NT

****! That should be 'creationism'.

Ooookaaayyy.

Let's see...
"Earth is flat"
"Elvis Lives"
"Something about a potato chip"

That about sums it up.

Um, don't evolutinism and Darwinism go hand in hand?

Damn, 'evolutionism' should be 'creationism'. Can mods please edit the poll?

On a scale of one to ten, how much scientific credibility do I have left?

I knew what you meant, but I still had to razz you a litte bit :p

I don't like that whenever people talk about evolution they most always associate it with Darwin and/or his theories. There are other theories about evolution.

By the way, Tenshu...
Muhammed is not believed to be mediation to Allah. Most religions have no mediation to their deity.

I chose the potato chip option only because I didn't know who the "DragonMaster" was.

Might I ask what brought this bitterness up?

I can't vote, no option for me.

None of the above. There's just.. nothing there with what I think.

consistant and congruent option for me.

There's no option for "fat."

Done.

Hey, wheres the "None of the above" option?

It really worries me that some of these actually have any votes at all:

Like:
-Earth is only 6000 years old
-Earth is flat
-Pangea theory is fiction; the position of continents has always been the same
-Creationism should be brought back to school, instead of Darwinism

There's no reason why anyone should seriously believe any of those, and I really hope those that voted are just crazy silly jokers.

The DragonMaster is the guy who showed up at the Star Wars movie premiere and tried to look clever to that talking dog.

The bitterness is a result from talking over at iidb.org forums, where guys constantly try to prove the choices above... (except for flat earth, elvis, potato chips).

There's a whole movement of these guys, who try to bring mankind back 1500 years. This is more or less their front man, Kent Hovind. Seriously, read that site. Everytime I feel like it's a vortex sucking all knowledge out of the room. Same goes for the followers.

There ARE guys who think earth is 6000 years old (real quote - "don't you think it looks young?"). There ARE guys who refuse to believe pangea theory. There ARE guys who claim Elvis lives. There ARE guys who deny darwinism. Apparently, man DID walk along dinosaurs ('the bible says it')

There are LOTS of those guys.

This really really bothers me, because those people are gaining both members and momentum. Also, they pose a real threat to society, because even though their ideas are dangerous, they're also covert and nobody seems to really believe they're dangerous.

But before you know it, creationism will be taught to 8-year olds, and I don't know if I can deal with that...

Allright guys, thanks for listening to my weekly BS... I think massassi is some kind of outlet for pseudo-intellectuality for me, since I think members here are actually somewhat above average IQ. I think I'll start up a seperate thread on that...

All schools should be religiously neutral.

Yes, religious studies lessons should be taught, covering all major religions objectively and unbiasedly, but I think it's horrid how some schools are founded on religion. To learn about Christianity, you go to a church and you talk to a priest. Schools shouldn't try to emulate that, as they're never going to do it as well as a church does.

School is about education, not indoctrination. Laying down the facts and allowing children to make their own judgements on what is right and what is wrong, and giving them the skills to be able to do that. It is ridiculous for Creationism to be taught alongside thermodynamics and the laws of planetary motion.
Such religious bias really should be removed from state schools.


Also, I read somewhere that the Flat Earth Society has 10 000 paying members. 10 000 people that not only believe the world is flat, but also pay a monthly fee towards it!

There really needs to be some sort of government crackdown on ignorance and superstition, perhaps showing short science lessons inbetween TV adverts or on billboards or something. Or just improving state schools.

Crazy.

I thought the "Flat Earth Society" was a joke, but if it's real...wow.

http://www.flat-earth.org/platygaea/faq.html hmm.

"God exists, I know the true God; everyone, believer in God or not, who doesn't agree with my view of god should be condemned to Hell for eternity because 'you shall not reach God, unless through me' (Jesus, Mohammed, ...). I don't care if this means billions and billions and billions of people are lost already by birth"

That's totally irrational. People aren't condemned because I believe something. Their condemned weather I believe it or not. It's not my believing the condemns them. Besides, God had sent his son to die for our sins. He has declared that that is the only way to him. Try to get to him another way is like saying, :God I know better than you! I'll do it my way!" Think for a sec. If God created the universe and all of existence, and we sin against him, we should he save us? If anything you would expect him to destroy us because we sinned against him. But amazingly he sent to son to die on the cross for our sins. And when they reject even that, why shouldn’t he condemn them? We are all dead in sin through Adam. Believing this or not believing it certainly won't change reality. (BTW some believe that their is an age of accountability which is 12 but I really haven't studied it enough to make a judgment one way or another.)

Of course Elvis lives. Haven't you seen Bubba Ho-Tep?

What I don't get is why it seems to be impossible for people to realize that the Bible ISN'T NECESSARLIY LITERAL!

