As I stated, brain goes bonkers, and it's hard to use.
Could you read what you quote?
Of course I can read what I quote. But your answer was inadequate because you didn't point out what was wrong with my logic. Below we will see it is you who is impressed with his ability to read 25 pages in a book.
No, I don't believe in Evolution, I just know enough about it, and all the atrocities it has caused, what charles darwin did to black people and a lot more.
First, Charles Darwin did nothing to black people. Interestingly, he published his theory just about the time that slavery was being fought over in the US. Southern slave owners were some of the strongest Christians in all of America at the time, and they were able to support their cause with the Bible.
You seem to think that Christianity is the fastest path to modern interpretations on morality. But read this:
Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being.
High standards (like the Ten Commandments, impossibly so), but maybe St. Paul should have taken some notes.
With a theory like Evolution proof just doesn't matter.
A scientific theory stands only on it's ability to explain and predict reality. So to the theory it doesn't really matter how Einstein, Newton, or Darwin behaved.
For example, I hear Hitler was a fervent believer in Newtonian physics. Did science throw out
that theory because of the bad PR it was getting?
The so-called "scientific community" are a bunch of dodos, all the people that talk about shots, well they're in the scientific community, shots are terrible, Global Warming is so obviously false, but let's not get into that. Generic scientists don't mean much to me any more, most of them are a bunch of geniuses being paid to lie.
Shots? Oh, you mean like smallpox vaccines that save millions of lives each year? Yup, it's all a damn conspiracy.
The disease killed an estimated 400,000 Europeans per year during the closing years of the 18th century (including five monarchs), and was responsible for a third of all blindness. Of all those infected, 20–60%—and over 80% of infected children—died from the disease.
I've read the first 25 pages of a book by John Sarfatti, Dawkins is an idiot, he's got quotes and everything, Dawkins is worse than Darwin!
You do realize you've just committed a major
ad hominem right? This is what I should expect from someone who cannot be bothered by evidence yet is convinced his position is true after reading 25 pages from a book. Not to mention habitually bad grammar (the period key is next to the comma).
I didn't know the source of that quote.
Which means you’re letting other people do your thinking for you, and then trying to take credit for it. The problem for creationists is that there is so little information that they can use. They have few arguments, whose rebuttals are easily mastered, and they all tend to quote mine the same stuff.
Sorry complexity doesn't go beyond the logic of the universe, no matter how complex the robot, it's only going to follow it's commands.
The opinion that it is impossible to create free will from complexity is not a law of the universe. Additionally, by what authority can you say that humans can never create robots with free will?
Is there anything in my genome that told me to eat some chocolate banana bread?
Well, once you’ve ate it, who is to say that you weren’t destined to eat it from day one? Unpredictability cannot necessarily be shown to be free will.
Random number generators have very complex ways of generating one specific output. If we didn’t know how the generator worked (e.g. “It has a soul, man!”) how would you show that it is not free will?
I have it pretty clear in my mind, but I have trouble expressing it in words, especially to you, because it has to sound good, otherwise you act like a 1200's flat earth believer.
Translation: “I’m convinced I’m right but there is no evidence to back my position”.
I can tell Free Will from Determinism easily, what the hell is wrong with you?
Nothing is wrong with me, or anyone else who disagrees with you.
But you seem to have difficulties in reading comprehension. What the statement says is that in hindsight, it is impossible to discern free will from determinism.
Yes he was racist, and his motives were anti-god.
Not all Christians disagree with Darwin. For example, the
Catholic Church, the largest religious denomination the world has ever known. Obviously the Pope’s motives were also anti-God too.
My theory is fully supportable! You believe in a random process, I believe in a creator. In that one sentence creation clearly sounds like the logical way we got here, look at a tree, random mutations I think not.
Blanket claim, strawman, appeal to common sense. You can’t honestly consider that an argument.
An appeal to common sense is not logical because common sense is not authoritative. The appeal to common sense got us geocentricism and flat earth-ism.
Well, I think it's kinda funny that she walked on fire then.
Me too. And so would every other rational person, because in a debate you cannot just claim a supernatural experience and expect people to agree with you. Remind me, how does fire-walking prove souls?
BTW there is some science behind this ability, but that’s not really important because you’re trying to prove the existence of souls with it.
And saying that you can't see it so you can't prove it, is like saying you can't see air so you can't proove it, following a simple path of logic will tell you that there is some substance floating around which you breathe.
Strawman. No one is so silly as to say that there is no air. Light a match. You can’t do that in a vacuum.
We cannot see gravity, yet we can substantiate our claims with
evidence, which is far more reliable than mystical claims about human anatomy.
Plus, we can measure wind speed (relative motion of air), and we can see the effects of tornadoes, and hurricanes.
Typical of you evolutionists, making fun of anything relating to god and jesus.
If it weren’t so ridiculous it wouldn’t be laughable. Every religion makes supernatural claims. Followers of every major religion claim to have supernatural experiences, yet you seem to think you are in a position to pronounce that yours is the only “correct” religion.
//EDIT
OK, you can read 25 pages in a book. I wouldn't be surprised if you chose not to read my post though (equivalent of a couple paragraphs of text). Don't say it hasn't happened before.
