If you don't believe in evolution, you also can't believe in...

[Flores]

It wont do you any harm whatsoever, so why not just give the whole issue a read? You have nothing to lose by doing so.

Exactly, studying can do no harm....Unless someone here is advocating the worshiping of evolution through series of sacrifices, bowing, and nodding positions....I really don't think that the Atheists are making the claim that evolution is god...it's a process.

 

[norad]

Okay...everyone is going on about adaptation, but please look at the second law of thermodynamics. Doesn't it say that basically everything falls into chaos under the law of entropy? If this is the case, then something is wrong. Either the second law of thermodynmics is wrong or the theory of natural selection, which some call evolution. Why? Because natural selection works towards a betterment or buildup of a species.
Please explain? Thanks

 

[Raithere]

Please explain?

The Earth is not a closed system. Tremendous amounts of energy pour in through the sky from the Sun. The second law is not broken by a localized decrease in entropy as long as it is balanced by an increase somewhere else. The decrease on Earth is more than balanced out by the decrease in the Sun's expenditure of energy.

~Raithere

 

[river-wind]

And beside, the second law of thermodynamics states that for every transfer of energy, some will be lost to heat. This doesn't preclude the possibility of the building of more structure, it's just that energy must be expended to do so, some of which will turn to heat in the process.


http://www.panspermia.org/seconlaw.htm
(a good page on this topic, though the rest of the site is for debate on another thread at another time.)

 

[spidergoat]

Doesn't it say that basically everything falls into chaos under the law of entropy?

Isn't chaos complexity, not randomness? Doesn't life seem to be increasing in complexity? (as measured by density of connections)

 

[Ellimist]

The Earth is not a closed system. Tremendous amounts of energy pour in through the sky from the Sun. The second law is not broken by a localized decrease in entropy as long as it is balanced by an increase somewhere else. The decrease on Earth is more than balanced out by the decrease in the Sun's expenditure of energy.

Raithere - I love you. That is an amazing explanation. I am elated.

Flores - you are fucking awesome...

River-wind... you do not want to get into a discussion about panspermia... it gets crazy... you don't want the raelians in here... haha... perhaps even crazier than than thread...


Proud Muslim - fucking moron - religion dictates nothing but religion, you know that. It does not say anything about science. It used to, but then the religions found out they were wrong, so the interpretations are different now. Besides, you haven't answered some important questions... please, disregard all else for a few minutes and think about and answer these:


Branching from Snakelord:

can you explain then why man has wisdom teeth, goosebumps, (which are worthless to a creature with as little body hair as man), and tail bones in humans? Does Allah give an explanation to these things?

Blind spot in the eye where the nerve is, nipples on males, appendix, etc...

Is that perfection, is that not explained by evolution?

AND

It is amazing to me that even though science has all of these checks and balances, and peer reviews and double-checks, and repeated verifications to make sure ideas are consistent with observations, that these little dumbass, uneducated children and adults alike think they know better than hundreds of thousands of scientists around the world. If evolutionary theory is wrong, they change it to fit the evidence. Not the other way around. You change the idea, not the observation. Do you think the theory of evolution is the same now as it was when Darwin formulated it? No! There have been recantations and additions made for the past hundred years... If there really is a problem with it, like so many theists, and others, say, why haven't they published their ideas and changed evolution, or even got rid of it entirely. Stop putting your ideas on fucking websites. If you really think you are right, publish it. That is the beauty of peer review. If you are right, they will verify it and you will change science... otherwise... you are blowing smoke.

That was from earlier...

Just answer the questions and requests... or admit you cannot, and admit your shortcomings and realize your utter lack of ability to use logic and your ineptitude regarding your grasp of religion and science... whichever, it matters not to me.

 

[norad]

If evolutionary theory is wrong, they change it to fit the evidence. Not the other way around.

Yes that was my mistake, but does that suggest the theory was wrong in the first place? Doesn't make me uneducated, just a simple question, which no one has given a satisfactory answer for.

Stop putting your ideas on fucking websites.

Stop using your foul mouth on websites. And you think you're smart? The only thing smart on you is your mouth, but I wouldn't call 'foul' smart!

 

[Tiassa]

Nations were created by man, currency was created by man, marriage was created by man.....what exactly are you trying to correlate here.....

Mere consistency is all.

The proposition in the topic title is a device that atheists at Sciforums reject, that one assertion extends into other parts of their lives. While an atheist doesn't believe in God for "logical" or "rational" reasons, that rationality--upon which they reject the traditional basis of human social guidance--is completely isolated. As long as it doesn't have a godhead, atheists are free to be as irrational and goofy and detrimental as any religious zealot. Apparently, the difference between irrationalities is the presence or lack of a godhead.

Likewise, one who disbelieves evolution can still believe in many other things objected to in the topic post. Religion being irrational, the religionist can find other, possibly irrational justifications for things like heritage.

The topic post is irrational and inflammatory.

Tiassa, the catch is there is no contradiction between science, religion, and evolution if we look at things correctly.

Yes, and you can try to make that situation clear or you can just rip on people over it.

There is no contradiction, only misunderstanding.

Yep. Which is why I'm appalled that those who would assert ignorance or misunderstanding would prefer to exacerbate the situation.

Yes but not everyone replying in this thread are atheists Tiassa.

True.

PM has just taken it upon himself to label all who believe opposite to what he does as atheists.

I'm familiar with the idea in Christian philosophy, and also with the idea that Christians were called atheists.

It seems that all believers in a higher power and non believers have all been grouped together and we're all having a good old retarded time

Nope, not all believers, but your point is taken nonetheless. And yes, y'all are having a good ol' retarded time.

JAHILIYAH !!! WAOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

At least I could remember that one. Stetkevych's Muhammad and the Golden Bough, in its introduction, spends some time on the pre-Islamic Arabic term jahl. (Americans--think of Star Trek's Klingons, who are victims of their own jahl.) Reading through this topic I was struck by a jahl-like concept in the course of the dialogue.

However, I still can't find the other word I'm looking for. What's really weird is there might not be a word for it. I keep coming across ideas that are close to it, but what is it about certain simplistic discussions of God that shouldn't be undertaken for their lack of applicability? Now that I have a use for the idea in a discussion, I can't find it. Oh, well, life is.

I'll have to assume your insane untill I recieve a valid explanation, "taking the piss" being pretty much the only reasonable explanation i can picture.

The explanation is that I'm in this because a bunch of apparently ignorant people are having a problem with someone whose only real error was responding to an inflammatory topic in the first place.

Once we get over the bandwagon rushing to prove itself dumber than sheep, we'll see that there's not much of a topic here, and there never has been.

This isn't your average debate where both sides have good points and choosing either side is acceptable, this is round earth vs flat earth type stuff, worse, this can only be described as evolution vs creation, the single most one sided argument imaginable.

But this is a fairly orthodox Sciforums debate: ignorance seeking to inflame. And now that the match thrown has ignited the tinder, people are rushing to criticize the fire and defend the arsonist.

I once responded to a two-bit hater who accused me of actually being Muslim on the grounds that I never openly criticized Islam by explaining that the day Sciforums wants to have a debate about Islam and Muslims that seemed legitimate and not utterly stupid, I would voice my criticisms of Islam and Muslims. On occasion, nearly-viable points in various debates have elicited from me some criticisms of Islam which--wonder of wonders!--haven't openly pissed off the Muslims. And I'll tell you the secret of how that happens. It's not anything particularly difficult to figure out, but in case you hadn't heard, Muslims are human beings too!

The topic post is narrowminded and inflammatory. In fact, it seems to forget that it's dealing with theism.

Here, I'll give you some examples:

If you don't believe in evolution, than you are hearby forbidden from using the word "hereditary".

Hmm .... I don't even have to finish perceiving the last quotation mark after "hereditary" before Stock Theistic Response #(Fill in the blank, I don't care):

• Heritage and hereditary traits are specifically endowed by God when your life is blessed by an act of God's will. This is no different than a programmer writing two separate programs.

