Don George Quixote
I will attempt to respond to your muddled, incoherent, vainglosious, paranoid fantasy, to the extent that I can actually see anything solid enough to respond to.
-
Yes, GAE is apologetics, and thus theology.
-
No, that does not mean that you cannot discuss it. Theology and Religion are a fairly common subject of discussion. This forum even has a tag for “Theology” (as well as “Adam” and “Church”).
-
The only thing that people are objecting to is your apparent demands that we classify GAE, and other miracles, as “science”.
-
I would also point out, again, that promotion of GAE is NOT part of this forum’s official mission. Nor does this mission mention theology.
-
Many atheists discuss theology, some even do it professionally – and have advanced degrees in the subject.
-
Let me introduce you to some new acronyms: KJBoA – Knee Jerk Basher of Atheists, KJDtPDGAE – Knee Jerk Demander that People Discuss GAE, and one that summarises the foregoing: KJJ – Knee Jerk Jerk.
-
It is unsurprising to me that a KJJ would fail to find a warm welcome in “pro-Evolution sites”, particularly if he came as a vainglorious crusader to " introduce the GAE to them".
-
Your distaste for Methodological Naturalism can easily lead to you being mistaken for an ID supporter.
8You are a legend in your own mind George.
9George, you are delusional. Can you point to even a single post that has declared GAE out of bounds? Beyond that, who do you think it is who has been discussing ‘GAE & Tasmania’ in recent days? Nobody thinks that GAE is out of bounds. It is just neither the “mission” of this forum nor its sole focus.
Yes George, go slay that ‘Dragon’
