creationism to be taught in schools?

[jefhatfield]

...by 46 percent of respondents in netscape poll

against 54 percent who believe in evolution to be taught is schools...how about the option for teaching both???

i believe a lot of things in the bible, but where does it say anything is wrong with science? and evolution is hard science, not some idea that scientists make the facts fit to...creationism to be taught in school, if it is taught that the world is a few thousand years old is ridiculous even though i believe in the big bang theory, but being started by god

someone had to get the ball rolling:p

[vniow]

Wow, 46% take the Bible literally? :rolleyes: :eek:

I think of instead of teaching both evolution and creationism, they should teach science and mythology cuz it seems like a helluva lot of people don't get either.:rolleyes:

[sturm375]

They teach Klingon at some universities. They allow people to major in Frisbee(sp?), so why not Creationism?

On a more serious side, there may be a way to scientfically explaine Earth being a few thousand years old. If you specify the year length to be relative to the current time keeping. Early in the universes creation (just after the "Big Bang") stuff was very close together, and expanding at a very fast rate. Relative time might be faster at this point in history. It's been a very long time since I played around with theoraticle time-space-and gravity stuff, so I may be off some. Essentially, it is possible that in the beginning of the univers, one years worth of development might take 1 day of our time, and 1 year of our time might encompass thousands, if not millions of years of early development.

Lots of "ifs" "Mights" and "maybes", but the same can be said of evolving from tiny mouse like mamals, to current humans.

BTW, There is a third possibility, what about the idea of aliens "seeding" the earth? There is some evidence to this effect.

[zorglub]

" so help me God "
" in God we trust "
" God bless America "

maybe too much "religion/real world" relations ...
i don't know, we are so cartesian here

z

[vniow]

If they teach creationism, they should also teach all other creation myths, like the Aztec one, or the Mayan one, Hindu, Greek, Roman, all the Native American ones, Egyptian ones, and all the countless others throughout history. Why just stop with the Christian one?

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by edvniow
Wow, 46% take the Bible literally? :rolleyes: :eek:

I think of instead of teaching both evolution and creationism, they should teach science and mythology cuz it seems like a helluva lot of people don't get either.:rolleyes:

but the bible does not teach the world is literally thousands of years old

and the bible does not say, "ignore all science"

i went to bible college classes and never did they teach or even refer to the world being just thousands of years old

christ died for our sins and that is all that is basically true to all denominations of christianity...other things like faith healing, toungues, women ministers, true day of the sabbath, and many other issues get hashed back and forth from denomination to denomination and within denominations...but saying the world is a few thousand years old is non-biblical and discredits the whole christian faith

some people won't listen to the great teachings of jesus because some idiots out there are rallying for banning the teaching of evolution in schools

other idiots used to jail those who believed the earth went around the sun or that the earth was round

sometimes members of the church act on their own ignorance and are not following the teachings of god and the bible

[vniow]

Originally posted by jefhatfield


but the bible does not teach the world is literally thousands of years old

and the bible does not say, "ignore all science"

i went to bible college classes and never did they teach or even refer to the world being just thousands of years old


True, how the creationists see the world as only about 10,000 years old is they take somebody like Peter who begat Abraham, who begat Joseph or what ever (I really have no idea what the order is :p) and go all the way back to Adam and Eve and add them all up and presto! The world is 10,000 years old!

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by edvniow
If they teach creationism, they should also teach all other creation myths, like the Aztec one, or the Mayan one, Hindu, Greek, Roman, all the Native American ones, Egyptian ones, and all the countless others throughout history. Why just stop with the Christian one?

when i was in school in the 60s-70s, they taught all those things except for creationism as mentioned in genesis

i say teach all of them and let the child decide what to believe thru study and years of life experience

but don't ban evolutionism or science in schools...the last thing we need now is fewer american scientists and engineers...message...we are not very good at math and science in america compared to many developed nations and some third world nations

[iGav]

It should be an option......

I was forced to take Religious Studies at school, even though I have absolutely zero interest in religion or infact posses any personal religious belief......

I found it a waste of a subject, one that I could have made better use of had I have been given the opportunity to choose.....

Curriculums, particularly in the UK need to be much more flexible than what they currently are, and enable people to make an informed choice about their own education and how it can improve their lives...... Not have stuff thrust down there throats.....

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by edvniow


True, how the creationists see the world as only about 10,000 years old is they take somebody like Peter who begat Abraham, who begat Joseph or what ever (I really have no idea what the order is :p) and go all the way back to Adam and Eve and add them all up and presto! The world is 10,000 years old!

i believe it is something between five and seven thousand years old in most quotes i have heard creationists say

so asians like me stemming from the chinese who go way back before that are either a 1) very old culture or 2) we are some demon race that was here before god made adam, a white man, to wipe out all us asians off the planet because we don't believe in a northern european looking jesus christ

jesus christ was jewish and many christians in america don't know that...i didn't learn of jesus' jewishness from my methodist church in a town that had very few minorities or jews

i once was sharing my testimony of chistianity to a middle eastern man, and he said, "i don't want to hear your white european religion" and "why would you want to believe that white man's religion"

sometimes looking at a western history book might make an outsider think that christianity was invented in europe!:p

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by sturm375
They allow people to major in Frisbee(sp?), so why not Creationism?



in california, the major/minor is properly called ultimate frisbee and people who engage in that major or sport will correct you immediately

want to piss off an ultimate frisbee player? just ask, "do you play frisbee?"

watch them go ballistic;) :D :p :eek:

...speaking about weird sounding majors, or non-traditional majors... go to www.csumb.edu

it's the local college where i live and one question the students hate is "now WHAT? did you say your major was?" too funny

check out the link though...it's a new angle on education and i still do not know what to think of it

[vniow]

Originally posted by jefhatfield


i believe it is something between five and seven thousand years old in most quotes i have heard creationists say

so asians like me stemming from the chinese who go way back before that are either a 1) very old culture or 2) we are some demon race that was here before god made adam, a white man, to wipe out all us asians off the planet because we don't believe in a northern european looking jesus christ

jesus christ was jewish and many christians in america don't know that...i didn't learn of jesus' jewishness from my methodist church in a town that had very few minorities or jews

i once was sharing my testimony of chistianity to a middle eastern man, and he said, "i don't want to hear your white european religion" and "why would you want to believe that white man's religion"

sometimes looking at a western history book might make an outsider think that christianity was invented in europe!:p

Actually somewhere in the Bible it says that angels mated with humans and created a new race which God later destroyed, maybe Asians are decendants of the ones that survived!:p:D

It seems silly to me that a lot of die-hard Christians don't know that Jesus was Jewish or Sematic (similar to Arab), hell, he even had a bit of African blood in him.
White man's religion my ass.;)

[mcrain]

The simple solution is to teach the truth. Sounds easy right? It's not.

What is the truth?

1. Christianity and every other religion was created by man.
2. The Bible and every other religion's text was written by man.
3. Every culture, from the beginning of time (as far as I have been able to tell) has had a belief in something greater than man.
4. Christians are the majority in this country, and most are white.
5. A white Jesus is about as likely as me having a 28 inch *****.
6. Despite that, most Christians belive in a white, light haired, light eyed Jesus.
7. Millions have been slaughtered in the name of religion.
8. The US sure seems poised to do it again.
9. The US consitition separates church and state, yet Christians feel compelled to try to mix the two.
10. Islam is an offshoot of Christianity and Judaism.
11. Science is science, and can only be refuted with science, not hokey pokey religious crap.
12. Fisbee isn't a major, it's a sport for drunk non-athletes.
13. Republicans get lots and lots of votes from Christian fundamentalists, thus in a two party system, one party pushes for anti-Constitutional things
14. Macs aren't the best computers ever made, and Jobs isn't god, but Jobs is a genius and Macs are wonderful.
15. Arn spends far too much time on this site considering he's a doctor.
16. BTTM's company is the best place to buy a mac.
17. Hindu's are one of the few religions that teach tolerence of other's religions.
18. We're all crazy.
19. Especially Jefhatfield.
20. And me.
21. I don't have a 28 inch *****.

[barkmonster]

Although they crammed that 2000 year old story book down my throat all through my education. It wasn't forced as studied subject as far as exams are concerned.

We had a 45 minute lesson called "religious education" but it was more about other religions and cultures than the bible.

I think in retrospect, they shouldn't be able to have any religious activities in schools, they shouldn't focus on it, it excludes those who believe in other forms of making us feel superior (yeah, I'm really important, so important infact that I'm going to this wonderful place when I die or I'm going to be reborn as another lifeform, BS, I'm wormfood like every other dead thing). I think religion should be studied in the same way as history in schools, matter of fact, these people believe this, these people believe that. No prayer in assembly only celebrate relgious holidays and festivals that exist by yearly tradition.

Okay, I left high school nearly 10 years ago but if they'd done this kind of thing in school instead of what they did all those hours of my life wasted on being a sheep would have been used to learn another subject or have more study time for exams. Anything other than god bothering.

Okay I realise I'm offending people here, those people who follow their religion like they're life depends on it or something and don't allow anyone else to have an opinion that goes against they're beliefs without them crying about it.

No offence :D

[rebscb]

There is much opinion in these comments and our Constitution allows for citizens to hold merely opinion and to vote with merely opinion.

Even those who argue for science (and trash religion) are spouting opinion. Opinion is an almagamation of some facts, some armchair theory, alot of false memory, all arranged by a brain/mind that seeks to put order where order may not exist.

However, I do believe that opinion must eventually give way to the struggle for knowledge (opinion washed by logic and method).

If you truly wish to think HARD about this subject then move beyond your opinion and read look throught this link

http://www.aaas.org/spp/dser/

Even many elite scientists do not see the need for separating science and religion for all time.

I am a scientist and I am a Christian too.... and I think deeply about these subjects a great deal and I am the richer for the struggle....

I wish all of you a good day and may God bless you for using Macs and may Nature provide you with all of the answers to why Apple is superior at both the quantum and cosmological levels.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by rebscb

I am a scientist and I am a Christian too.... and I think deeply about these subjects a great deal and I am the richer for the struggle....


Well said, and ditto, in theory :D

[e-coli]

Originally posted by sturm375
There is a third possibility, what about the idea of aliens "seeding" the earth? There is some evidence to this effect.

wtf?? not to hijack the thread, but i'd love to know what you're talking about. evidence??

