Would you like to add or edit content here? Here's how you can have an account!



Search results

From FreeThoughtPedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  • ...arguments. These will be broken down into categories based on whether the arguments are general in nature (i.e. applying to a generic "god") or against specifi Looking for a quick summary? Take a look at the [[Top ten arguments for the existence of God]].
    9 KB (1,438 words) - 02:03, 24 November 2010
  • Back: [[Common Theist Arguments]] ...ng about and cannot explain how such concepts work. They take snippets of scientific theory out of context and try to shoehorn them into their preconceived noti
    7 KB (1,162 words) - 14:17, 1 November 2010
  • == Philosophical Arguments == * [[Top 10 arguments for the existence of God]] - A comprehensive outline of the most common cla
    12 KB (1,963 words) - 20:48, 24 June 2011
  • ...ny statements that are ahead of their time. The Bible supposedly has great scientific wisdom and only now are we beginning to realize as much. ...e more than enough statements contained therein to forestall any claims to scientific precision. Indeed, many statements clearly belong in the realm of mythology
    12 KB (2,005 words) - 17:12, 18 December 2010
  • # We are told the Bible has no scientific errors, yet it says the bat is a bird (Lev. 11:13,19), hares chew the cud ( * [[Theological Criticisms#Arguments Against Scripture|Arguments against scripture]]
    13 KB (2,308 words) - 20:11, 31 January 2011
  • [[Category:Philosophical arguments]] [[Category:Scientific arguments]]
    11 KB (1,950 words) - 02:28, 28 January 2008
  • There are many simple arguments that are to often dismissed by believers in Intelligent Design, the most co [[Category:scientific arguments]]
    2 KB (292 words) - 23:27, 29 May 2009
  • ...llusion, caused by omission, which virtually guarantees that alone, either scientific theory or religious doctrine can only be half-right in their understanding Theist arguments:
    7 KB (1,094 words) - 20:37, 10 April 2009
  • ...estival on the persistence of religious belief in a world of unprecedented scientific and technological advancement. * [[Arguments Against Existence Of God]] Some arguments against the existence of God that are very effective on religious minds.
    3 KB (491 words) - 21:16, 10 March 2010
  • [[Category:Scientific arguments]] [[Category:Philosophical arguments]]
    4 KB (644 words) - 16:43, 11 October 2009
  • ...ist beliefs. The fundamentalists are potentially at a disadvantage as the scientific method is the best method known to find out the truth. Therefore fundamentalists tend to rely on lies, distortions and emotional arguments.
    3 KB (397 words) - 14:25, 3 July 2011
  • ...ternberg, claim that questioning Darwinism led to their expulsion from the scientific fold (the film relies extensively on the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy ...nd godlessness. Blithely ignoring the vital distinction between social and scientific Darwinism, the film links evolution theory to fascism (as well as abortion,
    67 KB (11,144 words) - 18:37, 2 January 2010
  • ...rhetoric (appeals to emotion) or another form of faulty logic. While these arguments also possess a particular form, ''one cannot tell from the form alone'' tha ...ional beliefs. In other words, learning logic won't only help you win some arguments, but it may help you to live a healthier life in general! Cognitive and REB
    113 KB (19,125 words) - 15:47, 22 February 2012
  • ... Inductive Logic|deductive logic]] in that the premises we feed into these arguments are not categories or definitions or equalities, but observations of the re ... high probabilities, but not certitudes. It is one of the strengths of the scientific method as it acknowledges a chance of error(while maintaining rigorous stan
    25 KB (4,209 words) - 16:56, 10 March 2008
  • * [[Theological Criticisms#Arguments Against Scripture|Arguments against scripture]] [[Category:Scientific arguments]]
    1 KB (180 words) - 05:28, 29 October 2008
  • [[category:Theological arguments]] [[category:scriptural arguments]]
    7 KB (1,187 words) - 14:24, 3 July 2011
  • Back: [[Common Theist Arguments]] ... book of fiction. Its been proven wrong by scientific evidence. When I say scientific evidence, I mean real, logical evidence involving studies and test, rather
    6 KB (959 words) - 14:50, 13 December 2011
  • ...ence to support this claim. It cannot be called a "theory" by traditional scientific standards because a theory requires some form of tests or validation proces ...at it only makes sense if homosexuality is in fact a genetic trait. (A now scientific fact but one that was widely refused by theists before) Second, point out t
    9 KB (1,451 words) - 21:41, 11 June 2010
  • In a seminal description of his results to a scientific conference this week in Sweden, Professor Majerus gave a resounding vote of [[Category:Scientific arguments]]
    7 KB (1,095 words) - 20:17, 26 July 2011
  • [[Category:Theological arguments]] [[Category:Scientific arguments]]
    4 KB (646 words) - 19:53, 31 August 2007

View (previous 20 | next 20) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)


This site costs a lot of money in bandwidth and resources. We are glad to bring it to you free, but would you consider helping support our site by making a donation? Any amount would go a long way towards helping us continue to provide this useful service to the community.

Click on the Paypal button below to donate. Your support is most appreciated!

Views
Personal tools
Partner Sites
Support Freethoughtpedia.com

Online Shop



Toolbox