Why don't you accept abiogenesis and evolution?

[darkendless]

:sarcastic: I agree with the article science is a 'false' religion that inspires blind believes. The Writer's Religion is far more likely.

Then get out of your house and get away from your computer, drop your mobile phone and never wear your sunglasses again, that way, you wont be worshipping a false God called science.

 

[painted wolf]

Science is as much religion as math.... less so, actually as Math has actually inspired religious cults.
Pythagoreanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(my favorite part of the Pythagorean religion was the banning of all beans from the diet... those dirty dirty beans.)

There has yet to be a 'church of science'.

wa:do

 

[rojse]

There has yet to be a 'church of science'.

What, believe in something that you can see and demonstrate to anyone you choose, regardless of their belief system?

It will never happen.

 

[Mister Emu]

Luminous was using the sarcastic smiley :sarcastic

 

[painted wolf]

I realized, but I've always found the Pythagorean cult to fun to not mention.
Evil evil beans!

wa:do

 

[Valjean]

Evolution theories are propositions of mechanism, creationism; a proposition of agency. They're two entirely different things. Apples and carburetors. Why are some people treating them as comparable alternatives?

The existence of complex organisms is a fact; a fait accompli. Evolution is the only accepted description of how this might have occurred. If the mechanisms proposed by biologists are impossibly improbable, what mechanisms do these religious dissidents propose as more probable?

-- keep in mind, I said mechanism.

 

[Autodidact]

The mechanism of literal Biblical creationism is magic poofing.

 

[Valjean]

My point exactly. Magic is no mechanism at all. Asserting that magic is a more reasonable explanation for life and biodiversity strikes me as a rather weak position.