we'll better understand it. that's what physics is all about.

an intelligent designer does not meet the definition of a theory, at least not a science is concerned:



'a good theory will describe a large range of phenomena on the basis of a few simple postulates and will make definite predictions that can be tested. if the predictions agree with the observations, the theory survives that test, although it can never be proveed to be correct.'

hawking, 'the universe in a nutshell'

there simply is no evidence of an intelligent designer that can be tested to show repeatable and predictable results.

my footprint is huge. traveling around in my rv and driving my classic 75 vette spending my kids inheritance. screw the next generation.

there's your answer. quit being an a$$. it amazes me that adults have to ask for help like this online. and you don't even trust anybody online.

i try to be creative while thinking of what the lady likes to do that works with what i enjoy doing. last date she said she liked museums so i took her to home depot. no second date yet.

precisely. many many people put faith in their belief that columbus discovered america and the fact is he didn't. americus vespucci discovered america. hense the name of the continent is america. even more people believe that jesus was the son of god. you just made an excellent point about belief and faith. to have faith in a believe certainly does not make it true.

with fifty percent of first marriages and seventy five percent of second marriages ending in divorce does anybody really commit?

he can't even find the higgs bosun.

wondering how anybody can even hope to read another's mind.

science has absolutely nothing to do with "god's creation."

like most, i believed in santa, the tooth fairy, easter bunny, et. al., simply because my parents said it was so. being taught that my elders were wise in all things and that i should pay attention i never thought to doubt santa. eventually i began to question the plausibilty of a fat man flying with raindeer and sleigh around the planet in just one night delivering presents to all the kids and couldn't figure out why the tooth fair would pay out all that money just for human teeth. discovering these fantasies to be, well, fantasies, i then began to question the racism i was taught living in the south which ultimately led to my questioning everything my parents, teachers and pastors had taught me including such concepts that the universe was six thousand years old, created in a matter of days and that jesus was the son of god who's mother was a virgin.

seems to me that if something is to be taught to be held as a core belief then the teacher would do well to steer far clear from fantasy during the teaching. at some point the student will begin to ask questions that cannot be answered in a manner that supports the fantasy. i see true intelligence as the ability to seek out one's own answers to the questions of life and existance. it takes little intelligence to simply buy into something that is told to you by another. that's simply rote learning and requires no reasoning. only when we question everything as to plausibility do we truely open our minds.

so, in answering the original question, yes, i did teach my kids about santa, the tooth fairy and the easter bunny. i expected that the time would come that they would uncover the fantasy and i used that as a lesson to not take everything that they are told as gospel. to open there minds to any possibilities that they might imagine and use their own reasoning on whatever topic including religion. i never taught them agnosticism but left it to them to reason things out on their own. one ultimately did become a devout christian and the other could care less about learning how everything came to be. but neither can question that i tried to force a belief upon them and that my teachings about santa was meant to be nothing more than a parent wishing for his children to enjoy their short time as a child.

i see quite a bit of intolerance of other religions from religious people themselves. today in america i see little tolerance for islam by many christians, for instance. of course some will say that it's the extremism that they don't tolerate, not the religion itself, but i see it as the dogma that can be so widely interpreted to mean very different things as regards what it is to be a "good muslim." this extremism can be found in just about every religion whether it be this jihad that we now must endure, the crusades, the inquisition, the salem witch trials or the bombing of family planing clincs. it's the dogma that i see as a danger to humanity that is little different than naziism. hitler could not have ruled were it not for the dogma that he preached so effectively to average germans willing to follow anybody who could deliver them from their plight in the thirties. he was their savior you might say.

i read the whole post and the op states, "please respect my religion" a couple dozen times. if it was meant as a request to respect the ability of each person to make their own religious choices why ask that his religion be respected? i do respect a person's right to chose but that's not what the op asked. he clearly asked that i respect his religion numerous times.

sorry jeannie. i quoated the wrong post.

but the op did not say "please respect my religious choice." the words used were "please respect my religion." i'm sure the kkk would like us all to respect their beliefs as well. regardless, if a god fearing person is firm in their belief why does it matter if i respect their belief? i've every bit as much right to show my disdain for religious dogma as the faithful have the right to shout their belief.

i assert that i made the statement.




i offer no proof. simply expressed my thoughts.




hahahaha. been delivering a sailboat to the carribean. no wifi offshore. some of us have a life outside the forums, you see. yes, i accept my definition of "delusion."



i suppose, but i've no fear of being perceived as wrong in public. couldn't care less what the public thinks. something like eighty five percent of americans fear god and i find it quite easy to dissmiss their testimony just as i dissmiss the testimony of a kkk klansman who testifies that whites are a superior race. simple really.

you bet people should be punnished for criminal negligence and if you want, just call it criminal stupid. pilots, for example, are punnished often for "neglecting" to follow regulations and for good reason. federal aviation regulations are there to protect people from unnecessary danger. those regulations serve no purpose if they are to be neglected. i have a friend who spent a year in jail and will never be out of debt because he was negligent/stupid. the county had declared the area an extreme fire danger and he decided that because he wanted to spruce up the place for a bbq the next day to mow his field. the exhaust on his riding lawn mower ignited the foot high dry grass and people lost homes in the wildfire that resulted. he now owes the state, county, city and several residents millions in damages. i don't know how we can deter negligence that affects many without punnishment.

i've always thought the golden rule to be self centered. why treat other's as i wish to be treated when i can treat them as THEY wish to be treated?

all of which is unknowable.

then there is the agnostic like me who believes nothing. questions everything. the dictionary has several definitions for religion and the legal definition in america is "a belief in a deity" so i'll go with that. i don't buy off on the definition that any belief system is a religion. to believe such i would have to say that oakland raider fans are religious fanatics.

and secular humanism is not a belief system. it is thinking that morals and ethics are derived from common sense.