Hooray for the Methodists

Discussion in 'Religion' started by exchemist, Feb 3, 2016.

  1. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,517
    That's a worthy but in my opinion rather naive view of this issue. The ID movement has a long history of slippery misrepresentation. It seems to me the organisers of the official conference of a serious religious group are quite right not to host the the promotion of ideas it thinks are false.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,517
    Tant pis.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    You don't know either.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    They made the first drone, landed it on the moon. And going into space is more than just shooting, it requires advances in almost every field.
     
  8. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I don't think timojin is stupid, just misinformed.
     
  9. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    What about yourself?
     
  10. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,909
    I'd be willing to bet that if a fundamentalist evangelical denomination excluded a group that had a display arguing that Christianity is consistent with biological evolution, the same people who applaud the methodists would condemn them for doing it.

    So what would justify the exclusion of dissenting opinion in the one case and not the other?
     
  11. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,531
    And you think combining waste removal with reproduction is an intelligent design?

    Two of the problems with ID is that it doesn't explain anything & there's no way to objectively recognize "design".
     
  12. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    exchemist likes this.
  13. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    You can spout off all you want, it's just not science, that's the problem.
     
  14. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    I suppose you know a woman have two separated orifices , if not please che ck wiki
    If you are a male you would know there is a valve by the prostate, and you balls are hanging so the sperm will not die from body temperature
     
  15. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    The giraffe has a nerve that loops from the neck around the heart and back up the neck. For no other reason than it evolved before the giraffe evolved long neck, and it had no way of unlooping itself. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Laryngeal_nerve
     
    Beer w/Straw likes this.
  16. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Ok guy . we don't know the purpose of this on . that mean we don't know , so let study it perhaps there is a good reason. So what is the reason for a giraffe to have a long neck ?
     
  17. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    To reach food. But one of it's nerves has 15 feet of unnecessary length! Intelligent design indeed!
     
  18. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    The reason is simple enough: It was never designed; it was tacked on.

    We see this happening in real life all the time. You move a lamp and the cord won't reach so you use an extension cord. Nobody would wonder why the lamp was "designed" with a two-piece cord. They'd conclude that it was adapted.
     
  19. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Do we know how many sensors are attached to the cord ? Since you apparently are more familiar with the giraffe. . Does the spinal cord runs the same way from cerebrum to the tail ? and so does the mentioned 15 feet cord runs from the spinal cord ?
     
  20. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,517
    First, I'm quite sure we'd all expect the fundamentalists to exclude such a group. The "same people" (=me, right?) would not waste energy condemning something so unsurprising.

    Second, ID is dishonest. The Wedge Document and the Kitzmiller trial show that clearly. Would you expect the UMC to welcome a stand at their annual conference promoting Scientology? Or a Ponzi financial scheme?
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2016

Share This Page