Kirk Cameron On Evolution

Oh, this should be rich.

1. Shove microphones at random non-scientists whereever you happen upon them.

2. Demand they provide a full spontaneous proof of a theory that's been lifetimes in the formulation.

3. Take points off if they don't speak in absolutes or allow room for error.

4. ...

5. GOD RULES!

It's really like these people speak a whole different language. Jesus freaks denouncing the opponents for a presumed lack of proof and evidence is lol on the face of it.

Just saw Thank You for Smoking last night and this bit is a perfect illustration of the lobbyist's conceit: I don't have to prove that I'm right. I just have to prove that YOU are wrong. I win.

I finally discovered Kirk's secret weapon in all of this. You have to 'cirmeepvent' the logic, then it all makes perfect sense.

You cannot use logic to prove that something illogical is correct.

You cannot believe in something if it has been proven to either exist or not exist. This lack of proof allows people to justify their own arrogance as they attempt to disprove the beliefs of others.

No one that I have ever met has been truly interested in God. People only try to persuade others that their understanding is correct and yours is not. This is due to self-doubt and a fear of damnation that almost all religious people have.

BASED ON BLIND FAITH

OMG ROFLCOPTER

Ugh people who argue against science NEVER understand it. meep.

As I seem to recall, you and Loki seemed to have a hard time figuring out the difference between science research and inventing things.

Nocal, a bible thumper could also argue that people who argue against religion never understand that either.

Funny jew

unfortunately, uart made an intelligent point.

many people that are hard core athiests who don't believe anything_else_at_all is going on dismiss all spiritual experience as purely psychological wackiness.

of course, religion and spiritual experience are considered by many people to be two totally different things, so maybe uart didn't say anything intelligent afterall.

For arguing against the biblical_literalism of the earth being only 12,000 years old does not require any grand insight beyond a middle school science class understanding of stuff like carbon dating..

Uart: Nocal, a bible thumper could also argue that people who argue against religion never understand that either.

They could, and they'd almost certainly be right, but it's immaterial.

One may not understand the rich tapestry of shenanigans that comprise a religion that's had thousands of years to build up tales -- I certainly won't pretend to -- but it boils down to the Great Invisible White Ubermonkey in the Sky judging you. Everything else is icing.

If you had to boil science down similarly, I suppose you'd boil it down to the scientific method, which kicks any god's meep any day of the week.

AMEN