Penn and Teller on Creationism

[dbk]

Cobb County is added to the list of places that I will never ever set my feet on.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: dbk
Cobb County is added to the list of places that I will never ever set my feet on.

Did you see the Daily Show profile on Cobb during their "Week of Science" segments several months ago (maybe a year?)

Fascinating...and terrifying. It seems that those citizens do a lot of inbreeding, and don't really pass county lines...so the problem seems to be well-contained at least

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: dbk
Cobb County is added to the list of places that I will never ever set my feet on.

Did you see the Daily Show profile on Cobb during their "Week of Science" segments several months ago (maybe a year?)

Fascinating...and terrifying. It seems that those citizens do a lot of inbreeding, and don't really pass county lines...so the problem seems to be well-contained at least

Again, I live in Dekalb county, right near Cobb. I went to college in Cobb county. Luckily, the university does not have to follow the decisions of the Cobb county schoolboard

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: thraashman

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: dbk
Cobb County is added to the list of places that I will never ever set my feet on.

Did you see the Daily Show profile on Cobb during their "Week of Science" segments several months ago (maybe a year?)

Fascinating...and terrifying. It seems that those citizens do a lot of inbreeding, and don't really pass county lines...so the problem seems to be well-contained at least

Again, I live in Dekalb county, right near Cobb. I went to college in Cobb county. Luckily, the university does not have to follow the decisions of the Cobb county schoolboard

well, that's refreshing to hear. Moreso that you (an individual) are able to think freely in such an environment, than the Univeristy is allowed to.

Oh, sorry about the inbreeding jibe

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: Coquito
There's plenty left that we can't prove through method, so let's not try to kill God off so quickly. We're not mature enough as a people to be able to survive without something more.

Balance is everything.

If you don't think we've proven evolution, you're not reading enough. It's a fact. Over time, things will develop traits to adapt to their environment.

And BTW, I'm mature enough to survive without religion. I don't believe that anything will happen when I die, and I'm able to live my life to the fullest regardless. Amazing.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: Coquito
There's plenty left that we can't prove through method, so let's not try to kill God off so quickly. We're not mature enough as a people to be able to survive without something more.

Balance is everything.

If you don't think we've proven evolution, you're not reading enough. It's a fact. Over time, things will develop traits to adapt to their environment.

And BTW, I'm mature enough to survive without religion. I don't believe that anything will happen when I die, and I'm able to live my life to the fullest regardless. Amazing.

Yup, this 'balance' argument is complete horsecrap... this reeks of the 'middle ground' fallacy:

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:rx...round+fallacy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

Sometimes the extreme position (in this case evolution) is the correct position while the other extreme (creation 'science') is garbage. This 'balance' argument is just a ploy to confuse the average dumbass into thinking the question of evolution and creation science is up in the air.

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: DaShen
I guess we will agree to disagree about this then. I do see why you believe that way, but again if you follow my reasoning, how can science disprove the concept of G-d? They are two different forms of thought.

Yea we'll have to because I think your completely off base. God and science can mesh just fine. I don't mean to sound mean but you simply don't understand how they can mesh, that doesn't mean they can't.

Originally posted by: zinfamous
It baffles me how this simple reality seems so ungraspable by many.

I could say the exact same about you

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why can't it? Explain to me why science cannot prove the existance of life after death.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: DaShen
I guess we will agree to disagree about this then. I do see why you believe that way, but again if you follow my reasoning, how can science disprove the concept of G-d? They are two different forms of thought.

Yea we'll have to because I think your completely off base. God and science can mesh just fine. I don't mean to sound mean but you simply don't understand how they can mesh, that doesn't mean they can't.

Originally posted by: zinfamous
It baffles me how this simple reality seems so ungraspable by many.

I could say the exact same about you

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why can't it? Explain to me why science cannot prove the existance of life after death.

You actually want me to explain this? well...Ok then
How do we investigate our ideas scientifically? We create tests! We posit a guess, think of a clever means of testing this guess, and based on those results either throw out our initial assumptions on what the results of that test will be, or accept results that support our initial guests as further evidence of our idea. We then design another test to examine this idea from another angle, create different situations to see if this idea is a broad-based concept, or simply limited to specific situations....etc..

Now. How would we test whether or not there is life after death? This sounds easy right? All we have to do is wait for someone to die (we could induce the process...but good luck finding funding for that one!), and obtain information from their departed...whatever, that they are currently experiencing an afterlife. Perhaps we could wait around and see if they regain life? Well, would they have ever been considered dead again? Only one person has ever been purported to achieve this feat, mind you...

I'm stumped. Perhaps you can design a method of testing this question?

Remember, you're asking me to prove the existence of life after death. Not reach a conclusion, either way, about it

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: thraashman

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: dbk
Cobb County is added to the list of places that I will never ever set my feet on.

Did you see the Daily Show profile on Cobb during their "Week of Science" segments several months ago (maybe a year?)

Fascinating...and terrifying. It seems that those citizens do a lot of inbreeding, and don't really pass county lines...so the problem seems to be well-contained at least

Again, I live in Dekalb county, right near Cobb. I went to college in Cobb county. Luckily, the university does not have to follow the decisions of the Cobb county schoolboard

well, that's refreshing to hear. Moreso that you (an individual) are able to think freely in such an environment, than the Univeristy is allowed to.

Oh, sorry about the inbreeding jibe

You know what, I realized afterwards that it was not Cobb profiled on teh Daily Show, but the town in Tennesse where the Scopes trial was held. The citizens have turned the town into a "museum" of God's truth over science, more or less. They advertise the defeat of evolution in that trial as a tourist destination. Far more frightening place than Cobb.....

 

[Matt1970]

Hey, the day science can eplain how the first living organism gained the instinct and the desire to reproduce and the day science can explain how a soul is created, I will question a lot of my beliefs, but untill then there is just way too much unexplained stuff in the universe for it to be explained all with evolution or with creationism.

Flat out they are BOTH theories since they niether can be 100% proved.

And those crackpots who think the earth is only 6000 years old are just in denial.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Matt1970
Hey, the day science can eplain how the first living organism gained the instinct and the desire to reproduce and the day science can explain how a soul is created, I will question a lot of my beliefs, but untill then there is just way too much unexplained stuff in the universe for it to be explained all with evolution or with creationism.

Flat out they are BOTH theories since they niether can be 100% proved.

And those crackpots who think the earth is only 6000 years old are just in denial.

There's a lot of unexplained stuff for you, but it's your job to go out there and find out why things are the way they are.
There are mountains upon moutains of evidence and explanation for how organisms gain instinct and desire to reproduce.
As for the soul, that's a supernatural belief that's not in the realm of science. The goal of science is to gain knowledge about the natural world. Whether or not if there is even a soul to begin with is a philosophical question.

 

[opticalmace]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Origin theory has nothing to do with a student's grasp of real science its a way for the liberal agenda to force our kids to NOT believe in God as much as creationism is forcing them TO believe in God. I guess you hypocrites can't see that though, huh?

Evolution is real science therefore it should be taught. Creationism is random ****** thought up on no scientific principles, so you're right, it shouldn't be taught in schools.

Creationism is a simple minded solution for those who aren't capable of understanding evolution. Not many are, yourself included. Future generations shouldn't be deprived of the opportunity to try and understand it.

Science: "Systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation."

How is it real science? Because your teachers long ago bullied you into never questioning them and they said so? Has evolution ever been observed? Can we experiment with it?

If you look at the forces of change claimed by evolution none of them account for actual "evolution" except mutation and that's where I call BS. The odds of a random mutation coming out as something benefitial AND not harmful AND that mutated form not being randomly killed by a predator AND that gene being passed on......it's just ludicrous......but it's all science has to disprove creationism so they cling to it and get sheep like you to call people who question the logic idiots and fairy tale believers. :thumbsup:

Wow. It's apparent you have no idea how evolution works, do you.
Take a biology course. :roll:

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: DaShen
I guess we will agree to disagree about this then. I do see why you believe that way, but again if you follow my reasoning, how can science disprove the concept of G-d? They are two different forms of thought.

Yea we'll have to because I think your completely off base. God and science can mesh just fine. I don't mean to sound mean but you simply don't understand how they can mesh, that doesn't mean they can't.

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why can't it? Explain to me why science cannot prove the existance of life after death.

