Pope Says Humanity Needs Saving From Homosexuality

[Curious]

I know you are exactly as I stated there. An Ass... and of magnanimous proportions.

I think I'm prepared to put my hand up for that one.

[Aunty]

They can deny it as much as they like, but it simply does not, and nor will it ever change the fact that homosexuality was created by God.

I thought you are a scientist. Or are you channeling Wesley?

So what are you saying? That a scientist cannot be a Christian? That the two are somehow mutually exclusive? That the purpose of science (or even its mere existence) somehow disproves the existence of God? What do you think science is a competing religion? You silly creature.

Science doesn’t address why, you moron, it addresses how.

[Curious]

Science doesn’t address why, you moron, it addresses how.

Oh OK, silly me. What's your take on Intelligent Design?

[Wesley]

Indeed, Jesus loves you like it or not. And yes throw your hands up in pure as to such a prominent display of ignorance that Aunty should have to step in.

Wes

[Aunty]

Science doesn’t address why, you moron, it addresses how.

Oh OK, silly me. What's your take on Intelligent Design?

That you are a prime example of its falsity?

[Curious]

Science doesn’t address why, you moron, it addresses how.

Oh OK, silly me. What's your take on Intelligent Design?

That you are a prime example of its falsity?

Right, but ID is a "how" question, isn't it? As a Christian yourself (and such an inspiration to us non-believers I'm almost ready to take Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior based on the example you are setting) what's it all about? Why are we here and what hapens next? I mean the Pope says he's a Christian and George W. Bush says he's a Christian and you say you are a Christian but what do you all agree about?

[Wesley]

ID, like anythign else, at least at this point in time, is still a theory, nothing more nothing less. You can no more prove there is not a god than Aunty can prove there is. Its all thoery, As long as it remains in the theoretical realm it is only a question for people like you to ponder.

Wes

[Curious]

ID, like anythign else, at least at this point in time, is still a theory, nothing more nothing less. You can no more prove there is not a god than Aunty can prove there is. Its all thoery, As long as it remains in the theoretical realm it is only a question for people like you to ponder.

That's why I'm looking to Aunty to provide me with answers to the "why". As Aunty says "JESUS LOVES YOU" and I'm guessing Aunty is a living example of what that love can do for you.

[Wesley]

I think that was meant in jest, I'm just guessing but I think that was toungue in Cheek.
I'm surprised with your intellectual prowess you missed it...?
Wes

[Curious]

I think thatwas meant in jest, I'm just guessing but I think that was toungue in Cheek.

But was it magnanimous?

[Wesley]

no I'm being magnanimous when I cut you any slack at all, I was talking about your proliferate ass hole, it has to be very giving to spew out such a stream of shit as you do.

Wes

[Wesley]

oops time to go chase a man, I'll leave you to gra45 and Aunty,

Wes

[Hmmm]

So what are you saying? That a scientist cannot be a Christian? That the two are somehow mutually exclusive? That the purpose of science (or even its mere existence) somehow disproves the existence of God?

OK, I'll bite. A scientific christian is at the very least incongruous - one set of rules for one part of your life, and another set for the other part. But the ID crowd wheel out science PhDs just as the sane side of that argument do, so science is obviously not a robust protection against delusion.

I seem to recall a lecture from you on statistical significance and probability. So what would you say ? God created everything, p < 0.05 ? Or just the invisible celestial teapot ?

[Aunty]

Oh don’t be a bore, Beryl. What do you mean one set of rules for one part of life and another set for the other part? What ‘rules’ are you talking about? What do you think science is a religion that competes with Christianity much like Islam? However if that is your view, then perhaps you could show me the Book of Science so that I may learn its doctrines and understand how I am to live a good and moral life. And once my days are done what will be my reward for having lived the good science life be? What does Science promise me for that?

Clearly you have a very different view of science than I do. And the other thing that you have left me puzzled with is what does a mathematical measure that gives me 95% confidence (or more) to say that the difference between a bunch of numbers in column A and a bunch of numbers in column B happened to be that way just by chance, or not as the case may be, got to do with creation? You silly queer.

Your notion that being a scientist and a Christian is somehow incongruous, well I can only conclude that either you don’t get out much, or you don’t know many scientists! However the following article may be of interest to you given your apparent extremist views.

Nation's Top Christian Geneticist Defends God and Evolution
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20 ... lution.htm

By the way I will not be adding anything more to this discussion. It just doesn’t interest me to do that here to be honest. This is a board with an equal measure of anti-christian and anti-science bias. Experience has taught me that discussions on topics of this nature are pointless, unproductive and uninformative around here. Let's get back to attractive young Thai men in their undies!

[555]

For me the sciences are a set of methods for discovering, coding and stating i.e. reifying, knowledge. Different sciences have different methods or epistemologies depending on the kinds of realities, or ontologies that are to be reified. The physical reality is received through our senses, social reality is the result of the manipulations were are subjected to by our fellows. The physical sciences reify knowledge about the physical world as it is found i.e. stumbled over, kicked against and how things may happen in a physical sense.

Some social scientists construct theories and demonstrate why things happen in a social ontology so the division between "why" and "how" is not as clear cut as stated above.

To equate the theories of Intelligent Design with those of Darwin and the scientists and thinkers of his time is simply crass. Darwin and the scientists of his time, painstakingly gathered evidence for the emergent theory of evolution. It served to demonstrate that an over-respected body of knowledge was deeply flawed. However, that doesn't mean that those bodies of knowledge didn't contain some useful heuristic for an orderly society in a warm dessert climate.

Perhaps that Jesus fellow or Mohammed did know better than their fellows and had interpreted evidence and drawn on knowledge flowing across the trade routes from East and West.

An open mind can have faith and curiousity, just not at each other's expense.