WE HAVE.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #190
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 07:52:36Copy HTML

Reply to Yobbo

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-to-talk-evangelicals-evolution-180968839/

If you aren’t caught on one side of the evolution debates, it can be hard to grasp what all the fuss is about. Here’s the short version: Charles Darwin’s crime wasn’t disproving God. Rather, the evolutionary theory he espoused in “On the Origin of Species” rendered God unnecessary. Darwin provided an explanation for life’s origins — and, more problematically, the origins of humanity — that didn’t require a creator.

What would Darwin think if he could see the evolution wars rage today? If he knew that, year after year, national polls find one-third of Americans believe that humans have always existed in their current form? (In many religious groups, that number is far higher.) That, among all Western nations, only Turkey is more likely than the United States to flat-out reject the notion of human evolution?

Those who research the topic call this paradigm the “conflict mode” because it pits religion and science against each other, with little room for discussion. And researchers are starting to realize that it does little to illuminate the science of evolution for those who need it most. “Acceptance is my goal,” says Jamie Jensen, an associate professor who teaches undergraduate biology at Brigham Young University. Nearly all Jensen’s students identify as Mormon. “By the end of Biology 101, they can answer all the questions really well, but they don’t believe a word I say,” she says. “If they don’t accept it as being real, then they’re not willing to make important decisions based on evolution — like whether or not to vaccinate their child or give them antibiotics.”


Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-to-talk-evangelicals-evolution-180968839/#sqBv2gDTl3L4mBUV.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
The lesser human character cannot dismiss the REALITY of the  higher and omnipotent being.

Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #191
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 08:26:19Copy HTML

Prove it.
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #192
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 08:28:43Copy HTML

Reply to Yobbo

Prove it.


Already known, except to those like YOU who deny reality. And YOU say ' prove it' as if you really wanted to be shown, when in fact you already have you mind made up, on the wrong side of reality.

Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #193
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 08:29:32Copy HTML

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Well, wale, that's just bullshit.
I don't know if you sincerely believe what you are saying is the "general understanding" of the word, or if you are merely lying so that you can pat yourself on the back and proclaim (falsely) that you did not use epithets.


You really must get over taking yourself , AND your idiotic pronouncements, so seriously. WE HAVE.

There is no "WE," wale.  You, and you alone, are the one expressing such opinions.

Between you and me, YOU are THE one making "idiotic pronouncements."

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #194
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 08:30:49Copy HTML

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Well, wale, that's just bullshit.
I don't know if you sincerely believe what you are saying is the "general understanding" of the word, or if you are merely lying so that you can pat yourself on the back and proclaim (falsely) that you did not use epithets.


You really must get over taking yourself , AND your idiotic pronouncements, so seriously. WE HAVE.

There is no "WE," wale.  You, and you alone, are the one expressing such opinions.

Between you and me, YOU are THE one making "idiotic pronouncements."

Again, this originates from YOUR inverse thinking and desires to reject reality.

Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #195
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:22-04-2018 08:58:41Copy HTML

Henceforth all replies will be made using Enigma, Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 1
      2. I, initial setting - 17
      3. III, initial setting -12
    Reflector: UKB C
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

apadl igsic dqvsx gjbku gdmyy wbukl yorda vqqqy ivvgs sdrvg aibwg rbgoi nshmz bqzzg ujpkv ltgko nbyoc peyop ryguy rzr

[End reply text]

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #196
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 01:11:13Copy HTML

Reply to wale63


I guess in YOUR inverted mind this proves something,

Of course it does; it firmly places the US with other third world shitholes.
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #197
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 01:24:18Copy HTML

Reply to Yobbo

Reply to wale63


I guess in YOUR inverted mind this proves something,

Of course it does; it firmly places the US with other third world shitholes.


I guess in YOUR inverted mind this proves something that REAL thinkers consider frivolous.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #198
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 01:25:21Copy HTML

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Henceforth all replies will be made using Enigma, Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 1
      2. I, initial setting - 17
      3. III, initial setting -12
    Reflector: UKB C
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

apadl igsic dqvsx gjbku gdmyy wbukl yorda vqqqy ivvgs sdrvg aibwg rbgoi nshmz bqzzg ujpkv ltgko nbyoc peyop ryguy rzr

[End reply text]


There's my argument, get off the meds.
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #199
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:04:09Copy HTML


https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/3/187/2468663

What do you think of this?
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #200
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:31:14Copy HTML

 What would Darwin think if he could see the evolution wars rage today?

___


There are no evolution wars.  In the minds of a very small group of idiots like Wale who don't the first thing about evolution.  There is no war in the scientific community whatsoever. 

Evolution the fact...is a fact.  Species allele frequencies change over time for a variety of reasons....polyploidy, genetic drift, epigenetics, mutation, inversion, crossing over and more. The ancestors become both phenotypically and genotypically different over time (new species).

Wale has posted no scientists who have stated otherwise...certainly no living scientists.

This part is a fact.

The Theory, as in all theories in science, is the body of knowledge about how evolution works and the details of phylogeny.  We will continue to add to the theory, we will NEVER learn evolution did not happen.  There is no war or debate about that....at all.




"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #201
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:32:18Copy HTML

 https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/3/187/2468663

What do you think of this?

----


Wale cannot argue science Yobbo.  He doesn't have a clue about the science.  He will provide a quote from a dead "scientist" and he wont even know what the guy or gal actually said.

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #202
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:33:20Copy HTML

 I did NOT use epithets.

