Don't forget the baby-eating...
EVERY time a fetus is dissimilated: Cannibalism of children.
What was that about broad brush stroke?
Sure, you can turn it around. I don't know of many if any atheist against abortion, however. It is a bit easier to use the broader brush stroke if it actually applies.
I'm not sure if you are responding specifically or just having a general rant. If you read what I wrote, this time it is about education. You can have intelligent people who have not been educated. There would have been plenty of people like that in ancient Palestine. And education, where available, would have been all about religious doctrine. And this is true in medieval times, and in the islamic world today also. You have bright people who could run rings around any of us here with their knowledge of scripture and theology. But outside of that, they would appear to be the most ignorant people we had ever met. And that's thanks to the education we did have: take your biblical knowledge back 500 years and you would be laughed at, but take your scientific understanding back 150 years and you would be a world expert, or else derided for being insane.
You'd have to prove some of this out. It is all speculation, and a bit with a white hood, as I've stated. Your brush is definitely larger than mine. I don't think there can be a question about that, and thus, it is going to be more prejudice (thus not education material).
. :nono: The hood thing again. You can't see as well when you are wearing it. I don't really get scared of crosses burning on my lawn.
You really shouldn't let me do that to you.
Wish granted.
I am not being personal here, in fact I have made an effort to avoid that.
Look, I started with 'dupe' but only as a warning away from wholesale buy-in without critical thinking. Your counter was 'idiot' for planes on high precipitation glaciers vs. low precipitation glaciers in higher altitudes (again, just special pleading really, once you begin entertaining the differences, it affects BOTH speculations, but those who drink the Kool-Aid instead of analyzing it, aren't using critical thinking skills any longer). Then there was a bit about kids leaving creation ideas in droves... :nono: You can think that's personal. It isn't. As I said, I only care about facts. "Idiots" is a bit removed from 'fact finding/reporting.'
I am sure there are people with higher IQs here than me.
I would say that statistically, they are more likely to be atheists than theists.
I've seen that stat and have often seen its refutation. As I said, there IS a reason the atheist perpetuates that perceived data.
They are also more likely to be deists than theists, I imagine.
Not necessarily, though they don't do well with legalistic churches, denominations, or pastors.
Sorry if it sounds arrogant, but it is true that the Judeo-christian scriptures are historical fiction.
:nono: Your wherewithal to prove such a thing isn't there, never has been. You can't, in fact, show any of it as fiction. Can't. I can dare you to try, but this thread isn't really about that. You can't, in point of fact, show any of it to be fiction. CANNOT.
That is pretty easily demonstrated, and I think I have shown that enough here in the past.
Again, you are TRYING to make yourself the empirical truth of the universe. You aren't that big of a fellow. The MOMENT you admit there is ANYTHING, you cannot explain, you've lost this argument. I actually do have the wherewithal to prove the point. You aren't open to the data, but that is completely beside the point, because the moment you CANNOT naysay an answer to prayer is the moment you lose this argument. Let me just state, unequivocally, you CANNOT actuate all claims on this earth. Because of that, you have NO idea if a sasquatch exists or not. Like me, you can be a sasquatch agnostic (Thomas, one of Jesus' disciples was a doubter too).
That fact only seems to be important to you.
See above.
Opinion noted. It's not that important to me. IQ counts for nothing if all you can do is spout dogma instead of seeking high-quality information. It is only of passing interest that statistically atheists are ahead of theists on IQ. That tells you nothing about individuals.
Funny thing that: ATHEISTS are generally the ones that propagate this idea :think: I've a pretty solid hypothesis why, as well as why Christians aren't really interested in it. I've done a bit of research. As you can imagine, humanitarians generally receive the Nobel Peace prize, Christian outgive all their counterparts, Jews excel at business, and atheists generally pursue more collegiate work. All makes sense to me but does not, in point of fact, reveal a lack of intelligence. I believe that is a propagated fallacy and I've looked at a good many of these 'reports' and papers.
Here is a space for you to allow your reptilian brain to give control back to your conscious human neocortex, which has been hijacked by your feeling of rage.
:chuckle: See those three fingers on your hand while you are pointing at me?
I ALSO have discovered things about others and about myself: We generally give reflection upon others, of who 'we' are when it comes to these kinds of reflective comments. Those fingers say a lot more about us than 'them' whoever they might be. I always read and reread what people write in order to see where they are coming from. When they say "emotional" or "upset?" You can generally tell they are emotional people themselves AND operate on that level. It means you, Stuart, show yourself to be an emotional person on TOL by such comments. I generally don't get my emotions involved on TOL (have been a few times).
I tend to know who I am, what I believe, what my intelligence level is, and what my areas of expertise are. When it comes to science, I had great grades and have taught a bit of it. Most do better and are more interested in the subject (though I still love science channel presentations, it isn't the same as doing or learning good science or practicing). This one is a bit more catered to me, however, because the content is also concerned about philosophy and religion.
So, I think I've a good handle on who you are, your hang-ups, as well as my own. :e4e:
It can't happen that you have theoretical advances without philosophizing 'what-if's.' Theoretical is the process of entertaining and finding 'what-ifs.'
