Richard Dawkins, Famed Atheist, Supports Free Bibles In Schools

[RCG Trader]

Quote from Ricter:

The problem is tautological. Reason, i.e. the "critical mind", is manmade. "Existence precedes essence." The scientific worldview constructs one type of ring and tells the world, "this is the only ring all of us are going to fight in." Again, I'm not arguing for the abandonment of rationality, only putting it in its place--it's a choice.

The problem most free thinkers have I think is not with the idea of a higher power, but the way that higher power is presented. If one reads the bible the way one would read, say, 1984, then one could easily argue that 1984 is closer to truth than the bible. Have you ever read that book cover to cover?

Stuffing all the world's animals into a boat for a month and ten days? With only five people to work it? Really?

 

[nutmeg]

Quote from RCG Trader:



Stuffing all the world's animals into a boat for a month and ten days? With only five people to work it? Really?

Noah on the ark says to his wife. "I'm really bored, I'm going to do a bit of fishing" and wanders off.

He's back half an hour later. "I'm still bored"

His wife say's "I thought you were going to do a bit of fishing, why stop after half an hour?"

He says "Well I only had two worms"

 

[nutmeg]

Hey.....

If you want to know how many bees Noah had... check the Ark Hives

... ..ahahahahaha..hahaha..

 

[tradingjournals]

Quote from Brass:

Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.

-- Isaac Asimov

Isaac Asimov is NOT christian, his opinion is worthless, and may even be biased.

What does he think about the circumstances of the murder of Jesus Christ?

"Atheism, truly and properly understood, is the most potent force ever conceived to believe in the existence of God" --- TJ.

 

[jem]

Quote from stu:

You must get aggravated with yourself an awful lot.


The burden of proof rests on you, the one claiming a (scientific) random chance claim is being made.
The claim as much as there is one, is of inevitable consequences, not particular random chance. Random chance is your determined wilful misrepresentation of that.

You mean the hope that science someday finds proof of a theory of everything?

Wouldn't that still leave us with a guess as to whether the universe was formed by random chance or Directed.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from RCG Trader:

The problem most free thinkers have I think...

WTF would YOU know about free thinkers liar boy?

You simply repeat whatever Jeese Jackass and Al Sharpton tell you to say. LOL

 

[Mav88]

The problem is tautological. Reason, i.e. the "critical mind", is manmade. "Existence precedes essence." The scientific worldview constructs one type of ring and tells the world, "this is the only ring all of us are going to fight in." Again, I'm not arguing for the abandonment of rationality, only putting it in its place--it's a choice.

Science just so happens to be the only choice that has been effective in understanding and manipulating the universe. I take it you want your doctor to use the scientific method as opposed to another 'choice' they might happen to like. It's 'place' is that of extreme value to humanity and it is the only methodology which has measurably changed our material conditions. I find it odd that someone would choose anything else, other than it can be corrupted, but I still find it odd.

Empirical and repeatable scientific measurements and the mathematics which decribes the results- that's all we have

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

You mean the hope that science someday finds proof of a theory of everything?

Wouldn't that still leave us with a guess as to whether the universe was formed by random chance or Directed.

There is no scientific reason to make those false dichotomies in the first place. Just a natural, inevitable consequence would be all that's required.
Random chance or something supernatural is guessing. They are unnecessary and groundless even without a theory of everything.

 

[stu]

Quote from Ricter:

The problem is tautological. Reason, i.e. the "critical mind", is manmade. "Existence precedes essence." The scientific worldview constructs one type of ring and tells the world, "this is the only ring all of us are going to fight in." Again, I'm not arguing for the abandonment of rationality, only putting it in its place--it's a choice.

It's simply not true to suggest the scientific worldview decides how things are going to be. Fact makes science. Science does not make fact.

Abandoning rationality through choice to hit yourself around the head with a baseball bat will merely deprive you of the critical thinking necessary to question your irrationality, and will remove the only one method there is, the scientific method, to prove the consequences. It really isn't a tautological problem.

 

[RCG Trader]

Quote from nutmeg:

Noah on the ark says to his wife. "I'm really bored, I'm going to do a bit of fishing" and wanders off.

He's back half an hour later. "I'm still bored"

His wife say's "I thought you were going to do a bit of fishing, why stop after half an hour?"

He says "Well I only had two worms"

If the worms were "clean" he could have had seven. I gotta say, I always had questions from a numerical standpoint about that story, but once I met some real farmers, all doubt about the fallacy of this story was cast aside.

Even IF Noah got all the animals on that boat, they would have died from the poo. All the worlds animals would have to produce an incredible amount of poo. Even if they fed them only once a week! Whats more, where DID they store all the feed? And the fresh water?:eek: