Someone finally put those Bible thumpers in their place! Evolutionists+1!

[nCred]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: JDub02
Would someone care to explain to me what makes creation any less valid than evolution?

I'm not arguing religious semantics. I'm saying some unnamed higher power creating us as opposed to billions of years of random chance turning mud into people.

There are no proof or even a theory to support it and just the thought itself is weird.

Creation of the world:
Nothing > nothing > 'poof' > the world we see today.

But isnt that what the Big Bang theory also says.. nothing at all > bang > billions of galaxies and so on.

 

[Cobalt]

Originally posted by: JDub02

Originally posted by: conjur

Then it's a good thing the sticker was removed. Using the term evolution to mean the origin of life itself is dishonest and it's the basis behind Hovind's $250k bet for proving evolution.

I still think the judge is off his nut. #1 for this to even be in court is just crazy. This should be a matter between the parents and school administrators. #2 To rule that pointing out that "abiogenesis" is a theory and not scientific fact is somehow injecting religion into the picture just goes to show that the judge has an agenda.


BTW, Hovind's offer still stands, IIRC.

Abiogenesis is totally different from evolution. Evolution is how things change over time, whether that be to adapt to new surroundings, or just better themselves. I don't see how this can be denied. It's peoples ignorance that is truly sad. When they start mixing abiogenesis with evolution and tout evolution as abiogenesis and use that as a means to bash it.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: JDub02
Would someone care to explain to me what makes creation any less valid than evolution?

I'm not arguing religious semantics. I'm saying some unnamed higher power creating us as opposed to billions of years of random chance turning mud into people.

There are no proof or even a theory to support it and just the thought itself is weird.

Creation of the world:
Nothing > nothing > 'poof' > the world we see today.

But isnt that what the Big Bang theory also says.. nothing at all > bang > billions of galaxies and so on.

not really:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

 

[Cobalt]

Originally posted by: cosine17
u just love pissin people off dont u.

on the other side.. evoluntionism is pretty rediculous imo. something to consider, why is it that believing in zeus and the gods of olympia considered to be utterly rediculous, yet believing that a snake talked and seduced a woman (ok i understand, its a woman and prolly not hard to pull off (no offense women. o snap double parenthasis, dont get lost)) into eating an apple that removed 2 people from a magical garden..

its just as rediculous.

Oh wow read the thread and my posts please.

 

[nCred]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: JDub02
Would someone care to explain to me what makes creation any less valid than evolution?

I'm not arguing religious semantics. I'm saying some unnamed higher power creating us as opposed to billions of years of random chance turning mud into people.

There are no proof or even a theory to support it and just the thought itself is weird.

Creation of the world:
Nothing > nothing > 'poof' > the world we see today.

But isnt that what the Big Bang theory also says.. nothing at all > bang > billions of galaxies and so on.

not really:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

Text From what I read, yes. I´m not saying the galaxies were formed instantly, But from nothing to something.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
I can agree with this statement from the article. But even this statement leaves open the possiblity that the mechanism of evolution is fueled by a higher power, or perhaps pure natural chance, among other things. So by the author's definition, I will concede that evolution is a fact that is not totally understood.

EDIT: You know, the more I think about it, the more I want to take back the statement above. I realize I am displaying my ignorance for all to see, but I just don't see how evolution can ever be classified as a fact. (Keep in mind that I have already admitted that I believe evolution happens). The reasons I can't call it a fact is that 1) it has never been directly observed - all we have is circumstantual evidence that seems to suggest evolution happens over long periods of time, and 2) it is not reproducable in a laboratory setting. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS "THEORY" HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED, SO HOW CAN IT BE CALLED FACTUAL???

So in my own mind I am perfectly happy to call it a very strong theory, but I doubt I will ever call it a fact. Yes, I'm splitting hairs, which will make some of you very unhappy, I'm sure.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

Observed Instances of Speciation

Some More Observed Speciation Events

Evolution is a fact because we have observed it. It is a reality of this world and that was the ground breaking work of Darwin, it wasn't his hypotesis on origins, it was that he spent 10 years of his life meticously documenting the FACT of evolution. His origin of species was the first attempt to explain his previously published work that documented that evolution was an observable phenomenon. The explanation that Darwin proposed was natural selection. It's funny that most people accept his THEORY as fact but not the observations he made that established the observed phenomenon he was trying to explain with his theory.

You should really spend some time on talk.origins and study what you obviously have no background in, it will give you the background you need to attack something you don't want to believe in a much more credible manner than burying your head in the sand because it doesn't fit your paradigm of the world.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge

education is a local matter for each community to decide

pi = 3 is so much easier to teach, let's use it!

hell, 1+1=11

No it doesn't!

