101. Banned From Church

Comment #115106 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 3:05 pm

Steve,

I was directing it at theantitheist as a comment on the belief that atheists have more morals than theists. I have met immoral atheists myself (one of them believed that shooting a kid they were babysitting with a tranqualizer was moral) so I know it is a mostly unfounded generalization.

The third question still remains though.

102. Banned From Church

Comment #115101 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 2:52 pm

What would happen if an atheist was converted to religion? Would they retain the atheism inspired morals?

Out of curiosity how would you approach an atheist who has converted to christianity?

103. Jay Spears: Smak Dem Christians Down

Comment #115080 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 2:06 pm

I meant the author of the song when he gave the list of non-christian founding fathers. I believe that Thomas Jefferson was something of a diest but still looked through the Bible (and crossed out phrases he didn't like:) ).

I don't think that many people are in favor of cannibalism. When I saw your comment I was worried I had made a typo. Luckily it was just a clarity issue.

104. Mixing Mammals

Comment #115056 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 1:24 pm

I was wondering but now I'm intriuged by the possibilities of a finned mouse. Hmmmmm... If this is possible is the Raburtle(rabbit+turtle) possible? A creationist and I used the Raburtle in a debate on micro- vs macro-evolution. He finished it by saying "That's too bad. I was looking forward to seeing a Raburtle." He may yet see one :)

105. Jay Spears: Smak Dem Christians Down

Comment #115030 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 12:46 pm

I thought Abe was a Christian. Did he[edit: the author of the song] consider Christian based diests non-christian?

106. Banned From Church

Comment #115018 by Deepthought on January 23, 2008 at 12:34 pm

Thou shalt not kill

107. Ken Ham in Leicester April 2008

Comment #114735 by Deepthought on January 22, 2008 at 4:30 pm

I just heard a radio evangelist saying that today's problems are due to us replacing God with Science and Technology. He then goes on to say that Science is "cruel impersonal and uncaring" and that we should return the "loving personal God of the universe" to the top of our society.

I wonder if he realizes that "evil" technology and science are allowing him to broadcast his "message".

108. Ken Ham in Leicester April 2008

Comment #114730 by Deepthought on January 22, 2008 at 4:14 pm

It's a pity I don't have the book anymore. I'm sure I could find a direct quote about this.

The problem with creationists is that they use what seems like a scientific way of arguing, but they just aren't interested in having any of their arguments refuted, which is very easy.

109. Ken Ham in Leicester April 2008

Comment #114707 by Deepthought on January 22, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Thank you Steve. I was thinking something along the same lines and now I'm trying to work out how they believe what they are saying. I kind of stopped reading the book after that point.

Another argument in there was that "Dawkins' gilb answer that 50% of an eye is better than 49% of an eye" doesn't hold water because they are talking about the parts working together instead of visual acuity. I doubt he has read Climbing Mount Improbable . What is more worrying is that he may have.

110. Ken Ham in Leicester April 2008

Comment #114693 by Deepthought on January 22, 2008 at 3:03 pm

I think that we should listen to their arguments. The comic relief value is tremendous.

I've been trying to read "Darwin on Trial" because a creationist friend of mine insists I read something that supports his side. I have been trying to work out how the fact that natural selection is a tautology makes it meaningless and that evolution is somehow wrong because it is an "unfalsifiable" hypothesis. To me it seems as though they are arguing that evolution is wrong because it is true. I'm almost certain I'm misunderstanding it because it makes so little sense. If this is the case could someone please correct me?

111. Why people believe weird things about money

Comment #111132 by Deepthought on January 13, 2008 at 5:09 pm

"If money is a curse then may God strike me down with it. And may I never recover!" -From The Fiddler on the Roof

Well I think that's what he says. I may be misquoting.

112. Fish out of water: Your Inner Fish

Comment #111127 by Deepthought on January 13, 2008 at 4:49 pm

Thank you Steve. I will try to find them at my local book store.
Hmmm... A book on the history of Christianity written by a Christian. At least no one could claim that he was "biased" against religion so the whole book is worthless.

113. Fish out of water: Your Inner Fish

Comment #111097 by Deepthought on January 13, 2008 at 2:55 pm

steeveroot

Is there anyway I could find those two books? I've been dealing with quite a few thiests who believe that the bible is the "inerrant word of god" and I have a hard time convincing them otherwise.

114. Fish out of water: Your Inner Fish

Comment #111049 by Deepthought on January 13, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Much of the difficulty is almost certainly due to our having a body built for an active animal but the lifestyle of a spud.

115. Why (Almost All) Cosmologists are Atheists

Comment #110784 by Deepthought on January 12, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Another measurement was that the speed of light was slightly higher some billion years ago. As the difference is very small and for this kind of distance/time scale measurements is a little inaccurate it might be just some a wrong measurement. I haven't heard latest confirmation about this.

116. A new website addition: Debate Points

Comment #110563 by Deepthought on January 11, 2008 at 1:46 pm

Topic suggestion: How could the universe come into being without God?
A Young Earth Creationist is currently saying that my inability to actually answer this question somehow makes him right. My response that "being fourteen and not a physicist, I can't answer this question" seems to hold no water for him. He just says "If someone had worked out wouldn't everybody know about it?"

117. It was a bad year for God.

Comment #109232 by Deepthought on January 8, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Someone in "The Ugly" section did though.

Atheism is a religion. You believe in science. You have beliefs. And Dawkins is your God.

118. Did mozzies, not a meteor, do for the dinosaurs?

Comment #109200 by Deepthought on January 8, 2008 at 2:58 pm

I just read The Lost World by Michael Crichton and I would like to know about the theories he proposed in his book. For example there is an entire section on how life could have self-organizing tendancies and that behavoir could too. Another is his theory that a behavoiral change contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs.

119. Arguments Against Evolution

Comment #109153 by Deepthought on January 8, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Today a Young Earth Creationist told me that some of the dating methods used to judge the age of the Earth were invalidated because they depend on the speed of light as a constant and the speed of light has been slowing down "exponentially". I spent ten minutes trying to work out what they meant and I'm fairly certain it wasn't speed of light in a vacuum but the speed at which light reaches the Earth. Is there any real basis for this argument?

120. Blind Faiths

Comment #108835 by Deepthought on January 7, 2008 at 5:45 pm

"A fanatic is someone who is sure The Almighty would agree with him if The Almighty had all the facts"