Scientist Observes Planet Being Formed

Kunoichi said:
Pixie didn't pick up on your very RUDE ass! - I DID, however.

When you begin by a thread by calling fellow posters whom you assume won't agree with you, "woefully ignorant, intellectual dishonest, delusional-minded, STUPID and archaic thinkers" - all in one breath...and then insist you're merely being truthful just because they dismiss your theories - even though no-one had yet to speak...is what's pure delusion - on your part. (and no, you didn't refer to "Young Earth Creationists or those who dismiss any area of evolution", so stop with your nonsense. This is a highly debatable subject and if you are NOT open to another's POV, then you are in no position to chastise them for the very attitude you are exuding also.

I'll contribute my opinion to those whom I see are open to discussion.
Click to expand...

Pixie tries to avoid personal attacks and rudeness, and overlooks them when she can (Hell, I sound like Lippy now LOL).

Particularly where the intersection of science and religion are concerned, I generally don't see a conflict. I consider myself at least agnostic if not an atheist, but I see no reason whatsoever that one cannot believe in both science and a deity. In some religions, the origin of the universe does not come into play. In others, the process of evolution of the universe is set into motion by a given deity or deities. I don't think science can prove or disprove the existence of deity. Nor do I think religion can prove or disprove the existence of deity.

So for me, I take what science can prove as fact, and disregard the issue of whether or not the process was sparked off by a deity as irrelevant to me.
 
BigBrotherWise said:
Wow, I had to mention these said individuals by actual name so that people would know who I'm referring to? That's spoon-feeding individuals who are oblivious to the entire discussion on evolution and ID. That was the whole point. Anyone who even remotely looked into it can pick up on that.

You REALLY need to read into all this instead of going on a menopausal tirade. They aren't my theories as much as the general science community who has been refuting creationist claims. And this article was the entire point of it. This shouldn't even be a controversy nor should be debated because people "have different beliefs."

Guess what? This is a proven theory and those who tend to argue against it are very much likely ignorant of the subject matter. I'm around people like that all the time and even if evidence (tangible and factual) have been presented, people STILL won't acknowledge it. There are some things that we DO KNOW and this is one of them. Don't dismiss it and call it "simply another theory". That just makes you as bad as them.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's a rudeness which needs speaking to. I am sick and tired of seeing women on this site referred to as "menopausal" when most of them are younger than I am and I'm still menstruating. Menopausal is being tossed around as a insult, as though aging and menopause were horrible things. It is also used as an excuse to say women are irrational and overly emotional. How about it isn't our hormones when we're pissed off, but like other people (read:men) sometimes things piss us off. Jeepers, BBW, I'm surprised at you.
 
As a kid I had this Time/Life book titled the "The Universe" which was part of the Time/Life series on the nature world. What fascinated me was the speculation of billions of worlds in our Milky Way Galaxy alone that may exist and out of those billions of worlds that perhaps a million with life. So much new information seems to make those earlier projections a thing of truth if not more than we expected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom