Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
Not that it matters he said.. It was a obvious quesiton with an either /or choice.. He dodged it so it was clear to me that he's gonna assume what i don't subscribe to..he's just that kinda dude
And confirmed? Are you saying the theory in quesiton explains Evolution in the best way possible given the current presented evidnece? In that sense yes its the most reliable working modle given how expounded upon it is but let's not assume its absolutely certain and is expected form science's flaws here here like NEW DATA, GENERALIZATIONS, FLAWED MECHANISMS, and reasonable objections which include, fundamental assumptions no matter Micro or Macro perspective, with which even tho the theory makes for a compelling lense to look at biological evolution of life on earth, its still limited by its constraints and keeps evolving, changing and rectifying, but it isn't the only lense to look at it from which is what science is about.. Its not about ascertaining Absolute truths especially not with limited evidnece give the lost biological blueprint of life on earth in Evolutionary theorie's case. There is a reason why fact in science is defined as the nearest most compelling explanation OF THE GIVEN DATA. So if by confirmed you mean its proven to be absolutely true, then that would contradict science itself unless you just mean the best working model.. Which i don't have a problem with and no one should.
I mean.. There's not 1 kind of theory for even evolution I don't seem to understand your interpretation here. Yes you cannot force it down someone's throat because you believe in something so what does that have to do with what you're alluding to here which is misunderstanding what scientific theory is composed of.. Which is still an attempt at explaining something in the most sensible manner with given facts way but never claiming to be absolutely true.You can reject theories and you can adhere to others..don't see why that's an issue.
How about logical evidnece rooted in reality? That is mathematically, logically, and universally consistent
Brilliant point, there things that are intangible but can be observed indirectly through affect.. Like Dark energy.
Us creationist don't reject evolution (the observable biological chnage) we reject what we don't believe complied with objective standards, we just posit the reality that there is an unmovaed mover and this universe is a an observable affect of its existence.
And confirmed? Are you saying the theory in quesiton explains Evolution in the best way possible given the current presented evidnece? In that sense yes its the most reliable working modle given how expounded upon it is but let's not assume its absolutely certain and is expected form science's flaws here here like NEW DATA, GENERALIZATIONS, FLAWED MECHANISMS, and reasonable objections which include, fundamental assumptions no matter Micro or Macro perspective, with which even tho the theory makes for a compelling lense to look at biological evolution of life on earth, its still limited by its constraints and keeps evolving, changing and rectifying, but it isn't the only lense to look at it from which is what science is about.. Its not about ascertaining Absolute truths especially not with limited evidnece give the lost biological blueprint of life on earth in Evolutionary theorie's case. There is a reason why fact in science is defined as the nearest most compelling explanation OF THE GIVEN DATA. So if by confirmed you mean its proven to be absolutely true, then that would contradict science itself unless you just mean the best working model.. Which i don't have a problem with and no one should.
I mean.. There's not 1 kind of theory for even evolution I don't seem to understand your interpretation here. Yes you cannot force it down someone's throat because you believe in something so what does that have to do with what you're alluding to here which is misunderstanding what scientific theory is composed of.. Which is still an attempt at explaining something in the most sensible manner with given facts way but never claiming to be absolutely true.You can reject theories and you can adhere to others..don't see why that's an issue.
Post automatically merged:
How about logical evidnece rooted in reality? That is mathematically, logically, and universally consistent
Post automatically merged:
Brilliant point, there things that are intangible but can be observed indirectly through affect.. Like Dark energy.
Us creationist don't reject evolution (the observable biological chnage) we reject what we don't believe complied with objective standards, we just posit the reality that there is an unmovaed mover and this universe is a an observable affect of its existence.
Last edited:
I've seen enough of his posts in the past to know what he means
Post automatically merged:
Bunch of researchers actually
Post automatically merged:
Flawed in what way? That we dont know every detail about the evolution of every trait there is?
Post automatically merged:
Yes really
Post automatically merged:
Well if he is getting at humans not being primates (the usual go-to for theists when it comes to evolution), then he is and thats still the same level of reality denial as being a flat earther.
Post automatically merged:
So you did miss that part in the definition of scientific theory after all. . .
Post automatically merged:
Well obviously the best explanation based on the evidence so far may change to be even better with new evidence coming in.
No evidence will change humans being primates though.
Post automatically merged:
So what is it that you reject?
I think its time for you to actually respond to my points and questions
Post automatically merged:
There is no such evidence for a supernatural being or creationism.
And even if there was, that wouldnt point to a single religion (much less a single denomination of a religion), so at best you'd argue for deism.
Post automatically merged:
So you ultimately reject evolution but just try to sugarcoat it, got it.
Post automatically merged:
Doesnt have anything to do with evolution btw.
You can believe in the unmoved mover without rejecting repeatedly confirmed science.
Didnt you even make a point about religious scientists earlier lmao?
Post automatically merged:
And as i mentioned earlier, i have seen a reinterpretation of the adam and eve story to be indicative of evolution. Being religious and accepting evolution are not mutually exclusive
Last edited:
Well, I'm a girl boss and that is how I know the ideas of the movement have become ridiculous. I make my own money, raise my kids, I purchased my own home ect etc. Because no one told me I was held back or couldn't do it. So I did it.
Which is my biggest problem with most movements. People telling people they can't do this or that because of trivial matters. I remember my son coming home with a bad grade in math a couple of years ago. When I took his phone away this kid replied to me. "Mom, I'm black. I'm not supposed to do good in math."
I will say this he brought his math grade up.
Post automatically merged:
Which is my biggest problem with most movements. People telling people they can't do this or that because of trivial matters. I remember my son coming home with a bad grade in math a couple of years ago. When I took his phone away this kid replied to me. "Mom, I'm black. I'm not supposed to do good in math."
I will say this he brought his math grade up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...one-far-say-majority-gen-z-millennials-study/
''More than half of younger generations polled say women's rights are now discriminating against men''
Post automatically merged:
hard to buy into a god when they all are based on human tropes and understanding
there are stories in the bible directly adapted from the epic of gilgamesh such as the flood story
https://www.icr.org/article/noah-flood-gilgamesh/
which cant occur if it's accurate retelling of history
only truth in the bible flood story would be that it's based on a small flood that did occur in mesopotamia
https://ncse.ngo/flood-mesopotamian-archaeological-evidence
any god's being involved is entirely untrue at least for the real world mesopotamian flood which the fictionized bible flood was based on
Last edited:
Possibly something. But there are a bunch of things I agree with but I don't classify myself as. Take Republicans and Democrats. The majority of each group shares ideology but they don't classify themselves as the other.
The majority of modern-day feminism I'm fiercely against. That is why I keep it more simple everyone despite race, sex, religion blah blah should be equal as long as they do no harm.
What are your thoughts on AI and the future of needing regulations by the government? I have seen discussions recently about politicians' concerns about it, as well as the entertainment industry. Never gave it too much thought. Until yesterday, I was searching for writing tools online and I had to scroll through multiple links trying to suggest I use AI programs to write for me. It's the first time I consciously noticed this is a big problem.
The majority of modern-day feminism I'm fiercely against. That is why I keep it more simple everyone despite race, sex, religion blah blah should be equal as long as they do no harm.
Post automatically merged:
What are your thoughts on AI and the future of needing regulations by the government? I have seen discussions recently about politicians' concerns about it, as well as the entertainment industry. Never gave it too much thought. Until yesterday, I was searching for writing tools online and I had to scroll through multiple links trying to suggest I use AI programs to write for me. It's the first time I consciously noticed this is a big problem.
Last edited: