Abortion, pro or con?

Care to explain how antibiotic resistance comes about then?

Anti=against

Bio=life

And actually many renowned physicists study and support creationism but you seem to know what you are talking about.
 
sounds like youre describing a pea pod.

seriously though, all exaggerations aside, abortion isn't murder. i don't give a fuck what your rationalization is.
 
My point was that nobody knows the truth yet, and if you are claiming to have the answers when some of the smartest people in the world are unsure...........well just doesn't seem very credible. But through the eyes of a bigot I am confident it's a different story.
 
We do know the truth to a certain extent. All the evidence points towards evolution, and we know that evolution happened (99.89% of scientists when surveyed in the national academy of scientist said they completely accept evolution.) There is virtually no uncertainty that evolution happened. The specific uncertainty you are mistaking for general uncertainty is very real though. There are definitely disputes over a few very specific ways two animals might have evolved etc. etc. and over some other mechanics of evolution.

On the other hand there is absolutely no evidence for creationism besides a poorly written book created by desert people thousands of years ago, and that really isn't even evidence.

I apologize for grammar and spelling i am on mobile.
 
Yup, you hit the nail on the head butttttt I'm talking about cause and effect, not books written by men. I'm curious of your view on causality if you can comment again later.
 
Sort of. I don't understand well enough if the "creator" would actually be a deity. In the eyes of humans, yes, but we don't know about the rest of the universe lol. Cause and effect would mean that something had to create the universe so I'm just curious of your opinion on the truth/legitimacy of cause and effect or cause without effect. Like you say, evolution is basically proven but causality is lingering like strong flatulence.
 
name one "renowned physicist" who supports creationism. Do they work for CERN, NASA, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, European space agency?

Antibiotic resistance comes about from all but a few bacteria dying from an infectious agent, the survivors posses a genetic mutation that gave them an advantage. Then they reproduce. Simple. Evolution at work.

Go back to school, unless you are from Indiana, in which case, you should probably stop watching the Christian Channel.

Sorry for being a douche.

 
James Clerk Maxwell to name one and there are many in this list:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/CMI_list_of_scientists_alive_today_who_accept_the_biblical_account_of_creation

And hey, I don't believe in a god but am familiar with cosmology. What is wrong with questioning theories? I am happy that you know the truth with such certainty even when these physicists have yet to prove anything and I appreciate the judgement.

By the way, make sure you are aware of MRSA strains and vancomycin since you may not be knowledgeable on the effects of over-using or frequent antibiotic use.
 
No...

StarTrekFacePalm.gif
 
dude we know evolution happened. The only things we are unsure about it are some of the specifics and details. Also you seem to not really understand the term "theory". Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.

I gave you the statistic before that only like .11 percent of scientist around the world believe in creationism.

 
Ya, no shit, thanks. My point being is that since there is that .11%, one should never stop questioning "theories". I apologize for appearing to distrust science lol, I rely on it everyday and learn more everyday because of it but I value the significance of questioning things.
 
First, He is not a "renowned" physicist. Has he contributed to any significant discoveries or theories (other than creationism)?Second, the only supporting evidence for creationism is when evidence that supports evolutionary traits don't ad up. This does not mean that evolution does not have overwhelming evidence. The Bible was written thousands of years ago by people who believed the world would end in an eclipse.

I am very knowledgeable on the effects of antibiotics. I was simply using antibiotics as an example of natural selection. We know it's a real thing. Human's can artificially select animals and create new species. We have done it before, to assume that this is impossible in nature is idiotic and ignorant.

What you mean is that you don't believe in the traditional concept of God. I'm agnostic, and for me at least, the most logical explanation for the existence of God (within the universe at least, outside who knows!) is that god is the collective intelligence of everything in the universe. Sort of like how the billions of cells that make up our body are organisms on their own, but interact in a way to create a combined intelligence. But then again, thats a bunch of philosophical bullshit, and I am probably wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top