Sure you have. And I've encountered Bigfoot in a tutu.
That you shouldn't eat pepperoni pizza before going to bed... :)))
Which makes absolute sense. He is claiming there are people who are IGNORANT of the actual mechanisms behind the evolutionary process, that are worried about considering other non-Darwinian mechanisms opening the door to creationists. It is their IGNORANCE that causes them to think that way. People who know the details of the Theory(like Stewart Newman) do NOT agree with that outlook.
Ah ha! Back in my youth I worked the London Markets, all "Gawd Blimey" and down the frog to the rubber dub dub for a fizzy foaming frothing pint of cockney keg ale and a Lahdi!
Your definition of evil lacks detail.
Yes. When I read the same response over and over, with no relevance to the question, I think of "his name is Robert Poulsen."
I see lots of reasoned atheists. It's why I addressed them specifically in my OP. I figured they might understand why it pops up in specific.
You are so obsessed with the fundamentalist construction of religion, where emphasis is placed on believing things. We've been over this - why are you clinging so hard to this? You are terribly mistaken in your whacky notion that religion contradicts reason, and not in the least persuasive, so don 't expect me to swallow such Ayn Rand tomfoolery.
my main point in the original post was to suggest the clown duck's lack of propriety by threatening observers in the visitors gallery. It isn't my fault those who reply seem to think RoFo is a more interesting post.
You're such a trouble maker Darcy!
Yes, I have. To me, Carrier's arguments sound appealing the first time you hear them. But once you dig deeper, you realize that he is wrong.
I'm that way when it comes to books.
How do you come to that conclusion?
SCOTUS just struck down the federal law that required states to ban gambling on the outcome of sporting events. How did that infringe upon religion?