BIG AL 30..... who the heck is "percy" *confused look*

BOAZ_David See Percy's post Jan 26 7.31pm. You are doing a wonderul job BOAZ. There's an old Irish saying : "More power to your hand" I wish it for you and your typing finger!

I will post a reply to all your post tonight.

Dear Al :) thanx.. I have my moments of inspiration.. but also of a more carnal attitude :) if ur a prayin bloke, pray that I will always be a chanel of Christs love, even in the most passionate things I say :)

Jesus did not hold back when addressing the "Pharisees" he gave em what for :) its in that mode I guess when I'm most vitriolic. I see a lot of stuff trotted out by the left as social insanity or.. social AGENDA.. or perhaps a mixture of both. They have yet to address the most fundamental issue of their doctrines.. "where does this ultimately lead.. when taken to its logical and reasonable conclusion"

If u point them to Neitzche.. they will scurry away to whine about 'humanistic values' but u put 3 humanists in a room and u have 3 sets of values :) who's is right ? They claim 'minumize harm' is a good universal value.. SAYS WHO ?????.. beside them... It only takes one Sadaam to rise up while they are enjoying their latte's and suddenly they will discover 'oops... I got it wrong.. this guy does not share our wonderful ideas.. tsk tsk'. What makes it more preposterous, is that given that such people as Sadaam and Stalin (they even look alike) attempt to run the show, the ONLY way u can prevent it is by FORCE.. guns..bullets.. bombs.. etc.. but where are these lefties ?? they are out there at the head of the PEACE marches. If they were not so dangerous they would just be a joke.. but the likes of Gary Bouma, Grace Pettigrew..Anita Lukin .. skillful with words but short on common sense.

Look closely at EVERYTHING that Ozaware says.. he is a man after my own heart..but with more 'restraint' :))... a very perceptive guy with excellent arguments.

I thought about what I should write in my reply to your posts so I thought about the audience. Religious people today can fit into four groups the agnostic, stupid, ignorant, and the zealot.
Agnostic:
The vast majority of people have a general belief in a higher power(s) which has been instilled in them as a product of their culture and don’t give it any real thought.
Stupid:
Human intelligence levels follow a classic bell curve of distribution and the fact is the more you move to the upper end the less religious people get.

Ignorant:
This group is much larger then it should be and for that I blame the education system.
This group is also a bit of a spill way for the stupid group. This group is made up of people who have never read a science book in their life and switch channel when a science doco comes on the telly. Often this lack of interest in science is due to low levels of intelligence. More often it is simply because the ideas being talked about don’t agree with the persons world view so they switch off. Take for instance Percy’s comments about evolution demonstrates a compete lack of knowledge about the subject. He said

“Kenny and arjay, not sure who it was. Are we 2% different from chimps? Apart from that being an extremely hairy figure vilifying to humans, did you know that we share 50% of our DNA with bananas - so did we descend from bananas? E.g. Lawnmowers and cars are made from steel aluminium and plastic etc - so did the car descend from a lawnmower -or did people design both?”

Percy with his additional comments takes a line favoured by many in the creationist movement and he probably belongs in the last group. Now I’m not Prof Dawkins but let me address some of the issue here.

We share a common ancestor with Chimps and bananas as we do with all known life on earth. I’ve never see a Lawnmower reproduce so it is a stupid example. Percy probably subscribes to creation magazine which I also read ever now and again for a luagh it is almost as funny as new dawn. There is a reason why evolution is taught in every modern school in the world why our knowledge of it’s process's has increased over the last few hundred years it’s because it is reality. There is no anti-religious under current to it in fact most of it’s early pioneers were very religious people. It is a matter of looking at the evidence and comming to point, rather then starting with point and trying to find evidence. As for putting words in Prof Dawkins mouth I think you need to go back to the source. For those of you don’t know much about the current state of evolution and are interested to find out there are many web sites and other sources of information about.

Zealot:
These persons are basically in need of a padded cell nothing can be shown to them to make them change their minds about anything they believe. Anything that contradicts their world view is either wrong or the work of the devil. I feel great pity for these people I wonder what has gone so wrong in their world that they have ended up like this. They twist words to suit themselves and will not listen to reason. It has been demonstrated on this tread quite a bit. Christian zealots believe the world is only six thousand years old for that to be true much of our knowledge about chemistry, biology and physics would have to be wrong. Many of you believe we have the right to free speech in Australia show me the law or legislation that shows that and I’ll be proven wrong if you can’t then admit you are wrong it ‘s that easy.

When you get to the end of this reply, think about this what evidence would you need to make you stop believing in a god(s). Then you’ll get a idea which group you are in. Many people find it hard to deal with the uncertainty of life and find the rigid dogma of religion comforting. They find the idea of changing your mind when new evidence arises as aberrant they require absolute wrongs and rights.

Dear Kenny :) there were about as many 'myths' and fallacies in what you said.. not to mention stereotypes etc.. as you ascribe to the 'laughable creationsists'.. and about intelligence :) well that statement clearly shows that the one who is not up to speed on just 'who' is and is not a creationist, is you.
Regarding the debate about "evolution and creation" Most of what you said showed also that you were just 'pidgeonholing' your opponents in a comfy little box for ur own peace of mind. Most of us are aware of the RNAworld model and also its weaknesses. If I'm not mistaken, that is about where the discussion is currently at concerning origins of life, quite apart from origins of the Earth.
The Creationism/Evolution debate is NOT one where 'nothing of evolution is admitted by creationists' There ARE factual and demonstrable aspects to the wider theory.
Have a peek at Genesis 1.1 and then look at Gen 1.3 do u see it ???
Gen 1.1 "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth"

Gen 1.2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Up to this point, it could have been ANY number of millions of years. AFTER which.. GOD separated the light from the dark.. and it was evening......'the first day'

Regards
BOAZ