|Kabbage - 2013-11-07 |
Awww shieeeee~ we got ourselves a holier than thoudown motherfuckerssssss
|EvilHomer - 2013-11-07 |
I really don't know who to root for here. Obviously, Pat is in the right - or at least more in the right than Eric and his Limey buddy there - but YEC Christians are much easier to take down than scientific ecumenicals, and the more Hovind mainstreams his viewpoint, the easier it will be for people to smell the bullshit.
You can find the full episode in the description, but I'll warn you now, it's mostly just them trying to sell crap to their viewers. Also, fuck Apple and it's product placement. From now on, I'm associating MacBooks with grown men who believe Jesus rode dinosaurs.
|Hooker - 2013-11-07 |
How can someone spend so much time on this? I have more respect for Star Wars nerds.
That goes for atheists that spend large amounts of their time trying to prove God doesn't exist / God is unknowable as well.
You can't prove a negative, it's logically impossible. The atheists you know who try are slack jawed retards.
You can prove a negative.
Logically, it's not any harder to establish the truth or falseness of (not A) than (A). Empirically, a hypothesis being falsifiable is pretty much a precondition for it being considered scientific.
You can't really prove that God exists (or not) because "God" is defined such that no evidence could possibly tell you either way.
You can try to prove God exists conceptually (Anselm, Aquinas), but all such proofs have had great big holes kicked in them (Immanuel Kant). Anyway, even if you think they do work, what they manifestly do *not* prove is anything like the christian personal God that these idiots think cares primarily about what you do with your dick.
So you can prove that someone didn't do something?
Its what happens when your faith and beliefs are so incredibly weak that reality itself disproves them.
|takewithfood - 2013-11-07 |
You know you're a completely worthless person when, of all the stupid things Pat Robertson has said, THAT'S the one you take issue with.
|pyslexic dharmacist - 2013-11-07 |
The only solution to this debate is to burn both factions at the stake and let god sort 'em out.
|Xenagama Warrior Princess - 2013-11-08 |
*shouts on playground*
Five stars for knowing what this type of lovely schadenfreude fighting is going to bring us.
|kamlem - 2013-11-08 |
"A different viewpoint comes from Stephen Jay Gould, who, while totally disagreeing with Ussher's chronology, nevertheless wrote:
I shall be defending Ussher's chronology as an honorable effort for its time and arguing that our usual ridicule only records a lamentable small-mindedness based on mistaken use of present criteria to judge a distant and different past
Ussher represented the best of scholarship in his time. He was part of a substantial research tradition, a large community of intellectuals working toward a common goal under an accepted methodology…
I love SJG. I know I say this a lot, but I totally would have gone gay for that man.
|Jet Bin Fever - 2013-11-08 |
Oh man, I bet Pat is shitting his Depends over this one.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|