You don't believe in the sperm joining wih the egg, god is the creator, you were created by god, sex is what evil people do, it does not produce babies, god creates babies in a factory in the sky.

What does this have to do with anything?

Perhaps black people have black children because god makes black children for them, ok for you the word hereditary refers to the way god customizes children to what will suit parents, remember you can't accept the passing on of genes as something that happens.

There are theistic models which would agree with that assertion.

If you believe that sex creates babies, and you believe that the traits of the parents are passed onto the babies, if you believe in individuals, that people are different from one another and that different people produce different babies, you believe in evolution, bottom line. You can't go that far and back out, I am here by declaring such an act as illegal, or at least immoral or something(obviously its irritatingly ignorant but thats not enough anymore).

What ridiculous pomposity!

If you believe god created all, you can't believe in anything appearing by way of evolution (ie being birthed out of a female organism).

Is the author intoxicated or just f@cking with us here?

You believe in creation, that means you believe things are created, not concieved, concieved is evolution, giving birth is evolution, sex creating babies is evolution.

I like how the author spends so much time telling people what to believe so he can criticize them.

You don't believe in these things, pregnant women are just lazy and fat, if a baby falls out of their vagina they must have put it in their themselves to try to trick theists into going over to the dark side.

Man, there's nothing like casting the villains you want to prevail over. Hey, Don Quixote, go find another windmill.

Consistency is all I ask

Integrity would be helpful.

However, even good arsonists burn themselves once in awhile.

Consistency is all I ask, you believe in creationism, you stick with it and try to live day by day believing in that. If you don't see hands coming out of the clouds delivering babies to newlyweds but you do see spiders laying eggs, recognise that you are indeed witnessing evolution.

I mean, what is this sh@t? What is the author's freaking problem? What kind of idiocy compels this sort of savagery?

If you do see giant god hands coming out of the sky with new creations, maybe planting a tree here and there and delivering puppies to your female dog at home, then by all means believe in creationism, untill then though I don't see why you would or how you could.

If one is so dead to the world as to require such tangible proof of God (which, by a twist very familiar to the readers of Douglas Adams, invalidates God) in order to not be a complete prick about things, well, frankly I think even Camus would say, "Go for it, dude."

Now then ... back to the present:

This did turn into a debate, purely because the most comedically ignorant cartoonishly moronic human being entered and debated the undebateable, and the rest of the thread played out with people reacting to such a character as one would expect, with disbelief and laughter.

Well, that moron shouldn't have started the topic in the first place.

And then a seemingly rational human being comes in and casually defends bizarro stance like thats the normal thing to do, is this some strange conceptual art piece I'm experiencing?
What gives?

I'm tired of stupid people invoking stupid and inflammatory debates just to have someone to hate.

Just because a bunch of ignorant folks are laughing doesn't necessarily mean there's anything humorous going on except in their own minds.

Which parts of proud muslims posts is he making valid arguments against what the others are saying and where are the others(myself included) going wrong?

I could care less about Proud Muslim's stance on evolution. If I choose to take him up on it, I'll actually take him up on it.

In the meantime, I think the scorching bigotry is the most problematic aspect of this topic and "what the others are saying."

I'm ... very disappointed at what passes for intellect around here these days.

Is there some piece of the puzzle I don't know about?

Obviously. But if you don't understand it by the time you get to this point in the post, don't worry about it.

He's in your house and he's strapped with dynamite?

You're the Barbie doll of bigots, baby.

I'm sincerely confused.

Obviously.

However, I'm still trying to find an ingress. At this point, I have no idea what to do to help you.

 

[SnakeLord]

Once we get over the bandwagon rushing to prove itself dumber than sheep, we'll see that there's not much of a topic here, and there never has been.

There is a topic here, although I guess you have no interest in it. As such I question why you're spending such time and energy to get your feelings and opinions out, (just like everyone else), in the middle of this non-existant topic. Wouldn't it seem of more value to start a 'real' topic telling everyone how you feel about threads with no topic? Just a suggestion.

I'm tired of stupid people invoking stupid and inflammatory debates just to have someone to hate.