1 + 1 = 10

to anyone that gets it.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge

education is a local matter for each community to decide

pi = 3 is so much easier to teach, let's use it!

hell, 1+1=11

No it doesn't!

1 + 1 = 10

to anyone that gets it.

Yes, that's binary for 2. Can I have my now?

 

[BD2003]

I've written numerous pages on this subject when it comes up monthly.

If you don't "believe in" evolution, then you dont understand it, but youre not necessarily an idiot. Try reading some books other than the bible. If you still dont, read them again. I can give recommendations for the hardheads.

Then if you still deny it, then youre an idiot.

There are no "holes" in the theory of evolution. There are some details that have yet to be filled in, but the theory is ROCK SOLID. Nothing short of a literal act of god can disprove it at this point. It has come a long way since darwin, but for some reason, people can't understand that.

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge

education is a local matter for each community to decide

These are public schools. If religious folks don't like the way things are taught, they can send their kids to private schools or STFU. Period.

HELL YEAH

And I just read this months National Geographic . . .

Cover Page : "WAS DARWIN WRONG"

Opening Page of Article : "WAS DARWIN WRONG?"

Next Page : "NO!"

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: BD2003
I've written numerous pages on this subject when it comes up monthly.

If you don't "believe in" evolution, then you dont understand it, but youre not necessarily an idiot. Try reading some books other than the bible. If you still dont, read them again. I can give recommendations for the hardheads.

Then if you still deny it, then youre an idiot.

There are no "holes" in the theory of evolution. There are some details that have yet to be filled in, but the theory is ROCK SOLID. Nothing short of a literal act of god can disprove it at this point. It has come a long way since darwin, but for some reason, people can't understand that.

Agreed, it should also be mentioned that belief in the process and belief in your god of choice aren't mutually exclusive just because one passage in a book written by men disagrees.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge

education is a local matter for each community to decide

pi = 3 is so much easier to teach, let's use it!

hell, 1+1=11

No it doesn't!

1 + 1 = 10

to anyone that gets it.

Yes, that's binary for 2. Can I have my now?

you can have a whole box!
.....____
..../
../
/
||
||
||
---------------

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge

education is a local matter for each community to decide

pi = 3 is so much easier to teach, let's use it!

hell, 1+1=11

No it doesn't!

1 + 1 = 10

to anyone that gets it.

Yes, that's binary for 2. Can I have my now?

you can have a whole box!
.....____
..../
../
/
||
|     |
||
---------------

I'll take one..... MMMMmmmmm.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: BD2003
I've written numerous pages on this subject when it comes up monthly.

If you don't "believe in" evolution, then you dont understand it, but youre not necessarily an idiot. Try reading some books other than the bible. If you still dont, read them again. I can give recommendations for the hardheads.

Then if you still deny it, then youre an idiot.

There are no "holes" in the theory of evolution. There are some details that have yet to be filled in, but the theory is ROCK SOLID. Nothing short of a literal act of god can disprove it at this point. It has come a long way since darwin, but for some reason, people can't understand that.

Agreed, it should also be mentioned that belief in the process and belief in your god of choice aren't mutually exclusive just because one passage in a book written by men disagrees.

Gasp! Did you just say the bible was written by man! Heresy!!

 

[Ulfwald]

Frustrated User.

Thank you for recognizing that not all the Christians are die hard, bible thumping, zealots.

Evolution has scientific proof, therefore I recognize that it does occur, but that same scientific proof does not disprove the existence of God, and Divine intervention.

And yes, I realize the Bible was written by man.

I was taught that the Bible is God's word, but I realize that it is god"s word as viewed and written by MAN, who, by their very nature, are flawed and make mistakes as well as twist things to their own advantage.

To me, the bible is not the absolute life instruction some take it to mean, it is however, a guide to daily living, and is meant to basic set of instructions.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Ulfwald
Frustrated User.

Thank you for recognizing that not all the Christians are die hard, bible thumping, zealots.

Evolution has scientific proof, therefore I recognize that it does occur, but that same scientific proof does not disprove the existence of God, and Divine intervention.

I like your thinking on this. IF I was a Christian that would probably be they way I'd see things.
:beer:

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Ulfwald
Frustrated User.

Thank you for recognizing that not all the Christians are die hard, bible thumping, zealots.

Evolution has scientific proof, therefore I recognize that it does occur, but that same scientific proof does not disprove the existence of God, and Divine intervention.

And yes, I realize the Bible was written by man.

I was taught that the Bible is God's word, but I realize that it is god"s word as viewed and written by MAN, who, by their very nature, are flawed and make mistakes as well as twist things to their own advantage.

