http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US8f1w1cYvs&feature=related
I actually live with people like this.Phew!
I actually live with people like this.Phew!
I'm pretty sure her IQ would test out normal. Having faith doesn't make you stupid. Being stupid makes you stupid. I get tired of these threads that toss the 'stupid' blanket on people of faith.
I'm pretty sure her IQ would test out normal. Having faith doesn't make you stupid. Being stupid makes you stupid. I get tired of these threads that toss the 'stupid' blanket on people of faith.
I'm pretty sure her IQ would test out normal. Having faith doesn't make you stupid. Being stupid makes you stupid. I get tired of these threads that toss the 'stupid' blanket on people of faith.
You should really consider accepting the Gospel of Elvis. Elvisology has been scientifically proven to be at least 83% more legitimate than the next leading religion.The problem is that it's ok to be stupid and a bigot as long as you believe in the big magical guy in the sky.
She doesn't realize that evolution is a fact.What's so stupid about her?
Dawkin's most certainly is.It wasn't even faith. Neither of them was really qualified to make a definitive statement on evolution.
Science doesn't deal with proof. "Proof" is for mathematics and alcohol. Science deals with evidence and testable hypotheses.Science has been proven and disproven many many times over the course of history. The fact is, using the scientific method, you would not even be able to prove that the world we live in is not a fantasy.
We do observe evolution, in laboratories and out in the world.The most definitive way to prove it either way would be to observe it actually happen.... in which case there would be no way to emulate the environments in a lab....
Even things like gravity are hard to prove definitively. We have come up with consistent results, so we can say that for our purposes that it is true.
She doesn't realize that evolution is a fact.
Dawkin's most certainly is.
Science doesn't deal with proof. "Proof" is for mathematics and alcohol. Science deals with evidence and testable hypotheses.
We do observe evolution, in laboratories and out in the world.
Your username is fitting.
Darwin made theories based on observations. They would still have to be proven as without documented specimen, they are only assumptions.
What's so stupid about her? It wasn't even faith. Neither of them was really qualified to make a definitive statement on evolution. Science has been proven and disproven many many times over the course of history. The fact is, using the scientific method, you would not even be able to prove that the world we live in is not a fantasy.
The most definitive way to prove it either way would be to observe it actually happen.... in which case there would be no way to emulate the environments in a lab....
Even things like gravity are hard to prove definitively. We have come up with consistent results, so we can say that for our purposes that it is true.
Basically everything you said is completley idiotic. Evolution has been proven without any question through the fossil record. And gravity has been proven far beyond theoretics. Have you read much physics? If not, you should refrain from making such assumptions.