Less Republicans believe in Evolution today than in 2009

[Timshel]

We have a very small piece of the puzzle, but much more of it than we had 100 years ago. Our theories and understanding of the natural world work well for our current environment, but we are only beginning to see that at the extremes the rules all break down. This is not magic, in my opinion but the search for a universal theory that explains the entire natural world is a project that will take many thousands of years.

Not relevant. There is no arrogance in basing your beliefs on the best available evidence.

The coward (sf) thinks that by pretending that theism and atheism are equivalent that he can still manage to seem erudite without offending believers, as long as he can change the subject whenever the topic is brought up to agw, abortion or some other issue where he pretends the science supports their shared ideas. His strategy is to ignore it. He is more worried about avoiding offense than error.

It is not accurate to say that atheists believe that god(s) does/do not exist(s). Rather, an atheist does not believe god(s) exist(s). It is an absence of belief in god(s) not a belief in the absence of god(s). We can substitute "amorepowerfulbeings" for "atheist" and "more powerful being" for "god(s)" and the statements hold true.

The coward, is pretending that "more powerful being" is essentially the same as god(s) and using his apparently vast knowledge of Star Trek philosophy to argue that magic is the same as something we don't understand to avoid offense again. He is playing a game of semantics.

 

[Jarod]

Not relevant. There is no arrogance in basing your beliefs on the best available evidence.

The coward (sf) thinks that by pretending that theism and atheism are equivalent that he can still manage to seem erudite without offending believers, as long as he can change the subject whenever the topic is brought up to agw, abortion or some other issue where he pretends the science supports their shared ideas. His strategy is to ignore it. He is more worried about avoiding offense than error.

It is not accurate to say that atheists believe that god(s) does/do not exist(s). Rather, an atheist does not believe god(s) exist(s). It is an absence of belief in god(s) not a belief in the absence of god(s). We can substitute "amorepowerfulbeings" for "atheist" and "more powerful being" for "god(s)" and the statements hold true.

The coward, is pretending that "more powerful being" is essentially the same as god(s) and using his apparently vast knowledge of Star Trek philosophy to argue that magic is the same as something we don't understand to avoid offense again. He is playing a game of semantics.

You are correct in everything you said except this... If you don't know something, don't fill in the gaps with a pretend theory and call it God. Simply admit that this part we don't understand. Leave it at that and people can call it God if they want, but its arrogant to assume that because you don't understand something it must not be understandable.

History is full of people who discovered something previously unknown that were killed for challenging what was previously thought to be Gods domain.

 

[Timshel]

Yes, we know... you are an atheist... we get it... you think we are the most powerful beings in the universe... but you aren't arrogant.

No, I did not say nor imply that we are the most powerful beings in the universe. You are as sloppy as pmp or ditzy and probably more ignorant.

 

[Jarod]

No, I did not say nor imply that we are the most powerful beings in the universe. You are as sloppy as pmp or ditzy and probably more ignorant.

He constantly makes assumptions so he can knock them down and feel better about himself.

 

[Phantasmal]

No... not quoting Rush limbaugh... funny how you try to associate everything with him. Obsessed with that idiot are you?



http://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/

Yes, obsessed with getting him off the air with his ignorant comments

http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/23/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2012/

 

[Timshel]

You are correct in everything you said except this... If you don't know something, don't fill in the gaps with a pretend theory and call it God. Simply admit that this part we don't understand. Leave it at that and people can call it God if they want, but its arrogant to assume that because you don't understand something it must not be understandable.

History is full of people who discovered something previously unknown that were killed for challenging what was previously thought to be Gods domain.

I did not say anything relevant to any of that. I certainly did not claim that because I don't understand something it must not be understandable.

 

[Jarod]

I did not say anything relevant to any of that. I certainly did not claim that because I don't understand something it must not be understandable.

Maybe I misunderstood, you said my claims that people should not pretend that just because they don't understand something it is automatically God was irrelevant.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Not relevant. There is no arrogance in basing your beliefs on the best available evidence.

