Free Lunch wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:11:14 -0500, in alt.talk.creationism
> Danwood <noreply@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> <XW_Zi.3736$II4.282@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
>
> ...
>
>> It isn't because I lack knowledge. The fact is I have a reasonably good
>> education: and I am an avid reader. So, It isn't a lack of knowledge,
>> therefore, it must be because I am a skeptic and I question the
validity
>> of certain "facts". And I think everyone should be a skeptic.
>
> When your supposed skepticism leads you to throw out evidence and
> replace it with religious dogma, you are no skeptic.
>
By definition dogma is a system of tenets or principles prescribed by a
religious or political institution. A prescribed set of religious or
political doctrines. So, what do you consider to be my "religious
dogma"? The point is if I have any religious dogma I arrived at them
from reading and studing works written by scientist, not some church.
Danwood
>
> ...
|
