The Drunk Debate Thread

[Viper1]

happydolphin said:

ID is really more than its origins, it's a concept, one that can be shown to have a bastard history rooted in creationism, but that's just because political correctness says that being affiliated to a thought of faith is wrong, when it really is only wrong if that thought of faith is off the deep end, and Christianity really isn't! Even people living 900 years is believeable. I mean if you're going to believe in parallel universes and all of the things in the world today coming from chance, I mean humans living 900 years is a joke of a step of faith, honestly.

I think you're right, God did make this earth. (lol, I know that's knot what you said but that's what I felt like replying). You think ID proponent as braindead drones, but most of them are as committed to the scientific debate as you are, but I don't know if that's something you'd like entering your frame of M-hindzz.

 

Meh- hayinzzzzz

Bold: The concept of multiple universes is radical but has evidence based on the standard model of nuclear physics.   People 4,000 years ago living for 900 years is based on absolutely nothing scientific.  In fact, all evidence suggests that 40 years of age is about as far as it went for most people.    A human being living for 900 years probably has the least amount of evidence as any scientific proclomation to come from King James.

 

Underlined: Committment isn't the problem.   The problem is having an answer prior to having a theory.   You can make any amount of evidence fit a theory if you have a pre-supposed theory.  Look at crime scene analysts for proof.  They will tell that entering a crime scene with a pre-conceived notion of what happened is the worse thing a criminologist can do and in many departments will get you fired.  Let the evidence tell you what to think....     A conclusion before the evidence is not only not scientific, it's ignorant.  

And if God didn't want us to believe in Darwanism, the Big Bang (which is ironically a Catholic theory), etc...he wouldn't have given us brains to question everything in the first place.   He'd have simply made us drones.