SkyHigh

My guess is you're right but the attempt could be humorous

First, as I often react to your posts in a negative way, I must commend you and say I couldn't agree more with you on this topic. From what I've been told by people much smarter and more informed than me,is that the way the Canada health act is currently written, allowing "official" private health care to come in would be a slippery slope to denying essential health care to the average person. *see what happens in the U.S* We do have private health care in ways though. My girlfriend broke he wrist (hair line fracture) we didn't want to sit in an emergency waiting room for 16 hours, so i found a private clinic that did everything but put the cast on( there are clinics that do that though, I just didn't know to ask) after that we went to the hospital and were fast tracked straight to orthopedics. The whole process from when we walked into the clinic, to when we left the hospital,was under 2hours and it was a 30 minute walk between the two . It cost us 480$ but we were refunded by the government for 400$ of that . Again I agree with you but I think one of the major problems is m9st people don't actually know what resources are available not just in health care either

To this you wrote "It's called a logical conclusion." Since you've invoked logic, could you please write this out as a syllogism, that is both sound and valid. Cheers

If that's what you need to tell yourself to support your non scientific fairy tales, go right ahead

Completely off topic, but you seem to be one of the only balanced, rational people on this site. Do you know of any other forums where people don't have to resort to calling people pedophile or Nazi ? Cheers

I'm not saying it's without any merit. To stick with the subject matter at hand, if you were curious as to when Darwin wrote the evolution of species, definitely check out Wikipedia. But as it's not peer-reviewed (in fact can be edited by layman) it lacks the rigour of the source material so can't be considered a reliable resource for understanding the mechanisms required for the diversity of life on the planet.

Going to a "creation scientist"( which again doesn't exist) for information on evolution, is like going to an atheist for Bible study. But , thank you for admitting that you have zero interest in even trying to understand the things you proclaim are untrue

Are there is the issue. Wikipedia is what you check to see who's right in a disagreement between friends not a resource for scientific discovery. Why don't you at least go on Google Scholar, type in evidence for evolution. Spend a few days reading the actual science behind evolution and not just regurgitate things you clearly don't understand ( most people don't understand things that require years of study, me included) written by people that aren't qualified on pseudo scientific websites like creation.com Again qualified means having been educated or having peer reviewed papers in the field they are speaking on. My financial advisor is a brilliant man when it comes to what to do with my money, but I don't go to him for medical advice because he's not a doctor.

I read that a small forest where Stradivari sourced the wood for his violins, had gone through a mini ice age giving the wood a higher density. One of the major factors of the quality of sound produced.

I didn't say no scientists believe in creation, I said there's no such thing as a creation scientist. Lots of people believe in lots of ridiculous things Show me anyone with a degree in young earth creation. You can't

Oh yeah, almost forgot There is no such thing as a creation scientist that is literally an oxymoron

First neither atheism nor secular humanism have anything to do with science. Second there are plenty of scientists that believe in God in all fields of study. Third you really don't care to understand the other side do you? If any scientist could provide testable novel predictions for either the existence of God or that evolution is false they'd win a Nobel prize and be the most famous scientist on earth. They don't because they can't. The hypocrisy of you calling the cumulative knowledge of multiple scientific disciplines biased when you get your information from a website called creation.com is astounding. If that alone doesn't make you at least curious enough to just look at what the scientific community says on the topic, you're not just ignorant you're willfully ignorant and that is an insult.

Once again you show your ignorance not only on your views of evolution but the basics of what science is. Proof only exists in math. Science is always provisional. That's what makes it great. New information, means new discoveries means modifying theories. No scientists I repeat NO scientists say they have proved Anything. In fact what the vast majority of scientists do is to try and disprove the experiments of other scientists. They call this peer review, the pseudo scientists you quote only write for pretend "scientific institutions" like creation.com , because they know if they tried to publish in any actual science journal they'd be disproven so fast they wouldn't be able to con their ignorant flock.

Once again, you don't even know what the theory of evolution is, in fact you have actually claimed that there is no such thing as an "evolution scientist". Here's are a few basic questions on evolution to illustrate my point. I would ask you to please respond directly to these questions, based on your own personal understanding , not a copy paste of the Christian apologists, with no relevant education that you tend to rely on. Can you explain how paternity tests work ? What are ERV"s ? What are alleles? If you can't answer these three simple questions, you will demonstrate you lack the command of the subject matter to have any authority to speak on the validity of one of the most agreed upon laws of the natural world held by virtually every trained scientist, in all related fields. I look forward to your response

Though the Bible "teaches" to love thy neighbor and to try and walk your path as Christ would, we will of course agree that one of Christianities core tenants in that we are all sinners, right? The idea of a death bed confession is of course ludacris , you can't do terrible things then right before death say you love Jesus and, bang! You're saved. Now because we are all born to sin, therefore will sin , it isn't works based. The only way to be forgiven for sin (which the Bible teaches we all do) is to accept Jesus Christ as your personal saviour. Period. Works means each individual action in this life is directly related to your "next life" . In Christianity you're "permitted" (I know that's not the best word, but you understand) to do "sinful" things as long as you ask forgiveness, and the only person you can ask forgiveness from is an itinerant, messianic, apocalyptic 1st century preacher, with little to no outside corroboration,and that my friend requires Faith.

You're not living up to 1st Peter 3:15 are you now? But like the saying goes, for most religious zealots "there's no worse hate than Cristian love" Though the fact you think Christianity is a works based religion, just makes the irony and cognitive dissonance even funnier.

John 14:6 I am the truth the way and the light, no comes to the father except through me. We could go back and forth for days, I'm not interested. I think it's all a plagiarized fairy tale. My point was if you affirm your interpretation is the only interpretation you are explicitly claiming to have the truth of what God ment therefore you're saying you know the mind of God

Are you presuming you know the mind of God?

Apologies if you think I'm being purposely obtrusive, but I don't think you care about truth. I believe you've made up your mind based on the few sources that agree with what you already believed, and honestly question your cognitive capabilities. Either way I'm not interested in continuing discourse with you. Take care

I think you'd be surprised. I had the opportunity to grow up in foster care so I saw many different family units. Two in particular I think are relevant. The first devoted Catholics (I was an alter server and had my feet washed), the second a fundamentalist Baptist (I taught Sunday school for the little ones) Two very different views of scripture, yet both the best possible versions of what a Cristian is supposed/called to be. It makes me laugh thinking they would have hated each other. Anyway I've read and studied the Bible with many theologians and continue to do so. You seem to focus only on the teachings of the Catholic Church. A closed mind can never be open to the true word of God

And see there lies the problem, that's your understanding. Not only are there thousands of different denominations of Christianity , but the person on the pew next to you has their own interpretation, to the point you accuse each other of perversion , heresy and not being true Christians. No all loving, all knowing, all powerful God, would let those who have accepted Jesus as their lord and saviour fight and kill over semantics. You may be right, but claiming it only applies to your God is the definition of special pleading. Just trying to explain it to you, you accused me of committing a logical fallacy without explaining how, then I literally made you commit one to illustrate.

And that is special pleading. Giving different (or special) attributes to one thing and not others

Ok you're obviously not actually trying to respond to what I'm writing and maybe not even reading it in good faith, you're more interested it spouting your retoric. I am not interested in those types of conversations. I hope you have a great night 😁 I asked you a question If everything is created who created god?

I'm not going to do a Bible study with you, but the fact that you can interpret the "word of God" ,in so many different ways on its own, proves a tri Omni god can't exist

I'd be interested to have you expand on where my reasoning was faulty. That's not what special pleading is. The best way to explain it to would be by asking you a question, so here goes (please answer). If everything is created who created god? We'll get back to that. The development of empathy was just an example of the evolution we've gone through as a species and totally irrelevant to atheism. In fact atheism has nothing to say about morality. Furthermore the concept of rules and laws existed in societies well before Abrahamic religions, as well as during and then continuously throughout history Nothing you're saying is specific to your version of God, nor is it specific to your moral system