The New York Times; Feighk and Gheigh

Avajs

Active member
You mean the mission to take back much of the civilized world from the Muslims before they destroyed everything?



Which one?



But you're not sure?



You mean like many of the fathers of modern science having been Christians and/or believed in a Creator, at the very least rejecting naturalistic origins?

The Muslim world kept math alive for a while.
No I don’t mean rhe fathers of modern science, I mean people today who don’t accept what those fathers of modern science have led us to.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
The Muslim world kept math alive for a while.

And they also slaughtered millions of people, subjugated them, and forced them to convert to Islam and Sharia law.

No I don’t mean the fathers of modern science,

Of course you don't, because it destroys your entire argument.

Most of them believed in a Creator.

I mean people today who don’t accept what those fathers of modern science have led us to.

Led us to?

You mean mathematical models of things never observed that have no basis in nor connection to reality?

Yeah, that's quite a brag.

Meanwhile, Christian scientists (who reject methodological naturalism, et al) are out there showing just how far behind we really are as a result of the propagation of the secular idea that live evolved over millions of years.

You don't get "evolution," "big bang," "methodological naturalism," etc., from science.

Science is the process of eliminating bad ideas using evidence.

Interpreting the evidence to support the things I listed above is not science. It's propaganda.
 
Top