Social Networking is everywhere now-a-days!

[boldie]

not too good with capital letters though, is he?

might be a she

interesting theory...a woman with a sense of humour.... 

interesting post...some of us require a sense of humour to cope

You must have a sense of humour, but you must be lacking sense in other areas.

Thanks Kin, you bailed me out there

[boldie]

interesting headline on Yahoo

"Gay Christians slam Pope"

[boldie]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

[kinboshi]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

Teach it in a religious class if it must be taught - but it has no place in a science class.  Science is based on putting forward a theory based on evidence, looking at counter-evidence and testing and re-testing.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, not something invented to match the stories of a book that's thousands of years old.

Creationism ignores scientific knowledge and advancement in many different areas including: biology, astronomy, geology, palaeontology, and physics.  All of the more 'precise' arguments put forward by Creationists that can be tested have been disproved by science.  The 'first cause' argument cannot be disproved, as it sits 'outside' science.  But therefore, it has no place in the science class...

[bolt pp]

http://www.christian-network.net/forums/display_topic/id_248/

 

you lot are funny, i'm surprised they havnt removed it!

can we have a BOB thread from a thread thats not on blonde but is by blondes?

[boldie]

I think they don't actually have any mods...It's a faith thing.

Very surprised that youtube thing came through though.

[Scottish Dave]

Who is 'reborn king' and 'Beelzbub'?

[boldie]

Who is 'reborn king' and 'Beelzbub'?

no idea.

[Claw75]

Who is 'reborn king' and 'Beelzbub'?

no idea but they are funny so must be blokes

fyp

[cia260895]

so God is male after all,it's definetly a mans voice right?
.

[cia260895]

interesting headline on Yahoo

"Gay Christians slam Pope"

Now if it was a gay christian politician that slams the pope that could be an explosive thread...

[WYSINWYG]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

Teach it in a religious class if it must be taught - but it has no place in a science class.  Science is based on putting forward a theory based on evidence, looking at counter-evidence and testing and re-testing.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, not something invented to match the stories of a book that's thousands of years old.

Creationism ignores scientific knowledge and advancement in many different areas including: biology, astronomy, geology, palaeontology, and physics.  All of the more 'precise' arguments put forward by Creationists that can be tested have been disproved by science.  The 'first cause' argument cannot be disproved, as it sits 'outside' science.  But therefore, it has no place in the science class...

I'm amazed that you're having a pop at religion at this time of year.

What has science really proved after all, conclusively. Scientists are proving each other wrong all the time, and they keep coming up with just 'theories' like 'theory of evolution', 'theory of Big Bang' (whatever that is). When they stop coming up with theories and start coming up with FACT, then I'll listen.
The universe had to come from somewhere: FACT
This person who made it had to  be intelligent: FACT
This must have been God: FACT

[ ] Saw Charles Darwin make even a blade of grass recently.

[kinboshi]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

Teach it in a religious class if it must be taught - but it has no place in a science class.  Science is based on putting forward a theory based on evidence, looking at counter-evidence and testing and re-testing.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, not something invented to match the stories of a book that's thousands of years old.

Creationism ignores scientific knowledge and advancement in many different areas including: biology, astronomy, geology, palaeontology, and physics.  All of the more 'precise' arguments put forward by Creationists that can be tested have been disproved by science.  The 'first cause' argument cannot be disproved, as it sits 'outside' science.  But therefore, it has no place in the science class...

I'm amazed that you're having a pop at religion at this time of year.

What has science really proved after all, conclusively. Scientists are proving each other wrong all the time, and they keep coming up with just 'theories' like 'theory of evolution', 'theory of Big Bang' (whatever that is). When they stop coming up with theories and start coming up with FACT, then I'll listen.
The universe had to come from somewhere: FACT
This person who made it had to  be intelligent: FACT
This must have been God: FACT

[ ] Saw Charles Darwin make even a blade of grass recently.

LOL

[WYSINWYG]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

Teach it in a religious class if it must be taught - but it has no place in a science class.  Science is based on putting forward a theory based on evidence, looking at counter-evidence and testing and re-testing.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, not something invented to match the stories of a book that's thousands of years old.

Creationism ignores scientific knowledge and advancement in many different areas including: biology, astronomy, geology, palaeontology, and physics.  All of the more 'precise' arguments put forward by Creationists that can be tested have been disproved by science.  The 'first cause' argument cannot be disproved, as it sits 'outside' science.  But therefore, it has no place in the science class...

I'm amazed that you're having a pop at religion at this time of year.

What has science really proved after all, conclusively. Scientists are proving each other wrong all the time, and they keep coming up with just 'theories' like 'theory of evolution', 'theory of Big Bang' (whatever that is). When they stop coming up with theories and start coming up with FACT, then I'll listen.
The universe had to come from somewhere: FACT
This person who made it had to  be intelligent: FACT
This must have been God: FACT

[ ] Saw Charles Darwin make even a blade of grass recently.

LOL

FML, thought that one had legs 


My favourite Christmas Carol

[boldie]

other story today

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20081223/tuk-third-of-teachers-want-creationism-6323e80.html

Oh boy.

Teach it in a religious class if it must be taught - but it has no place in a science class.  Science is based on putting forward a theory based on evidence, looking at counter-evidence and testing and re-testing.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, not something invented to match the stories of a book that's thousands of years old.

Creationism ignores scientific knowledge and advancement in many different areas including: biology, astronomy, geology, palaeontology, and physics.  All of the more 'precise' arguments put forward by Creationists that can be tested have been disproved by science.  The 'first cause' argument cannot be disproved, as it sits 'outside' science.  But therefore, it has no place in the science class...

I'm amazed that you're having a pop at religion at this time of year.

What has science really proved after all, conclusively. Scientists are proving each other wrong all the time, and they keep coming up with just 'theories' like 'theory of evolution', 'theory of Big Bang' (whatever that is). When they stop coming up with theories and start coming up with FACT, then I'll listen.
The universe had to come from somewhere: FACT
This person who made it had to  be intelligent: FACT
This must have been God: FACT

[ ] Saw Charles Darwin make even a blade of grass recently.

top class level WP