Friends of the Secular Café: Forums
Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
Talk Freethought
Rational Skepticism Forum
EvC Forum: Evolution vs. Creation
Living Nonreligion Discussion Forum
The Round Table (RatPags)
Talk Rational!
Blogs
Blue Collar Atheist
Camels With Hammers
Ebonmuse: Daylight Atheism
Nontheist Nexus
The Re-Enlightenment
Rosa Rubicondior
The Skeptical Zone
Watching the Deniers
Others
Christianity Disproved
Count Me Out
Ebon Musings
Freethinker.co.uk
 
       

Go Back   Secular Café > Science and Stuff > Creation & Alternative Science

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30 Apr 2012, 10:17 AM   #360045 / #1
DMB
Old git
Beloved deceased
 
DMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mostly Switzerland
Posts: 41,484
Default Pat Robertson on science

I'm posting this here, since it's a mishmash of science and religion.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...wed-to-believe

Quote:
he wants you to know that science is legitimate, except in certain areas where it's not, and the delineation between those two areas is, as always, whatever religion says it is...
..."God created the world; the laws of nature were created by God. True science tries to find out what God put in the world. The trouble is where scientists speculate about theology and they don’t know what they’re talking about because they weren’t there. They can’t speculate about the origins of life because they weren’t there. If they tell you observable phenomenon then we ought to believe them, and I tell you if you find a geologist who tells you something existed 300 million years ago then you better believe them because he knows what he’s talking about. We don’t want our religious theory go with flat earth."
You may think this sounds confusing. Maybe, but it's also one of the most concise explanations of the relationship between fundamentalism and science I've ever seen...
Please read the whole thing. It's not long.
DMB is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 10:54 AM   #360054 / #2
trendkill
Senior Member
Mini KickUps Champion, KickUps Champion
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,056
Default

I'm not reading the whole thing, which appears to be quite a long and boring rant about that one quotation. Suffice to say, as much of a shock as this may be, Pat Robertson appears to be deeply confused about science.
trendkill is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 12:46 PM   #360073 / #3
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

I did read the whole thing.

It confirms that Robertson is a world-class turd. He basically wants science to be confined to places where religion says it's OK to look. OK to look specifically excludes origins of life, and the fact that we share DNA with animals.

Not much new - he wants religion in charge, and taken as the ultimate authority on anything.
__________________
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 01:21 PM   #360082 / #4
BioBeing
Zymurgist
 
BioBeing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMB View Post
I'm posting this here, since it's a mishmash of science and religion.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...wed-to-believe

Quote:
he wants you to know that science is legitimate, except in certain areas where it's not, and the delineation between those two areas is, as always, whatever religion says it is...
..."God created the world; the laws of nature were created by God. True science tries to find out what God put in the world. The trouble is where scientists speculate about theology and they don’t know what they’re talking about because they weren’t there. They can’t speculate about the origins of life because they weren’t there. If they tell you observable phenomenon then we ought to believe them, and I tell you if you find a geologist who tells you something existed 300 million years ago then you better believe them because he knows what he’s talking about. We don’t want our religious theory go with flat earth."
You may think this sounds confusing. Maybe, but it's also one of the most concise explanations of the relationship between fundamentalism and science I've ever seen...
Please read the whole thing. It's not long.
And Pat Robertson wasn't there when Jesus was crucified & resurrected, so stop acting as if you know its real, Pat. You weren't there!!!
__________________
"Theologians, Christian apologists, and New Age gurus have, for decades now, claimed scientific support for their beliefs. These claims are provably wrong, and scientists who work in the applicable fields know they are wrong. However, their unwillingness to engage in the very real war that exists between science and religion is handing victory to religion by default.” Victor Stenger
BioBeing is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Secular Café > Science and Stuff > Creation & Alternative Science

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Uhm, Pat Robertson Does It Again Lulu Religion 4 04 Apr 2013 08:32 PM
Pat Robertson: You Might Have Demons in Your Underwear MattShizzle Religion 2 04 Mar 2013 01:34 AM
Pat Robertson: Lunatic MattShizzle Religion 9 11 Sep 2012 08:32 PM
Mitt's new BFF is Pat Robertson sohy Politics & World Events 4 11 Sep 2012 04:16 AM
God's Wrath According To Pat Robertson PostMortem Religion 7 30 Jan 2010 01:38 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
 
Ocean Zero by vBSkins.com | Customised by Antechinus