____


You don't use data or evidence either.  Got a scientific argument?  Rhetorical

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #203
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:37:04Copy HTML

 ? If he knew that, year after year, national polls find one-third of Americans believe that humans have always existed in their current form?

___


What idiots like Wale believe is hardly relevant to the reality of the science.

Wale:  Whatever idiotic claim you make, look it up here first.  It could save you some embarrassment.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/


"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #204
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 02:43:49Copy HTML

 when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'.


----


Evolution is a fact. Margulis and Foder accept it as fact.  They don't have a problem with that.  They question some relative contribution of mechanisms, not the idea itself.

What you are saying is the same as saying that since some scientists disagree how the power of gravity works (The Theory of Gravity), then maybe gravity isnt real.  We may find out more about how gravity works, but we will never find out gravity isn't real and suddenly start floating around.

This is exactly the same.  We have observed evolution and know it s a fact.  We will never learn it is not a fact.  NEVER.



"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #205
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 04:38:04Copy HTML

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Henceforth all replies will be made using Enigma, Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 1
      2. I, initial setting - 17
      3. III, initial setting -12
    Reflector: UKB C
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

apadl igsic dqvsx gjbku gdmyy wbukl yorda vqqqy ivvgs sdrvg aibwg rbgoi nshmz bqzzg ujpkv ltgko nbyoc peyop ryguy rzr

[End reply text]


There's my argument, get off the meds.


Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 12
      2. I, initial setting - 2
      3. III, initial setting - 6
    Reflector: UKB B
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

hcojr zieoh fyptk mhbvk hcytv szmgu jyizf xqbia dghki qhymd rcsfq ybelz wuzga pafxs fxutj ogkzz tbqyc ynvll oxfip hxqyp qhdsm nehkw hi

[End reply text]

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #206
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 06:32:36Copy HTML

Skwanderer:  Here is a long list of data, scientific studies and more.

 Wale:  Here is a picture of a donkey and Ill call you skoodle.

Skwanderer:  You are a fucking idiot Wale.

Wale:  He said a bad word.  He must be losing the argument.


You really cannot make this shit up.  Wale is a ten year old pretending to be a man. 

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #207
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 08:19:34Copy HTML

Reply to skwanderer

Skwanderer:  Here is a long list of data, scientific studies and more.

 Wale:  Here is a picture of a donkey and Ill call you skoodle.

Skwanderer:  You are a fucking idiot Wale.

Wale:  He said a bad word.  He must be losing the argument.


You really cannot make this shit up.  Wale is a ten year old pretending to be a man. 


I guess it must gnaw at you that your word isn't taken blindly, or at all.

Do you have some sort of inferiority complex skdander?

wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #208
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 08:20:35Copy HTML

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Henceforth all replies will be made using Enigma, Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 1
      2. I, initial setting - 17
      3. III, initial setting -12
    Reflector: UKB C
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

apadl igsic dqvsx gjbku gdmyy wbukl yorda vqqqy ivvgs sdrvg aibwg rbgoi nshmz bqzzg ujpkv ltgko nbyoc peyop ryguy rzr

[End reply text]


There's my argument, get off the meds.


Model 1. (cryptii)
  Settings for this reply:
    Rotors:
      1. VI, initial setting - 12
      2. I, initial setting - 2
      3. III, initial setting - 6
    Reflector: UKB B
    Plugboard patches: bq cr di ej kw mt os px uz gh

[Begin reply text]

hcojr zieoh fyptk mhbvk hcytv szmgu jyizf xqbia dghki qhymd rcsfq ybelz wuzga pafxs fxutj ogkzz tbqyc ynvll oxfip hxqyp qhdsm nehkw hi

[End reply text]


Were too may drugs tested on you today?
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #209
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 08:21:48Copy HTML

Reply to skwanderer

 when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'.


----


Evolution is a fact. Margulis and Foder accept it as fact.  They don't have a problem with that.  They question some relative contribution of mechanisms, not the idea itself.

What you are saying is the same as saying that since some scientists disagree how the power of gravity works (The Theory of Gravity), then maybe gravity isnt real.  We may find out more about how gravity works, but we will never find out gravity isn't real and suddenly start floating around.

This is exactly the same.  We have observed evolution and know it s a fact.  We will never learn it is not a fact.  NEVER.




Not a fact no matter how much you repeat that or desire it to be skdander.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #210
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:23-04-2018 08:22:39Copy HTML

Reply to skwanderer

 when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'.


----


Evolution is a fact. Margulis and Foder accept it as fact.  They don't have a problem with that.  They question some relative contribution of mechanisms, not the idea itself.

What you are saying is the same as saying that since some scientists disagree how the power of gravity works (The Theory of Gravity), then maybe gravity isnt real.  We may find out more about how gravity works, but we will never find out gravity isn't real and suddenly start floating around.

This is exactly the same.  We have observed evolution and know it s a fact.  We will never learn it is not a fact.  NEVER.




when scientists have problems within the idea of evolution and are at odds with others within that idea, perhaps the idea itself. is flawed'Like Margulis, they face pushback from peers who feel they are betraying science: “We’ve been told by more than one of our colleagues that, even if Darwin was substantially wrong to claim that natural selection is the mechanism of evolution, nonetheless we shouldn’t say so. Not, anyhow, in public. To do that is, however inadvertently, to align oneself with the Forces of Darkness, whose goal is to bring Science into disrepute."  They observe that in the ivory tower, “neo-Darwinism is taken as axiomatic,” “literally goes unquestioned,” and contrary views are “ipso facto rejected.” 
Copyright © 2000-2018 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.