hard2miss Posted May 9, 2010 Author Share Posted May 9, 2010 http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/draper00.htm Theres loads of stuff suggesting and showing examples of science and religion in conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted May 9, 2010 Author Share Posted May 9, 2010 You are aware that 'modern science' was conceived in the East, h2m? I didn't, but someone has pointed out on here that the Muslims had quantum physics worked out years ago but seemingly left it under the carpet until man could compehend it. Our last born was conceived in the back of my car but if I ask him to change a wheel he just looks at me gone out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pininsho Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 Seems you are bitter about something eh? I can't recall saying religious people tried to stop the advancement of science, in fact here is what I did say to save you trawling back through the thread And you and Jimmy pretend I say religious people Both FJ and H2m have given clear examples of where your statement was clearly wrong. All we're doing tabby is stating the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted May 9, 2010 Author Share Posted May 9, 2010 http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/2192/believex.jpg I take it back, science can help compliment religion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/draper00.htm Theres loads of stuff suggesting and showing examples of science and religion in conflict. Some religious dork must have written this. It hurts my very consciousness. Conflict? Obviously. Science asks for evidence to prove theory. There is no evidence for any invisible magic friend anywhere. Faith is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 That is a stupid distinction to make, religions are concepts, they can't really do anything. religious people can do things because of them though, which is clearly what you meant. Religions only exist inside people's heads, so religion can't do anything, but people can do things because of religion. But then again you are the guy who argues that suicide bombers who explicitly say that they're doing it because of their religion aren't doing it because of religion. Congratulations on wearing me down I can't be bothered to argue with you about this anymore, anyone reading our full discourse will know what's up. Anywho I'm off out now, have a nice night. It's so stupid that you repeat the same distinction to me and yet tell me that I am wrong. Rather a dodgy stance you have on one hand to tell me religion is a concept and this concept in itself can't do anything but the people do. I said all along that it's the people who use their interpretations to cause problems and not the religions, which to me is the same thing as you said, but in your snooty wisdom what I said is deemed stupid and what you say is correct Yeah right You Jimmy boy are too full of your self-righteousness that you're now despite explanations to the contrary trying to tell me what I meant, when in reality it was your own blinkers that obscured your understanding of what I had said. As for the suicide bomber accusation you are irritatingly making up lies now Jimmy boy, I have always maintained there is less of a religious justification for suicide bombers and more a political cause handed to them by the invading or occupying armies. Are you suggesting that it's because of religion they commit attack American soldiers and anybody they see as on the American side? Are you implying it has nothing to do with the invasion or the Yanks melding in the Middle East? That is one desperate attempt to sidetrack the argument yet you have no time to answer a request to educate us on the principle of first cause, totally understandable why you don't wish to argue.......init? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 And I have your number, I changed the word west to science so that wasnt the big change you make out. The fact that your actually admitting your hatred of the west by your statement means no one even has to shirlock homes you, why is the word west confrontational to you as a Muslim then ? learn to read, dear... I am not expressing any anti-west sentiment, nor did I use the word "confrontational". Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 And I have your number, I changed the word west to science so that wasnt the big change you make out. The fact that your actually admitting your hatred of the west by your statement means no one even has to shirlock homes you, why is the word west confrontational to you as a Muslim then ? oh, and by the way, you can't wriggle out of things that easily:- the caption at the top of the dialogue box which reads "title" still declares Re: Religious extremists hate/fear of the west So this supposedly "minor" change wasn't that minor, as it changes the whole semantics of the "argument" you are trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 Both FJ and H2m have given clear examples of where your statement was clearly wrong. All we're doing tabby is stating the obvious. Indeed you understand the argument well don't you, well done:hihi: You seem to have some difficulty with what the word clear means unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted May 9, 2010 Share Posted May 9, 2010 http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/draper00.htm Theres loads of stuff suggesting and showing examples of science and religion in conflict. Indeed there are h2m, especially with names like 'positive Atheism' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.