The article does state, in regards to the Vatican "...its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature"... couldn't that mean that the Pope won't be covered by the rediculous diplomatic immunity rules?Originally Posted by Patrick
Aio ki te Aorangi
The article does state, in regards to the Vatican "...its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature"... couldn't that mean that the Pope won't be covered by the rediculous diplomatic immunity rules?
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
Having a Zen moment...
Hilarious! Bling to you.
Without completely derailing the thread, why's that? His views on evolution?
Redefining slow since 2006...
Having a Zen moment...
Ah, the truth is so much more mundane than the bull the newspapers print: http://sciblogs.co.nz/open-parachute...esting-comedy/
Redefining slow since 2006...
Forum whore
What a shame! I'm on Ed's side... would have been interesting to watch at least.
A dream without a plan is just a wish!
Make it happen....
....DREAM+PLAN+ACTION=GOAL/TARGET
Forum whore
Not really, it's his attitude. Most of what he says about religion is quite accurate, but he has become to enamoured with his own status and the fawning of his supporters that he is arrogant and opinionated and brooks no opposition or questioning of his beliefs. He has allowed his opposition to the church to cloud his objective scientific judgement.
I have read his books and have criticised his reasoning on several issues. One simply cannot have an open-minded, fair and objective disussion with him on the subject of creation v. "evolution". I put evolution in speech marks as many confuse exactly what it means. His dogmatic prejudice against religion and the God of the Bible does not allow him to look objectively at scientific evidence regarding whether the Universe and Life could come about without direction from an intelligence.
Even many evolutionists believe that something or someone had to create the Universe and life at least initially, and are open minded as to where the science may lead.
Yeah, just shows how reliable newspapers can be.Still I reckon the world-wide publicity about the Catholic Church is yet in its early stages. Much more to come I reckon!
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Having a Zen moment...
I quite like that, tbh. Birds of a feather, and all that.
That's a big call - I listened to his recent talk from when he was in NZ and he is pretty dismissive of creationists and theists generally, but I think it's just he can't be arsed having the argument. He is still as open to real evidence as any scientist, I suspect. Having had lots of religious arguments myself I do sorta see his point. I mean, it's not like he's going to win fair and square, is he? Can't argue with faith, after all.
Being fairly close to a non-theistic quasi-buddhist-type thing myself, I don't find his views at all threatening or offensive, but having once been fairly conventionally Christian (both pentecostally and conservatively), I can see how he might indeed offend many.
Ah well, sticks and stones (and Catholic priests), eh?
Redefining slow since 2006...
Forum whore
As I said, not many can argue with his criticisms of the churches and religions, and most creationists have their heads in the clouds as well. But he, like many evolutioninsts is similarly dismissive of any person of any persuasion or any scientific studies that point towards creation as needing to be a deliberate act rather than arising purely from natural chemical processes. There is significant evidence from purely scientific research that show key processes cannot occur naturally and require deliberate manipulation. It is the question this evidence raises that people like Dawkins cannot abide.I quite like that, tbh. Birds of a feather, and all that.
That's a big call - I listened to his recent talk from when he was in NZ and he is pretty dismissive of creationists and theists generally, but I think it's just he can't be arsed having the argument. He is still as open to real evidence as any scientist, I suspect. Having had lots of religious arguments myself I do sorta see his point. I mean, it's not like he's going to win fair and square, is he? Can't argue with faith, after all.
Being fairly close to a non-theistic quasi-buddhist-type thing myself, I don't find his views at all threatening or offensive, but having once been fairly conventionally Christian (both pentecostally and conservatively), I can see how he might indeed offend many.
Ah well, sticks and stones (and Catholic priests), eh?
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Irritant
Significant is a little extreme.. Maybe he can't abide it because it's as significant as creation
It's only when you take the piss out of a partially shaved wookie with an overactive 'me' gene and stapled on piss flaps that it becomes a problem.
Forum whore
Okay, extremely significant then...Significant is a little extreme.. Maybe he can't abide it because it's as significant as creation
Fact is that when one carefully researches and studies all the evidence of natural chemical processes and the processes and requirements for the formation of life, it leaves the question of how it could occur if not by purely natural processes? Scientific study clearly shows the at crucial stages, things had to occur simultaneously and completely in conflicting environments each part requiring the other to form and remain existing.
If one only considers the facts of science, life as we know it is impossible and could never occur by natural means. It is simplistic and completely ignoring the scientific facts for anyone to claim that anything can happen given enough time and space. That is fairy story stuff.
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Forum whore
Galileo would be chuffed.
Forum whore
Him and everyone else who was abused by the church!
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Irritant
Maybe that's why science continually looks for more answers, instead of saying that 'a god did it'.
It's only when you take the piss out of a partially shaved wookie with an overactive 'me' gene and stapled on piss flaps that it becomes a problem.
Forum whore
Genuine science is open to the idea of direct creation, not closed minded. Even many evolutionists, as I have often brought out, believe the facts of science mean there had to be an act of creation by some form of higher power.
Even though I personally believe in direct creation, how it was accomplished remains as much a mystery to me as to anyone else. The fact that so much had to occur in a manner at direct odds with natural processes and demonstrably cannot occur as some evolutoinists wish to believe, still remains.
As I said, according to purely scientific discoveries, it would appear that life and for that matter even more so, the formation of the Universe, is impossible. The sheer power and precision, the contradictions and the incredible control evident is simply beyond the realms of science to explain or to even theorise about.
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Come warm yourself by the fire
Yeh your probably right. Its way easier for me to just say "She'll be right" with my engineering than do any work.
I mean whats the likely hood I am wrong? Not worth worrying about it really......
oh lord lol
Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.
Come warm yourself by the fire
Yep only a foolish god would put man on the earth, and only a retarded monkey would have man as a child.
Damned if you do, Damned if you don't
Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks