Re: Collins to head NIH?
- From: Mark Isaak <eciton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:00:32 -0700
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:18:51 -0700, snex wrote:
On Jul 31, 10:51 am, Mark Isaak <eci...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:26:24 -0700, snex wrote:macbeth is a fictional story.
[re black-and-white thinking]
barring quantum events, you do not live in a universe you described.
you live in a universe where *our understanding of it* is fuzzy, but
to claim the events themselves are fuzzy is to claim that there is
no reason to bother studying them to reduce our fuzzy understanding.
either a virgin gave birth or she didnt. its a binary condition.
nobody "kinda gives birth but kinda doesnt."
You have never read "Macbeth", I see.
So you also doubt the fact, obvious to virtually everyone else in the
world, that fictional stories can have important things to teach?
no doubt its offensive to people who hate the fact that science and
rationality dont prop up their religious superstitions, but too
fuckin bad. thats how science works and how science will always work..
the solution is not to bow down to these superstitions and apologize
for offending them, its to get rid of them.
How? By showing them that "rational" people are rude, inflexible,
unhappy, impractical, and unreasonable?
im only rude when i feel the situation calls for it. and when people
are constantly lying about me and my positions, that certainly calls
for it. you can apologize for it at any time and continue having a calm
discussion, but i doubt you will.
I do apologize for being rude to you. The situation never calls for it.
However, I have never lied about you, have never deliberately lied about
your positions, and do not believe I have ever mischaracterized your
position grossly enough to warrant the charge of lying.
its just too easy for you to appear to be "winning" if you lie about
me.
I am quite confident that I have "won" a long time ago, mostly by letting
you speak for yourself.
i havent [supported a religious test]. francis collins fails to be
SCIENTIFIC and RATIONAL. those are the tests.
Bullshit. Francis Collins is at least as scientific as anyone who has
ever held the post, and you have no reason to think that he will not
bring exemplary rationality to his job. What you object to is his
religious beliefs and religious statements, and you and everyone here
know it.
what is the scientific basis for his religious beliefs and religious
statements?
Like I said, what you object to is his relgious beliefs and religious
statements. You ask for a religious test.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"It is certain, from experience, that the smallest grain of natural
honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct, than the most
pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems." - D. Hume
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Collins to head NIH?
- From: snex
- Re: Collins to head NIH?
- Prev by Date: Re: Question for the Evolutionist
- Next by Date: Re: Question for the Evolutionist
- Previous by thread: Re: Collins to head NIH?
- Next by thread: Re: Collins to head NIH?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