LMAO... so desperate to avoid being labeled arrogant for your way of thinking. Yes, it is arrogant to think as you do.

The coward (sf) thinks that by pretending that theism and atheism are equivalent that he can still manage to seem erudite without offending believers, as long as he can change the subject whenever the topic is brought up to agw, abortion or some other issue where he pretends the science supports their shared ideas. His strategy is to ignore it. He is more worried about avoiding offense than error.

Oh look, he is calling me a coward again... whatever will I do?

It has nothing to do with avoiding offense you moron. It is the understanding that none of us knows for sure whether or not there is or is not a more powerful being. Whether or not there is one that could have actually created a planet/galaxy/universe. It is the understanding that as we look upon an ant, have the ability to create a 'world' for ants, there to could be another being that looks upon us in the same manner.

Amusing how you bring up science with regards to abortion and AGW... because the actual SCIENCE does indeed support my positions on both of those issues. Just as it does on evolution. Amazing how it is consistent like that. Whereas you ignore science when it suits you.

It is not accurate to say that atheists believe that god(s) does/do not exist(s). Rather, an atheist does not believe god(s) exist(s). It is an absence of belief in god(s) not a belief in the absence of god(s). We can substitute "amorepowerfulbeings" for "atheist" and "more powerful being" for "god(s)" and the statements hold true.

ROFLMAO... keep spinning moron...

The coward, is pretending that "more powerful being" is essentially the same as god(s) and using his apparently vast knowledge of Star Trek philosophy to argue that magic is the same as something we don't understand to avoid offense again. He is playing a game of semantics.

Oh no, he went and called me a coward again. Poor string is starting to sound like the moron Cypress of old. Clearly demented and desperately trying to assign his inner most feelings of himself to others.

You are the one playing semantics moron, just look at your jumbled mess regarding atheists.

 

[Canceled.2014.2]

Okay, well suffice to say, the less educated people I have had the experience of knowing are mostly Social Conservatives.

This would be my experience as well.

 

[Ishmael Pequod]

Yeah, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, etc were ignorant. Yup. Prepare for a barrage of rewriting history.......

 

[Jarod]

Yeah, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, etc were ignorant. Yup. Prepare for a barrage of rewriting history.......

I never knew GW, or TJ.

They were the social liberals of their time.

 

[Timshel]

LMAO... so desperate to avoid being labeled arrogant for your way of thinking. Yes, it is arrogant to think as you do.

Oh look, he is calling me a coward again... whatever will I do?

It has nothing to do with avoiding offense you moron. It is the understanding that none of us knows for sure whether or not there is or is not a more powerful being. Whether or not there is one that could have actually created a planet/galaxy/universe. It is the understanding that as we look upon an ant, have the ability to create a 'world' for ants, there to could be another being that looks upon us in the same manner.

Amusing how you bring up science with regards to abortion and AGW... because the actual SCIENCE does indeed support my positions on both of those issues. Just as it does on evolution. Amazing how it is consistent like that. Whereas you ignore science when it suits you.

ROFLMAO... keep spinning moron...

Oh no, he went and called me a coward again. Poor string is starting to sound like the moron Cypress of old. Clearly demented and desperately trying to assign his inner most feelings of himself to others.

You are the one playing semantics moron, just look at your jumbled mess regarding atheists.

There is no jumbled mess. I was quite clear and it appears you don't have what it takes to challenge any of it.

I don't see any reason to believe anything you argue is supported by science and some of it is clearly refuted. You don't share much on evolution and so I can't form an opinion about whether your position on that is supported.

A lack of certainty does not make belief without proof equivalent to a belief based on the best available evidence. It does not make the absence of belief without proof arrogant or any other sort of vice. You have it all backwards and disregard the fact that it is the theists who make a pretense of certainty. You are just desperate to find some way to insult those who contradict religious dogma to win favor with the religious. You are a coward and want to prove to your in-group, that you are okay.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yes, obsessed with getting him off the air with his ignorant comments

http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/23/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2012/

The Reps gaining ground among low income voters does nothing to change what I stated. They still vote predominantly for Democrats as the link I posted shows. My link shows voting patterns for 2012, your article was a poll done prior to the elections in 2012.

