The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I heard two people talking about this the other night, and was wondering what you guys thought. Is being gay in your DNA, or is it 'acquired' through your life?
So yeh, enlighten me...
So yeh, enlighten me...
Page:
Anti-creation?
Forest Fan wrote:
> Yep, I am anti-evolution, just as anti-creation as everyone has been
> towards me.
1. Creationism is scientifically non-explanatory.
2. Science and religion are two different cognitive fields between which communication is not possible.
3. Science is dynamic, its goal to approach the objective truth as much as possible, and religion is static, its goal to protect a system of subjective truths set a priori.
4. Being religious does not have to mean being creationistic.
5. Why would, of all the available creation-myths, the Hebrew one be the only valid one ?
6. Creationism is inherent to a view of life in which man is disconnected from nature, and has the right to exploit his environment, which is characteristic of expansionistic religions.
7. Despite of what creationists say, evolution is a scientific theory which produces testable hypotheses that are still corroborated everyday by data from the fossil record, comparative morphology, biogeography, molecular systematics, and other disciplines.
8. Creationism is not concordant with the fossil record.
9. Creationists do not seem to be aware of, or prefer to ignore, the latest findings on the field of Self-organisation and Chaos/complexity theory which indicate that life really is able to originate and develop on its own.
10. The idea that nature has been designed and crafted together is so anthropomorphic, that it is more likely to be a projection by ourselves. Is not nature equally wondrous by imagining that it has all come into being on it's own?
> Yep, I am anti-evolution, just as anti-creation as everyone has been
> towards me.
1. Creationism is scientifically non-explanatory.
2. Science and religion are two different cognitive fields between which communication is not possible.
3. Science is dynamic, its goal to approach the objective truth as much as possible, and religion is static, its goal to protect a system of subjective truths set a priori.
4. Being religious does not have to mean being creationistic.
5. Why would, of all the available creation-myths, the Hebrew one be the only valid one ?
6. Creationism is inherent to a view of life in which man is disconnected from nature, and has the right to exploit his environment, which is characteristic of expansionistic religions.
7. Despite of what creationists say, evolution is a scientific theory which produces testable hypotheses that are still corroborated everyday by data from the fossil record, comparative morphology, biogeography, molecular systematics, and other disciplines.
8. Creationism is not concordant with the fossil record.
9. Creationists do not seem to be aware of, or prefer to ignore, the latest findings on the field of Self-organisation and Chaos/complexity theory which indicate that life really is able to originate and develop on its own.
10. The idea that nature has been designed and crafted together is so anthropomorphic, that it is more likely to be a projection by ourselves. Is not nature equally wondrous by imagining that it has all come into being on it's own?
Yep, I am anti-evolution, just as anti-creation as everyone has been towards me.
You don't have to be irreverent to work here, but it helps...
Got all the staffies on my case now!
Forest Fan wrote:
> La, la, la. Can't hear you. La, la, la. Can't hear you.
> La, la, la. Can't hear you. La, la, la. Can't hear you.
Although you claim that you've now dropped lesbians, I just wanted to say that I found it interesting that Mr Anti-Evolution used the argument:
Forest Fan wrote:
> Science told me.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Science told me.
"Inside the mind of the gay sheep"
Now there is a title to grab your attention.
Now there is a title to grab your attention.
Forest Fan, can you explain this please? [URL]http://www.theregister.com/content/73/36074.html[/URL]
Millflop, we have already dropped the subject, hence my previous post.
Page: