Moontanman

No not at all, Galileo was one man, his struggles did not cause the common man to question religion but the idea that the wrath of God could be avoided by simply hanging a metal rod on your house was profound, it marked the true turning point of science showing that religion was not the end all be all of reality.

Good point, he can't be from the USA, probably a British Imperialist

The point in time when religion and science really butted heads can be pin pointed. Until this point in time religion and science has pretty much been ok with each other, there had been a few skirmishes about the sun, the earth, the moon, and planets and how they moved but that had been mostly an intellectual exercise with neither side really suffering due to it. but the real point at which religion really found it's self unable to explain why science was right and religion was wrong was the..... Lightning Rod! Yes the lightning rod, with a simple metal rod you could thwart the will of God! Up until then it was widely taught that lightning was definite proof of gods wrath and anyone who suffered a stroke of lightning was being punished by god! (of course the sin of the occasional Oak tree that was blasted out of existence was unexplained as was the fact that the church steeple was the most likely Building to be hit by lightning) Any man could by simply installing a lightning rod to keep God from striking his house or place of business. Of course to us today this seems silly but at the time it was a real problem for religion and some churches claimed it was sacrilegious to install a lightning rod because it interfered with god and his ability to punish people. But the common mans desire to not be struck by lightning prevailed and slowly the use of lightning rods spread around the world, finally showing up in church steeples... BTW good post Lemur, @ #14

Maybe we can get the war between the states heated back up! The rude, aggressive, Yankee Patriots vs The mannerly, gentile, Southern Loyalists ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE?

I think you have hit the nail on the head, I know that many theists give me a look like I'm brain damaged when they find out my faith is somewhat limited, much the same look i give them when they try to convert me...

I have to agree severian, disagreements is one thing but to be disgusting is quite another. Everyone has to draw limits, i draw mine somewhere before the skull comes into play much less a lizard having sex with it... "people are strange"

It's all that ydoaP guys fault, he did it...

I think there are definite differences in the way the two groups thinks, the religious need a yes-no, white-black, right-wrong, type existence, the less religious to atheistic don't need total certainly in life and can deal with a world of less certainty that changes as new knowledge comes in.

Yes! you are so correct, we let an idiot drag us down to his level and then beat us to death with experience. On a good note this is not because we are idiots but because we like to assume a poster is really looking for clues not full of it.

This is a great post dude....

I think you are correct, everyone sees a different rainbow, your rainbow is unique to you and therefore as real as anyone else's. I think this is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow or this, I've seen the moonbow effect many times but not a glory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glory_(optical_phenomenon)

Did I mention I am nuclear physicist?

Animals and plants change over time due to the environment, I've directly observed it but I didn't video tape it. In animal husbandry and over time you get the chance to see lots of things most people never notice. The faster an animal reproduces the faster the changes accumulate, some animals I have personally watched change over time in captivity... Heterandria formosa Gambusia holbrooki Amphiprion percula Enneacanthus gloriosus Cambarellus shufeldtii several species of Coral Ghost shrimp Now I know that since I didn't video tape it you won't believe it but i find it difficult to video tape a process that takes years and hundreds of generations but the time it takes does not negate the process. How long have you been observing the universe ?

The really sad part of this is not that Pelosi lost her power or that democrats won or lost. what is really sad is that nothing will change. Two years from now all will still be shit and the republicans will be crying foul that they just haven't had enough time and the Dem's will be shouting vote em out they screwed us and the reality is you can't repair a sinking boat by changing Captains. This country has real problems that will not be solved by putting someone else in power, that revolving door does not solve anything. To me the politics of most of my life have been more about getting power than using it wisely. How often do you see a politician change his mind for any reason other than personal power? When will a real leader come to be that will make the hard choices? NEVER, no one can survive in power by doing anything but running in circles and barking at the moon and getting other people to do the same to the same tune as you... As far as I've seen barking at the moon has no effect, my dogs don't even do that.

I would guess that observing fast reproducing animals in captivity as they change due to the captive environment isn't evolution?

Yes I can, hold on let me load my pistol, now the real question is, will you be able to testify I have proved matter exists after I prove it.

I knew it! An ape evolving into a human. From your stand point nothing really exists... including you

No atom has ever been directly observed, all we have is some evidence for them like we do electrons but then again we have evidence for evolution too but no direct observation according to you. I say there is just as much evidence for evolution as there is for electrons. We can observe evidence of electrons in the form of electricity and we can see evidence for evolution all around us, both in fossils and in the living organisms of the earth. We see no evidence what so ever for ID or creationism or the book of urantia or any other fairy tale. Plenty of evidence of evolution, just as much evidence of evolution as there is for fusion inside the sun, or rings around Uranus. There is support somewhere for everything, supporting numbers does not the truth make.

Ok, I'll bite, what in your estimation would constitute direct evidence of evolution?

Star Wars really doesn't have anything to do with space travel, it's an out dated concept that was never really financed. Everyone is interested in the helium 3 on the moon in one way or another. I doubt there would be much strategic interest in a moon base. I hope we do not abandon the space program but I am pretty sure it will still be a whipping boy for politicians who want to be noticed.

If you are really a botanist the evidence i provided must have been particularly difficult for you to ignore, when you gonna pay sfn the 10 pounds?

So what is the source of ID for an atheist? Creationism requires ID, ID is not a theory that stands alone. Being an atheist doesn't make you intelligent, i am quite sure there are atheists that believe some pretty stupid stuff. Only evolution has evidence to support it, the rest are simply bullshit told to create doubt in evolution or to support fairy tales. The book of Urantia attempts to do that. Preference has nothing to do with reality.

I think cabinintheforest owes sfn 10 pounds, i wonder why his bet was so low? must have not been convinced of his own data...

You need to read them all then. Nope, no one has suggested that aphids or sea urchins do not reproduce sexually. I have to ask why does the reproduction of aphids have to do with homosexuality? I grow large amounts of Daphnia magna, they alternate between sexual and asexual reproduction so i do understand the principles involved. Not true, sea urchins do indeed have sex to reproduce, the closest we would would understand as sex between urchins is masterbation, yes echinoderms reproduce by masterbation. You really need to read the entire thread... So homosexuals are diseased? Homosexuals are more promiscuous than heterosexuals? Do you just troll this nonsense out by repeating what you have been told your whole life? Can you show your sources of this revelation other than your own rectum? I can and so can many others in this forum back up my assertions with real data so far all you have done is make claims about other peoples data and shown none of your own.