“I suppose you must find a way to fill the void created when you dispel God from your soul.”

Wow… just wow. Where to start with such an insulting AND ridiculous statement??

I have 2 kids 5 years old and younger – I can promise you there is no “void” to fill. I barely have time eat, worrying about imaginary beings is the farthest thing from my mind.

“when you dispel God from your soul.”

I love it! “dispel god”? You think I had to do ~something~ to remove this ridiculous notion from my mind?? The idea that god is the default position is just another ludicrous position religious people take… I can assure you – we’re all born atheist until the church gets ahold of us!

I was lucky enough to avoid the child abuse children of religion have to endure – so I didn’t have to have the exorcism you describe above. I’ve been happily atheist my whole life!

And BTW – ID still isn’t science.

Not quite. I use the FACT that there are billions of stars out there, many of them orbited by planets just like our earth, to deduce that the odds favour alien life. I don’t believe alien life is supported by the current evidence though – that’s why SETI is working so hard to solve this!

But, as you no doubt planned to do, you’ve derailed the discussion! You must be hoping nobody would notice that you have avoided ONCE AGAIN to provide ANY proof that ID is scientific in ANY way!

Do you remember I asked for ONLY ONE peer-reviewed paper on ID, just one! You can’t even provide one…. which doesn’t surprise me as I know there are NONE out there… because ID is in NO WAY science!

“Just the statistical end of ID theory”

Please… You have NOT been able to show that ID is a “theory” so can you please stop referring to it as one! It doesn’t deserve that stature…

You try to provide a reason for ID, but you don’t provide any science:

“if the expansion of the universe changed in speed by as little as 10 (-)23rd power, the universe would not exist.”

First of all – what does this have to do with ID? Second of all – the universe as we know it would not exist, but that doesn’t mean an alternate universe wouldn’t exist in it’s place. The expansion speed isn’t the way it is because of us – we’re the way we are because of it!
You have it backwards…

If this is your reasoning for ID good luck ya!

“Atheism not required to have scientific proofs”

Because atheism ISN’T science either! It doesn’t make any claims – it doesn’t need any evidence.

“Christianity required by those same atheists as having to have scientific proof”

I’m not surprised an ID’er like you doesn’t understand science – but scientists don’t talk about “proof” – it’s called “evidence”. Proof is left to mathematicians…

The thing here is that christians have made a VERY big claim – the existence of god. This requires evidence because it’s a claim. Atheism doesn’t make any such claims (it just refuses to believe religion’s claim because there is NO evidence the claim is correct).

“the apparent belief by leading atheists in aliens.”

Really? “leading atheists” believe in aliens? I’m not sure why that is so bad in your eyes though.

I believe in alien life – but my “belief” in alien life does NOT mean that (a) I think my views are backed up by science, I understand it’s just my belief and (b) that it should be taught in science class!

That’s what this is about!! I don’t care that you’re a creationist – I really don’t! What I care about is that you try to propose ID as a scientific theory on par with evolution. ID is NOT science!

I’ve given you many many oportunities to support your claim that ID is science. You OBVIOUSLY cannot do this…. doesn’t that say anything to you??

Did I mention facts? No, let me rephrase that: WHERE did I mention facts? Belief has nothing to do with facts. And atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of or denial of belief.

And where did I say I believe in aliens?

I personally don’t give a damn what you believe. Or what you believe you believe. Or what you believe I believe. It has nothing to do with me.

Just the statistical end of ID theory is staggering. For example, if the expansion of the universe changed in speed by as little as 10 (-)23rd power, the universe would not exist.

Atheism not required to have scientific proofs, Christianity required by those same atheists as having to have scientific proof, and the apparent belief by leading atheists in aliens.

I suppose you must find a way to fill the void created when you dispel God from your soul. ET call home.

RevRomansky

http://revromansky.wordpress.com

“The isn’t exactly relevant, but yes I do.”

Good for you, Joe! But his “relevance” in bringing this point up was to intimidate you into agreeing with him on some point so he could stick out his metaphorical foot and trip you up. The inference was that only children and fools “believe in” aliens, as if aliens were fantasy creatures in some kind of fairy tales written by fundies who want to scare their children into behaving themselves. He was treating you like a child, and you aren’t having any. Bravo!

And yes, there has to be life out there. There’s way too much there there not to have life forms of some kind!

Are you disagreeing? Do you not see how an interview (obtained under FALSE pretenses) could be edited in such a way as to change the meaning of what was said??

“As long as Dawkins said he didn’t say what he said, but he meant something he said in a different way than hwo he plainly stated it, that’s alright.”

You’re not exactly clear here… but I think I’m getting your point. You still haven’t read the link I posted did you? If you had you would realize that you’re not making sense…

“I really hate icons, Joe.”

That’s funny, because god’s a pretty big icon!!

And Dawkins isn’t an icon to me. A smart man who is good at writing, but not an icon.

“And I don’t believe in aliens, do you?”

The isn’t exactly relevant, but yes I do. I think we’d be pretty naive to think, with the billions of stars and planets out there, that we’re alone in the universe. I don’t believe we’ve been visited by little green men, but I think there has to be other life out there – the odds are too great!

And once again you avoid your earlier claim about ID (which happens to be the most interesting part of our discussion – to me).

Will you admit you can’t back up your claim now? It’s getting pretty obvious that you can’t. Will you finally admit that ID is NOT scientific in ANY way – and thus irrelevant to science?

If you think you got something, son, then link it.