Will the world ever agree on Einstein's ~religion~?

[crackpot]

You never addressed that.Did I say "illogical"? Tell me where I said that, or, ah, what was your charming phrase?

Not you, missy...I was mostly addressing the other Genius, BGoodForGoodSake. You may keep quiet.

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Ok crackpot I will demonstrate below

original quote

Einstein was a physicist. He knew about physics. His thoughts on God or auto mechanics or cooking are likely on the same level as mine on these subjects: simple and largely ignorant.

That people care about what Einstein said on subjects besides physics probably has more to do with his celebrity status than any knowledge he had beyond physics.

Whatever Einstein may have said about God or auto mechanics or cooking is of no real value because he was a dingbat in these areas.

modified quote

crackpot was a evangelist. He knew about God. His thoughts on science or auto mechanics or evolution are likely on the same level as mine on these subjects: simple and largely ignorant.

That people care about what crackpot said on subjects besides God probably has more to do with his celebrity status than any knowledge he had beyond God.

Whatever crackpot may have said about science or auto mechanics or evolution is of no real value because he was a dingbat in these areas.

By extension then..the unqualified Christians who hold to the reality of the flood or how evolution is false..
you will agree that their opinions are without value, and that they are dingbats in those areas?

Your idea is that an individual is only good at what they are known for and therefore have nothing to contribute in other areas. That is what she is pointing out. By extension then...

Your logical fallacy was the failure to see that your statement applies equally to both Einstein and the ordinary dingbat.
Sorry it's not technically a logical fallacy, but rather a failure in your logic.

By attempting to illegitimize Einstein's beliefs or thoughts, you have effectively closed the door to anyone besides qualified experts from even discussing the topic of evolution

And in case you miss the point again she wasn't even defending Einstein, just pointing out that the statement you made was problematic.

[Audie]

Ok crackpot I will demonstrate below

original quote

Einstein was a physicist. He knew about physics. His thoughts on God or auto mechanics or cooking are likely on the same level as mine on these subjects: simple and largely ignorant.

That people care about what Einstein said on subjects besides physics probably has more to do with his celebrity status than any knowledge he had beyond physics.

Whatever Einstein may have said about God or auto mechanics or cooking is of no real value because he was a dingbat in these areas.

modified quote

crackpot was a evangelist. He knew about God. His thoughts on science or auto mechanics or evolution are likely on the same level as mine on these subjects: simple and largely ignorant.

That people care about what crackpot said on subjects besides God probably has more to do with his celebrity status than any knowledge he had beyond God.

Whatever crackpot may have said about science or auto mechanics or evolution is of no real value because he was a dingbat in these areas.

By extension then..the unqualified Christians who hold to the reality of the flood or how evolution is false..
you will agree that their opinions are without value, and that they are dingbats in those areas?

Your idea is that an individual is only good at what they are known for and therefore have nothing to contribute in other areas. That is what she is pointing out. By extension then...

Your logical fallacy was the failure to see that your statement applies equally to both Einstein and the ordinary dingbat.
Sorry it's not technically a logical fallacy, but rather a failure in your logic.

By attempting to illegitimize Einstein's beliefs or thoughts, you have effectively closed the door to anyone besides qualified experts from even discussing the topic of evolution

And in case you miss the point again she wasn't even defending Einstein, just pointing out that the statement you made was problematic.

Doesn't even need a Einstein to see that!

[abelcainsbrother]

Einstein was a jew, so if he was religious? He would've been influenced by Judaism but I don't think it is all that important what his religion was.He could've been more non-religious at times and more religious at different times in his life. Did you know that Christians and Jews have produced more technology and invented more things that have blessed our lives and made it better than any other kinds of people?

[crackpot]

Your idea is that an individual is only good at what they are known for and therefore have nothing to contribute in other areas. That is what she is pointing out

Wrong on all counts. I said that Einstein was a physicist, not a theologian, and that his ideas on God, auto mechanics and cooking were of no interest. Go back and read it. I never brought up evolution. Never even breathed the E-word. Audie did that because she's obsessed with evolution...

I take it your doctor has a PhD, right? Would you trust him to fix your car or would you prefer your mechanic do the job? My point is, Einstein was obviously mixed up on faith. He was all over the place. Only idiots would trust him to have anything of value to say on the subject.

I told her to keep quiet but Audie's post provides an appropriate closing to my post:

Doesn't even need a Einstein to see that!

[Storyteller]

That people care about what Einstein said on subjects besides physics probably has more to do with his celebrity status than any knowledge he had beyond physics.

Not that much; I believe it has to do with that thing of Einstein having been one of the most brilliant human beings ever. I mean...if I had to choose only one human in human History in order to tell what the "truth" is, I would choose Einstein.I choose Christ.

But as for that being a PERSONAL God, one Whom has visited us, died for us, will return, Whom invites interaction and relationship - nah, THAT God, he did not believe in.

We "know" that; it's written on mr. Deem's article. That still doesn't really specificy whether he was a theist, an agnostic, a pantheist, etc...which is a shame.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "contradictory oxymoron" a redundance?

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Your idea is that an individual is only good at what they are known for and therefore have nothing to contribute in other areas. That is what she is pointing out

Wrong on all counts. I said that Einstein was a physicist, not a theologian, and that his ideas on God, auto mechanics and cooking were of no interest. Go back and read it. I never brought up evolution. Never even breathed the E-word. Audie did that because she's obsessed with evolution...

I take it your doctor has a PhD, right? Would you trust him to fix your car or would you prefer your mechanic do the job? My point is, Einstein was obviously mixed up on faith. He was all over the place. Only idiots would trust him to have anything of value to say on the subject.

I told her to keep quiet but Audie's post provides an appropriate closing to my post:

Doesn't even need a Einstein to see that!

Just a wild guess, you are not good with algebra.

[crackpot]

Just a wild guess, you are not good with algebra.

Just a wild guess, you are an Einstein groupie. And not too bright at that...

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Just a wild guess, you are not good with algebra.

Just a wild guess, you are an Einstein groupie. And not too bright at that...

And in case you miss the point again she wasn't even defending Einstein, just pointing out that the statement you made was problematic.