Then...

Well, that moron shouldn't have started the topic in the first place

I mean, what is this sh@t? What is the author's freaking problem? What kind of idiocy compels this sort of savagery?

And so on. It seems you're invoking enough all by yourself.

Anyway, on to (non existant) topic related matters...

Yes that was my mistake, but does that suggest the theory was wrong in the first place?

View it as a gigantic puzzle. You don't get every piece in the right place instantaneously, and certain pieces of that puzzle will need to be changed in order to end up with a completed puzzle. However, just because one piece doesn't fit, it doesn't make the entire puzzle worthless.

 

[spudbud21]

This must sound far fetched but evolution must exist. Do you really belive that some force ( not saying there is nod G-d ) really created humans and put us on the earth. Really if you thik about it why out us here or why make everythying how is is like today. Evolution had to happen becaseu humans simply could not have survived when the " asteriod " that killed all the dinosaurs hit. So if you dont belive in evolution are you saying G-d just randomly makes new species at random times in history because we really couldn't have been around since the creation of the earth. We would have to survived so many natural wonders like I said beofre... The ice age and the asteroid. I just dont belive that a race could have survived all of that.

 

[norad]

Thank you SnakeLord. At least you explained it without the personal attacks and quite well I might add.

Another question for you or anyone else. I had mentioned earlier, page 4 I think, that I felt carbon-dating was flawed. Is it really only good for up to 60,000 years, give or take a few thousand years, and if so, why? The other question is from what I understand of carbon-dating is that it's based off of a decay rate? Is this correct? If so, what makes us certain that the decay rate has remained constant? Thanks...much appreciated.

One more thing I won't ask anymore of these questions here since this is really a religion thread, but since people were going on about the theory of natural selection , among other things, I wanted to post my questions here.

 

[Tiassa]

Spudbud

An excellent point, but I think a factor complicating this discussion is one that transcends Sciforums and recalls the Scopes trial, at least. So many religionists in America, at least, see evolution constructed as a threat; their definition of the debate goes all the way back to the beginning, especially as Darwin's work was well-received by atheists.

Think of the phrase, "God is dead." How many times have people said that? And yet, despite the heritage of the phrase, the question, "Is God Dead?" on the cover of Time magazine or some such thrust the idea into public consideration and it's been an overinflated discussion bearing moral, ethical, and emotional implications ever since.

Finding a way to phrase evolution in the dialect of any specific religion can be difficult. It's why some folks who believe God created the heavens and the earth have no problem with evolution; it meshes with their understanding of God.

 

[SnakeLord]

Is it really only good for up to 60,000 years, give or take a few thousand years, and if so, why?

Yes. C14 is unstable/radioactive and as such has a 'half-life'. At 5000 something years half of it will decay, and then 5000 something years later half of that half decays and so on. At 60,000 odd years, there's nothing left to decay.

I'm not that much into chemistry, so you'd get a much better answer from someone who is. I hence apologise for its lack of clarity.

The other question is from what I understand of carbon-dating is that it's based off of a decay rate? Is this correct?

Yes.

If so, what makes us certain that the decay rate has remained constant?

From what I can gather that is somewhat of an assumption, but all tests of age-known items has been accurate. Again I can only apologise but chemistry is not my field of expertise

There are also other methods with which to date things, (some are enivronment insensitive and thus rates of decay are invariant), and they too corroborate carbon dating.

All I can hope, is that there's someone here with a greater knowledge of chemistry and dating techniques than I. I'm certain there is, and I'm sure they'll answer your questions with much more clarity, and much greater ease

 

[Tiassa]

There is a topic here, although I guess you have no interest in it.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear when I called the topic inflammatory and referred to the discussion as scorching bigotry.

• The topic post is irrational and inflammatory.

• The explanation is that I'm in this because a bunch of apparently ignorant people are having a problem with someone whose only real error was responding to an inflammatory topic in the first place.

• But this is a fairly orthodox Sciforums debate: ignorance seeking to inflame.

• The topic post is narrowminded and inflammatory.

