Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Reply to thread

Message

Based on what I've quoted you as saying, it appears you agree with me... So I'm not sure why you would want to sound like we are in disagreement.

The fact that GTR is "widely accepted" does not, in any way, bring it closer to being a scientific fact. It is no different than the existence of God. While it is "widely accepted" that God exists, that does not bring the "theory" any closer to being a scientific fact.

Other than that, you seem to have completely missed the point I was trying to make... Every time "Conservatives" and science are mentioned in the same sentence, people attack "Conservatives" as Bible-thumping-knuckle-draggers who reject all things scientific and in this instance, that's clearly not the case. These individuals did cite specific scientific laws that are incompatible with the GTR but all the scientifically sound arguments they made were overshadowed by their scientifically unsound citations of the Bible, Jesus and God as being "proof" of the point they were making.

BTW, Welcome to the HOP and in case you didn't already know, I'm an Atheist.

<blockquote data-quote="GenSeneca" data-source="post: 143185" data-attributes="member: 1169">Based on what I&#039;ve quoted you as saying, it appears you agree with me... So I&#039;m not sure why you would want to sound like we are in disagreement. The fact that GTR is &quot;widely accepted&quot; does not, in any way, bring it closer to being a scientific fact. It is no different than the existence of God. While it is &quot;widely accepted&quot; that God exists, that does not bring the &quot;theory&quot; any closer to being a scientific fact.Other than that, you seem to have completely missed the point I was trying to make... Every time &quot;Conservatives&quot; and science are mentioned in the same sentence, people attack &quot;Conservatives&quot; as Bible-thumping-knuckle-draggers who reject all things scientific and in this instance, that&#039;s clearly not the case. These individuals did cite specific scientific laws that are incompatible with the GTR but all the scientifically sound arguments they made were overshadowed by their scientifically unsound citations of the Bible, Jesus and God as being &quot;proof&quot; of the point they were making.BTW, Welcome to the HOP and in case you didn&#039;t already know, I&#039;m an Atheist.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GenSeneca, post: 143185, member: 1169"] Based on what I've quoted you as saying, it appears you agree with me... So I'm not sure why you would want to sound like we are in disagreement. The fact that GTR is "widely accepted" does not, in any way, bring it closer to being a scientific fact. It is no different than the existence of God. While it is "widely accepted" that God exists, that does not bring the "theory" any closer to being a scientific fact. Other than that, you seem to have completely missed the point I was trying to make... Every time "Conservatives" and science are mentioned in the same sentence, people attack "Conservatives" as Bible-thumping-knuckle-draggers who reject all things scientific and in this instance, that's clearly not the case. These individuals did cite specific scientific laws that are incompatible with the GTR but all the scientifically sound arguments they made were overshadowed by their scientifically unsound citations of the Bible, Jesus and God as being "proof" of the point they were making. BTW, Welcome to the HOP and in case you didn't already know, I'm an Atheist. [/QUOTE]

Verification