To me, the bible is not the absolute life instruction some take it to mean, it is however, a guide to daily living, and is meant to basic set of instructions.

Only those with closed minds disregard what science has taught us in favor of their own paradigm. Religion is NOT at odds with science and it NEVER will be. Science cannot disprove the existence of god and it never will be able to, as a result science will never be interested in the question of god. There is plenty of room in what we know of the universe for a divine being.

That being said, there is also no room in the science classroom to teach what is outside science. Lets leave god in the home and science in the schools.

 

[The Sauce]

Originally posted by: baoytl
I wonder how some people would react if a similar sticker was placed on bibles.

That would be complete falsehood. The bible is not a theory - it is pure fiction. No science, reason, logic or even intelligence in there. It's quite obvious a bunch of guys sat down and made stuff up in order to control the mindless in society (i.e. most of it).

 

[The Sauce]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: Ulfwald
Frustrated User.

Thank you for recognizing that not all the Christians are die hard, bible thumping, zealots.

Evolution has scientific proof, therefore I recognize that it does occur, but that same scientific proof does not disprove the existence of God, and Divine intervention.

I like your thinking on this. IF I was a Christian that would probably be they way I'd see things.
:beer:

Yes, but by that same tolken it does prove that the bible is complete hooey.

 

[Ulfwald]

I am sorry snatchface, but it does not prove that the Bible is a bunch of hooey. All it proves is that the events of the Bible could have happened. The story of the Great Flood, Genisis, and other such "stories". As I have stated, the Bible is written by men, therefore it is subject to mans view of it, and the thoughts and views of men are often flawed and a bunch of "hooey". As I have said, The Bible tells of events, that science has almost proved to have happened. The problem with the bible is that it is written in man's time, therefore it is flawed. Like I said before as well, 1 year to us is maybe a fraction of a second to God, therefore 1 million years of our time maybe but a day to Him. This would explain the actual chronological age of the earth, thus allowing for God to create us through evolution.

 

[Kasper4christ]

forgetting everything...
which is more impressive? to say it took your God billions of years to make the earth and all life?
or my God did it in 6 days?

 

[NuclearNed]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
I can agree with this statement from the article. But even this statement leaves open the possiblity that the mechanism of evolution is fueled by a higher power, or perhaps pure natural chance, among other things. So by the author's definition, I will concede that evolution is a fact that is not totally understood.

EDIT: You know, the more I think about it, the more I want to take back the statement above. I realize I am displaying my ignorance for all to see, but I just don't see how evolution can ever be classified as a fact. (Keep in mind that I have already admitted that I believe evolution happens). The reasons I can't call it a fact is that 1) it has never been directly observed - all we have is circumstantual evidence that seems to suggest evolution happens over long periods of time, and 2) it is not reproducable in a laboratory setting. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS "THEORY" HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED, SO HOW CAN IT BE CALLED FACTUAL???

So in my own mind I am perfectly happy to call it a very strong theory, but I doubt I will ever call it a fact. Yes, I'm splitting hairs, which will make some of you very unhappy, I'm sure.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

Observed Instances of Speciation

Some More Observed Speciation Events

Evolution is a fact because we have observed it. It is a reality of this world and that was the ground breaking work of Darwin, it wasn't his hypotesis on origins, it was that he spent 10 years of his life meticously documenting the FACT of evolution. His origin of species was the first attempt to explain his previously published work that documented that evolution was an observable phenomenon. The explanation that Darwin proposed was natural selection. It's funny that most people accept his THEORY as fact but not the observations he made that established the observed phenomenon he was trying to explain with his theory.

You should really spend some time on talk.origins and study what you obviously have no background in, it will give you the background you need to attack something you don't want to believe in a much more credible manner than burying your head in the sand because it doesn't fit your paradigm of the world.

If you would pull your head out of your largest orifice, you would realize that from my very first post I have acknowledged that I thought that evolution was a very real phenomenon. What I did in the post that you seem to hate so much is quibble over the definition of the word "fact". You would be surprised at how much I know about evolution, so for you to say that I "obviously have no background" in this subject only exposes your personal idiocy, because you don't actually know me or my knowledge base.

Your condescending attitude and lack of reading comprehension skills must be a real hit with the ladies.

 

[Cy6nUsX1]

Evolution is a theory? OK, would anyone want to BUY my Intel 450mhz processor? I have a theory. I would get a few, very low offers.


UPDATE: Sold to the Missing Link.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Jzero
There is a fine nuance between the colloquial definition of theory being something that is not proven and the scientific definition of theory being something that, while may not be directly observable, has been well-backed by solid experimental data.

 

[His Lord Uberdude]

That is so stupid.