Search results

.....then you must be extremely agnostic about your post making any real sense.

Nope. I gave definition. It's not mine. It’s Wiki's. So again as you would say..... " it’s Jem against Wiki ". Next up " Jem v Online Dictionary". Probably not "respected" enough because it doesn't agree with your own prejudices. Definitions in all dictionaries change over time as...

Yeah ok you lose I know. You did that at the first brain spasm which must have tricked you into thinking you had a clue. No, it is not my argument. You can't be this dim - seriously - can you? You pathetically accused me of changing definitions when it's not just my definition, and I...

Huxley who coined the word, used it as a joke. You know, like yourself, a joke. It's not me changing definitions.... it's Wiki's definition you goof. "Defining agnosticism Demographic research services normally list agnostics in the same category as atheists and/or non-religious...

Apart from being completely off topic to the thread, as usual you've lost the plot in just a couple of posts. You were the one who asked “who or what created the fact of evolution.” So you figure that is saying - evolution is not about creation. Still with religion at the...

You sure get your panties in a fluff real quick . Just a silly irrational belief makes you so aggressive, defensive and irrational. Evolution is not about creation, so if you're going to ask inappropriate questions, why not ask yourself who or what created your imaginary creator God or at...

The problem with your argument is unlike your God, evolution is a fact not an idea, and therefore quite inconsitent with superstitious beliefs.

Anyone can do that. What you obviously can't do is be honest about what they say. Susskind doesn’t say what you say he does. Bernard Carr is saying nothing scientific. He is voicing his own personal philosophical view. A view shot down by other scientists and physicists all the time...

I know. Infuriating isn't it? First one gets nonsensical superstitious ideas put in one's head about an imaginary magical sky God creator. Then all it takes is one of destroyers grey bunny rabbits or an ordinary dumb puddle to come along, and the invisible Father in the Firmament gets...

Hey JEM....you left your kit behind

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u-tC9MU852k&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u-tC9MU852k&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"...

Altering and distorting quotes of what people actually say , focusing only on quotes that sound like they support your own conclusions, and calling people names because they won't accept such bullshit, is hardly anything like truth. It's just ignorance and arrogance born from not thinking...

..in what, imbecility?

ok so you think it's down to multiverses or a sky wizard.

I already realize you can't think for yourself Jem you've made that abundantly clear. You just take what an educated person is quoted as saying at face value if it fits with your own uneducated view point. So when an educated person says he thinks the universe has a tuner or there are...

If you're going call natural circumstances - chance, then anyone can show how the universe runs on "chance". There is science which proves natural circumstances - "chance" happens in Evolution. destroyer was being honest, not trying to pretend there was equivalent science to prove origins...

Yea but…. it’s because there is true and scientifically provable evolution of the species, means there’s a magical mystic beardy sky wizard conjuring it all up.

If it doesn't matter what you or I think, why do you bother with what scientists think? Why did you even mention using critical thinking if you cannot reason what physicists actually say in their quotes, why do you make the links in the first place? You make no sense Jem whichever angle...

Tuned for life is a cliché creationists like to bandy around. But even were the universe tuned, certainly it's not tuned for life. Those physical laws principally give rise to a vast, empty, cold, dark, violent and unimaginably destructive cosmos. Only at points of hiatus does the...