[Spike Spiegel]

Originally posted by mcrain
The simple solution is to teach the truth. Sounds easy right? It's not.

What is the truth?

1. Christianity and every other religion was created by man.
2. The Bible and every other religion's text was written by man.
3. Every culture, from the beginning of time (as far as I have been able to tell) has had a belief in something greater than man.
4. Christians are the majority in this country, and most are white.
5. A white Jesus is about as likely as me having a 28 inch *****.
6. Despite that, most Christians belive in a white, light haired, light eyed Jesus.
7. Millions have been slaughtered in the name of religion.
8. The US sure seems poised to do it again.
9. The US consitition separates church and state, yet Christians feel compelled to try to mix the two.
10. Islam is an offshoot of Christianity and Judaism.
11. Science is science, and can only be refuted with science, not hokey pokey religious crap.
12. Fisbee isn't a major, it's a sport for drunk non-athletes.
13. Republicans get lots and lots of votes from Christian fundamentalists, thus in a two party system, one party pushes for anti-Constitutional things
14. Macs aren't the best computers ever made, and Jobs isn't god, but Jobs is a genius and Macs are wonderful.
15. Arn spends far too much time on this site considering he's a doctor.
16. BTTM's company is the best place to buy a mac.
17. Hindu's are one of the few religions that teach tolerence of other's religions.
18. We're all crazy.
19. Especially Jefhatfield.
20. And me.
21. I don't have a 28 inch *****.

excellent points, although i think muslims would resent the way you said that their religion was an offshoot

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by e-coli


wtf?? not to hijack the thread, but i'd love to know what you're talking about. evidence??

i tried seeding the earth once and nothing happened:p

[sturm375]

Originally posted by e-coli


wtf?? not to hijack the thread, but i'd love to know what you're talking about. evidence??

Keep in mind I don't place much, if any stock in these ideas. I remember seeing a documentry on this once on TV. Their evidence comes from things like: a painting of Chirst crusifiction with angels in what look like space ships; Egyptin history; and a lot more I can't remember. Here are a few links I Googled up with a search for: "extraterrestrial" origins human species

http://www.thedent.com/horn.html

http://www.salemctr.com/newage/center31.html

Like I said, it's pretty far out, but there is some contriversial evidence for this theory.

[mcrain]

Originally posted by weezerophile


excellent points, although i think muslims would resent the way you said that their religion was an offshoot

I don't think so. Christianity is a religion based on the belief that a Jew happened to be the son of God. Islam is based on the teachings of a prophet of God. They also believe in Jesus and the other Jewish prophets, however, they believe that Mohammad was the last in the line of enlightened prophets.

Islam is analagous to the Mormans with their "other testament" of Jesus book thing.

[mcrain]

Originally posted by jefhatfield


i tried seeding the earth once and nothing happened:p

I try to spread my seed at every opportunity.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by mcrain


I try to spread my seed at every opportunity.

I think I am going to leave now, it's getting pretty seedy around here.:D :D :D

[maluscanis]

Nearly every single post I read on this subject was from ignorant minds...this doesn't make your point invalid...but it doesn't say much for you. The truth is you base your scientific beliefs on what people with doctorates tell you in textbooks and base your hatred of Christ and Christianity on hypocritical TV evangelist and fiery Southern Baptist preachers. The truth is that these "Scholars" were taught from infancy that evolution is a fact and have interpreted all there research findings from that viewpoint; furthermore, what makes an individual with a doctorate in Biochemistry any less biased than your typical labotamized christian? And by the way, I am a strong Christian who can't stand hypocritical christians who condemn everyone else while at the same time they are cheating on their wives and using tithe money to buy porsches. I am a christian because the bible speaks to my heart in such a way as to change me in every respect. I believe that most of you will live your whole lives searching for something to bring meaning...searching for a purpose and love and acceptance. I believe that Jesus (not christianity) answers life's hardest questions and would change your life if you gave him a chance. This is not a stupid belief... what's stupid is the idea that atheism is a default worldview that needs no defending. Agnostism is the only worldview that doesn't have to defend itself- but this means you don't know anything. Before you say something so strongly against religion and ethics, maybe you should read a little more about it. There is no such thing as objective morality outside of a theistic worldview. For those atheists out there, this means that rape and murder are not really wrong but just societally wrong...know how many of you are willing to admit to that...I hope none of you because our world is going to hell very quickly if people like that exist. As for evolution, I have a Bachelor's in biochemistry and am pursuing a doctorate in the same field. the truth from someone who actually knows what they are talking about is this: it is absolutely arrogant beyond belief to make a statement of origins given our current scientific understanding. Evolution as it stands make sense only in that groups of organism are related on many different levels (this is why Darwin's came up with evolution because it makes sense in this respect). Evolution while at the outset appears sensible; absolutely (emphasis should be added here) breaks down at the molecular level. It defies objective understanding to believe that the simplest cell could evolve. THe reason why is, and listen very carefully, life only works when all the systems are working. What is the purpose of DNA if transcription and translation don't work (the processes of making proteins from DNA) since proteins are needed to run the cell. (sure RNA can act as an enzyme but the argument still stands). THink of this argument from this standpoint. If only one protein (out of millions) in the body is rendered ineffective from a mutation, it can and usually does cripple the body, many times resulting in fatality. Furthermore, without genetic repair systems, it makes no sense to believe that any species could survive long due to a loss of coordination between proteins. As far as creationism, as a theory goes it has more scientific support than evolution for one reason; if you have an all powerful God then anything is possible; whereas with evolution you have to rely only on naturalistic processes. The truly honest opinion is that neither theory is in any position to be considered fact...I am ashamed at the scientific community as a whole for being so willfully biased and subjective - they have literally brainwashed millions of people with their intellectual position.

Please people, don't be like those Christians you hate so much...try to think objectively, consider other people's opinions and treat them with respect, and look into these very worthy questions that you obviously know so little about. Thank you for reading.


And by the way, frisbee rocks and anyone who says otherwise is going to burn in hell. I know that's in the bible somewhere. i might need some time to look it up though.

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by mcrain
I try to spread my seed at every opportunity.

Shudder, Son of Taxman...

Thank God for condoms and the pill ...

If all else fails, there is always hoping St. Darwin will eliminate you from the gene pool before your seed sprouts.

[jelloshotsrule]

could someone break up that post into readable paragraphs? i read the first few lines, was interested, but got lost amidst the massive, one paragraph form...

oh well

[evildead]

Religion has brought nothing but pain and hate into my life. I would never send any child of mine to a shool that teaches creationism. If you want to read fairy tails to your kids on your own time... then do it on your own time and on your own dime. I dont want any of my taxes going to teaching kids to form groups, not date out side of the group, try and get others to join the group, not trust others that dont joine the group, trust blindly anyone in the group (molester religiouse figures), hate others that are not part of the group, etc....


Its human nature to form groups that war with one another.. but if your going to hate each other... at least make it over something better than what stupid book you grew up reading ... thats about as stupid as ethnic Identity

[ejb190]

Science only works when the facts are evaluated independently of any preconceived ideas. The problem with evolution science is that the idea was conceived first and scientists have spent the last 100 years trying to find evidence to support that theory.

Darwin's assumption was that a further examination of the fossil record would reveal the evidence that he was missing. Well here we are 100 years later and the theory has not advanced at all. In fact, I would say it has a few new holes in it with some of the recent research I have read.

My point is if you are going to use science as a hammer to crush other people's view points, but sure you are using it correctly. I have seen a museum exhibit on evolution that presented missing link animals that have never been found as fact. Evolutionary scientists have used the general public's lack of understanding of science to promote the idea that science (and therefore scientists) can't be wrong.

Remember those Martian meteorites with the bacteria in them? Upon further scrutiny (which the media did not pick up on), scientists determined that there were no life forms in the rocks. In fact, it is even being questioned if the rocks are indeed from Mars or not. But a "scientist" made the claim so it must be true.

BTW, I am also both a Christian and a scientist.

But I digress....and its time to go home!

eRiC

[mcrain]

I personally don't care what any of you believe. I also accept all of your viewpoints as being potentially correct. Acceptance rather than intolerence is my credo. My point when I challenge Christians on their viewpoints is that when someone says the Bible said to me whatever, I have to remind them that we just don't know if the Bible really was written by someone who was really inspired by god. We just don't know. If you can admit that, you can accept others and their beliefs.

As for that big long post, I have two things to say. First, blah blah blah blah blah (HIT ENTER). Second, I'm happy for you and what you believe, but the only viewpoint that is correct is that we don't know what's correct so why bicker about it.

As for me sowing seeds, that was a joke! :D

[mcrain]

Originally posted by maluscanis
Nearly every single post I read on this subject was from ignorant minds...

If you think that calling others ignorant is going to win you points, then you're ignorant.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mcrain
5. A white Jesus is about as likely as me having a 28 inch *****.
Sure you do - just about everybody has a larger chest than 28 inches - at least in terms of circumference.

[Hemingray]

What I dislike is how evolution is touted around like it's fact, when it's really only a theory. To deny the opportunity for other cultures/religions to share their beliefs (and I'm not talking just Christianity here), education is being discriminatory in that regard.

The only truly fair solution is to either eliminate all credible theories as to our origin, or include all of them. You really can't win; there are so many diverisifed beliefs that to include all of them would make the course impossible to finish, and yet to offer evolution as the sole scenario is extremely obtuse.

Sigh...

[mc68k]

Evolution is man trying to explain God.

Evolution is actually pretty silly to learn soley based on the timescales. They're completely made up by scientists and change rather frequently when a new "breakthrough" is found.

If the timescale is incorrect, then most everything else will be too.

There are many other examples, but that is the most glaring one.

[vniow]

Originally posted by mc68k
Evolution is man trying to explain God.

Evolution is actually pretty silly to learn soley based on the timescales. They're completely made up by scientists and change rather frequently when a new "breakthrough" is found.

If the timescale is incorrect, then most everything else will be too.

There are many other examples, but that is the most glaring one.

And how is that different from any other creation myth?

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by mc68k
Evolution is man trying to explain God.

If there is a joker in the house, they'd say -

God is man trying to explain evolution.

Not to mention those translations of translations of the sacred text, I cringe at the thought of the politically correct Bible.