I would love to see Rush off the air, so I wish you well in that endeavor. But I personally believe the best way to do that is for people to stop paying attention to him and what he says.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

There is no jumbled mess. I was quite clear and it appears you don't have what it takes to challenge any of it.

It was a jumbled mess. I did challenge everything in your post except the jumbled mess portion.

I don't see any reason to believe anything you argue is supported by science and some of it is clearly refuted.

Abortion results in the death of a unique human life, the fact that there is not sufficient evidence that man is the primary driver of climate change, evolution... all of those positions are supported by science. No matter if you see any reason to believe it or not. You only see what suits you... as I stated.

You don't share much on evolution and so I can't form an opinion about whether your position on that is supported.

I have stated many times that I believe in evolutionary theory. Sorry you are too ignorant to comprehend that.

A lack of certainty does not make belief without proof equivalent to a belief based on the best available evidence. It does not make the absence of belief without proof arrogant or any other sort of vice. You have it all backwards and disregard the fact that it is the theists who make a pretense of certainty. You are just desperate to find some way to insult those who contradict religious dogma to win favor with the religious. You are a coward and want to prove to your in-group, that you are okay.

Again... you twist, turn and spin to try and justify your absolutist position. Keep spinning, once you stop, you will simply be right back where you are today... an absolutist on a matter that is not absolute.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It is not accurate to say that atheists believe that god(s) does/do not exist(s).

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism

1
archaic : ungodliness, wickedness

2
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Rather, an atheist does not believe god(s) exist(s).

see above... you directly contradict yourself...hence your argument was a jumbled mess.

It is an absence of belief in god(s) not a belief in the absence of god(s).

The above bolded is agnostic, not atheistic. The underlined second portion is atheism.

[h=2]ag·nos·tic[/h] noun \ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\ : a person who does not have a definite belief about whether God exists or not

 

[Damocles]

I never knew GW, or TJ.

They were the social liberals of their time.

There is a huge difference between the libertarian ideas they espoused and the current political "liberal". They were what would currently be called Classical Liberals, or more modernly Libertarians.

 

[Bonestorm]

There is a huge difference between the libertarian ideas they espoused and the current political "liberal". They were what would currently be called Classical Liberals, or more modernly Libertarians.

This a sarcastic post, right?

 

[Jarod]

There is a huge difference between the libertarian ideas they espoused and the current political "liberal". They were what would currently be called Classical Liberals, or more modernly Libertarians.

I am calling them social liberals. TJ was not married to, but lived with a black woman with who he fathered children.

 

[Timshel]

It was a jumbled mess. I did challenge everything in your post except the jumbled mess portion.

Abortion results in the death of a unique human life, the fact that there is not sufficient evidence that man is the primary driver of climate change, evolution... all of those positions are supported by science. No matter if you see any reason to believe it or not. You only see what suits you... as I stated.

I have stated many times that I believe in evolutionary theory. Sorry you are too ignorant to comprehend that.

Again... you twist, turn and spin to try and justify your absolutist position. Keep spinning, once you stop, you will simply be right back where you are today... an absolutist on a matter that is not absolute.

No, it was not a jumbled mess. As you are dimwit I can only guess you are having trouble with my allowance for a one god or many Gods. So I will dumb it down for you.

Again, it is not accurate to say that an atheist believes that God does not exist. It is accurate to say that an atheist does not believe that God exists. Absence of belief in God is not the same as belief in the absence of God.

I am not interested in your cowardly attempts to provide cover for you in-group, change the subject and ignore the science on evolution.

Pmp claims he accepts that humans are getting taller due to evolution. But then he turns around and argues that acceptance of evolution implies a rejection of creation. So I am sorry, your simple statement does not mean much to me. You don't like to discuss this subject and you always try to change it to AGW, abortion or ad homs against those that accept and support the science on evolution.

I am not an absolutist.

 

[Jarod]

“As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.”

who said this?