Missing Link Unveiled?

[hrmwrm]

Apparently you haven't learned any new snappy comebacks since the fifth grade.

I'm not interested in 'proving' anything to you. Your fate awaits you after death. God will deal with you Himself. And I won't be sorry to see it.

you said ANYTHING supernatural. that means many things also. more than just a god. so put up or shut up.

as for my fate, trust me. i'm not worried.

 

[hrmwrm]

So your position is that anyone that exhibits faith is a weak mind scoffer?
Of course, would I presume that you think because you don't embrace any religious faith, you think yourself superior to any weak minded scoffer, and that gives you justification for your hostility and belligerence?

i said anyone?

 

[fossten]

you said ANYTHING supernatural. that means many things also. more than just a god. so put up or shut up.

as for my fate, trust me. i'm not worried.

What would constitute proof in your eyes?

 

[hrmwrm]

scietifically verifiable. there are lots of magicians and tricksters. and so far i've seen none that can pass the reality test. it's amazing what the power of suggestion can do.

 

[Calabrio]

scietifically verifiable. there are lots of magicians and tricksters. and so far i've seen none that can pass the reality test. it's amazing what the power of suggestion can do.

Quick question, you keep posting signature quotes that are hostile and condescending towards religion. That's fine, enjoy your shallow crusade.

But are you aware of the context or the back stories of the people you're quoting? Because when you actually know that, the sources aren't really enlightened at all.

Pirsing may speak critically of "religion" but is very spiritual. So much so that he thought his murdered son's (the one in his first book)life force was carried over into his next child's body. He was actually going to have the child aborted until he arrived at that mystic conclusion. And, for the record, I thought his book was horribly overrated, pop philosophy crap.

And the Chaplin quote that you're repeating is widely considered to be a misquote, or a quote that is void of the proper context. It comes from the Manual of a Perfect Atheist, by a radical leftist Mexican writer named Eduardo del Río who writes under the pen name of Rius. Chaplin, according to his own autobiography was very spiritual as well. If anything he was an agnostic, not an atheist.

 

[hrmwrm]

the background of the people is unimportant. to be able to make such an epiphanic statement is all that matters.
there are many who are spiritual without a god or specific religion.
you don't need either to be spritual. it depends on how spirit is taken. as to whether it's something within a person, or something that can go beyond a person.
but mostly, i just point out the obvious from all past centuries. gods have come, gods have gone, just as have civilizations. whoever can hold the people with a god, has the power over them.(jim jones comes to mind)

but then it's no more targeting than other sigs. like fosstens at present anti liberal sig. it's only offensive if you let it be offensive.

 

[Calabrio]

but then it's no more targeting than other sigs. like fosstens at present anti liberal sig. it's only offensive if you let it be offensive.

I would also argue that Fossten's signature is intentionally "offensive" and was selected in order to provoke a response. He may also have thought it to be a form of parody or mocking humor, as you probably do with your avatar.

 

[hrmwrm]

that is why i've kept it as my avatar and not as a larger sig pic.it's not as much "in your face" as a sig. although i do see fossten's has been downsized from it's original can't miss it size.

 

[stlunatic]

so people say that fossils that bear resemblance dont necessarily prove evolution, i agree with this. in order to PROVE evolution you would need to find a fossil from EVERY generation of said animal to see the progression. i believe in evolution but i also believe it will never be proven.

 

[Calabrio]

so people say that fossils that bear resemblance dont necessarily prove evolution, i agree with this. in order to PROVE evolution you would need to find a fossil from EVERY generation of said animal to see the progression. i believe in evolution but i also believe it will never be proven.

As mentioned in the other thread, people overwhelmingly recognize that evolutionary processes take place in nature. The debate between creationsim, ID, and Darwinian Evolution, is specifically about the origins of all species.

Did they come about complete at random, mutating from the primordial ooze.(Darwinian Evo)
Was there some sort of external influence directing the evolution and organizing the complex systems.(ID)
Or were the species created largely as we see them. (Creationism)