|
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
| (...) I think Todd would be smart enough to figure out that somebody changed the newsgroup in the reply thread and that I simply didn't realize it. So yes, he'd probably find that funny - I mean, the laugh's on me! Which is something you didn't seem (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|  
bruce
(score: 1.327)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.325)
|
|
| | Re: Family values?
|
| (...) It's kind of like being convicted of manslaughter and given 18 in prison, and upon being found not guilty, still having to serve the term. The woman is not punished for fraud. The real father does not carry the burden of his actions. AND the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.325)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.325)
|
|
| | Re: Star Wars on DVD
|
| (...) Hey, I LIKE Brian Setzer, have for years... It's not my thesis that all artists with BS for initials make dreck, (or all Lugnetters, for that matter, (hi Bruce!)) just that I found it funny in this case. At least Britney's easy on the eyes. If (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.324)
|
|
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) But they are more willing to do it with a gun. And if they want to knife fight, that's okay, my knife is three feet long! Crocodile Dundee, eat your heart out. Of course, I'd reach for the 12 gauge first... Bruce well-armed liberal :-) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.324)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.324)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
| (...) Simply read "Origin of Species". If Darwin had the wealth of information we have today, he'd no doubt modify his theories, but it's the best starting point. The whole point of sexual reproduction is gene mixing as an aid to rapid evolution. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) I agree with that. But I've never said God doesn't exist. (...) He should have stated that there is no verifiable known way to physically visit God. Tom probably doesn't want to modify his statement, but that's the way I'd put it. Bruce (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) There were a fair number of responses, that may be daunting in their scope or time involved. But yes, it was more than a comment in passing and he invited debate on the subject of evolution. If he doesn't want to pursue it further, I don't (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) No answer can be an answer when one side finds itself overmatched - slinking away quietly is an answer (I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case here). (...) It may mean he can't back up his claims. That doesn't mean others might not (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Ummm, actually looking back on the string, Steve was making the assumption that "Darwinists" are atheists by definition. They aren't - evolution doesn't address God. Now, a Darwinist can be an atheist, but they also may not be, which is what (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) You are confusing an overwhelming body of evidence that reduces the probablity of inaccuracy to virtually nothing with "faith". You are also confusing reproducable results through a set experiment with no reproducable results that have no set (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) If he runs on about evolution being bankrupt without addressing the other points, I think we have an answer through a non-answer. If he simply drops the subject, we probably have an answer, but can't be sure of it. Anyway, a non-answer can be (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Depends on how you want to phrase it: I find given the scale of the universe, it seems mathematically likely that there is extra-terrestrial life. Evidence is suggesting that planets are fairly common. The right mix of time, elements, (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) See above: I don't always agree with a scientist's findings. So, no, I didn't take it on faith. And there were a fair number of creditable scientists that confirmed the cold fusion experiment (the problem not being the results, but the test (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Actually, you are trying to say everything is equally valid because everything comes down to faith. I disagree. (...) Maybe. Test it against knowns and see if consistent results are obtained. (...) No, you are assuming that I am assuming such. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
|
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Major snippage of worthy discussion, but the really important part is here. Rummaging for a dictionary... faith 1. Complete confidence or trust. 2. Belief in God or the doctrines of religion. 3. A system of religious belief. 4. Loyality or (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 1.323)
|