I agree that science and religion can intertwine in various way, but to mesh them is fundamentally a difference in thought and logic. Religion is a philosophical idea, while science is an experimental idea. How can you experiment on the idea of "good" or "G-d"? You can't. That is my point as well as zinfamous'.

I understand that science and religion can mix sometimes, but to try to force science and religion to be the same thing will just not work. Again, you are entitled to believe otherwise, but I gave my reasoning a few times about this already in previous posts. You can point out something wrong with that reasoning, but asking for it to be explained over again does not add to the discussion.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I agree. I don't want creationism taught in schools and I believe in it. I also don't want evolution taught in schools. Origin theory has nothing to do with a student's grasp of real science its a way for the liberal agenda to force our kids to NOT believe in God as much as creationism is forcing them TO believe in God. I guess you hypocrites can't see that though, huh?

Too bad the foundations of Biology are in Evolution. Last time I checked Biology is taught in school so you have to teach the foundations of biology and that is what? DING DING DING

EVOLUTION.

Astronomy is also pretty much impossible to teach without accepting Evolution as well.

If you're looking for an amusing read, try reading a Science text book from an evangelical Christian school. It won't take long, since it's a LOT shorter

I can imagine how the book reads:
The Earth orbits the sun NOW, because God wants it to.
A duck lays eggs because it is a bird and God wants all birds to lay eggs.
Mammals all bare live young because God wants them to.
We still can't explain the Platypus.

oh....thats cause god was smoking a blunt when he intelligently designed the platypus

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I agree. I don't want creationism taught in schools and I believe in it. I also don't want evolution taught in schools. Origin theory has nothing to do with a student's grasp of real science its a way for the liberal agenda to force our kids to NOT believe in God as much as creationism is forcing them TO believe in God. I guess you hypocrites can't see that though, huh?

Too bad the foundations of Biology are in Evolution. Last time I checked Biology is taught in school so you have to teach the foundations of biology and that is what? DING DING DING

EVOLUTION.

Astronomy is also pretty much impossible to teach without accepting Evolution as well.

If you're looking for an amusing read, try reading a Science text book from an evangelical Christian school. It won't take long, since it's a LOT shorter

I can imagine how the book reads:
The Earth orbits the sun NOW, because God wants it to.
A duck lays eggs because it is a bird and God wants all birds to lay eggs.
Mammals all bare live young because God wants them to.
We still can't explain the Platypus.

oh....thats cause god was smoking a blunt when he intelligently designed the platypus

The Platypus is an awesome creature (see avatar). Hooray for evolution!

 

[RyanM]

Years of neffing on forums has taught me that as fun as it may be, there's about a .01% chance of dispelling a creationist loon's fallacies, misunderstandings, and ignorance about science as it pertains to evolution and cosmology. All I care to contribute to this debate anymore is what I consider to be the seminal comic on the topic:

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/db/2006/db060702.gif

 

[UCDAggies]

We learned a little creationism in my school, we learned it wasn't likely, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[Looney]

Great video. I'm glad Canada doesn't have much of this BS.

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

Come again?

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

Come again?

He is just going into semantics. This is not a logical step, more of a wordplay thing.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

Come again?

He is just going into semantics. This is not a logical step, more of a wordplay thing.

Ya...I was wondering if he was serious, intentionally stupid, or just fooling around.

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

Come again?

He is just going into semantics. This is not a logical step, more of a wordplay thing.

Ya...I was wondering if he was serious, intentionally stupid, or just fooling around.

Actually, I was showing you to be wrong in the clearest possible way. Unless you want to restate your argument, I'll assume I've done just that.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: zinfamous
not really. science can never prove or disprove the possiblity of life after death.

Why would science be necessary? It's very obvious. If you die, I'm still alive, therefore there's life after death. Perhaps not for you, but that's beside the point.

Come again?

He is just going into semantics. This is not a logical step, more of a wordplay thing.

Ya...I was wondering if he was serious, intentionally stupid, or just fooling around.

Actually, I was showing you to be wrong in the clearest possible way. Unless you want to restate your argument, I'll assume I've done just that.

OK, ignorant and stupid. NVM then

 

[NanoStuff]

If the ignorant and stupid can prove you wrong, I can't imagine how you must feel