Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (382906)	5/6/2008 7:04:52 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1573969

CJ, > What is Christianity without the miracles? Oh yeah. Judaism. Moses didn't part the Red Sea? Tenchusatsu

To: combjelly who wrote (382906)	5/6/2008 8:00:18 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573969

"The part about him being hostile to conventional Christianity isn't" What is Christianity without the miracles? Oh yeah. Judaism. I see you've never read the Old Testament. Miracles galore there. Because without the miracles, all of his claims to being the Son of God are sort of hollow. Jefferson was a Unitarian and almost certainly didn't believe Jesus was the son of God. Nevertheless, Jefferson had no hostility to conventional Christianity at all. "He often went to church by himself, took part in the services as a normal congregant, and this after he'd left public life." You keep bringing this up like it is a telling point. He wasn't wedded to any particular church, in fact he often wished there were a deist church nearby so he could go there. I posted several quotes on this last time we went around about this. Yes, it is a telling point. It shows 1) despite his unorthodox religious beliefs he was himself quite religious and 2) he was not hostile to orthodox Christianity. He may have wished there was a unitarian church nearby, but not a deist one. Deists had no churches. "I mean the things taught by Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Bill Provine, PZ Myers, etc etc etc. and my college biology teacher years ago. " If their views on religion are taught, it would only be in the context of a philosophy class. No, they insist their religious views are mandated and proven by science and no one seriously disputes them as spokesmen for science. "Its based on a narrative involving things that are said to be possible." No it isn't. You've never read Darwin either. Evolution says nothing about origins. True in a sense. Darwin was smart enough not to address the subject. But atheistic evolutionists always attribute origins to some sort of "chemical evolution". Biology textbooks even say this, though they usually stick "probably" in there. Bacteria do acquire new characteristics, they can acquire immunity to antibiotics and can change to utilize different materials as food. This isn't as trivial as he tried to make it out to be. Do they change into higher organisms or even into other sorts of bacteria? They might if given enough time, I won't say otherwise. But its not a fact that any such thing has been observed. We haven't observed any new species originating and our beliefs about how that happens are speculations, not proven facts. A great example is the Ashkenazi. They are prone to a number of genetic disorders and some of them are unique to them. Most, in their heterozygous forms confer some sort of adaptation to living in crowded and unsanitary conditions. However, Ashkenazi Jews remain part of the same species as the rest of us. Their genetic disorders really tell us nothing about the evolution of human beings. The first one recognized in the Ashkenazi was Tay-Sachs. It gives an immunity to TB. I suppose you could take the stance that The Designer knew that a certain subset of his chosen people were going to be forced into ghettos There's no need to attribute such things to a designer at all. Mutation and natural selection could produce them all by themselves. Sickle cell anemia is another one of those disorders and it is common in populations that are prone to malaria. Sickle cell anemia like Tay-Sachs is likely a result of mutation and natural selection. This tells us nothing about the origin of species, though as the carriers of sickle cell anemia like Ashkenazi Jews remain part of the human species.