Science or Spirituality...You Choose:

Steinhauer said:
You will be surprised at the number of scientists that believe in intelligent design.

Aren't there repercussions for scientists who declare they believe in God?
Click to expand...

it's the other way around.

check out my facebook page.
 
AquaBlue said:
it must be an misunderstanding because your reply doesn't make any sense to me. you are like off-topic. how does prejudice come into the picture? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

You are saying hearing people would not behave in a discussion of this nature, but deaf people would behave. Now you are calling to close the thread. Kinda looks like you goofed.
 
saywhatkid said:
You are saying hearing people would not behave in a discussion of this nature, but deaf people would behave. Now you are calling to close the thread. Kinda looks like you goofed.
Click to expand...

what???????????????

I am so cofused. I never meant none of that. is that how my words were wrongly translated. oh please. ge real. i was praising deaf folks...what's wrong with that? I'm lost.
 
AquaBlue said:
and all i wanted to do was talk.
Click to expand...

Ok, then let's talk (btw, I have to leave soon). You have brought up the teleological argument but have not discussed any actual evidence supporting your views.

Since you are arguing, presumably, that there is no design in nature, that life happened "coincidentally" and that there is no "creator", then let me suggest a discussion geared towards that end.

Let's discuss irreducible complexity and specified complexity.
 
AquaBlue said:
what???????????????

I am so cofused. I never meant none of that. is that how my words were wrongly translated. oh please. ge real. i was praising deaf folks...what's wrong with that? I'm lost.
Click to expand...
Praising deafs is great, but why make disparaging comments about hearing? There is no reason to downgrade one group of people when trying to elevate another.
 
AquaBlue said:
it must be an misunderstanding because your reply doesn't make any sense to me. you are like off-topic. how does prejudice come into the picture? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

You are prejudiced against other hearing people. You said that hearing people respond poorly towards religious discussions while deaf people respond in a good manner. We do not believe this for a couple of reasons. 1) We see other deaf people argue all the time just like hearing people, so we know that you haven't encountered many deaf people. 2) The hearing status has NOTHING to do with how we discuss topics. It's basically the same as saying "Wow.. deaf people are so much better at being astrologists than hearing people."

Does that make sense?
 
Aquablue:
I am out of this thread before it gets nasty. I did not mean to make you look bad.
 
Daredevel7 said:
You are prejudiced against other hearing people. You said that hearing people respond poorly towards religious discussions while deaf people respond in a good manner. We do not believe this for a couple of reasons. 1) We see other deaf people argue all the time just like hearing people, so we know that you haven't encountered many deaf people. 2) The hearing status has NOTHING to do with how we discuss topics. It's basically the same as saying "Wow.. deaf people are so much better at being astrologists than hearing people."

Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
It surely makes sense to me. That is exactly my point.
 
Steinhauer said:
Ok, then let's talk (btw, I have to leave soon). You have brought up the teleological argument but have not discussed any actual evidence supporting your views.

Since you are arguing, presumably, that there is no design in nature, that life happened "coincidentally" and that there is no "creator", then let me suggest a discussion geared towards that end.

Let's discuss irreducible complexity.
Click to expand...

there is no design in nature, yes. but there are patterns. that's different. i am 100% on the side of Randomness also.

irreducible complexity? Answer: Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but which does not adhere to a valid scientific methodology, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status. PERIOD. Next question....
 
should have asked me why i take an anti-science and anti-religion stance...but never mind.... hiint hint, neither of them helped d/Deaf people, i think intution is the best...and small amouont of science and small amount of morals is sound but getting too far making it sooo important above all things natural is not right, hell I'm even anti-business...like if i believe in say, making a website for someone should be negotiated as 'good will' like if the business has more success then pay in return for the success, contribute to a good name for those who helped the firm/company/small group, and if the website or bid to advertise wasnt success at all then they shouldn't be charged at all...or at least return a small thank-you for effort...so as a whole if all kinds of business ran this way - the world would be a better place. in addition its not communism, more of socialism, but these theories are VERY heavy handed so i would go to detail, all i just did here was made a simple statement that im anti-science(power of institutes), anti-religion (again power of authority - historically and now is used to maintain capitalism, etc) and anti-business , which to id like to see faith in people than faith in money become a more realistic 'rules of thumb' for 'trade', and hence the community spirit admit this all seem wishy washy, but look at China their "for the nation" (similar concept as im talking about) is abused...it all boils down people got to stop relying on those 'masterminds' like Masterminds should be outlawed...
hmm
 
saywhatkid said:
Praising deafs is great, but why make disparaging comments about hearing? There is no reason to downgrade one group of people when trying to elevate another.
Click to expand...

oh now i see. okay. i'm hearing. i'm not deaf, hoh, or coda. i'm hearing. i know my people because i am a hearie. and though it seemed like i was degrading hearing folks, i was not, of course. that would be like degrading myself being that that's my culture.
 
Daredevel7 said:
You are prejudiced against other hearing people. You said that hearing people respond poorly towards religious discussions while deaf people respond in a good manner. We do not believe this for a couple of reasons. 1) We see other deaf people argue all the time just like hearing people, so we know that you haven't encountered many deaf people. 2) The hearing status has NOTHING to do with how we discuss topics. It's basically the same as saying "Wow.. deaf people are so much better at being astrologists than hearing people."

Does that make sense?
Click to expand...

well the i will say it this way: i like deaf folks more than hearies (GENEARLLY SPEAKING). :roll:

that's not bias. please
 
AquaBlue said:
well the i will say it this way: i like deaf folks more than hearies (GENEARLLY SPEAKING). :roll:

that's not bias. please
Click to expand...

.... that's the definition of bias....

It's okay to like one group more than the other. Sometimes you have bad/good encounters with several people of one group and one tends to shy away from/be attracted to that group.

However, I have doubts about WHY you like deaf people more than hearing people. Your reasons (that I know of) don't really make sense, but hey, to each their own.
 
Daredevel7: i do not have, and have never EVER had a prejudice bone in my body. I am the opposite of all that. it's so silly to even thnk that i am prejudice. it's just that you all don't know me a person, face-to-face. this is so silly.
 
Back
Top