Christians use only factual information that can be proved historically and <u>chemically and logically</u> and no one wants to accept it? [Emphasis added]
[9/1/2003 12:00:00 ]
Fundie Index: 3
Christians use only factual information that can be proved historically and chemically and logically...
Things in the Babble can be proved logically? But the entire Babble is illogical....
11/27/2007 4:36:20 PM
Great. Let's hear it.
11/27/2007 4:36:50 PM
11/27/2007 5:41:00 PM
11/27/2007 6:32:42 PM
How about PROCTOLOGICALLY?
11/27/2007 7:08:44 PM
Try proving God chemically. I dare you.
11/27/2007 9:01:54 PM
As for your example, I’m not going to take the bait. You’re asking me to play a game: “Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your ID position as I do for my Darwinian position.” ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If ID is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. True, there may be dots to be connected. But there may also be fundamental discontinuities, and with IC systems that is what ID is discovering.” --William Dembski
11/27/2007 9:17:27 PM
By chemically, he means he took certain chemicals of the lycergic variety that enabled him to see and hear god.
11/27/2007 9:36:41 PM
Uh-huh. Tell me another.
11/27/2007 10:11:32 PM
The idea of a virgin giving birth is *very* logical.
It's okay. I already know your position really doesn't have a leg to stand on. No need to compensate for that.