Christian Terrorists?Follow

Actually I was talking specifically about ID. It's not science, so it shouldn't be taught in science class. Which is what people like Alma want.

I don't care if you want to be a Christian or a Muslim or whatever, so long as it doesn't affect any one else. Which, teaching Intelligent Design as if it were fact, does.

This, according to Alma makes me ignorantly biased. I don't really care about that, though. If it is not science, it shouldn't be taught as such. Simple, no?

I've not doubt it won't be productive, but I've got to pad my post count somehow.

Neither. Assuming what you're saying is "idiotic", I would suggest that the doctor is off in his specialty and not an overall idiot. That thought that the world revolves around you and anyone with a disagreement in your opinion is an overall idiot speaks volumes about your character.

Without derailing this topic into ID, you can't prove or disprove the existence of God, so to just simply label everyone as an idiot as oppose to accepting the fact that not everyone carries the same beliefs as you, once again, speaks volumes about you.

I didn't avoid your question at all, you just didn't like my answer. I said that a person who believes in homeopathy doesn't make him an over all idiot. I might call a person an "idiot", but not in the reference of a total life ***** up idiot, which is why I asked you for clarification in the first place. So, to answer your question, "No". It doesn't make you an overall idiot.



Reading comprehension?... Was that referencing text in my block that I quoted? Uh... the answer is no. I started replying to that post long before I posted it because I got busy.

In any case, unless you agree with everything that is taught in the education system, you're full of crap. The nation is divided on global warming, there's evidence for it and there's evidence against it. No matter what position I have for global warming, I wouldn't posses the feelings that you have towards ID on people with global warming. I also believe that you wouldn't either, else that make you that person who believes that the world should revolve around your beliefs and opinions. That's exactly the reason why I called you ignorantly biased, because it has nothing to do with "inaccuracy" of what's being taught, but the fact that it is related to religion.

I'm not sure why you're pretending to be otherwise. People aren't stupid and they called you out on it, woman up and accept the consequences for your actions.

So are you now retracting your answer? If so, that changes the entire conversation.



False. Every single argument that I've seen for/against global warming use scientists as their support.



So, do you have the same view for global warming being taught as true/false in the classroom if it is against your viewpoint? Assuming that you believe it's true, do you have the same problem with it being taught as false in the classroom? If you believe it's false, do you have the same problem with global warming being taught as true in the classroom?

That's not semantics because that was the entire point of me asking you for clarification. You came off implying that you were a total overall idiot for believing certain things. You said "Y'know, the people who'd be too dumb-as-bricks to do any other work?". That implies that their stupidity extends beyond "I.D." into the overall stupidity. That's why I specifically asked for the clarification that you just made.

So, yes, if you're retracting your statement, that changes everything. If you're not talking about overall stupidity, then you have NO bounds to claim that they would be "too dumb-as-bricks to do any other work". You simply made that claim based on their view of I.D. So which one is it?



Varus? Really? I'm not sure why you all play along with his trolling, but I don't even waste my time with that character. It's bad enough trying to convince people who are naturally wrong. I don't have the time to waste with a troll like Varus. Now, if he were more of a Ugly/BT troll, then I can handle that, but Varus, not worth it.



Cool story bro, now answer the question.

I didn't ask your opinion on facts in the classroom.

So, do you have the same view for global warming being taught as true/false in the classroom if it is against your viewpoint? Assuming that you believe it's true, do you have the same problem with it being taught as false in the classroom? If you believe it's false, do you have the same problem with global warming being taught as true in the classroom?

You're semantically talking in circles. You just said that your beef was I.D being taught in class as a science, affecting others. Only science and accuracy should be taught in the classroom. Now you're claiming that your beef is with people who believe ID for the sake of ID, which puts you in the belief that the world should revolve around you and your beliefs. Which one is it? Why are you jumping around so much?

Why can't you just admit that your problem is with religion? It has nothing to do with science, accuracy or what's being taught in the classroom, but your overall dislike of religion.



Uh.... no. Just another example of how the world should revolve around you and your opinions if you honestly believe that all of the opposition is a "varus troll".



Yes, it does. Given the fact that there exists "facts" that counter your "facts" and vice-verse, you're simply calling all opposition idiots, which as I said, speaks volumes of your character.

Like I already said, my dislike of religion is irrelevant here. As I've used other examples that I'm against just as much as ID which have nothing to do with religion... If homoeopathy were being taught to medical students, I'd be against that. If alchemy was being taught to Chemistry students, I'd be against that. Incidentally I'd say people who believed in alchemy were stupid, too.

Was I not talking about the article he linked, too?


Oh, cute. You wrote it like "facts".




My sleep pattern is fucked. Night work etc.

Also why are people other than varus calling me "Nat"?

Edited, Jul 29th 2011 11:08pm by Nilatai

Your name is composed of mostly short width characters in a non-intuitive arrangement, making it difficult to remember.

False: You originally implied that everyone who believed in ID was an idiot. I then asked you if you believed that a person was overall an idiot for believing in ID. You replied with yes. You later then changed it to say that you weren't talking about over all stupidity, but teaching it in the classroom. I quoted our conversation to show you where you said that you were indeed talking about overall stupidity. You replied with "SEMANTICS".

Then you said that you find it hard for anyone with intelligence to believe in ID and that politicians support it for political reasons, not out of stupidity.Contrarily, people who believe in ID for the sake of ID are INDEED stupid. I stated that you have a problem with religion and you stated that it's about teaching the wrong stuff in the classroom. Now you're saying that people who believe in ID are stupid (which you first said then later denied with the Semantics card).

So will you please tell me your final answer? You believe that anyone who oppose your opinion of ID is an overall idiot?



That would depend on the environment, who all supported it and why. Initially, I would say no. There's a lot of crap that I don't believe or support that is being taught in education, mainly social sciences. I learn it for the test and move on.

Now, since you're NOT against religion and are solely against teaching inaccurate statements as facts, would you support teaching ID as simply a concept with no implication of it being false or true, in a science class?




I never stated that I was for ID in the first place. If I were for it, I wouldn't care if you teaching about a singing farting frog.



So you don't believe that there exist any intellectual people who oppose your opinion but don't see yourself as believing that you are the center of the universe where opposing to your opinion equates to stupidity?

I just realized Nilatai's name doesn't start with Nat.

This thread did have a use!

I saw this a mile away, that's why I tried to prevent the ID derail.