• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. David M

    More Dawkins idiocy...

    Signature strikes target innocent civilians on purpose.
  2. David M

    More Dawkins idiocy...

    BS. 27% do not sympathise with the gunmen, they have some sympathy with the motives behind the attacks. Guess what, I do as well, what they did cannot be justified but some of the motives of people who join such groups arise from legitimate grievances.
  3. David M

    More Dawkins idiocy...

    Do you think its ok for Governments to have their agents kill innocent people?
  4. David M

    More Dawkins idiocy...

    No, its a fact. The actions of the west have absolutely contributed to the rise in radical islam.
  5. David M

    Atheism ... Heh

    Mine was, why does the OP have demonstrably no idea about what evolution actually entails but feels qualified to post a criticism?
  6. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    You do realise that "blacks" and "whites" are the same species. Skin colour is a truly superficial difference when it comes to humans.
  7. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    Except that a species does not necessarily evolve in only one way, often one population of a species can end up evolving in a different way to another population. Look up "ring species" and you can see snapshots of that process. That fact does cause issues for your premise.
  8. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    You are wrong there, while it is rare (especially in animals) polyploidy events result in offspring which are a different species to their parent.
  9. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    Except they do, its an observed fact.
  10. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    So something that is 19 years old, you do realise that science advances with new discoveries?
  11. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    No, the observation does not remain. That observation was true (but still what you want it to mean) only for a short while and resulted from no one looking at the older rocks in much detail, since then there has been a lot of research done on cambrian and pre-cambrain rocks and the "sudden...
  12. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    No its not. Evolution is a fact. It is accepted as a fact. The Theory of Evolution is a Scientific Theory. They are not the same thing. If you want to be imprecise with your use of language then any mistakes that arise are down to you.
  13. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    We'd be lucky to see a full orbit of Uranus (84.5 years) in a single lifetime and no-one has seen a full orbit of Neptune in their life (164.8 years).
  14. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    Nope, the fact part is that Evolution (Changes in allele frequencies is populations over time) is an observed fact. So yes there is solid agreement that evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution explains why that fact happens.
  15. David M

    Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

    No, he does not say that evolution is not observable. Evolution has been observed. What Coyne is talking about is the stawman of evolution that Creationist talk about, which is why he calls it "so-called macroevolution". It is that level of evolution that is not observable in a single human...
  16. David M

    Are most scientists emotionally mature adults?

    Oh ffs, stop making up definitions of words, especially words in a language where you are not a native speaker. If you make a statement you believe to be fair or true then you are being honest. If you make one you do not believe to be fair or true then you are being dishonest, By definition...
  17. David M

    Are most scientists emotionally mature adults?

    No its not the same, you really don't understand the nuances of the english language. Honesty is a concept, and as defined in common discourse the concept of honesty can only result in the honesty of a statement being true or false and that result is what is a fact. The only way to get away from...
  18. David M

    Are most scientists emotionally mature adults?

    No, he said that whether a statement is honest or not is a fact. That is because honesty is based on the actions taken by a person based on what they know. How we judge honesty in others can be subjective or objective based on what is known of the person making the original statement. Whether a...
  19. David M

    Present arguments for atheism

    Yes you can, as long as both are not the broadest application of the term. In the same way you can be supporter of football but not a supporter of a specific team.
  20. David M

    Are most scientists emotionally mature adults?

    A is posited as an omniscient observer because that allows statements about objective fact to be made without rebuttals stemming from semantic gymnastics, but unfortunately you still found a way to go there. You often get little respect for your arguments because you refuse to accept that you...
Top