{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/11/2015 11:27:28 AM
1
"Mister reasonable".
I like how you use that as if it is a criticism.
The problem here is you can't just go with an idea being most likely simply because we don't yet have other ideas. That is classic 'god of the gaps'. The difference between me accepting evolution as the best explanation whilst not accepting god as an explanation is that we have a mountain of independently verifiable data behind evolution and none behind god. They couldn't be further apart in that sense. As for the rant about liberal media, you're just throwing out ransom accusations based on nothing. You have no idea what I read.
English
-
oh lolz, you got me with that mister reasonable quip. i would like to say that it was tongue in cheek. (: we have gotten to the point where usually the discussion can go no further because it becomes an argument about semantics. 'god of the gaps' such an easy term to throw at someone. a man can say that god is what keeps our feet on the ground Einstein says that its curved space, is the first guy wrong? i would say it depends what the guy means as god. to say god created the universe is not saying we will never learn understand the act of creation. it is completely possible to hold an idea in your mind (and soul) without it taking the place of a different type of understanding. you are free to love jesus and be loved by jesus while still learning to understand the intricacies of his greatest gift to us (existence) i really hope youre beginning to understand.
-
and about the previous post, the liberal media accusation was made because your track for thinking fits the pattern of those liberal fools who are so quick to jerk off scientists just because its fashionable. maybe im wrong, but you seem like you'd go with the physicists multiverse theory (or something scientifically similar) way before you would go with the idea that is seen portrayed as stupid in popular culture. i hope im wrong but youd probably go with the sciencey sounding idea even thought it doesnt explain anything (Where would a multiverse come from?) thats my problem, that people like you would rather go along with an inferior explanation simply because of cultural bias, peer pressure, or whatever petty bull that keeps you from thinking clearly.
-
You're just rambling now.
-
i love talking about this stuff. it does make me sad how rare it is to find someone who is willing to having a polite discussion about topics like this in which ideas are articulately argued and debated on the merit of the point without resorting to personal comments. i mean rambling? i know its not my doctoral thesis but rambling seems like an exaggeration. next time i'll try to explain the origins of the universe in ten words or less.
