Posted on 12/11/2009 5:57:16 PM PST by Jim Robinson
You are drifting into OCD.
It would take hundreds of thousands of years or more to prove or discard the theory, on a scientific level.
Pointless.
What difference does it make?
your responses.
I am offended by being told what I must believe to post here.
- - - - - -
I never told you what you must believe to post here. Neither did Jim Rob, that is only your interpretation.
I am not offended by you, I do however feel very sorry for you.
That was a satanic influence.
Gee whiz. I am not hostile. reaganut has listed posts where she/he has proof that I’m hostile. In 10 years here I have pissed no one off except, appaarently, you people. What I am mad about is the original thread. I have to believe certain things to be a FReeper?! Bullshit!
I did not log ALL of your posts. You claimed you were never hostile, I disagree and listed posts that supported my view.
and what is wrong with them?
You have no reason to feel sorry for me. In fact, it’s condescending. You don’t know me. People who do, actually like me.
I’ll be sure to keep track of all your posts in the future. What is your problem here.
- - - - - - —
Feel free. I spend most of my time on the Religion Forum.
I have no problem. You accused me of mis-stating your hostility so I posted several of your posts (this thread ONLY btw) to show what I (and others) considered hostile.
I am however wondering what your problem is.
If you do not feel comfortable on this thread, then leave it.
A belief that biodiversity can be explained conclusively and definitively without God.
Now, that's not the same as saying aspects of biodiversity can be explained without resorting to divine intervention.
And it's not the same as saying conditionally that all biodiversity can be explained through natural causes.
It's dogmatically holding the position that all life developed without intervention from God and, no, we don't have to spell out exactly how this happened, and if you question this you are anti-science.
That's what Darwinism is. It's a social movement not a scientific exercise. See the link to Wiki in which the coiner of the word called it "a veritable Whitworth gun in the armoury of liberalism" promoting scientific naturalism over theology . . .
God was influened by Satan? It’s the Old Testament! The Jews didn’t believe in Satan!
I have 10 years worth of posts. You logged tonight. Yes, I have a gripe tonight. Excuse me. I’m allowed.
This whole thread has been interesting, difference of opinion is what makes a horse race and both you guys are good...
They showed a rather high level of hostility.
So in 10 years you never ticked anyone off? Then you must be perfect.
(insert eyeroll here).
Ah but I do, and somehow I doubt that.
And F the naysayers.
If you feel hostility, I feel I am stating my case. I have enjoyed this thread because I have finally opened up. Your invitation to leave is arrogant.
Yes, it is. Prove otherwise.
I didn’t think his replies to you were hostile, which is why I did not list them and ping you (if I did it was unintentional and a mistake).
One of the things I enjoy about FR is the differences of opinion.
If Darwinism is survival of the fittest then it is obviously not truth. Look around. How many people alive today would have been alive 100 yars ago? Half of the people in this country think food comes from government fod stamps.
People are getting dumber and dumber because modern technology allows the stupid to survive. Someday we may all perish because of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.