Our Common Ground in This Group Here

[Patrick]

@gbrooks9

Do you think I’m 10 years old?

No @gbrooks9 most 10 year old’s are much smarter.

[gbrooks9 (George)]

@T_Aquaticus

Was it not clear to you that I itemized two (2) kinds of processes
for creating lightning?

Was it not clear to you that I don’t know how to describe the more
miraculous process - - with the implicit understanding that this is
not surprising … when that thing is particularly MIRACULOUS?

Was it not clear to you that the “other”, not-so-miraculous, process
is easy enough to describe that it can summarized in a Wiki article?

And finally, and most importantly, was it not clear that I have no
problem attributing God’s participation in both of these processes?

Is there a particular reason that you think hounding me, absent any
particularly sound or reasonable grounds, is somehow a good idea?

@Swamidass … I’ll expect you to intervene if he comes at me on this
thread with any more postings along the lines of these last postings
of his.

[T_aquaticus]

@gbrooks9

Was it not clear to you that I don’t know how to describe the more
miraculous process - - with the implicit understanding that this is
not surprising … when that thing is particularly MIRACULOUS?

Can you point to observed lightning bolts that were created by this miraculous process?

@gbrooks9

And finally, and most importantly, was it not clear that I have no
problem attributing God’s participation in both of these processes?

Then why do you have a problem when I use the Wiki-style definition of evolution that does not mention God?

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@gbrooks9

Take a look at the label on your profile:

To be fair, Swamidass put it there(at least in my case). I’ve felt it weird that I have this label attached to my profile since I started. Not because it isn’t true what it says, but it seems to serve as nothing more than a tool for people with opposing viewpoints to dismiss what we all have to say on any topic of religion.

@gbrooks9

Anyone reading your supposed clarifications that nature is sufficient for Evolution to work is going to make the logical conclusion: you are opposing God-as-Designer because you are an Atheist.

Couldn’t that same argument be turned around? If someone sees “Frantic Unitarian” on your profile and see you argue to the effect that we can’t disprove God’s involvement in evolution, then they can make the logical conclusion that you are opposing naturalistic evolution because you’re a theist?

Perhaps none of us should have these labels attached to our profiles. Keep em guessing.

[gbrooks9 (George)]

@Rumraket

Couldn’t that same argument be turned around? If someone sees “Frantic Unitarian” on your profile and see you argue to the effect that we can’t disprove God’s involvement in evolution, then they can make the logical conclusion that you are opposing naturalistic evolution because you’re a theist?

Perhaps none of us should have these labels attached to our profiles. Keep em guessing.

@Rumraket,

While it is always possible to be confused by a single posting … I don’t believe anyone will be confused for long by my frequently posted position regarding my endorsement of God-Guided evolution… but without endorsing any idea that Science can prove it!!!