Joined: June 2006
|Quote (jujuquisp @ Jan. 23 2007,15:18)|
|From the Master of the Tard:|
I’m confident that when ID is fairly presented it is obvious that it’s not religion. I’m also confident that when atheism is fairly presented it’s a Godless religion.
Atheism is a religious belief under the same definition that ID is a religious belief. You can’t 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