Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by GeorgiaBoy
Originally Posted by MojoHand
Originally Posted by GeorgiaBoy
Originally Posted by MojoHand
[quote=GeorgiaBoy]At this point, I think it is evident that AS's posts follow a predictable pattern:

“We can therefore express the major elements in the New Atheists’ agenda as follows: Religion is a dangerous delusion: it leads to violence and war. We must therefore get rid of religion: science will achieve that. We do not need God to be good: atheism can provide a perfectly adequate base for ethics.”
― John C. Lennox, Gunning for God



Peter Atkins (a highly regared athiest) makes this positive assertian:
"Science is omnipotent."




Do you disagree with him also?


A) what truth claim are you referring to?

B) I would have to get a clarification from that guy on what he means by 'omnipotent'. Does he mean infallible? Does he mean all powerful in that he believes science will eventually be able to explain all? Perhaps he clarified in another portion of the video/debate?


In answer to A):

I quoted you. Don't you read your own post, or do you view with the same sense of babbling as the rest of us?

In answer to B):

Atkins give sufficient dialog to understand his meaning.


GB, are you trotting out Atkins and his silly statement that "Science is all knowing". To me, that is a highly arrogant, and moronic statement.


I don't agree. However, from reading your posts, arrogant and moronic seems to be part of both your internal and external dialog.

Besides, if you don't like Atkins "silly" statement, take it up with him. As fellow athiest, I'm sure you may speak freely...and dishonestly.