Humanist/Atheist Motoring Club
#176
Mark
#177
Legal action would be extreme although I can understand someone feeling offended that their design was "stolen" and modified. There's plenty of room for multiple, completely different designs. My personal favorite by far is still JustinGTP's:
In the end, it's all a moot point to me. I don't like having badges, bumper stickers, stripes, decals, graphics or other applied decoration on my car.
In the end, it's all a moot point to me. I don't like having badges, bumper stickers, stripes, decals, graphics or other applied decoration on my car.
#180
Legal action would be extreme although I can understand someone feeling offended that their design was "stolen" and modified. There's plenty of room for multiple, completely different designs. My personal favorite by far is still JustinGTP's:
In the end, it's all a moot point to me. I don't like having badges, bumper stickers, stripes, decals, graphics or other applied decoration on my car.
In the end, it's all a moot point to me. I don't like having badges, bumper stickers, stripes, decals, graphics or other applied decoration on my car.
#182
I guess I was mistaken in thinking that this was a brainstorming session to work out a logo that the majority liked. I assumed people were contributing ideas, and others were free to alter or refine it. I didn't realize that it was a contest for who got to control or profit from the logo. If an image posted on the web has been copyrighted, it should be marked with the copyright mark or word "copyright," a name, and a year.
#183
I think it would be a nice thing for the "community" if the member who feels they have legal ownership of the image provided the copyright information first. Then they can get into the whole cease and desist thing.
Mark
#184
I like it. Reminds me of the style Apple used for early Mac logos. However, the feet bother me. I think it would be good of they were modified a little to look less like the letter L and more like feet.
#186
Enough with the pretty pictures.
Do all atheist believe in evolution? Can a person believe in evolution, and still belong to a religion? Do folks that believe Earth is just a petri dish for some older advanced civilization, believe that that civilization is made up of "Higher Beings"? Does believing that there are spirits in plants and animals, include or exclude, one from atheism? How do cults fit in to this whole picture?
Mark
Do all atheist believe in evolution? Can a person believe in evolution, and still belong to a religion? Do folks that believe Earth is just a petri dish for some older advanced civilization, believe that that civilization is made up of "Higher Beings"? Does believing that there are spirits in plants and animals, include or exclude, one from atheism? How do cults fit in to this whole picture?
Mark
#187
Well, I am a Christian and I believe in evolution. Might want to check out www.biologos.org for others with a similar position.
#188
Well, I am a Christian and I believe in evolution. Might want to check out www.biologos.org for others with a similar position.
Mark
#189
I have met and had interesting conversations with people with pretty much every combination of religious, scientific, and pseudoscientific persuasion. (young Earth creationists, old earth creationists, "creation evolutionists," and so on).
The oddest one was an old classmate who was a young earth creationist, but at the same time, was a successful geologist. When I asked him how he could practice modern geology and yet believe the earth was only 6000 years old, he said that God created the world with the appearance of age. So, all the rocks and geologic structures that he studied and wrote papers and reports on (that were published in the mainstream journals) were 'created' as-is and only made to look old. He applied modern geologic analyses to them, successfully published the work, but really didn't 'believe' that what he wrote happened.
The oddest one was an old classmate who was a young earth creationist, but at the same time, was a successful geologist. When I asked him how he could practice modern geology and yet believe the earth was only 6000 years old, he said that God created the world with the appearance of age. So, all the rocks and geologic structures that he studied and wrote papers and reports on (that were published in the mainstream journals) were 'created' as-is and only made to look old. He applied modern geologic analyses to them, successfully published the work, but really didn't 'believe' that what he wrote happened.
#190
When I asked him how he could practice modern geology and yet believe the earth was only 6000 years old, he said that God created the world with the appearance of age. So, all the rocks and geologic structures that he studied and wrote papers and reports on (that were published in the mainstream journals) were 'created' as-is and only made to look old. He applied modern geologic analyses to them, successfully published the work, but really didn't 'believe' that what he wrote happened.
Mark
#192
So the answer to the original question is "Yes". Of the several questions you posed, that is really the only one I had anything for.
Originally Posted by ofioliti
he said that God created the world with the appearance of age. So, all the rocks and geologic structures that he studied and wrote papers and reports on (that were published in the mainstream journals) were 'created' as-is and only made to look old. He applied modern geologic analyses to them, successfully published the work, but really didn't 'believe' that what he wrote happened.
#193
Enough with the pretty pictures.
Do all atheist believe in evolution? Can a person believe in evolution, and still belong to a religion? Do folks that believe Earth is just a petri dish for some older advanced civilization, believe that that civilization is made up of "Higher Beings"? Does believing that there are spirits in plants and animals, include or exclude, one from atheism? How do cults fit in to this whole picture?
Mark
Do all atheist believe in evolution? Can a person believe in evolution, and still belong to a religion? Do folks that believe Earth is just a petri dish for some older advanced civilization, believe that that civilization is made up of "Higher Beings"? Does believing that there are spirits in plants and animals, include or exclude, one from atheism? How do cults fit in to this whole picture?
Mark
#195
+1
I've often found that people who doubt "major evolution" are unfamiliar with the evidence and have only heard about the "holes" poked by the creationists.
I've often found that people who doubt "major evolution" are unfamiliar with the evidence and have only heard about the "holes" poked by the creationists.
#196
Well, I am a Christian and I believe in evolution. Might want to check out www.biologos.org for others with a similar position.
#197
It's a two way street buddy. As NAM has rules regarding these kind of discussions, this cannot be discussed here.
#198
I am not really up to speed on all the nuances of evolution or the positions of the creationists, but I think my understanding of what might be considered a "hole" was summed up pretty well by Darwin himself:
Depending on how it is being explained, this basically comes down to the lack of evidence of transitional forms. My own understanding is that the creationists also make arguments related to irreducible complexity, but I have not seen any argument they make that I find sufficient to debunk the theory.
My own opinion is that the lack of this evidence is not fatal to the theory.
"The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on Earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."
My own opinion is that the lack of this evidence is not fatal to the theory.
#199
I am not really up to speed on all the nuances of evolution or the positions of the creationists, but I think my understanding of what might be considered a "hole" was summed up pretty well by Darwin himself:
Depending on how it is being explained, this basically comes down to the lack of evidence of transitional forms. My own understanding is that the creationists also make arguments related to irreducible complexity, but I have not seen any argument they make that I find sufficient to debunk the theory.
My own opinion is that the lack of this evidence is not fatal to the theory.
Depending on how it is being explained, this basically comes down to the lack of evidence of transitional forms. My own understanding is that the creationists also make arguments related to irreducible complexity, but I have not seen any argument they make that I find sufficient to debunk the theory.
My own opinion is that the lack of this evidence is not fatal to the theory.
#200
http://www.google.com/url?url=http:/...KQ_8uikr7mw9qA