[vniow]

Originally posted by Sun Baked


If there is a joker in the house, they'd say -

God is man trying to explain evolution.

Not to mention those translations of translations of the sacred text, I cringe at the thought of the politically correct Bible.


Too late. When they were translating it to the King James Version that we all have come to know and love, they changed 'Eve was made out of Adam's crotch', to 'Eve was made out of Adam's rib.'
I just luv it when people try to mold the 'word of God' into their own image, don't you?
Doesn't the Bible say that Man was created in God's image? :rolleyes:

[vniow]

Originally posted by Sun Baked


Shudder, Son of Taxman...

Thank God for condoms and the pill ...

If all else fails, there is always hoping St. Darwin will eliminate you from the gene pool before your seed sprouts.

No, no, no, no, no. Didn't you hear? (http://lightning.prohosting.com/~montypy/sounds/everysperm.wav) :p

[mc68k]

Originally posted by edvniow


And how is that different from any other creation myth? If they're both myths then, why is one being censored?

[Kethoticus]

...and there a few of you, Creationism is not a rehash of the Genesis account of life's origins. It is a school of thought based on the idea that there is scientific evidence to support the idea that we were deliberately popped into existence, not accidentally.

I can't say much about the validity of either theory of life's origins (evolution or creationism), as I am attempting to understand both thoroughly as my busy life permits. I am born again, which means that I have accepted Jesus as my personal savior, which established a personal bond between me and the God of all creation. Without Jesus' sacrifice 2,000 years ago, nothing I could ever do would ever bring me to God (or Heaven). A personal, intimate relationship is all God wants with us, but only a few ever open their hearts to Him.

That being said, I believe in the Adam and Eve account as stated in Genesis. But whether or not Creationism provides enough scientific proof I have yet to personally determine. If it does, then there is no reason for it not to be taught in schools. If our children can be taught about the "normalness" of homosexuality, how to tell fortunes with playing cards and practice new age visualization, then something that provides a legitimate scientific alternative to evolution has every right to be explained to our children.

As a final note, if evolutionists are going to try to discredit the idea of intelligent design, then they seriously need to take phrases like "ingenious design" and "created" from their vocabulary. According to the theory, ALL life is an accident. And that is how they should express themselves.

And as for tolerance, few in this thread seem to have any. It is fashionable to bash Christians, but bash anyone else, and you're a bigot. Almost funny.

[vniow]

Originally posted by mc68k
If they're both myths then, why is one being censored?


Here we go.......


Creation myth: A symbolic story about the origin of humankind.
The Christians have theirs, Genisis, the Hindus have theirs, the Greeks had theirs and the Aztecs also had theirs.
The U.S also has one and they call it evolution.
Now any good scientist will tell you that it's theory, not fact.
Any good Chistian will understand what Genisis really means. (you want me to go through a whole psycoanalasis of Adam and Eve? Ask me tomorrow)
Creationism is the result of Christians who try to practice their religion in a culture that values science above all else.
You can try to disprove evolution all you want, but keep in mind that Creationism is not a true science, as it does not go by the proven scientific method.
There is no scientific evidence that Adam and Eve ever existed, nor will there ever be. They are just characters in a myth. But also keep in mind that it does not make them any less real. Just because they never existed in the physical world doesn't mean that they never existed, after all God isn't physical and people still believe.



For those who do not understand...

...and there a few of you, Creationism is not a rehash of the Genesis account of life's origins. It is a school of thought based on the idea that there is scientific evidence to support the idea that we were deliberately popped into existence, not accidentally.


Actually it is and it isn't.
The Creationists try to back up their claims by looking at the main characters in the Bible and their lineage. They extrapolate the time in which they existed which comes out to somewhere inbetween 8 and 10 thousand years.
You are right in the fact that it is a school of thought based on the idea that there is scientific evidence to support the idea that we were deliberately popped into existence, not accidentally.:)


I can't say much about the validity of either theory of life's origins (evolution or creationism), as I am attempting to understand both thoroughly as my busy life permits. I am born again, which means that I have accepted Jesus as my personal savior, which established a personal bond between me and the God of all creation. Without Jesus' sacrifice 2,000 years ago, nothing I could ever do would ever bring me to God (or Heaven). A personal, intimate relationship is all God wants with us, but only a few ever open their hearts to Him.


I totally respect that.
I hate it when people ry to force their beliefs on me, I don't mind debate, but people jamming their not-very-well-thought-out beliefs disgusts me.



That being said, I believe in the Adam and Eve account as stated in Genesis. But whether or not Creationism provides enough scientific proof I have yet to personally determine. If it does, then there is no reason for it not to be taught in schools.


I've said this before and I'll say it again. Why favor Creationism over other myths? (including evolution)
If you're going to teach Creationism and/or evolution you should also have a class dedicated soley to myths.
Mythology is something that's lacking, to say the least, in this culture.


If our children can be taught about the "normalness" of homosexuality


That one's almost not worthy of a response. It's a whole 'nuther thread anywayz......:rolleyes:


how to tell fortunes with playing cards and practice new age visualization, then something that provides a legitimate scientific alternative to evolution has every right to be explained to our children.


First of all, tarot cards are based off of intuition, nothing more.
Second, I agree that if a legit scientific alternative to evolution is found, it should be taught alongside it, but the problem with creationism is that it's not true science.

As a final note, if evolutionists are going to try to discredit the idea of intelligent design, then they seriously need to take phrases like "ingenious design" and "created" from their vocabulary. According to the theory, ALL life is an accident. And that is how they should express themselves.


Wow, what a helluva accident created something as biologically complex as a human.
Another thing evolution fails to explain is how exactly life got started. Creation myths have no trouble in that category, but in evolution, you actually have to prove it. :rolleyes:


And as for tolerance, few in this thread seem to have any. It is fashionable to bash Christians, but bash anyone else, and you're a bigot. Almost funny.


I've seen little, if any bashing.
If you Christians think we are bashing your beliefs, then you may not be all to comfortable with them.

[ibjoshua]

okay. i've read the whole thread and there is a lot to be said in reply but i'm not going to be the one.

there has, as usual been a lot of intelligent observations (on both sides of the fence) and some complete rubbish (also to be found on both sides of the fence). i would like to comment on the following statement:
Originally posted by ejb190
Science only works when the facts are evaluated independently of any preconceived ideas. The problem with evolution science is that the idea was conceived first and scientists have spent the last 100 years trying to find evidence to support that theory.

if i'm not mistaken the whole scientific process begins with hypothesis. (i.e. a "preconceived idea" - not a conclusion mind you) which is followed by experimentation and research. science is still working on proving the theory of evolution, true, but all theories are revised and re-examined at differnt intervals and as there is no serious scientific alternatives to evolutionary theory i think it is fair to keep going with it.

creationism is clearly not a scientific theory and 'intelligent design' seeks merely to 'fill the gaps' that science has so far been unable to explain.

my conclusion is not that the bible has no value but that (as nicely summed up in New Scientist's latest editorial (28th Sept 2002)) "The sensible, if boring, remedy is to stick with the idea that science and religion are quite different realms of understanding, and it is wrong to seek to explain or refute one through the other. "

i for one (and i don't think that i deserve flaming for this belief) believe that accident is a perfectly adequate explanation for life and the complexities of nature. if one believes that the universe is near infinite then surely there are near infinite chances that anything can happen. will i win lotto tonight? probably not but i won't suddenly find god if i do. :)

please, if we don't agree on anything at least take a rational look at the idea that science and faith are completely different ballgames. if we're going to question the validity of teaching evolution (whether it is right or wrong) then we are essentially questioning whether we should teach science and scientific processes.

please let's leave the teaching of faith to parents, churches and sunday schools.

i_b_joshua

[ibjoshua]

hey edvniow,

looks like we were typing the nearly the same thing at the same time. (although i don't agree that evolution is a 'myth' whatever your definition of myth)

oh, and can i just say i think yours and dukestreets are the two best avatars i've seen in a long time.

:)

i_b_joshua

[vniow]

Originally posted by i_b_joshua
hey edvniow,

looks like we were typing the nearly the same thing at the same time. (although i don't agree that evolution is a 'myth' whatever your definition of myth)

oh, and can i just say i think yours and dukestreets are the two best avatars i've seen in a long time.

:)

i_b_joshua


Great minds think alike no?;)

I found a grey version of the 'tar on the web somewhere, (I think it may have been some other guy's tar.:eek::p)
duke modified it to look like it is now.
I think I'll keep up with the theme, I have about 4 billion different variations of it.:D

[Kethoticus]

creationism is clearly not a scientific theory and 'intelligent design' seeks merely to 'fill the gaps' that science has so far been unable to explain.

Creationists would disagree with this. If there any in this forum, they should speak now to defend the scientific validity of their points. I'd be interested to hear them as well.

i for one (and i don't think that i deserve flaming for this belief) believe that accident is a perfectly adequate explanation for life and the complexities of nature.

I'm glad to hear an evolutionist say this. But I too often hear things like "Nature provided this creature with..." and "adaptable design" and once I read "evolutionary forces". Some of these scientists really need to be sure that they genuinely believe their doctrine of life being a Godless accident. Just pay close attention to any wildlife or prehistoric documentary on the Discovery Channel for some great examples of this inconsistency.

[vniow]

Originally posted by Kethoticus


Creationists would disagree with this. If there any in this forum, they should speak now to defend the scientific validity of their points. I'd be interested to hear them as well.



