OK. I don't know why, but I had a feeling you were working up to calling the Amish a cult.
Guess that shows why I haven't applied for the million, huh? My mind-reading skills leave much to be desired.
You're just like everyone else, then.
OK. I don't know why, but I had a feeling you were working up to calling the Amish a cult.
Guess that shows why I haven't applied for the million, huh? My mind-reading skills leave much to be desired.
You're just like everyone else, then.![]()
And after reading the original sticker, does it strike anybody as odd that in order to knock down science to foster disguised religion these people have to rely on a shadow of skepticism? If they expect their children to take those words at face value and question everything, wouldn't that lead to asking those uncomfortable about the nature of the Invisible Friend and hence lead them eventually to skepticism?
And after reading the original sticker, does it strike anybody as odd that in order to knock down science to foster disguised religion these people have to rely on a shadow of skepticism?
If they expect their children to take those words at face value and question everything, wouldn't that lead to asking those uncomfortable about the nature of the Invisible Friend and hence lead them eventually to skepticism?
The skepticism of the creationist cadre has less to do witht actual critical thinking than it does with disguising true intent.
This is one arrow in the latest creationist quiver. I would say it is no "shadow" of skepicism, rather it is an open tactic. "We are only trying to apply a healthy dose of skeptisism to this mere theory...".
It is only a conicidence -- I am sure -- that this outburst of intellectual vigor is saved for a theory that we fel threatens our beliefs. And that they raise the bar for "truth" to unattainable, unreasonable heights. And that they apply any number of logical fallacies (argument from ignorance, genetic fallacy, flase dichotomy) to their "critical thinking"