Ban the internet
- Started
- Last post
- 174 Responses
- ********0
I will say this and then put Discipler on my ignore list:
It is a misunderstanding of the christian creationist to think that ANY scientist or any branch of science is about finding absolute proof. Science is about asking a series of better and better questions, and no body of knowledge is ever EVER sacrosanct. Current Evolutionary theaory is pretty solid, but it doesn't pretend to be ABSOLUTE proof. Given the proper evidence the theory is open to modification.
The ID crowd says "God created everything."
How do we know that? We just do. We have to take them at their word. Whatever evidence they find is only found to PROVE what they already believe. This is not science. this is faith.
Science does not rule out faith or belief in a piritual world, yet Creationism rules out science.
This is the same line of thought that kept humanity in the dark ages bowing down to wizards, kings, priests and prohets for about 5,000 years. The idea that there is some sort of "golden age" and mankind has fallen from that.
BS I say. Humanity is about improving itself. There is no golden age to return to and I am not an original sinner. That's your trip dude, not mine.
If these guys win the grand enlightenment experiment that is American Civilization dies.
Now back to more snarky Star Wars posts. Tick Out.
- ********0
ohh dear 'The Creation' fight/talk again
- discipler0
the truth is, if you take the time to examine this issue rather than quote uninformed bloggers and political types, that there are countless Creation Scientists with the number growing daily and these scientists have raised legitimate questions about Darwinism that cannot be effectively answered and which demonstrate it's errors. So, many "mainstream" naturalist scientists want to silence this collective voice.
Intelligent Design and Creationism is not about illegitimately imposing the dictates of faith upon science, but about raising rational objections to proposed Darwinian explanations of the biological world.
- BonSeff0
everybody knows it started with a snake and a tree
- ********0
everybody knows it started with a snake and a tree
BonSeff
(May 19 05, 08:15)Not a chicken and an egg?
Colonel Sanders would be highly upset. He's spinnnig in his grave
- ********0
"Creation Scientists". Oh tha's rich.
It's just like those Islamic fanatics with little drawings of nuclear bombs in caves in Afghanistan thinking they're going to build a bomb, you know, by the will of Allah.
Welsome to the Dark Ages people. The Church had "proof" for centuries that the sun went around the earth too...
Dsicpliner is now officially on the Tick's Ignore List. Going for coffee.
- discipler0
A shame Tick ignores people he disagrees with rather than opting for objective discussion.
First of all, Creation science is science. Just not science which stems from an Atheistic/Naturalist world view. Rather it is science which recognizes that where there is complex design, there must be a designer. Again, Intelligent Design and Creationism is not about illegitimately imposing the dictates of faith upon science, but about raising rational objections to proposed Darwinian explanations of the biological world.
Yes, the ID crowd says, "God created everything." Why? Because there is an abundance of evidence which points to an intelligent designer behind the universe. Look at the structure of human eye, a human egg, the perfect distance of the earth from the sun and the moon from the earth, etc... What honest seekers need to learn about is such biochemical marvels as the clotting cascade, the chemistry of vision, the bacterial flagellum, and countless others, and decide which hypothesis better explains what is observed, random evolution or Intelligent Design. If you suggest that matter just sprang from nothing... you still have to answer the question - who/what caused this? An infinite series of causes? No, that just leaves you with an infinite series of effects which is logical suicide.
Physical sciences can only account for physical processes. It cannot account for metaphysical realities like the will and emotions, the ability to love and feel compassion.
And much of what is considered "Enlightenment" is really the result of bad science. We've grown, we need to revise and look at the real problems with the Darwinian framework.
- ********0
yak yak yak yak yak
the crap you speak discipler
your "transition fossils" and "species mutation" problems are a failure in your understanding of evolutionary theory and a clear lack of imagination - the fact that these things happen over mllions of years, species don't jut FLIP into another.
But i guess that's your whole game.
buddah you spout some sheeit!
- ********0
haha yeah, you'd done a Gallop Poll and a comprehensive "Scientific" survey with graphs and shit
Are you a Dr type? YES/NO
Did you used to believe in Evolution? YES/NO
Do you now believe in Creationism? YES/NO
lol - you are so full of shit mate!
- ********0
This is so cool. With Discipler on ignore I don't have to read what he wrote, but can read everyone's witty and pithy rejoiners. Oh this is like heaven. With a small "h"...
- ********0
the abundance of "evidence" for God, is your lack of imagination.
It's like "woah, thats so complex, there MUST be a God!"
that's call, argument from ignorance
doesn't stand up in the court of law....
except for in Kansas, apparently
- ********0
If god exists, how do explain nads? Hmm..would a perfect supreme being bet the farm of human creation on such a fragile little container of sacred seed?
I think not.
- discipler0
heh, kes, though i'd wager you're just yanking my chain, I'll humor you...
First off, evolution is not a theory... it doesn't qaulify. Why? Because it's neither observable or falsifiable - (part of the criteria for something to be considered a Scientific Theory). It is more accurately a "notion", but feel free to use the term "theory" loosely.
Secondly, you begin with the presupposition that the earth is billions of years old. There is evidence to suggest it is MUCH younger. Still, it is not an issue of time length. It is an issue of a molecular machine having within itself the faculties necessary to become something else completely. Science has never observed this. There is room for Phenotypikal expression - dogs: great danes, collies, terriers, etc... Cats: persian, tabby, etc...
but at the end of the day, a dog is still a dog and a cat is still a cat. :) A Genome does not become a different species.
...and Buddha was a big fatso.
- discipler0
I can't respond to you while I'm on ignore, Tick. ;)
- discipler0
But in case you still see me... let me answer your question with a question...
If God does not exist, how do you explain the universe and the complexity of the examples I mentioned above?
- ********0
your so stupid discipler.
no point even engaging with you. you are a very deluded man. and i've read enough material since you rearerd your ugly head to know what argument i find most convincing.
and to say the earth is less than a few billion years ago is another one of your ludicrous relgious "theories"
and christ was a homo :)
- mrdobolina0
it's a great mystery, like the native americans say. cant be explained in any book.
discipler, JUST ONCE post in a thread not about your beloved god.
- spongebob0
discipler makes sense on this.
it's hard to convince people who are rooted.
the way people believe in evolution nowadays is like those days when folks believed that the earth was flat (even Christians believed that, hence the term 'corners of the earth')
evolution uses a large number people can hardly fathom so as to 'give themselves time' to 'evolute'. And because it says millions of years, in some ways it takes that long to disprove it.
maybe i'll just become the next guy on the ignore list, but it's just human nature to not want to listen to differing opinions I guess. *shrug*
at least i don't resort to lame argument like 'nads'.
- discipler0
another loo loo, Tick...
If the mechanism by which a trait is inhereted is that it conveys a survival advantage to the possessor, then why are we not all self-fertile hermaphrodites, like earthworms? Dimorphic sexuality - male and female - has no reason to ever arise under evolution since every organism would already have within itself the seeds of its own survival.
- mrdobolina0
discipler, you are as closed-minded as you make us out to be.