I'm a fairly religious person (I believe that there is a supreme being), and I realize full well that fact. If it is not taken literally, the Bible can fit in extremely well with the theory of evolution.

Say a 'day' is actually millions of years. God sets up a system where man will be created, and then all he has to do is sit back and maybe make some minor adjustments. He creates sea creatures one 'day', and land creatures another. So land creatures evolve from sea creatures in a day (millions of years, remember). They're still created by God aren't they? It makes sense that the Jews, not understanding the theory of evolution would record it like they did.

Why more people don't see how science and religion can go hand in hand is beyond me.

God is not a fact.

You believe that God exists.
You believe that God will condemn sinners.
You believe that they will go to Hell.
You believe in this through no evidence or logic or judgement whatsoever. That is called faith. Not fact.

Obi, PLEASE take note of what Mort-Hog has said.

It does? News to me. Religious tolerance in action here, folks. Exactly.
Depends where you're reading. Read the first few verses of Genesis and think Big Bang Theory.
There's plenty of indication that creation was not literal. Adam and Eve's son, Cain, married a woman, when there is not mention of other human life yet. There is also mention of him going to build a city, and that God put a mark upon him that no man who finds him would kill him.
Literalists would have a pretty hard time trying to explain that.

Alternatively, the creation account in Genesis may not be the first creation. That would account for the age of the earth, as well as finding ancient cities that, for some reason, are laced with radiation. (Nuclear explosions, perhaps.)
You have to admit; "In the beginning" is a bit vague. What beginning are we talking about?

In my opinion, the Bible can't be taken literally for certain at least until the days of Moses (considering he wrote the first 5 books).

6000 YEARS OLD BABY

THIS OPTION WAS SUPPOREDT BY THE TERROSITS CELL/ POSSIBLE CULT / POSSIBLE POLICTICAL PARTY WHO BGEIN WITH N AND HAVE AN A IN THE MIDDLE AND END WITH SOMETHING ELSE

RESPECT

WE ARE AGAINST ENGLISH RULE, BUT WE LIKE OUR EUROPEAN PASSPORTS. JAMES ******** LIKES LITTLE BOYS. THAT IS ALL

WE WILL HAVE A WEBSITE IN THE NECXT FEW DAYS, POSSIBLY IN ARABIX, POSSIBLY NOT AT ALL DEPENDING ONW WHETHER ON NOT WE BECOME A TERRTROSTYST CELL OR A PCOCLITCAL PARTY.

P.S.S EVERYONE FROM ADELQAIDE LICKES MAJOR ********** **********8, SAM WASSINAEM FROM THE FOOTY SHOW SAID SO.

Actually, it is now believed that Moses did not write them, and that they were actually compiled from four different sources. I'm taking a course on the Old Testament and we just covered this; it is fascinating stuff. If you are interested, DogSRoOL, I can PM you with more details about it.

I think a truly objective education system would teach creationism alongside darwinism, and then allow the students to decide which theory they want to believe. Darwinism has not been proven yet, it is no more science "fact" than creationism is.

Yep, until 2 days ago this was news to me too, until reading through threads on evolution over at iidb.org. It's incredible what religious fanaticists will come up with to try to solidify the already shakey ground their belief system is built on... Apparently in the Bible there is mention of a dragon-like creature called Leviathan, and now guys use that as an example to show the Bible (why do I keep writing bible with a capital???) actually describes dinosaurs.

But we know better right? Please reaffirm this to me and explicitly deny that man has ever lived in the same era as dinosaurs. Otherwise I could never be 100% sure on people here.



Don't you go 'religious martyr' on me here. Reread what I said and admit I didn't do anyone any wrong. Creationism is a dangerous, irrational, anti-scientific belief system and may NOT under any circumstances be taught to anyone, especially not to highly-susceptible kids. Children are at the peak of information-absorption then. Let's make sure we don't **** em up when their real life has yet to begin.



No man. Evolution is a scientific theory, A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. Gravitation is also a scientific theory. Creationism is a belief.

Don't put Creationism on par with actual scientific thining.

Darwin worked for years studying animals to form his theory on the survival of the fittest. It supports all observation, it's based upon evidence, and most importantly, it makes sense. There's no "controversy" in Darwinism, it is just as sound as Kirchoff's Laws of conservation of charge and energy.

Whereas there are so many flaws in Creationism, it's not even funny...

I voted for dinosaurs. There's one downstairs right now.

Very interesting statement. How ever, I have a problem with this statement, "no evidence or logic or judgment whatsoever" It's just not true. Besides the actual physical evidence from the creationist view point of science, there are simply way to many ways that that I see God in my life, for me to honestly deny Him.

