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 : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (2676)	6/25/2009 2:41:23 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

<It was an "example" that was too removed from the reality of blog posting.> It wasn't meant to have anything to do with the posting... it's a general idea... ie. you need context to evaluate statements.... as I said. <My non-answer stems from not understanding what you were asking about.> I don't understand it (personal God) either... Oh, well. What is clear is that from the moment "Greg or e" showed up he had his agenda (just as he did the first time when he actually tried to discuss evolution) and no intention of any discourse other than to jump ahead of any logical pattern of discussion to try and put forward HIS belief: That there is a split between godly people and scientific (presumably "ungodly" or evil) people: <<Of course to the vast majority of the "Scientific" intelligentsia; all creationists are by definition, wackos, including you.>> Message 25723345 (remember, using HIS definition of creationist of course... ie. just about any Christian. His entire (very limited) discourse was entirely dictated by this belief. There was NO WAY he was going to be able to admit that anyone who believes in god could be a scientist, or have a scientific bent... let alone evolution. Therefore he immediately jumped to his bottom line questioned my spirituality (well, OK in his limited world we'll call it religious dognma, and actually it was barely a questioning... more like challenged) and started in with Creator God. When I made it clear I believed in a "creator God", he moved to "personal God"... yadda yadda yadda. It's all bullshit with NO real discourse, all simply vailed banter looking to score little side issues and save face while running away after making some outlandish (and tangential anyone can see) claim in order to halt the discussion. It's worth noting his basic premise again... using HIS definition of creationist as pretty much any Christian. <<Of course to the vast majority of the "Scientific" intelligentsia; all creationists are by definition, wackos, including you.>> In fact, the wacko's are a pretty limited group, which I'm starting to think probably includes our friend "greg". DAK