Me too. I haven't heard a lot from their side either. Should be interesting. :)

[jefhatfield]

i believe in evolution as far as a process, but a process that was started by god

and by the definitions i am seeing of creationism vs. evolution, i find myself in a gray area

what is so wrong, if anyone finds fault, with believing that evolution is a natural process by nature, who in my opinion, is god?

so far, i have not seen any really bad arguments like some have accused of, though i do see some very passionate arguments on both sides

the way i see it, proving evolution as well as having completely proven the world is not flat has no bearing on the fact that there was a jewish man named jesus who changed human history in one of the most dynamic ways possible

i choose to believe this man was god in the flesh and others reject that belief, but for anyone to say that because evolution or a round earth was proved, then that means that jesus then never existed, is something that would make me scratch my head

evolution as a process seems quite likely to me, i think the part of whether it was by design or by accident is the bigger question here

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
i believe in evolution as far as a process, but a process that was started by god

and by the definitions i am seeing of creationism vs. evolution, i find myself in a gray area

what is so wrong, if anyone finds fault, with believing that evolution is a natural process by nature, who in my opinion, is god?

so far, i have not seen any really bad arguments like some have accused of, though i do see some very passionate arguments on both sides

the way i see it, proving evolution as well as having completely proven the world is not flat has no bearing on the fact that there was a jewish man named jesus who changed human history in one of the most dynamic ways possible

i choose to believe this man was god in the flesh and others reject that belief, but for anyone to say that because evolution or a round earth was proved, then that means that jesus then never existed, is something that would make me scratch my head

evolution as a process seems quite likely to me, i think the part of whether it was by design or by accident is the bigger question here

jeff i wish all christians were like you!

i totally agree with what you say except that i'm an atheist and don't believe that jesus was a divine being.

so what do i mean by agree?
well, i cannot disprove the theory that god created the universe and all its crazy little mechanisms in it (including evolution) i just choose not to believe that.


Creationists would disagree with this. If there any in this forum, they should speak now to defend the scientific validity of their points. I'd be interested to hear them as well.
i'm with edvniow on that one. i'd like to hear any scientific arguments they might have. (i don't believe there are any.)

But I too often hear things like "Nature provided this creature with..." and "adaptable design" and once I read "evolutionary forces". Some of these scientists really need to be sure that they genuinely believe their doctrine of life being a Godless accident. Just pay close attention to any wildlife or prehistoric documentary on the Discovery Channel for some great examples of this inconsistency.
i think that is nit-picking. those seem to me more like terms of phrase much like 'face of god' as used by some theoretical physicists and the like. it is simply using metaphorical language to describe things of wonder. if you choose to take it a step further as does jeff (and many religious scientists) then the explanation that god and nature are synonymous also explains this type of language.

i_b_joshua

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by i_b_joshua


jeff i wish all christians were like you!



this is a big stretch, but i think most christians believe as i do

i didn't meet one person at my bible college or church that believed the earth was 5-7 thousand years old

i had one roomate who believed that but he had no scientific proof or theory for his belief, he just thought that carbon dating was wrong

when i asked him how it was wrong, he had no answer except that he thought it was arrogant to assume physics like the way things are now didn't have to be the same as it was then

he mentioned that perhaps human cells were different and that accounts why some people lived in the bible for 900 years or that the elements on the periodic table might have had different properties than they have now

but that takes faith and even though he was an engineering major, he was able to accept how the physical world worked now and accepted that the bible was also 100 percent literal...kind of that is, accounting for "language" and "translation"

[Kethoticus]

i believe in evolution as far as a process, but a process that was started by god

One problem here: Evolution and Christianity completely negate each other. Now I didn't say belief in God and evolution were mutually exclusive, just Christianity and evolution. How?

The Bible teaches that death came into the world as a result of sin. We were never supposed to die. Evolution teaches that death has been with us from the beginning and is as natural a part of life as everything else. But the rift between Christianity and evolution goes much deeper than this.

If you believe in evolution, then there is no sin. "Sin" is merely a collection of primitive, animal instincts that go back to our most ancient ancestors 2-3 eons ago. The desire for revenge, the desire to engage in sexual activity with multiple partners, the desire to look out for self first, all can be seen in current animal behavior. It is natural for them, but it is not sinful. Therefore, if we evolved from apes, and in fact, still are a type of primate, then how can anything we feel or do that falls under the label of morality be immoral at all? Immorality is simply primitive, natural behavior that we're struggling to get under control in order to keep our civilization intact.

But Christianity is founded on the idea that selfishness, lust for vengeance, etc., are the result of Adam's self-centered decision in the Garden of Eden. Sin was (is) the complete antithesis to God's holiness. We were supposed to naturally, instinctively, put God first, others second, and ourselves last. Instead, this spiritual disease known as sin now causes us to put ourselves first, others second and God last. But if you believe in evolution, this is the way it was ALWAYS meant to be (excuse me... "meant" implies intent, and in evolution, there is none). This would have been God's intention and design, but this doesn't seem consistent with the God of the Bible.

Now if indeed "sin" is part of the human condition, then Jesus' dying on the cross and rising from the dead 2 days later was exactly what we needed. But if there is no sin, just a collection of primitive animal instincts that have been placed by God during the eons of earth's history, then how can that same God judge and condemn us for those things? Why would He feel it necessary to sacrifice His life for us to save us from Hell? Simple: he wouldn't.

Also, seeing life as the evolutionists see it, having a violent and even cataclysmic history for the past 3 billion years, shows that if there is a God, he is not the God of the Bible. He is a creative superbeing who felt a need to experiment with the life he created. He either wasn't sure about His creation and continually made experiments, or He's the ultimate sadist. Nature, currently, is not just tender, magnificent and beautiful, but it is also violent and horrific. Things die. God's precious life dies on a regular basis, and sometimes in the cruelest of ways. People suffer, sometimes greatly, before they die. Supposedly the earth has been hit by several meteors or comets during its 4.5 billion years, making extinct countless species. Animals thrive on the deaths of others. And according to evolutionists, this survival of the fittest phenomenon has been part of life almost from the very beginning.

The God of the Bible is not sadistic. He wants no part of His creation to suffer or to die. He is perfect, having an nth-dimensional vantage point, so He'd have no need to experiment with his creation. Since the Bible says that he *IS* love, He would not create a world that depended on death in order to keep order and balance. This is the result of man's folly back in the beginning, not of a near-infinite chain of accidents that slowly rolled uphill, creating ever more complex creatures with the passage of time.

I don't know if my long post helped anyone to understand where I'm coming from or not. I hope I've made the points clearly. If anything didn't make sense, please ask me and if I can, I'll try to explain better. If anyone believes I'm wrong, you can say that, too ;-)


As for i_b_joshua:

i think that is nit-picking. those seem to me more like terms of phrase much like 'face of god' as used by some theoretical physicists and the like. it is simply using metaphorical language to describe things of wonder. if you choose to take it a step further as does jeff (and many religious scientists) then the explanation that god and nature are synonymous also explains this type of language.

Okay, that is fine. But Nature and God being one and the same is not Christianity. That's something else, but I'm not sure exactly what it's called.

And keep in mind that many of these evolutionists do not believe in any kind of higher power, or at least try to convince themselves that they don't. And in those cases, I think it is important for them to keep their language consistent with their philosophy and the scientific points that they're trying to make. It is scientifically inaccurate to say that something has an ingenious design or that evolutionary forces influenced an animal's development, when the point they're supposed to be trying to make is that such and such an organism had NO intelligent influences whatsoever affecting its development and adaptablity.

I'm just speculating here, but I believe that when they say these things, they're acknowledging, perhaps unconsciously, that the fossil they're looking at was indeed the result of an "ingenious design". I believe (and no, I'm making no claims to be a mind-reader) that those "slips" are very indicative of what they believe unconsciously.

[Kethoticus]

If our children can be taught about the "normalness" of homosexuality...

That one's almost not worthy of a response. It's a whole 'nuther thread anywayz......

If I've offended you, that was not my intention. I believe a certain way, and obviously you do, too. And now that we've established that....


First of all, tarot cards are based off of intuition, nothing more.

As far as tarot cards are concerned (or fortune-telling with playing cards, which is really what I should have said), it is an occultic practice or borderline with the occult. It is problematic to me when there are so many people out there who attack the 10 commandments being displayed in a public classroom, but overlook occultic practices being taught. Weird double standard.


I've seen little, if any bashing. If you Christians think we are bashing your beliefs, then you may not be all to comfortable with them.

Hmmm... I'm tired right now and I may (or may not) have reacted to some of the comments here personally. I'd have to go back and look at all the posts again, but I do have a life, as they say, and have spent too much of it here tonight.


Anyone want to hear about my experiences with Windows XP on a single-1.533GHz Athlon? [ducking from all the fruits and vegetables being thrown at his head]

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by Kethoticus

Hmmm... I'm tired right now and I may (or may not) have reacted to some of the comments here personally. I'd have to go back and look at all the posts again, but I do have a life, as they say, and have spent too much of it here tonight.


Anyone want to hear about my experiences with Windows XP on a single-1.533GHz Athlon? [ducking from all the fruits and vegetables being thrown at his head]

is your athlon an athlon xp processor? you know that makes a huge difference when running windows xp...just kidding ;)

i started this thread in the interest of honest discussion and i hope that it didn't incite people to attack each other in a flame war battle like the old days of gocyrus and his pc/mac wars threads:p

[Sun Baked]

C'mon you have to love heated religious debates ...

Because no matter how long you debate or how erudite your arguments -- nobody can ever really win the argument with absolute certainty.

The only way to truly win the debate, means you must be "dying to prove your point."

So while your life slowly fades away, would you mind checking into reincarnation while you're at it?

PS. I hope you don't mind me banging your wife/girlfriend while you're away...

[vniow]

Originally posted by Kethoticus


One problem here: Evolution and Christianity completely negate each other. Now I didn't say belief in God and evolution were mutually exclusive, just Christianity and evolution. How?



See, this is another thong I fail to realize, why can't people accecpt two completely and mutual different ways of thinking? Christianity explains culture, while evolution explains nature as we know it. Religion is spiritual while evolution is physical. Of course they're going to negate each other if you try to lump them in the same category.


As far as tarot cards are concerned (or fortune-telling with playing cards, which is really what I should have said), it is an occultic practice or borderline with the occult. It is problematic to me when there are so many people out there who attack the 10 commandments being displayed in a public classroom, but overlook occultic practices being taught. Weird double standard.


Funny how pagan rituals are always seen as occult rituals :rolleyes:

[iGav]

I've never seen 'God' spelt with a lower case 'g' as often as I have in this thread......

I think he'll be pretty pi$$ed at that...... :p :p :p

[vniow]

Originally posted by iGAV
I've never seen 'God' spelt with a lower case 'g' as often as I have in this thread......

I think he'll be pretty pi$$ed at that...... :p :p :p


Yeah it's hard when you're typing so fast to tell the difference between divine and not-so-divine in this thread. :rolleyes: :p :D

[Taft]

Originally posted by Kethoticus
If our children can be taught about the "normalness" of homosexuality, how to tell fortunes with playing cards and practice new age visualization, then something that provides a legitimate scientific alternative to evolution has every right to be explained to our children.

