The Logic of Atheists vs. Theist Arguments

[Baruch]

Because they said something we agreed with, and couldn't put into better words ourselves? Even then, we're choosing our own people to quote. We are not as a group coming together to decide whose opinions to accept into atheistic canon.

Individualism precludes all conspiracies and potential agreements.  Yes, in every human concept, people are right twice a day, just like a broken clock.  Looking at it random, every 3600 broken clocks are broken the same way (60x60).

@Mr.Obvious ... this primarily responds to you as well.

[josephpalazzo]

...people are right twice a day, just like a broken clock. 

Aren't you tired of this old cliché...

[Absolute_Agent]

You're conflating one scientist's personal opinions with scientific claims. The two are not the same things.

"As Science, Evolution, and Creationism makes clear, the evidence for evolution
can be fully compatible with religious faith. Science and religion are different
ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future."

National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2008).Science, Evolution and Creationism. National Academy of Sciences. p. xiii.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism

Does this look like an individual scientist's personal opinion to you?

Deus summus

[Mike Cl]

"As Science, Evolution, and Creationism makes clear, the evidence for evolution
can be fully compatible with religious faith. Science and religion are different
ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future."

National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2008).Science, Evolution and Creationism. National Academy of Sciences. p. xiii.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism

Does this look like an individual scientist's personal opinion to you?

Deus summus

Did you read any of that book you listed?  Didn't think so.  I does NOT support creationism in the least.

[Absolute_Agent]

Did you read any of that book you listed?  Didn't think so.  I does NOT support creationism in the least.

We weren't debating creationism CI.  Get with the program.

Deus summus

[Mike Cl]

We weren't debating creationism CI.  Get with the program.

Deus summus

Yeah, that would be a good idea--look in the mirror when you make that suggestion.  Your listed source does not lend any credence to your 'program' of god nor space spooks.

[Absolute_Agent]

Yeah, that would be a good idea--look in the mirror when you make that suggestion.  Your listed source does not lend any credence to your 'program' of god nor space spooks.

I made no such claim.  I think you're confusing this with another debate.

Deus summus

[josephpalazzo]

"As Science, Evolution, and Creationism makes clear, the evidence for evolution
can be fully compatible with religious faith. Science and religion are different
ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future."

National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2008).Science, Evolution and Creationism. National Academy of Sciences. p. xiii.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism

Does this look like an individual scientist's personal opinion to you?

Deus summus

What a crock...

That book clearly states that:"...nonscientific alternatives such as creationism should not be part of the science curriculum in the nation's public school." on page xii.

[Baruch]

Aren't you tired of this old cliché...

I am a sucker for classics ;-)

[josephpalazzo]

I am a sucker for classics ;-)

Lame.

[Blackleaf]

"As Science, Evolution, and Creationism makes clear, the evidence for evolution
can be fully compatible with religious faith. Science and religion are different
ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future."

National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2008).Science, Evolution and Creationism. National Academy of Sciences. p. xiii.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism

Does this look like an individual scientist's personal opinion to you?

Deus summus

It is an opinion held by some scientists, yes. And it still isn't a scientific claim. You clearly do not understand what science even is.

[trdsf]

Still using insults as a substitute for rational arguments to get your point across I see, @josephpalazzo

Still using bullshit as a substitute for actual facts and reproducible data, I see.

Don't you want 72 virgins in Paradise?

Good grief, no! I want a hunky studmuffin who knows what he's doing!

Well, okay, two hunky studmuffins.  And I want them now, not in an alleged afterlife for which there's not the tiniest shred of evidence.

[Baruch]

Lame.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rYoRaxgOE0

Suckers?  Those gals aren't lame ... like taking candy from a babe

[Unbeliever]

Athiests think they are free of dogma.  If so, why do they keep quoting atheists of past times?

Because they often put the case pithily?

[Baruch]

Because they often put the case pithily?

Only if they wear pith helmets ;-)