RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2007,15:30   

Quote (jujuquisp @ Jan. 23 2007,15:18)
From the Master of the Tard:




1:44 pm


Iím confident that when ID is fairly presented it is obvious that itís not religion. Iím also confident that when atheism is fairly presented itís a Godless religion.


Atheism is a religious belief under the same definition that ID is a religious belief. You canít have your cake and eat it too.

Either I'm stupid or very confused or stupidly confused.  Nothing that DaveTard has posted here makes much sense to me.  He superficially sounds logical but if you actually read the content, it is a bunch of gibberish with non-sequiturs.  Am I stupid for not understanding his statement?  Explain this to me, you chimps.

Explanation:  ID isn't religious, but atheism is religious just like ID is religious.  You can't have your cake and eat it too, because that would be contradictory.

What's so hard to understand about that?

"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]