...
And as for tolerance, few in this thread seem to have any. It is fashionable to bash Christians, but bash anyone else, and you're a bigot. Almost funny.

Can you say hypocrite?? In one breath you pass judgement on homosexuals and what you later describe as "occult practices" and in the next you accuse other people of a lack of tolerance. Nice.

In my opinion, the biggest problem with Christianity is that it contains the component of conversion. It says people need to be saved and accept Jesus to go to heaven. This is problem simply because it creates an army of Christian soldiers that feel they must push their opinions and beliefs on everyone else.

This is really at the heart of this and every debate about religion and Christianity. It creates an intolerant environment and makes it impossible to really debate about facts, because religion goes beyond facts: it is based on faith. With strong enough faith, you can counter any scientific argument. "God did it" becomes the end-all retort.

But my answer to all of this is that there is absolutely no need to take the bible literally and evolution theory in no way precludes arguments for the hand of God for those who want to believe it. The basic beliefs of the Christian religions can remain intact even if all of the bible isn't taken literally. And I would suggest that if the major Christian religions taught the bible this way, the Christian world would be a much more tolerant place.

And none of this is to say that all Christians are intolerant. But there is a component of the religion that points people in that direction by people's very nature.

Taft

[Taft]

I've actually had a few conversations on this topic over the last few weeks (many of them sparked by news items like the ability for genes to "store" their behavior which may make evolution theory applicable in the case of the bombadire beetle). One of them was with a very Christian person.

This person's high school had voted to disallow Darwin's theories in biology class. They did it by an overwhelming majority. Through the conversation, it became clear that this woman didn't "believe" in carbon dating. She used this fact to disprove much of the evidence for evolution.

I find this very amusing and hope that most Christians who are ardent supporters of Creationism aren't so poorly informed. Not believing in evolution is a supportable position, but carbon dating is pretty much irrefutable fact.

Taft

[krossfyter]

oh oh here comes taft!;)

[noht*]

what's interesting is that this whole creationism/evolution debate is really only found (at least in these dimensions) in the usa. i don't believe that there is any non-private school in europe which does not teach evolution theory.
another point: i'm pretty glad that this thread stayed so civilised...i remember similar discussions on the AI and spymac forums that were no more than flamebaiting and name-calling.
[personal belief]
i find crationism to be ridiculous. what irritates me is that it actually defines itself by calling evolution non-scientific and unproven, yet failing to supply by itself a set of axioms upon which the system/theory is built and which are backed by facts...yeah, i know, it's all in the bible, so we don't have to prove it...but please, dear creationist, if you don't accept the evolution theory (which is a possible point of view); then bring your own. and no, creationism is NOT a theory; you could probably call it a thesis at best. just denouncing other ideas is not by itself one.
i mean, people like these just make me shake my head: How did all the animals fit on Noah's ark? (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/Magazines/docs/cen_v19n2_animals_ark.asp) (btw, i openly question the state of mind of the author of this essay) it's a classic example of selective perceiving; you happily list (pseudo-) facts which suit your theory, and ignore, or even worse, deny everything else. i think this is typical of many creationists. most of their arguments are easily debunked, but you hear them over and over again.
errr...enough now, let me just add that i myself am atheistic, however i perfectly know i can't prove that i'm right. that's what separates agnostic atheists from the others :D
[/personal belief]

noht

edit: hmmm, i noticed that i have posted flame-bait myself...oh well. it's a heated topic after all...

edit: uhm no me not like grammar and such

[Taft]

Originally posted by krossfyter
oh oh here comes taft!;)

I'm becoming the liberal boogity man of these boards.

Thats right. Boogity.

At least I've got people like Kross around to keep me in line. ;)

Boo!!

Taft

[vniow]

Goddamnit Taft, I thought this thead was mine.:p

[Gelfin]

Originally posted by iGAV
I've never seen 'God' spelt with a lower case 'g' as often as I have in this thread......

I think he'll be pretty pi$$ed at that...... :p :p :p

I can't speak to most of this thread. It would be an exercise in frustration for all of us. But I do have to wonder about statements like this. Here you supposedly have an all-powerful, all-knowing being, who created the entire universe. The people this deity created make squiggles on flat surfaces to represent ideas. At many points in their history, these squiggles are translated into different squiggles so that different cultures may read stories of the deity. At some point these stories are brought into a culture that uses two different variations of the same set of squiggles to express their ideas. They have idiosyncratic rules for determining which set of squiggles to choose from in particular cases, and at the time of the translation, the translators decide to use the "big squiggle" instead of the "little squiggle" when writing the word that refers to the deity.

And we're supposed to believe that, from that point on, this supposedly tolerant, loving, forgiving and absolutely good deity is going to be enraged whenever someone chooses a squiggle from the "small" set instead of the "large" set? Does that make sense?

Incidentally, your argument might carry more weight if you had remembered that the "he" in "he'll be pretty pi$$ed" should also be capitalized.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Taft


I'm becoming the liberal boogity man of these boards.

Thats right. Boogity.

At least I've got people like Kross around to keep me in line. ;)

Boo!!

Taft


*shudders in the dark corner peering omniously at the dark looming object overhead and yelps "mother"*

[scem0]

If you teach the christian creationist point of view, then teach the Buddhist, Hindu, and other religeous creation stories. But I would rather people not teach any. I hate religeons.... (I am agnostic)

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by Kethoticus
One problem ..... If anyone believes I'm wrong, you can say that, too ;-)

kethoticus, thank you for taking the time to write that. what you say makes a lot of sense and to a degree argues with me that you cannot fairly compare the two views of the world. although i personally see no reason to believe in the literal interpretation of the bible i now see how it fudamentally disagrees with evolution and scientific practice in general. that's a shame because i think the 'god as nature' type of religion has a lot more to say to us as human beings (read: animals).
As for i_b_joshua:
Okay, that is fine. But Nature and God being one and the same is not Christianity. That's something else, but I'm not sure exactly what it's called.
i don't know if there is a generic term and i'm not going to look it up right now but you could say 'druidism'

And keep in mind that many of these evolutionists do not believe in any kind of higher power, or at least try to convince themselves that they don't. And in those cases, I think it is important for them to keep their language consistent with their philosophy and the scientific points that they're trying to make. It is scientifically inaccurate to say that something has an ingenious design or that evolutionary forces influenced an animal's development, when the point they're supposed to be trying to make is that such and such an organism had NO intelligent influences whatsoever affecting its development and adaptablity.

i can't agree with you there. being too literal just makes you sound like a bore. it would be like asking people to stop using the word 'terrific' because they don't actually mean it.

I'm just speculating here, but I believe that when they say these things, they're acknowledging, perhaps unconsciously, that the fossil they're looking at was indeed the result of an "ingenious design". I believe (and no, I'm making no claims to be a mind-reader) that those "slips" are very indicative of what they believe unconsciously.
i think your hunch may be right but i personally prefer to read it from a more agnostic slant. i think there are few real atheists in the world. i believe that there are many more with slightly agnostic beliefs than would like to admit. please don't read that as a condemnation of them, just an acknowledgement that most atheists know they would have a very hard time 'proving' conclusively that God (happi iGav?) doesn't exist.

i think this has been an excellent thread and the civility has astonished me. :)

i_b_joshua

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by noht*
what's interesting is that this whole creationism/evolution debate is really only found (at least in these dimensions) in the usa.

true. 'Creationism' as a pseudo science is by-and-large a creation (pardon the pun) of the US. it was clearly born out of a perceived need by christian religions to 'answer' to an increasingly science-based country. rather than entice people back to the church however it seems to have created a divide between different groups that previously was not nearly so prevalent.

i_b_joshua

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by Taft


I'm becoming the liberal boogity man of these boards.

Thats right. Boogity.

At least I've got people like Kross around to keep me in line. ;)

Boo!!

Taft

you 'n' me both taft!


:D

i_b_joshua

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by i_b_joshua
most atheists know they would have a very hard time 'proving' conclusively that God (happi iGav?) doesn't exist.

piggybacking on that, I'd conjecture that those 'atheists' would also have a hard time proving that they do not have a "God"-like-esque figure in their lives....

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by Choppaface


piggybacking on that, I'd conjecture that those 'atheists' would also have a hard time proving that they do not have a "God"-like-esque figure in their lives....

why? are you volunteering? :D

coz i'm available too. :)

i_b_joshua

[resm]

Originally posted by iGAV
I've never seen 'God' spelt with a lower case 'g' as often as I have in this thread......

I think he'll be pretty pi$$ed at that...... :p :p :p

HE couldn't care less....

God has no Ego...that is something he leaves up to us to struggle with and just look at all this postings and you can see what I mean.

I once came across the sentence "and everything is mind" and that's when it hit me like a light flash....that is for me the only acceptable explaination for our existence.

Cosmic mind (God) has created this physical universe in his mind and everything in it (we are unit minds) and since the first original thought he never stopped thinking.
Nothing in his mind is unimportant or useless and like any of our own thought processes his thoughts will go on expanding, changing and creating new physical expressions.
(another explaination for the continous expansion of the universe)

Nothing will stop for ever...it will only change form.

And that is the explaination for "Evolution".

Right away...the explaination of "GOD" is:

G = Generator
O = Operator
D = Destroyer

He creates, He maintains and He destroys....only to start the cycle again.

[krossfyter]

God also created us to have fellowship with him. Thats one of the main reasons we were created.

[scem0]

The truth should be taught. So whichever has more proven points - either evolution or creatonism - should be taught. It is clearly evolution so it should be taught. We will never know the truth of the creation of life, but we should try to get as close as we can. Science has and always will be more credible then religion. If you want to hear a christian view of creation go to a church. If you want to hear what is the closest to the truth then go to school.

[krossfyter]

why cant both sides be taught in schools?

and let the students make up thier own minds. that way it wont look like they are force feeding any side.

[mc68k]

Evolution has too many fallacies to be considered true science. It's just people trying to make hard connections between organisms using evolutionary apomorphies when there aren't any.

Like saying birds are closely connected with crocodiles. I was taught this in a college organismal BIO class!

[resm]

Originally posted by mc68k
Evolution has too many fallacies to be considered true science.

I disagree.....