• I'm tired of stupid people invoking stupid and inflammatory debates just to have someone to hate.

• In the meantime, I think the scorching bigotry is the most problematic aspect of this topic and "what the others are saying."

Beyond that, I have addressed the topic post specifically, both generally and point-by-point.

• The topic post is narrowminded and inflammatory. In fact, it seems to forget that it's dealing with theism .

Here, I'll give you some examples . . . .

• Likewise, one who disbelieves evolution can still believe in many other things objected to in the topic post. Religion being irrational, the religionist can find other, possibly irrational justifications for things like heritage.

In fact, that second point, the failure to account for the nature of the theistic response, undermines the entirety of the topic.

As such I question why you're spending such time and energy to get your feelings and opinions out, (just like everyone else), in the middle of this non-existant topic.

Hmmm ... prior to the Sciforums 3.0 update, people were complaining about moderation, about other posters, and so on. In response to the Sciforums 3.0 update, the Sciforums Open Government forum was exploited for a Ban War. People aren't getting along because they don't want to.

I think of the people, myself included, who have devoted many words of various temperaments to considering the state of discussions around Sciforums. Some of our most legendary wallopings have grown out of issues of paradigm and perspective that can be worked around if only people should choose to. And while some of those issues have been tragic misunderstandings, there's no question about the inflammatory nature of this topic. I see some intelligent people here advocating the ignorant and inflammatory for reasons that seem to be somewhat immediate; the argumentative context stays in a vacuum. I know a couple of intelligent folks are disgusted by Proud Muslim, but he operates under the burden of other people's bigotry.

It's generally easy enough to get along with him. For the most part, just don't go out of your way to be offensive. There are and have been a number of tragic misunderstandings afoot, but where the folks Dr. Lou describes as laughing are among fellows of common context and sympathy, Proud Muslim is not.

I've been in crossfires before where people who really didn't mean to contribute to the negativity did so anyway and got absolutely thrashed by the response.

So between the fairly narrow concern of conduct and atmosphere at Sciforums and my broader personal commitment against bigotry as an ignorance bearing tall consequences, I'm very compelled to respond and to remind the laughing chorus that just because five men are laughing and saying it's good doesn't make it so for the victim of a gang rape.

The topic post was inflammatory. Proud Muslim may--perhaps should, but that's left to him--wish to reconsider taking such bait in the future, as the scale of the waiting ambush should be apparent by now. But none of that redeems this topic or the absolutely flaming ignorance driving the laughing chorus.

Easy enough?

Wouldn't it seem of more value to start a 'real' topic telling everyone how you feel about threads with no topic?

I do, every once in a while. They're not very popular.

 

[Repo Man]

A big reason I come to places like this online is so I can voice my opinion about the sort of Mindless dogma PM and his ilk spew.
I have to deal with people like PM everyday. They aren't Muslim, but different though the dogma may be, the certainty of being right is the same.

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure, while the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

That is, and probably always will be, my favorite quote ever. When the joker in the car in front of me has a bumper sticker that says "Warning, in case of Rapture, this vehicle will be unoccupied", I sigh, and think of that quote.
When I have to listen to talk radio, and the verbal diarrhea of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Savage, I remember that quote.

This thread was started to address the same sort of frustration I feel. Surrounded by mindless lowing bovine individuals who reject evolution because it is too damaging to their self esteem, yet who's lives are made possible by the very science that they only dimly understand, and regularly ridicule. Cognitive dissonance is the only thing that allows them to get through their day. Posting their ignorance using computers!

I can't tell these people how much contempt I have for them in real life, I have to live among them. It gives me some insight into how closeted gays must feel.

I actually like most people I meet as individuals. But my respect plummets when I find out they believe in Christianity, Islam, Astrology, or any other silly superstition.

I think James Maynard Keenan said it best.

Some say a comet will fall from the sky.
Followed by meteor showers and tidal waves.
Followed by faultlines that cannot sit still.
Followed by millions of dumbfounded dipshits.

