This is why I don't like debating religion

[timmah]

dsgrue3 said:

timmah said:
My point was that Abiogenesis may be an accepted theory, but there is not one single, provable fact within that theory. And that article is the biggest load derogatory crap I've seen in a while, and does not accurately portray the arguments of ID proponents.

EDIT: I'd certainly go so far as to say that God cannot be proven by Science, nor can Intelligent Design be 'proven'. On the other hand, the theories above can't be proven either, so the assertion that people who believe in ID are stupid is not a fair conclusion. Articles like the one above just go to show the level of condescending hate that some people have towards conflicting viewpoints. I simply don't share that type of hatred or condescention towards your views.

Well, we know that complex things can come from simple ones given the Miller-Urey experiment. Bonds between elements form amino acids. There's a fact. Abiogensis can in fact be proven or disproven. It lays out a few possible transitions from organic matter to life. These are testable. God isn't. Neither is ID. That nullifies their relevance entirely to Science.

I wholeheartedly agree that ID is just religious nonsense in an attempt to validate theism.

That's not what I said at all, and you're twisting my words, as well as being condescending in the process. I've been trying to say that we can disagree and have a civil discussion without assuming that the other is 'stupid' or calling somebody's views 'nonsense', and apparently that is impossible with you. I apprecieate the people who have tried to have a meaningful discussion, you're not one of them.