You can know something is true with out physical evidence. How do I know this? Simple. Prove the existence of logic. You simply can't, but we know it exists. Freaky huh? What's really freaky though is you can't prove it through logical methods either. I'm thinking... PARADOX!

Did you read the whole thing? Or are you joking? o.o

Elaborate on this "evidence" for the creationist view of "science".



...right. And one person's subjective experience really doesn't count for anything. The ways you 'see God' could be explained as schizophrenia or other psychological disorders.



Yes, that is correct, mathematical proofs often derive results, but they're rarely relied upon as solid grounds to prove a physical theory. The Higgs Boson is the particle responsible for gravity, and it has been mathematically derived, but there is no physical evidence to support its existance. No-one's ever seen a Higgs boson, but it should exist.

However, I'd love to see your mathematical proof for the existance of God.




No.. it really isn't..
"Prove the existance of logic".


That's like saying "prove the existance of metaphor!" or "prove the existance of thoughts!".
Logic is a system of thoughts that derive a result through a series of small steps. In fact, I probably could "prove the existance of logic" through neuroscience and explain to you exactly which part of the brain is involved in logic. But I don't think either of us know enough neuroscience for this to be useful.

If creationism were taught alongside evolution, evolution would come out better because the students would see that evolution has stronger arguments. I think they should teach that there are plenty of people who don't think evolution contradicts their religious beliefs.
I'm christian, but the bible was extremely vague about how we came to be. I don't see why evolution couldn't have been used as a method of creation.
Smock said it better than I can.

There really are flat-earth believers. They're the ones who originally argued that we faked the moon landings, because it shows the earth to be a sphere. These are religious people who insist that the earth is flat due to some bible verse about Jesus ascending to heaven. Apparently they think the earth has to be flat for that to happen.


Nowhere in the Bible does it says that people will go to hell for not believing that Jesus was the son of God and was crucified, etc.


I'd be interested, Wuss.


You idiot! Of course we exist with dinosaurs! Haven't you ever seen Barney?
Just kidding.
I wasn't there personally, so I don't know. Otherwise I'd deny the human-dinosaur coexistance thingy.
However, it doesn't say so anywhere in the bible that man lived alongside dinosaurs, and I don't believe it.


I think that the arguments of creationism should be taught, as well as the evolutionist response to this criticism. That would be the most educational.


Do you have a website or something that answers the attacks of creationism? I keep hearing these anti-evolutionary arguments from conservative people, but I want to know what the answer to them is.


Logic is simply a method of analysis created by people. It doesn't really exist.

I bet it has a pi somewhere in it.

^^^ mmmm... I like Pie... let's put an e and some logarithms and exponents in too and make a cent equal a dollar all over again.
I think he was referring to "seeing" God through the acts of others?

Since this thread isn't really about that and I don't feel like doing it for you, if you're interested in it, do a Google search. It's out there, and very easy to find.



I'm not talking about physic stuff here. It's a very easy and logical concept to grasp. I mean, all you have to do is look around you at creation. Also, just small every day ways, I can see that God is making every thing work. (Kind of but not. Hard to explain) I’m not going to taking time to explain it all here, except it has nothing to do with physic or abnormal stuff at all. Just from observing through out my life I’ve realized things that I’d be a fool to ignore.



Since when did I say I would do that, and when was the argument even about finding a mathematical proof for God? Re-read my argument to see what I was actually saying *Red Herring Alert* *beep beep*




In other words, owned! You can’t prove any thing with out first assuming something else is true. Which isn’t really proving it. See?

Below are some of my thoughts on the matter.

You have to use logic to prove logic. Which means it's not "provable". In fact nothing physical can be "proven" through science anyway. I think you'll find even prominent atheists would agree with me on this one. The trouble is, we can't scientifically "prove" anything. Which leads us to wonder what is proof any way. Dude... Ok, I've basically just lost my self.

Just... don't listen to conservative Christian literalists. I'm telling you this as a Christian. A "dragon-like creature" could have meant quite a number of reptilian animals.
Oh, and you capitalize Bible for the same reason you capitalize the name of any other book.


What? Dinosaurs still walk the earth today!
And the earth's really only 21 years old... :p

Maybe the version you've been hearing from the creationists you've been talking to. Creationism is simply "God created the universe." How he created it is for science to discover. It's not the point of Christianity by a long shot.
There is simply no reason for me to believe that science contradicts Christianity. Believe it or not, there are some more rational Christians out there than the ones you seem to be encountering. I used to think a lot of naive things when it came to my religion, but I've learned much. Anyone remember how I was when we had the religious discussion forum?
0+0=0. :p
Keep going... you've almost discovered something valuable. Relative proof; what serves as proof to one person may not serve as proof to another. It explains faith well, too.