Intelligent Design explains many follies

quote:

---

You have your beliefs, John 10:10 has his.

---

This may be, but then both of you should be posting in the [forum=-6] forum, and not the science forum.

quote:

---

His creating things eliminates other possiblities. 100%.

---

It most certainly does not. Even if He did create some things, to jump to conclusion that He has created EVERYTHING (which would rule our other possibilities), is a little hasty.Sorry to join in this so late. I should probably go back and address the opening post before continuing.Trék Edited by Invictus, : I was going to reply to the opening post, but I realize that everyone else has done so very well. Not to mention that this late in the discussion talking about the opening post would be almost off-topic (slightly ironic, no?).

I erred, I will admit. I should not have included you in my post. It is only John and one other member that you claimed were displaying their beliefs and you did not say you were doing the same.

quote:

---

No, not if we ware talking the God of the bible, we can say that. In this case that happens to be the majority God in question as well. Fancy that.

---

If you are talking the God of the Bible, then I would suppose you are right. Especially if you are talking about the method of creation as mentioned in the Bible, because the Bible claims that it is the only way things happened, and so in believing the Bible, you would have to believe that there was no other way. Then again, this is for a different forum.And another thing, on your other point about the U.S. and what they have claimed to believe in. You make this statement as if all people in the U.S. believe in the same thing, and in the same God... when we most certainly do not! To say "of the type, say, the US has claimed to believe in" doesn't narrow down anything at all. However, this is also something for another forum.Also, instead of trying to make your posts wordy and make yourself sound smart, you would be better understood if you were simply concise and to-the-point with what you're saying. And please don't take personal offense to this. Trék

Why bother? You never said anything about "majority."

quote:

---

of the type, say, the US has claimed to believe in.

---

You see?You did say "majority" in another post, but I don't know what to do about that because it seems somewhat contradictory. You won't sound stupid because you are concise. All that will happen is that people will be able to understand your messages the first time they read them. The main problem with your wordiness, however, is that you seem to flat out misuse some constructions and phrases.Trék

I was hoping you would be able add more to your argument (lets say, a fact or two), but that will not be happening, as I've just posted the 300th post.Trék