Less Republicans believe in Evolution today than in 2009

[Timshel]

LMAO... I do not reject science. I have never stated that I do. So again, coward, show me an example where I reject science.

What I have done, coward, is provide you with topics on this board where science is on my side. So why do you keep asking me to do the same thing over and over again, coward?

Are you too afraid to provide and example of where I reject science?

Except, again dear little coward, I have addressed this already.

But since, dear little coward, you are so ignorant... I will do it one final time.

Disbelief: inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real

Absence of belief: Neither believing nor disbelieving
[/COLOR]


The above highlights the typical fundamentalist response to someone who disagrees with their belief system.

Thanks for proving you are just as much a nut as a religious fundamentalist.

I am not interested in helping you change the subject from the fact that Republicans are more likely to reject the science concerning evolution. Maybe you would like to comment on it?

You did not address previously. You are just making a bigger jumbled mess with your stupid semantic argument and a circular definition of absence of belief. If disbelief simply means a "refusal to accept that something is true" then it does not imply assertion that that something is false. It is no different than absence of belief. But whatever, Merriam Webster's attempt to define these words have no bearing on what atheists actually believe. I have proven beyond all doubt that atheist do not necessarily claim certainty on the existence of God and that my claim is neither unique nor novel with the reference to Russell's teapot. You are arguing a strawman and semantics, because you are stupid coward that wants to avoid upsetting the Republican theists and you reject the value of scientific evidence in doing so.

 

[Timshel]

didn't see any reason to point it out to you since you already knew where it was......pointed it out to the Newb, though.....didn't want him to continue living in ignorance.....

No, you did not point it out to the newb, liar. Go ahead and provide him with the thread.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

No, you did not point it out to the newb, liar. Go ahead and provide him with the thread.

?????.....are you sure?.....

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I am not interested in helping you change the subject from the fact that Republicans are more likely to reject the science concerning evolution. Maybe you would like to comment on it?

In other words... you are a coward who makes accusations and then runs away when asked to back up YOUR accusations.

Keep running coward.

You did not address previously.

another lie by the coward.

You are just making a bigger jumbled mess with your stupid semantic argument and a circular definition of absence of belief. If disbelief simply means a "refusal to accept that something is true" then it does not imply assertion that that something is false. It is no different than absence of belief. But whatever, Merriam Webster's attempt to define these words have no bearing on what atheists actually believe. I have proven beyond all doubt that atheist do not necessarily claim certainty on the existence of God and that my claim is neither unique nor novel with the reference to Russell's teapot. You are arguing a strawman and semantics, because you are stupid coward that wants to avoid upsetting the Republican theists and you reject the value of scientific evidence in doing so.

No moron... I explained it yet again to you, because YOU keep bringing it up. You are wrong. You are too cowardly to admit you are wrong. Its ok... we don't expect anything else from you.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I have proven beyond all doubt that atheist do not necessarily claim certainty on the existence of God

The above portion deserves to be split out... for you have done no such thing. Such is the life of a fundamentalist. You are so caught up in your beliefs that you refuse to accept any input that shows you are wrong. Maybe you should go on Duck Dynasty.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

But lets do ignore Strings attempts to divert the thread with his lies...

Lets get back to the fact that a greater percentage of women don't believe in evolution than men. Yet we don't see Mutt, Garud and the resident coward String mocking women... I wonder why?

 

[Timshel]

?????.....are you sure?.....

Yes, I am sure that you did not provide the thread. You have since edited it with a link to a thread that does not have what you claimed.

 

[Timshel]

In other words... you are a coward who makes accusations and then runs away when asked to back up YOUR accusations.

Keep running coward.

another lie by the coward.

No moron... I explained it yet again to you, because YOU keep bringing it up. You are wrong. You are too cowardly to admit you are wrong. Its ok... we don't expect anything else from you.

I am not going to help you run, coward. Show some support for science, once and share your thoughts on evolution.

 

[Timshel]

The above portion deserves to be split out... for you have done no such thing. Such is the life of a fundamentalist. You are so caught up in your beliefs that you refuse to accept any input that shows you are wrong. Maybe you should go on Duck Dynasty.