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will cuz
I sure could use a vacation from this

Though it would be a horrible end, I have to say I would take a certain satisfaction in being here while a comet came down. As the cosmos gave a graphic demonstration of how little regard it holds for humans or the planet we are presently destroying on our own, my last thoughts would be, "where is your god now, you stupid sons of bitches?"

Another favorite quote:

It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.
-- Bertrand Russell, from from "An Outline of Intellectual
Rubbish" in the collection, Unpopular Essays

 

[Tiassa]

General note: So it really is, in the end, that PM is a Muslim?

Repo Man - I hear you, indeed, but I'm of the opinion that in this general issue PM is not at the moment one of the people who would be better served by choosing to shut up.

As you note, the problem isn't just with Muslims. It's a human problem. And though you might find hateful bile and infantile stupidity to be a comforting expression of the frustration you feel, the fact remains that the topic post was inflammatory and ridiculous. So ... what does that say of your frustrations and any comforts you might take from the absolutely despicable excrement that passes for a topic post?

I mean, why don't you just walk down the street and bludgeon people you think are religious? The more I read through the development of the dispute in this topic, the more disgusted I am with the topic post and the absolutely shitty excuse for thought coming from the idiot chorus.

Given the fact that few people like the SFOG forum because there's not a ban war going on right now to satisfy their lust for chaos, I'm thinking of proposing action against the topic poster for this absolutely offensive hate campaign. Sciforums doesn't need that brand of bigotry, and if someone's going to go out of their way, as the topic poster has, to inflame an already difficult situation in our community, we ought to consider action.

My own opinion is that, compared to the history of those who have been banned, our topic poster ought never set foot around Sciforums again.

People who think they can eliminate the Muslim voice at Sciforums by spitting on it and then whining and moaning when it strikes back ought to consider history: Such a tactic has never quelled the Muslim voice anywhere.

I can't tell these people how much contempt I have for them in real life, I have to live among them. It gives me some insight into how closeted gays must feel.

I both understand sympathetically what you're saying and also chuckle for a moment. Because you're right, inasmuch as my being beaten for looking Asian a whole three or four times, and challenged to fights many times on the same grounds, gives me some insight into how a black man feels when being harassed by the cops, or how Ernesto Miranda felt when he was coerced into confessing crimes he didn't commit.

But on the other hand, which of your fundamental living rights do you currently have establish before you're treated equally to your neighbor?

Though it would be a horrible end, I have to say I would take a certain satisfaction in being here while a comet came down. As the cosmos gave a graphic demonstration of how little regard it holds for humans or the planet we are presently destroying on our own, my last thoughts would be, "where is your god now, you stupid sons of bitches?"

Wow.

That's amazing.

Trying to understand your human neighbors is such a horrible idea that you'd rather see humanity extincted.

I mean, I have my pessimistic days, my "blow up the outside world" days, but phack!

 

[Repo Man]

The only certainty of life is death. I think this is true of individuals, and the species Homo Sapiens. Even our own name smacks of egocentrism!
Eventually, we humans will become extinct.
It would be nice to think that we might reach some sort of enlightenment as a species beforehand. But I don't think it is possible. We have, in my opinion, too much biological baggage from our evolutionary past. Our need to follow leaders, our seemingly innate need to believe on dogmatic nonsense, our territoriality.

How many more centuries will humans continue to argue against things such as the truth of evolution? No matter how obvious it is, the fight continues, as strong as ever.
There are still individuals who will argue that the Earth is flat.

Maybe the dogma of religion has a very strong adaptive value, or at least did in our tribal past. Blind obediance to leaders I'm sure had a very strong adaptive value in the past. The tribe that spent all of its time arguing over what to do about the threat from the next tribe over would likely have been destroyed by the tribe who obeyed their leader when he said it was time to invade and slaughter the arguing tribe.
But like a lost wax casting, the world that molded this behavior in humans is gone. Will we be able to overcome our biologically determined behavior?

I don't think so.

I personally think the only real hope for humans to make this a world worth living in is to put aside our overbearing egocentrism, and realize that on a cosmic scale, humans are beyond insignificant. If we could somehow do that, maybe we could actually consider working together cooperatively, rather than competing for resources as mindlessly as bacteria in a petri dish.

