Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Treeees!!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Observer" data-source="post: 27039" data-attributes="member: 576"><p><strong>Re: Treeees!!!</strong></p><p></p><p>I stand corrected on Dmitri. Panspermia? Interesting. (Dmitri, cometary? Intentional)</p><p> </p><p>Please let me tone down my anti-religious rhetoric. I just re-read most of my posts, and it is a dis-service to all. The rational and calm back and forth gets the most across.</p><p> </p><p>I agree that religion and science are not mutually exclusive. My personal Hero (Though he did not believe in QM) is Albert Einstein. A moral man and the possessor of a singular mind. He was also religious. "Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind". It is simply hard for me to comprehend beyond a very simplified definition of what a religious person is. I spend too much time with hard minded men and we all broadside each other to kill time at work. You would not believe the topics we covered downrange. (Actually, if you are a student of human boredom, you may very well have a distinct and most likely accurate idea).</p><p> </p><p>Bubba, I don't drink alcohol, but I will raise my Coke to you and imagine the clinking glasses.</p><p> </p><p>I disagree in some respects though regarding ID and Creationism. Creationism was indeed hijacked by fundamentalist. (Or more correctly, Creation Science...hard to put those two words together). ID is not science, it is philosophy. It cannot be disproved. Where is the science in that? It does not provide an answer for anything it attacks in the mainstream theory of evolution. Punching holes is fine, it is <em>NECESSARY</em> in regards to science progressing, but at least have something tangible that can explain observed evidence, so as to have something to fill those holes. ID is the brain child of the discovery institute. Look up who funds it, read up on those people. I stand by my point about ID and its proponents.</p><p> </p><p>Aside from that, I look forward to meeting all of you in different forums on this site. I was primarily interested in one topic, but have found many other stimulating areas to toss around ideas about. </p><p> </p><p>Thanks for the back and forth,</p><p> </p><p>Jim</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Observer, post: 27039, member: 576"] [b]Re: Treeees!!![/b] I stand corrected on Dmitri. Panspermia? Interesting. (Dmitri, cometary? Intentional) Please let me tone down my anti-religious rhetoric. I just re-read most of my posts, and it is a dis-service to all. The rational and calm back and forth gets the most across. I agree that religion and science are not mutually exclusive. My personal Hero (Though he did not believe in QM) is Albert Einstein. A moral man and the possessor of a singular mind. He was also religious. "Science without religion is lame; Religion without science is blind". It is simply hard for me to comprehend beyond a very simplified definition of what a religious person is. I spend too much time with hard minded men and we all broadside each other to kill time at work. You would not believe the topics we covered downrange. (Actually, if you are a student of human boredom, you may very well have a distinct and most likely accurate idea). Bubba, I don't drink alcohol, but I will raise my Coke to you and imagine the clinking glasses. I disagree in some respects though regarding ID and Creationism. Creationism was indeed hijacked by fundamentalist. (Or more correctly, Creation Science...hard to put those two words together). ID is not science, it is philosophy. It cannot be disproved. Where is the science in that? It does not provide an answer for anything it attacks in the mainstream theory of evolution. Punching holes is fine, it is [i]NECESSARY[/i] in regards to science progressing, but at least have something tangible that can explain observed evidence, so as to have something to fill those holes. ID is the brain child of the discovery institute. Look up who funds it, read up on those people. I stand by my point about ID and its proponents. Aside from that, I look forward to meeting all of you in different forums on this site. I was primarily interested in one topic, but have found many other stimulating areas to toss around ideas about. Thanks for the back and forth, Jim [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Treeees!!!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top