What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

    Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

    Read The Gospel Online.

[_ Old Earth _] Google Doodle on Evolution

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,048.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Donate View
gerbilwoman

gerbilwoman

Member
41st-anniversary-of-the-discovery-of-lucy-5736109501841408-hp.gif

This is today's Google doodle. It's about Lucy the Australopithecus. I have nothing against monkeys but the doodle to me looks like it promotes evolution.
 
It does promote evolution. Considering that Evolutionary theory is accepted by the vast majority of Biologists and other life sciences. Most of the theory's critics tend to not accept the general concept for religious reasons, not scientific.
 
What's funny is that it presents orthogenesis, which is not part of modern evolutionary theory, or even part of Darwin's original theory.

Doesn't happen that way, in almost all cases. Certainly not in human evolution.
 
Milk-Drops said:
It does promote evolution. Considering that Evolutionary theory is accepted by the vast majority of Biologists and other life sciences. Most of the theory's critics tend to not accept the general concept for religious reasons, not scientific.
Click to expand...

Argumentum ad Populum does not demonstrate truth or falsity of a given premise.
 
Mike S said:
I notice that Christians who are offended by Google haven't threaten to cut off any heads yet. What's up with that?
Click to expand...
LOL! Yeah, with the talk lately about how peaceful Muslims are and how violent Christians are, I would have thought we'd be seeing You Tube videos of Christians down at the Google office sawing off the executives heads with a tree saw by now.
 
Mike S said:
I notice that Christians who are offended by Google haven't threaten to cut off any heads yet. What's up with that?
Click to expand...
That is because they are too busy going to Colorado to shoot up medical clinics and police officers. ;)
 
Last edited:
Barbarian said:
Wrong. If criticism of a scientific theory is not supported by evidence, it's of no consequence at all.
Click to expand...

Consensus is not evidence or proof though evidences or proofs may inspire that consensus, and while that in some cases may be correct, sheer numbers of people who agree with a perspective does not make it true! For example many scholars today agree that Matthew probably was not written by Matthew but all of the only evidence we actually have suggests no other author nor impeaches the credibility of those who received this tradition from the Apostles or those the Apostles taught and appointed. Therefore their "consensus opinion" is hogwash while the "consensus opinion" that Jesus was a real historical person IS supported by the evidence and proof but the sheer numbers of people accepting the premise does not make it true or correct.
 
Milk-Drops said:
Your principle is misplaced considering you didn't address my actual argument and instead argued against a straw-man.
Click to expand...

And arguing against a strawman argument is bad how? Your final premise however "Most of the theory's critics tend to not accept the general concept for religious reasons, not scientific" is an accurate assessment (the key word being "most" and not "only") with which I agree, however the principle still stands.
 
That is because they are too busy going to Colorado to shoot up medical clinics and police officers. ;)

That slime ball killed 3 people .. how many a day does PH kill .. Medical clinic ? butchershopis more like it.. The planned parenthood money mill and those who support them are terriosts
 
brother Paul said:
And arguing against a strawman argument is bad how? Your final premise however "Most of the theory's critics tend to not accept the general concept for religious reasons, not scientific" is an accurate assessment (the key word being "most" and not "only") with which I agree, however the principle still stands.
Click to expand...
Do you have anything to add or are you just interested in tare down and befuddlement?
 
reba said:
That slime ball killed 3 people .. how many a day does PH kill .. Medical clinic ? butchershopis more like it.. The planned parenthood money mill and those who support them are terriosts
Click to expand...
So you justify fighting Terrorism with terrorism? My point was to illustrate and point out how silly Mike's statement was, considering an extremist just went and did an act of terrorism. You may call the guy a slimeball but you still justify the overall action by going off on a rant. And yes Planned Parenthood is a medical clinic considering that most of what they do is medical and a very small percentage of their overall activity is abortion related. Reba you are too entrenched in political bias for me to take your claims of PA being terrorist seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top