This is the same as Allopathic Medicine disregards Natural Medicine that has been proven to be helpful for thousand of years just because most of them have not been "scientificaly" proven to be helpful.

The proof of the pudding ls in the eating.

Only within the past few years some open minded Doctors have started to use Natural Medicine to be used in their treatments, BECAUSE THEY HELP THEIR PATIENTS, and that is ultimately what counts.

The same with Science of Evolution.

There is much more to that than what you can prove in the laboratory.

The biggest laboratory we have available is our mind.

If we would explore that more in a scientifical way, we would have many more answers to our questions than what we have today.

interesting reading here :

http://www.home.zonnet.nl/microvita/CDindex.htm

[Kethoticus]

Taft wrote

Can you say hypocrite?? In one breath you pass judgement on homosexuals and what you later describe as "occult practices" and in the next you accuse other people of a lack of tolerance. Nice.

It is only "nice" if you do not understand why I said what I said.

Christians feel the practice of homosexuality is wrong. We also believe that heterosexual immorality is wrong. We base this on what God tells us through His word. It is not judgemental to discern right from wrong. What would be wrong would be for me to pick up stones to throw at a homosexual, e.g.

The term "occult" covers a broad range of mystical practices from astrology to all-out devil worship. Exactly how was I intolerant in my using this term? If our kids are not allowed to pray on their own time in a public school, but are allowed to be taught new-age visualization and other quasi-spiritual practices, tell me why I shouldn't complain. That is the ultimate of hypocrisy on the parts of church/state-separation activists.

I accused other people of being intolerant because a) I was way past my bedtime, and b) some here had some snide comments about my expression of my beliefs. But did that actually constitute a flame? I don't know and don't care anymore. If anyone felt I falsely accused them, I apologize.

But there IS Christian-bashing in our society, and it is fashionable. Jesse Ventura's public comments are a great example. Another is a shirt I saw in a Greenwich Village store a couple of years ago that read, "So many right-wing Christians. So few lions." But that's okay. Now imagine if some skinhead wore a shirt condemning homosexuals in that part of NY? He'd be skinned alive. (Not that I'm saying he'd be right in his beliefs, but the lack of tolerance for his freedom to say what he wants is what gets me.)

As for "tolerance", let's define it. Tolerance means to tolerate--"to put up with" or "to agree to disagree". But to many in our society now, it has come to mean that I must accept another's belief system and way of life as equally right and as valid as my own. I must embrace what they do and say it's ALL good and okay. That is actually the opposite of tolerance, as the parties in question can not get along unless they agree with one another.


In my opinion, the biggest problem with Christianity is that it contains the component of conversion. It says people need to be saved and accept Jesus to go to heaven. This is problem simply because it creates an army of Christian soldiers that feel they must push their opinions and beliefs on everyone else.

Some Christians "push", and are even obnoxious about their witnessing. I completely agree with that. I however, do not. I TRY to LIVE it, and discuss it later, if the opportunity arises. However, we believe that we are warning people of impending doom. We would be doing you a tremendous disservice if we did not tell you about what God wants for you. But if you don't want to accept it, I'll do what Jesus would do--let you move on and never bring it up again, that is, unless you do.


But my answer to all of this is that there is absolutely no need to take the bible literally and evolution theory in no way precludes arguments for the hand of God for those who want to believe it. The basic beliefs of the Christian religions can remain intact even if all of the bible isn't taken literally. And I would suggest that if the major Christian religions taught the bible this way, the Christian world would be a much more tolerant place.

No sir, you are wrong. If they taught it this way, then it would no longer be Christianity. And I've already explained why. What needs to be taught is how to love people into the kingdom of God. THAT would create a more tolerant environment.


And none of this is to say that all Christians are intolerant. But there is a component of the religion that points people in that direction by people's very nature.

Hmm... if I understood that correctly, we might actually agree on something ;-)


I find this very amusing and hope that most Christians who are ardent supporters of Creationism aren't so poorly informed.

Unfortunately, many are. Perhaps not all, but I'm willing to bet many. We are not nearly educated enough about things like this, and our ignorance is painfully revealed when we try to take on a paleontologist. And I am embarrassed by my brothers and sisters who do this. Many of us seem to go with the preacher or the teacher instead of doing hard-core study on our own. This is what I have tried to do, but have had to put it on hold for a time.


i_b_joshua wrote:

kethoticus, thank you for taking the time to write that. what you say makes a lot of sense and to a degree argues with me that you cannot fairly compare the two views of the world. although i personally see no reason to believe in the literal interpretation of the bible i now see how it fudamentally disagrees with evolution and scientific practice in general. that's a shame because i think the 'god as nature' type of religion has a lot more to say to us as human beings (read: animals).

Well, if it's any consolation ;-), I believe that God put a little of Himself in everything He created, but only in the sense of a reflection, not His substance. Altho whether Christianity eliminates legitimate scientific investigation is another thing (but I don't believe it does).


i don't know if there is a generic term and i'm not going to look it up right now but you could say 'druidism'

Actually, a Christian friend of mine told me that it's actually pantheism. But the two beliefs (druidism and pantheism) are rooted in pagan practices and beliefs I believe.


i think your hunch may be right but i personally prefer to read it from a more agnostic slant. i think there are few real atheists in the world. i believe that there are many more with slightly agnostic beliefs than would like to admit. please don't read that as a condemnation of them, just an acknowledgement that most atheists know they would have a very hard time 'proving' conclusively that God (happi iGav?) doesn't exist.

Perhaps you said better what I was TRYING to say last night.


i think this has been an excellent thread and the civility has astonished me.

Me too. There have only been a few angry posts, and considering the volatility of what was said (by me as well as others), I'm impressed with the self-control of many here (particularly edvniow--thank you sir for reminding me that I need to be sensitive to the feelings of others even if I disagree with their behavior.) Altho edvniow wrote Funny how pagan rituals are always seen as occult rituals I must explain why this bothers me.

Pagan is occult. But whether or not paganism is occultism was irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Both are spiritual in nature, so ultimately it doesn't matter. Anything spiritual is supposed to be excluded from the public classroom. My point was that some quasi-religious practices were being taught to public school children. If you believe in separation of church and state the way it has been implemented, then you must agree that this is wrong.


jefhatfield wrote

is your athlon an athlon xp processor? you know that makes a huge difference when running windows xp...just kidding

Oh poop.


i started this thread in the interest of honest discussion and i hope that it didn't incite people to attack each other in a flame war battle like the old days of gocyrus and his pc/mac wars threads

There were some heated words, but overall, it really wasn't that bad.


Folks, I for one am retiring from this thread. I said yesterday that I actually do have a life, and I'm interfering with it with this novel of a post. If anyone feels the need to express agreement or disagreement with anything I've written, I welcome all non-flaming emails. I can be emailed with the button below.

[gooddog]

It's not so much WHAT they teach; it's what they teach it AS.

Taught as science, it is fraudulent and makes liars of good teachers, fools of
naive students who will despise us, in their adult years , for our delinquency today.

Taught as religion, it highjacks the compulsory attendance of minors in public schools. These are young people who come from many distinct religious up-bringings and atheists legally compelled to attend what inevitably will become evangelical conversion sessions.

By pretending that creationism is science, it's proponents betray a need to have their faith stamped with the imprimateur of rational, empirical materialism.

At bottom, it insists on so-called "supernatural causes" that are claimed to be, by definition, beyond the reach of scientific methods. In the absence of rational, empirical investigation, we will foster a recrudescence of arbitrary and politically convenient scholasticism like that which hobbled the physical sciences and soiled the judicial system during the apogee of ecclesiastically controlled "education".

Science is not in the business of preserving slack-jawed awe , wonder, and "the unexplainable". Neither is it in the business of certifying miracles. Quite the opposite, it seeks to shed as much light on Natural causes and our understanding of it's own lexicon as possible.

The counterfeit of science will merely practice our planet's young in the art of deception and teach them to dissemble as a daily ritual. It will soon become second nature to them. This is not in our best interest.

Give the kids a break.

Like the 1980's TV talk shows (Tammy and the Jimmy's) that were not really talk shows; their commercial breaks that were not really commercial breaks; their realestate bonanza's that were not really bonanza's; the library that - collapsed to only one book- is not really a library; their "universities" that are not really places of learning; the abortion clinics advertised in the Yellow Pages that are really "right-to-life" fronts; and their clergy who are exposed to be off-the-rack johns, child molestors and lousy husbands; this juxtaposition of two totally unrelated practices (scientific enquiry vs. the rattling of cat bones and chicken lips) as if they occupied the pans of a scale at equilibrium, is a scam that lacks all subtlety.

The substitution of hard-won knowledge and wisdom with yokum evangelism - however polished - is disturbingly evocative of the way that certain viruses, fungi, and parasites replace the genetic code and entrails of a host until it is killed, all the while sporting a disguise that resembles the host superficially. Often times, one does not realize that the host has been replaced by the parasite , until it is too late.

It has been said that scientific proof makes faith superfluous and faith makes scientific proof irrelevant.

I wonder if these people have any real faith.

---gooddog

[jefhatfield]

about separation of church and state;

if christianity is taught in the classroom, then teach other religions

but since christianity is not taught in classrooms, then other religions should not be taught there either to be truly separating church and state...and that includes paganism and occultism since they are religions too like christianity, judaism, or islam

singling out christians and censoring them only in schools is wrong if other religions are taught there

let worship of religions be done in their own buildings and gatherings and basic academics to be taught school

[iGav]

Originally posted by Gelfin


And we're supposed to believe that, from that point on, this supposedly tolerant, loving, forgiving and absolutely good deity is going to be enraged whenever someone chooses a squiggle from the "small" set instead of the "large" set? Does that make sense?

Incidentally, your argument might carry more weight if you had remembered that the "he" in "he'll be pretty pi$$ed" should also be capitalized.

I was taking this pi$$....................... :rolleyes:

Anyway, in my eyes, there is no GOD............. plain and simple........ :eek: :eek: :eek:

[resm]

Originally posted by iGAV
Anyway, in my eyes, there is no GOD............. plain and simple........ :eek: :eek: :eek:

you are right !

He is never in our eyes....he is in our mind :D

[Taft]

Originally posted by Kethoticus

It is only "nice" if you do not understand why I said what I said.