But when you hear that the main topic on the news is gay marriage (who cares?!?), you wonder if we, as a species, are even worth hoping for.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

So I deserve to be banned for this thread tiassa?
Ha not sure on what grounds but go for it, make that proposal, would love to see how it played out. Its about time I was a contraversial topic.

In truth, despite tiassas dramatic over the top attempts to make this thread into a monster, this thread was intended for nothing more than a reality check for anyone who was not in check, religion is not something I take into account, I'm talking to human beings and in reality there is only one way the world operates, we are all on the same planet and it is what it is.

If representatives of certain religions come in here and say "wrong it works like my religion says", no I will not be sensative to their cultural heritage, no one is exempt from knowing the truth.
Ignorance is ignorance, and I am prejudiced against ignorance.
Whether it comes from a proud muslim, a proud hindu, a proud yardee or my proud father, I really don't give a shit.

I'm still not sure what you're problem is tiassa? Is it that you are so against culture bashing that you will find it where it is not? Like when someone addresses a muslim with an exclamation point at the end of their sentence you fly off the hinges and call them a redneck biggot?
Thats all I can extract from your posts.

Keep in mind, A muslim was attacked and made fun of in this thread, not the muslim faith.
However if the muslim faith did show ignorance I would have a problem, but as it can be taken(by some flexible types) as a symbolic worship of the natural world it will retain immunity.

I consider knowledge and truth as far more important than anyones feelings, pm was never corrected in here by you T despite being flagrantly wrong about many things, you don't seem concerned with that, you're more concerned that someone is having their mistakes pointed out, oh and ofcourse that that someone is of alternative cultural heritage to "the west", which makes them precious golden calfs that shant be addressed with anything other than a curious and apologetic tone

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

PS good posts all round repo man, consider me in agreement on just about everything.

 

[Bells]

General note: So it really is, in the end, that PM is a Muslim?

Personally, and I'm speaking personally, I don't care that PM is a Muslim, it means naught. If I had gotten to the point where I would only argue with someone because they were a Muslim, then I'd sooner stand on a hill with Repo and watch the asteroid come down on top of my head while cheering. In my various discussions with PM in this medium, we've argued, discussed, probably abused each other and I know for myself I've learned from him as well. However, bigotry goes both ways. When I first took part in this thread, it was to discuss evolution with someone who believed in creationism, it was for me, a debate. It stopped being that when labels of 'atheist retard' were put on people of the opposite side of the evolutionary debate. All I asked PM was to read some books that were not religiously based in regards to evolution, to study both sides of the argument before making any decision. Instead, accusations of my misunderstanding Islam were thrown about and the accusations that the Muslim members of my family and extended family and friends who did believe in human evolution were not in fact real Muslims. But personally, what I found so grating that any person could say that because a Muslim could dare believe in evolution could not make them a proper Muslim, who is he or anyone else to judge others in such a way? As I said before Tiassa, bigotry goes both ways.

If PM wishes to believe in creationism, hey that's his choice. But it's not his place to call people retards, etc, because they do believe in evolution. As a child my parents ensured that I learnt both sides of the story before I made up my mind. That's how I was taught, that I should never ever make an opinion on something unless I study both sides in detail. That was all I was asking PM to do. It's funny in a way actually. The person who first taught me about evolution was actually a Muslim, and I'd mentioned him in my posts on previous pages. This man was inspirational to me when I was in high school, and even today I still look up to him. He once told me 'never discount what you haven't ever learnt'. As I read through this thread his words kept coming back to me. And then to hear PM say that this man could not be a proper Muslim, well I found his high handed manner to be insulting to a man who was not only a devout Muslim, but also a man who'd extensively studied both sides of the argument and only then made up his mind, all this while still keeping his mind open to any other possibility.

And as for ridding this or any other forum of the Muslim voice, I'd never sit back silently while such a thing happened. If such a thing were allowed to happen, then all Christian, Jewish, Buhddist, Mormon, etc voices should also be silenced.