The coward dropped the context of the proof. Is Bertrand Russell's devastating argument not real? Was he not an atheist or was he certain that God does not exist, because you THINK a dictionary says so. Your an idiot that has offered but lousy semantic arguments.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I am not going to help you run, coward. Show some support for science, once and share your thoughts on evolution.

LMAO... so YOU make an accusation, I ask you to back it up... and now you are pretending that I am running?

I have already in this thread stated a few topics where Science is on my side. I have also stated my position on evolution. Why is it you continue pretending otherwise?

Is it your attempt to run away from your accusations coward?

Tell me where it is that I have denied science or admit you lied... one or the other coward...

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The coward dropped the context of the proof. Is Russell Bertrand's devastating argument not real? Was he not an atheist or was he certain that God does not exist, because you THINK a dictionary says so. Your an idiot that has offered but lousy semantic arguments.

No, that is not proof. Which is comical that you think it is.

 

[Timshel]

But lets do ignore Strings attempts to divert the thread with his lies...

Lets get back to the fact that a greater percentage of women don't believe in evolution than men. Yet we don't see Mutt, Garud and the resident coward String mocking women... I wonder why?

"Ohhhh noes, they are mocking us. Science is so mean and arrogant," says the anti science coward.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"Ohhhh noes, they are mocking us. Science is so mean and arrogant," says the anti science coward.

What the hell are you rambling about?

You flat out lied. When called out on it... you lied again. You continue to refuse to back up your assertion that I disagree with science. Why is that coward?

Show me one topic where I disagree with science. Just one.

But you won't do that, will you coward? You will just continue lying and then running away.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

1) Abortion: ends a unique human life... Science is on my side
2) Evolution: Man evolved from apes... Science is on my side
3) AGW: The argument is not over with regards to mans effect on the climate, the fear mongers have exaggerated the effect of man with data that does not support them... science is on my side

So tell us String, you fucking pathetic coward... where is it that you claim I disagree with science?

 

[Timshel]

No, that is not proof. Which is comical that you think it is.

Yes, it is proof of what atheists ACTUALLY believe. What is comical is that you think Merriam Webster's is proof for anything more than your lousy semantics argument.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yes, it is proof of what atheists ACTUALLY believe. What is comical is that you think Merriam Webster's is proof for anything more than your lousy semantics argument.

LMAO... no moron, it is proof of what one man believes. You moron.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

But lets take a look at your 'proof'...

I ought to call myself an agnostic; but, for all practical purposes, I am an atheist. I do not think the existence of the Christian God any more probable than the existence of the Gods of Olympus or Valhalla. To take another illustration: nobody can prove that there is not between the Earth and Mars a china teapot revolving in an elliptical orbit, but nobody thinks this sufficiently likely to be taken into account in practice. I think the Christian God just as unlikely. - Bertrand Russell

So your guy agrees with me. Thanks for your proof.

 

[Timshel]

1) Abortion: ends a unique human life... Science is on my side
2) Evolution: Man evolved from apes... Science is on my side
3) AGW: The argument is not over with regards to mans effect on the climate, the fear mongers have exaggerated the effect of man with data that does not support them... science is on my side

So tell us String, you fucking pathetic coward... where is it that you claim I disagree with science?

When you constantly try to bury the science on evolution because it looks bad for Republicans, you are not on the side of science. All you ever do in these discussions is try to change the subject but science is not on your side in the other ones either. You would just rather talk about those then register disagreement with other Republicans, which makes you a coward.

We are apes.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

When you constantly try to bury the science on evolution because it looks bad for Republicans, you are not on the side of science. All you ever do in these discussions is try to change the subject but science is not on your side in the other ones either. You would just rather talk about those then register disagreement with other Republicans, which makes you a coward.

We are apes.

What the fuck are you talking about? These are the accusations you continue to make with NOTHING to back it up.

Try reading the fucking discussion you moron.

Then show me where it is I tried to bury the science of evolution. Come on coward... show us where... you keep saying stupid shit like that... back it the fuck up or shut the fuck up.

 

[Timshel]

But lets take a look at your 'proof'...

So your guy agrees with me. Thanks for your proof.

Thanks, for proving that you have a short attention span. He does not agree with you. He was mocking your position.

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time. - Bertrand Russell