Christians feel the practice of homosexuality is wrong. We also believe that heterosexual immorality is wrong. We base this on what God tells us through His word. It is not judgemental to discern right from wrong. What would be wrong would be for me to pick up stones to throw at a homosexual, e.g.
...
I accused other people of being intolerant because a) I was way past my bedtime, and b) some here had some snide comments about my expression of my beliefs. But did that actually constitute a flame? I don't know and don't care anymore. If anyone felt I falsely accused them, I apologize.
...
As for "tolerance", let's define it. Tolerance means to tolerate--"to put up with" or "to agree to disagree". But to many in our society now, it has come to mean that I must accept another's belief system and way of life as equally right and as valid as my own. I must embrace what they do and say it's ALL good and okay. That is actually the opposite of tolerance, as the parties in question can not get along unless they agree with one another.

From dictionary.com:

Tolerance-
n.

1. The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others.

Intolerant-
adj.
Not tolerant, especially:

1. Unwilling to tolerate differences in opinions, practices, or beliefs, especially religious beliefs.
2. Opposed to the inclusion or participation of those different from oneself, especially those of a different racial, ethnic, or social background.
3. Unable or unwilling to endure or support: intolerant of interruptions; a community intolerant of crime.

Judgmental-
adj.

2. Inclined to make judgments, especially moral or personal ones:

By saying that homosexuality is "wrong" you are assigning a morality to it. By assigning a morality to it, you are making a judgment. The tendancy to do this is described as being judgmental.

While being judgmental in no way makees you intolerant, I have found that often times the two go hand in hand. As you can see from the definition of tolerant and intolerance, a wide variety of actions can fall under the category of intolerance. In other words, wether or not you are intolerant would depend on HOW you "put up with" given ideas and actions.

And I didn't think you flamed anyone, but I do see hypocracy in casting judgements and then calling others intolerant. Thats by my admittedly subjective definition of intolerance. By the very nature of the word each of us makes his own definition of what intolerance is.


The term "occult" covers a broad range of mystical practices from astrology to all-out devil worship. Exactly how was I intolerant in my using this term? If our kids are not allowed to pray on their own time in a public school, but are allowed to be taught new-age visualization and other quasi-spiritual practices, tell me why I shouldn't complain. That is the ultimate of hypocrisy on the parts of church/state-separation activists.


But practices that you describe as "occult" need not have spiritual associations. Just because a practice originated years ago when nearly EVERYONE had some sort of religious or spiritual association, that doesn't mean valuable and useful techniques and discoveries stemming from those practices should be abandoned. There are plenty of practices that originated in Christianity that are in use today. The origins of ideas shouldn't preclude their use if they have proven legitimate uses.

Its like saying Yoga (as its taught in most US institutions) is wrong because it is spiritual. Almost all yoga classes in the US have no spiritual association and focus simply on the benifits of relaxation and stretching. If those things have positive effects on health, why shouldn't we do them?? We should avoid healthy practices because they originated from asian or "pagan" cultures?? Blah.

Again, I think you are casting judgement on a thing because you must assign a moral right or wrong to a situation.


But there IS Christian-bashing in our society, and it is fashionable. Jesse Ventura's public comments are a great example. Another is a shirt I saw in a Greenwich Village store a couple of years ago that read, "So many right-wing Christians. So few lions." But that's okay. Now imagine if some skinhead wore a shirt condemning homosexuals in that part of NY? He'd be skinned alive. (Not that I'm saying he'd be right in his beliefs, but the lack of tolerance for his freedom to say what he wants is what gets me.)


What you describe as fashionable, I call a "reasonable amount of disapproval." For centuries, Christians ruled and opressed people with other beliefs. Only in the last century or so have people really begun to feel free to express their opinions against religion and freely pronounce and practice their beliefs.

As many Christians are still trying to push and impose their morality on others, and "non-believers" are free to opposed this behavior without persecution, we see a lot more of the behavior you call "Christian bashing."

Think about it...how many Jews, Hindus, Buddists, or Native Americans have you seen trying to push their religion on others lately?? How many have tried to influence governmental policy for the benifit of their religion and set of morals?? There are some religions in the world whose congregation and leaders still try to do this, and Christianity is among them.

And this is really the point of my previous post. Christianity has an aspect to it that causes its followers to attempt to change society to conform to their beliefs. This is what I see as the problem.


Some Christians "push", and are even obnoxious about their witnessing. I completely agree with that. I however, do not. I TRY to LIVE it, and discuss it later, if the opportunity arises. However, we believe that we are warning people of impending doom. We would be doing you a tremendous disservice if we did not tell you about what God wants for you. But if you don't want to accept it, I'll do what Jesus would do--let you move on and never bring it up again, that is, unless you do.

Believe it or not, I respect this.


No sir, you are wrong. If they taught it this way, then it would no longer be Christianity. And I've already explained why. What needs to be taught is how to love people into the kingdom of God. THAT would create a more tolerant environment.

I don't get this. I don't see why teaching that God exists, Jesus was his son and dies for our sins, and that the Bible is a collection of stories that illustrate Gods love, Christian morality and how to live your life but not necessarily a book of accurate historical events; I don't see why that would kill Christianity.

The bible has been traslated and copied tons of times. There have been ample opportunities for people to change it over the years, even if the original document (or part of it) came from the hand of God. Think about it. Lets pick one of the apostles, Matthew. He was a normal man. As Christianity teaches, he was a sinner just like the rest of us. He was susceptable to temptation, greed, desire for power, etc that the rest of us were. To make the assumption that his words, written a couple thousand years ago, then translated and copied hundreds of times in between, either accurately respresent what EXACTLY happened or weren't altered in the traslation, is pretty faithful of MANKIND. Not faithful of religion, mind you, but of the men--just like you or me--on this earth who have acted as the stewards of the religion in our deity's abscence.

The same--and even more--questions can be raised against the Old Testiment (like did the people in the Old Testiment even exist??)

So, given the assumption that the Bible can't be treated as fact (just humor me), how would we go about teaching the Bible?? If you look at it from my perspective, you'll see why I feel the way I do.


Hmm... if I understood that correctly, we might actually agree on something ;-)


It made sense in my head. :)

Taft

[Taft]

Originally posted by krossfyter
why cant both sides be taught in schools?

and let the students make up thier own minds. that way it wont look like they are force feeding any side.

What about other religion's theories?? Scientology?? They believe our existence has something to do with alien cultures (I think, anyway--correct me if I'm wrong). Should we teach that too???

The problem is Creationism is a belief. There is really little evidence for it in nature. While there is plenty of evidence for evolution (a theory, not a belief, nor a fact) and some evidence against it. The problem with teaching beliefs is that they don't need to rely on facts and knowledge, but rather beliefs and feelings.

Schools are institutions for the acquisition of knowledge. Period. While private schools should be allowed to have their own agendas and teach belief, public school have responsibility to teach only facts, knowledge, art, laws, history and scientific theory. Anything outside of this and they are preaching belief. Personally, *I* want to be the one responsible for my child's beliefs. I don't want a teacher saying that he'll go to hell if he isn't good, or that Creationism is how mankind came to be despite very good evidence for more scientific theories.

That is why this shouldn't be taught in schools.

Hate to start a conversation and then take off, but I'm leaving the country. Taking political excile in London for a week :rolleyes:. But I really am going for a week for work related stuff. I'd like to keep this conversation going, so I'll try to check this board.

Taft

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by Taft
What about other religion's theories?? Scientology?? They believe our existence has something to do with alien cultures (I think, anyway--correct me if I'm wrong). Should we teach that too???

You're right one look at Michael Jackson and/or Dennis Rodman and just about anyone would tend to believe in alien manipulation of the Human species.

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
...someone had to get the ball rolling:p

From a poll, to a Georgia school near you ->

Ga. Board OKs Evolution Options (http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/other/1110/9-27-2002/20020927021502_17.html)

School board members in this conservative Georgia school district said they don't see the harm in encouraging critical thinking about evolution, even if that means teaching creationism.

The school board voted unanimously Thursday night to give its teachers permission to introduce students to different theories on the origin of life, including creationism.

The measure says the district believes "discussion of disputed views of academic subjects is a necessary element of providing a balanced education, including the study of the origin of species."

[scem0]

It seems unfair that they would teach the christian point of view (creation-wise) but not the Hindu way, or other religions. I understand that they could spend the whole year going over different creation stories - but it is unfair to teach only the christian creations story.

[onemoof]

Some people who have not taken courses in evolution may not understand that evolution is not a theory. Evolution is indeed a fact. Natural Selection is a theory as a vehicle by which evolution happens, but there are other theories in existence that have been proven wrong (such as the theory that an animal will grow flippers if it spends a lot of time in water).

Individual cells or organisms DO NOT EVOLVE, only populations evolve. Evolution can be caused by genetic mutation: basically when a strand of DNA is being copied there is a very tiny percentage of "glitches" that occur which may be detrimental to the organism in development stages (and cause it to die), or it might be beneficial (such as give it some sort of immunity, or make it a little bit bigger in size than its parents). The point is that it's random.

Evolution does not have to come from mutation. Any change in a population is evolution.

Here's an experiment: Find 10 pea plants of various sizes and note the percentage of short plants to tall plants. Now kill the 5 smallest plants and force the other 5 plants to produce 10 offspring. More likely the 10 new offspring will have a larger average height than the initial random sample. You have now witnessed evolution.

[big]

just to chime in....I love how premarital sex is sooo condemned, but premarital sex is, only if you intend on getting merried (hence the pre part). so why not condemn that sex of which involves persons you do not intend on marrying, and just condemn the premarital activities?

oh well, all man's thinking is flawed in some ways, ie evolution doesn't happen (as if) but why can our creator not have designed us that way?

*sigh*

[krossfyter]

Alright hell f*ck it.... teach all religions in school... or teach NONE at all.. even evolution...


all religions that should be taught so people dont get a major heart attack...

Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist, Buddhism, Chinese traditional religion, primal-indigenous, African Traditional & Diasporic, Sikhism, Juche, Spiritism, Judaism, Baha'i, Jainism, Shinto, Cao Dai, Tenrikyo, Neo-Paganism, Unitarian-Universalism, Rastafarianism, Scientology, Zoroastrianism



any more?


ta hell with it all.

