Ray comfort is a moron. he is consitantly making a fool out of himself by saying things like snails are not animals, it is harder to prove the sun exists than god, bananas are proof of god. Reading origin of the species doesnt make anybody knowledgable on the current science of evolution; it would be like calling yourself an expert at mathematics after reading an algabra book,, we have come along way since darwins theory. comfort also says that the beauty of nature is enough to prove gods existance, his naivity or simple foolishness speaks for itself.
what has not changed is the foundational philosophical premise of Darwinian evolution- A mindless, non-living, impersonal, unguided, unintelligent process depending on chance and time is responsible for all the complex variety of life we can observe. There is no evidence that this did, or could happen. It is unreasonable to think it could. Evolution is not based on observable, repeatable science. It is a philosophy, and a belief system. It is based on assumptions about things which cannot be known, because they cannot be observed or repeated. The advances in evolution are a series of convolutions and assumptions set up to avoid what advances in science show- Evolution cannot do what the evolutionist says it did. Calling someone a moron cannot change that
"We have come a long way since Darwin's theory." Translation: We have to make up new theories that are untestable and which contradict what we actually observe, because phyletic gradualism and abiogenesis have never been observed in nature or the fossil record.
How "scientific" of you.
‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’
June 29, 2013 at 7:53am
Seems like alot of people here dont understand what einstien ment by “god”. He was a follower of Spinoza and had the same spinozistic god in mind. you can replace “god” with totality or nAture. there is a very pantheistic tone to einsteins god. a quote posted by atrum_angelus furthur down is pointing this way.
History is lost on these people. But the real point is that even IF Einstein had been a Young Earth Creationist, it wouldn't make the least bit of DIFFERENCE to whether or not Young Earth Creationism was in fact TRUE. The correctness, even brilliant insight, of one's beliefs on ONE subject are completely irrelevant to the correctness of ANOTHER independent belief one has. To think otherwise is to commit the appeal to authority fallacy.
June 29, 2013 at 7:39am
He was not a deist nor a theist. he was a flavor of pantheist. To him “God” is the same thing as the totality of everything that exists, or nature
June 23, 2013 at 12:47pm
How about you do some research on the atheists before saying they are not open to religions. dan dennette (famous atheist starring in the film) has advocated for years that religions should be tought in school just like other subjects. he wants christianity, islam, buddism, anr many others taught throughout a childs education. if that is not open minded or accepting, tell me what is
June 23, 2013 at 10:28am
There is no such thing as nothing
June 21, 2013 at 10:31pm
Heidegger showed that nothing has being in a certain sense, andtherfore is something every time you think or utter the word. I believe words like “nothing” “being” “exsitence” are vapor words when you get down to it…. you need a negation of a word in order to have it mean anything.. All my examples have no negation
June 16, 2013 at 6:21pm
Sounds like you would rather have sombody dead than sombody pushed down, with his glasses and book stolen. I think adding a gun to the situation would make it much more violent of an outcome
June 6, 2013 at 2:10pm
Atheism is not a religion. theim is not a relgion, deism is not a religion, pantheism is not a religion. christianity, jewish sects, islam, satanism (both theistic and atheistic) are religions.
June 4, 2013 at 6:33pm
Nu uhh, mormonism is the same as christianity only more true, nu uhh, my god told me that your god is wrong, nu uhh, really we are all jewish, nu uhh, if you read between the lines you can tell we are both right, which means im right and you just didnt know it… these comments should be enough to turn a person atheist
June 4, 2013 at 6:20pm
The most efficient way to become an atheist is to read the bible.
June 1, 2013 at 1:11pm
Theother…. if you want to talk science, you need some peer reviewed scientific journals, not a website made by creationists, not a creationist journal which they only allow to be reviewed by other creationists, and not any scientist. i asked for a scientific journal with published information supporting your thoughts that is peer reviewed, and you give me a creationist website or name a creationist journal… learn what science means, the scientific methode, falsifiablity, what theory means, and how peer review works.
May 31, 2013 at 11:13pm
Regions with differing temps are closer to us than the background radiation. when we measure as far as possible the measurments are extremely consistant with the predictions… and lets just pretend that the background radiation was compleatly dynamic, would that imply that a god existed? Theories need predictions that are testable and falsifiable… unless you can come up with a test we can do for god, it is impossible to criticly analize it
May 31, 2013 at 5:25pm
First… irc.org is not anything published in a scientif journal, nor is peer reviewed by the scientific communoty; it is a creationist circlejerk website… Next, rocks dont become spiders; amino acids are a major building block for life (which we find naturally in asteroids as well as earth… also you are made of mostly four elements, thats all, just elements, elements are not alive like rocks are not alive but when elements get togerher in a way which can reproduce/feed/excrite/respond we call it living… also, if i accept your stTement as true, all you are doing is making a god of the gaps aurgument, which im sure you have heard of…. learn what a peer reviewed scientific.journal is, then learn the difference between that and a.website.
May 31, 2013 at 5:16pm
Thor… if a theory has a testable prediction, it can be falsified. the big bang has had testable predictions which as i have said, have been verified…. Believing in a god has no testable predictions. and fyi the radation is uniform. the universe’s mass is ununiform but the background radation we detect is
May 31, 2013 at 3:34pm
Thor… there is background radiation (which was predicted with the big bang theory before it was found) that supports the theory. there are also philisophic reasons for a begining of space/time… but saying there was an explosion at the beggining is not the same as saying that an omipotent, omniscient, onmibelevilent, trancendent (while at the same time in the world) “being” which made everything but cannot be verified or more importantly, falsified.
May 31, 2013 at 3:25pm
Ad athoritarium… and not even a good one since currwnt medicine relied on our understanding of evolution to make
May 31, 2013 at 3:14pm
Just so i have this strait… The sun rises and sets, bees polenate plants we can eat, and stars exist….. therfor god exists. i knew he was a good fiction writer for a reason
King exists .... this may be a compelling argument that God has a very sadistic sense of humor.
Like having testicles on the outside...
Mrgeek ......you know why testicles are 'on the outside'? It has to do with temperature regulation, directly related to sperm production.
May 31, 2013 at 3:08pm
Canyou…. Evolutionist have come a long way since darwin. show me a peer reviewed science journal debunking evolution (in its current state)… Attacking darwin is a straw man and ad hominem attack that would be like me saying newtons theories are a crock because he believed in alchamy.
May 31, 2013 at 1:33pm
No mass blew up because the big bang created space/mass/time… an atom has two forces which keep hings in orbit around it, solar systems have one, and the universe has nothing orbiting it. atoms have an electron cloud that has equal stuff orbiting in every possible direction, solar systems have one main belt in which the majority of the mass revolves, the universe has no cloud or belt of mass around it. When doing prediction for atoms and their electron clouds we must use quantum theory, while making predictions for solar systems we use einstiens/newtons theory…
May 31, 2013 at 10:21am
Quita… nobody said you cant be a christian and a hypocrite