Search results

No, evolution is a completely separate issue from the origin of life itself.

So, what, you think it's some literal, fiery place then?

Don't go into psychology whatever you do. Your reasoning is as simplistic as it gets.

You do realize that the ToE isn't about the actual origin of life itself, right? It isn't vague in the slightest, not if you're familiar with it and of course there's evidence for it. If there wasn't it wouldn't have become a theory. I thought you said you were familiar as to how theories become...

What point do you think you're making? I asked you if an atheist is solely defined by their lack of belief in a god, not what the term actually means. Your latter was predictably arrogant really.

If you think that the ToE is "vague" then the ignorance is once again, all yours. I'm not on the "side" of anything but there's no fantasy about it.

So, what is it then?

Do you think that all atheists are completely defined by their lack of belief in a god? That's rather ignorant if so. Rejecting fundamentalism is hardly the same thing as rejecting the Bible so that's kinda moot.

Not so much recently you haven't but you have in the past. It's no big deal to me one way or the other. If I agree with someone who's an atheist then eh, so? If someone makes sense and I happen to concur with them then I'll say so, it even happens with conservatives on occasion...

I corrected you where it came to your assumptions that I was an atheist. I've little time for 'organized religion' or fundamentalism. Besides which, it isn't a requirement for Christians to believe in some sort of "hell" as per the sort that certain churches preach.

It's not "my theory", it's one that's established globally in science. You say you know how the term theory applies where it comes to such. If that's the case then you'll know just how much evidence it requires in order for it to come about. I've no interest in any of the bizarre stuff you want...

How would you know?

Do you know what a 'theory' actually is in science?

No, you start off with a conclusion based on your religious beliefs. Your silly quip about ignorance can just be laughed at and discarded accordingly as you seem to have no idea as to just how stringent testing a posit in science undergoes before it becomes established as a theory. Continually...

Everyone goes to the grave RD.

You don't know what state of mind he was in when he died, nobody does. If he did, and? Let me guess, he's on his way to "hell"?

Irrelevant. There'll be a whole array of disparate belief systems among scientists, from Christianity to atheism and a whole load more as well. What matters in science is the evidence. No theory has come about or become established in science because of personal bias, it's ridiculous to posit...

What myths exactly? Why would he want a 'do over' also?

Is there even a remote possibility for you that 'Q', no matter who many individuals it may or may not comprise of, is just flat out ridiculous conspiracy rubbish designed to dupe the gullible?

No, it doesn't RD. Scientific theories do not become formulated because of 'assumption' and science is independent of any human bias. The evidence is what matters. Beliefs, biases, prejudices et al are entirely irrelevant. The ToE did not come about on some sort of whim by way of. If it didn't...