[krossfyter]

this is how all beliefs and or religions should be taught in school accept no substitute. if taught this way... the world would be a better place... funny even:rolleyes:


Agnosticism (1)
What is this ****?
Agnosticism (2)
Maybe there is **** or maybe it happens; then again, maybe not.
Altruism (1)
Want some ****?
Altruism (2)
Let me give you my ****.
Americanism
Who gives a ****?
Amish
**** dost occur.
Anal Retentivism
Keep your **** to yourself.
Anglicanism
Our **** doesn't stink.
Apathism
I don't give a ****.
Archimedesmism
If I had a lever that's long enough, and a place to stand, I can move the earth -- even if it is full of ****.
Aristotlism (1)
Once a **** is stretched by an idea, it never again happens in its original shape.
Aristotlism (2)
**** is real.
Neil Armstrong
This is one small **** for me, but one giant heap for mankind.
Asatru
If **** happens, blame it on Loki.
Atheism (1)
I don't believe this ****.
Atheism (2)
There is no ****.
Ba'Hai
All **** is truly ****.
Baptist
You are ****ting wrong, therefore you'll be punished.
Baptist Fundamentalism
**** happens because the Bible says so.
Blondism
I'm stupid as ****.
Bowdlerism
**** happens.
Branch Davidianism
**** burns.
Breathairians
We don't have to eat that ****.
Buddhism (1)
**** happens.
Buddhism (2)
If **** happens, it really isn't ****.
Bushism (1)
What ****?
Bushism (2)
Read my lips, no new ****.
Calvinism
Man is nothing but ****.
Calvin-and-Hobbesism
Man, this **** is fun.
Caninism
**** happens in the neighbor's yard.
Capitalism (1)
Do you buy this ****?
Capitalism (2)
How much will this **** cost?
Capitalism (3)
**** happens, and it'll cost you!
Carmensandiegism
Where in the world is that **** happening?
Cartesianism
I ****, therefore I am.
Catholicism (1)
If **** happens, you deserved it.
Catholicism (2)
Everybody gets ****.
Chauvanism
We may be ****, but you can't live without us.
Chestertonianism
**** is the farthest thing from ****.
Christian Fundamentalism
The belief that Hell is where everyone must mind their own ****.
Clintonism
I didn't inhale the ****!
Commercialism
Let's package this ****.
Communism (1)
It's everybody's ****.
Communism (2)
Everyone's **** is everyone else's ****.
Computerism
Why won't this ****ing **** work?
Confucianism
Confucius say, "**** happens."
Constipation
My **** just won't happen.
Contract Theory
If we don't agree to form society, everything will go to ****.
Creation Science (1)
We have proof that God created all the **** that happens.
Creation Science (2)
**** happens all at once.
Creation Science (3)
...And the Lord said "Let there be ****"...
Dadaism
Blue **** rumage Idaho potato.
Dadism
Your mom knows her ****.
Daffy Duckism
It's *my* ****! Down, down! Go, go! Miiiiine!
Darwinism
We came up from ****.
Deja Vu
I think this **** happened before, but I'm not sure.
Descartes
I **** therefore I am.
Dianetics (1)
Even **** can make money.
Dianetics (2)
**** your way to a better life.
Discordianism
This MIGHT be ****, but is instead a fuzzy 1973 Mustang.
Dominicans
Believe in ****, or we'll boil you in it.
Donism
I'm gonna' make ya' a **** you can't refuse.
Dyslexianism
Hits shapnep.
Egoism
I AM the ****!
Egotism
My **** is the only **** that matters.
Empiricism
**** only happens if I see it happen.
Employerism
This **** is your fault.
Energizer Rabbit
**** happens... and happens... and happens...
Environmentalism (1)
Recycle this ****.
Environmentalism (2)
**** happens, but it's biodegradable.
Euphemism
Caca happens.
Evangelism
You need our ****.
Evangelicalism (1)
I can heal people -- but oooonly with the help of yourrrrr ****.
Evangelicalism (2)
God has a wonderful plan for your ****.
Evolution (1)
**** happens gradually.
Evolution (2)
**** is getting better all the time!
Existentialism
**** doesn't happen; **** just is.
Existentialism, General
Your **** is what you make of it.

cont....

[krossfyter]

continued from my previous post....


Existentialism, Sartre
We are defined by our **** happening.
Felinism
**** happens... bury it.
Feminism
Men are ****.
Finagle's Third Law
The happening of **** tends to a maximum.
The Force
Do not be swayed by the Dark Side of the ****.
Freudianism
**** happens as a result of repressed sexual urges.
Frisbeetarianism
**** happens under cars, just out of reach.
Garbagism
I dump your ****.
Geocentrism
Our **** is the center of the cosmos!
Green Peaceism
Save this ****.
GURPSism
Our **** can happen in any conceivable place or time.
Guruism
The master's **** does not stink.
Hare Krishnaism
**** happens **** happens **** happens rama rama.
Hedonism (1)
**** that ****; let's party!
Hedonism (2)
This **** is fun!
Heisenbergism
**** happened, we just don't know where.
Hinduism (1)
This **** happened before.
Hinduism (2)
This **** is not a religion. It is a Way of Life.
Hippyism
Make peace with ****.
Hitchhikerism
The answer to all this **** is 42.
Idealism
That ****'s all in your mind.
Illuminism
We make **** happen.
Interrigationism
'Ve have 'vays of making you ****!
Islam
If **** happens, it is the will of Allah.
Islam, Shi'ite
When Shi'ite happens, kill Salman Rushdie.
Islam, Sunni
Why do Shi'ites always happen to us?
Jehovah's Witnesses (1)
No **** happens until Armageddon.
Jehovah's Witnesses (2)
Let me in your house and I'll tell you why **** happens.
Jehovah's Witnesses (3)
Good Morning, I have some **** for you to read.
Judaism
Why does this **** always happen to us?
Judaism, Reformed
Got any Kaopectate?
Jungianism
All **** that happens is an aspect of the archetypical **** generated consensually by the mass subconscious.
Kennedyism
Ask not what your country's **** can do for you, but what your **** can do for your country.
Kierkegaard
This **** is highly improbable; therefore, we should believe it happens.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
I have a ****...
Kinisonism
Ooh-**** happens! Oo-ooooooooooo!
Thomas Kuhn
**** always happens exactly the way you expect it to.
Libertarianism
Keep your hands off of my ****.
Logical Positivism
**** = S+H+I+T.
Lutheranism
Catholicism is ****.
Marie Antoinette'ism
If they can't afford bread, why don't they get **** instead.
Marines
It's not just ****, it's an adventure.
Marvin
Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and I can't even ****.
Marxism, Classical
The workers take all the ****, but they're gonna dish it back out again.
Materialism
Whoever dies with the most **** wins.
Mathematicism
Necessary and sufficient conditions for **** to occur are: 1) **** must exist and be continuous in a domain D 2) No **** must exceed **** on the boundary of D.
McCarthyism
Are you now, or have you ever been, a ****?
Josh McDowell-ism (1)
Anyone who investigates the evidence for this **** and doesn't see the truth as plain as day is a nincompoop.
Josh McDowell-ism (2)
Anyone who investigates the evidence for this **** and doesn't agree with me must want to have sexual intercourse outside of marriage.
Mennonite
None of this modern **** now.
Momism
You'll eat this **** and like it!
Moonies
Only happy **** really happens.
Mormonism (1)
Your **** is ****, but our **** is the ONE TRUE ****.
Mormonism (2)
God sent us this ****.
Murphism
**** always happens at the worst possible time and place.
Narcissism
My **** don't stink.
Native American
This **** is sacred when it happens.
New Age (1)
Why did I happen to create this ****?
New Age (2)
This isn't **** if I REALLY believe it's chocolate.
Newton's First Law
**** that is happening tends to keep happening.
Newton's Second Law
You have to push to make **** happen.
Newton's Third Law
Every **** that happens has an equal and opposite **** happening.
Neitzscheism (1)
If you're not Ubermenschen, you're not ****.
Neitzscheism (2)
A man without a **** is not a man.
Neitzscheism (3)
**** is dead!
Nihilism
Everything is ****.
NIMBYism
Your ****'s not gonna happen here.
Nixonism (1)
**** didn't happen, and if it did, I don't know anything about it.
Nixonism (2)
I am not a ****.
Nonsequiturism
Route 176 goes south.
Oat Branism
Your **** will keep happening.
Objectivism
****=****
Occultism
We eat our ****.
Optimism (1)
That **** won't happen to me.
Optimism (2)
This ****, too, will pass.
Paganism (1)
**** happens. Accept it.
Paganism (2)
**** is a part of nature and makes things grow.
Panglossism
This is the best of all possible ****s.
Paranoia
**** happens because it's a plot.
Pascalism
We are just ****. But we are thinking ****.
Patriotism (1)
My ****, right or wrong.
Patriotism (2)
Give me liberty, or give me ****!
Patriotism (3)
Give me ****, or give me death!
Pee-Weeism
You can't arrest me for that ****!
Perotism
We're in deep ****.
Pessimism
That **** is going to happen.
Platonism
There is an ideal ****, of which all the **** that happens is but an imperfect image.
Politically Correctism (1)
Don't call it ****. That's not nice. Call it "Nutritionally-Deprived Output."
Politically Correctism (2)
Nutritionally Corrected Output happens.
Positive thinking
**** is what you make it.
Pragmaticism
It may be ****, but it works.
Protestantism
Let **** happen to someone else.
Psychology
I can help you deal with the **** that is happening.
PTL Club
Send us your ****.
Quaker
_
Quayleism
****e happense.
Rastafarian (1)
**** happens, but if it's all right with Jah, it's all right with me.
Rastafarian (2)
Let's roll that **** up and smoke it.
Reaganism
I don't recall if **** happened.
Reaganism, Nancy
Just say, `**** happens.'
Republicanism
We earned our ****.
Robinism
Holy ****, Batman!
Rousseau
Only natural **** is worth ****.
Schroedingerism
**** does not happen until you smell it.
Scooperism
If your **** happens here, you gotta pick it up.
Secular Humanism
**** happens, but there's a rational explanation.
Seventh Day Adventist
No **** on Saturdays.
Shakespeare
To **** or not to ****, that is the question.
Sherlock Holmes
I know where this **** came from.
Shinto
**** is everywhere. So as long as you're stepping in it, show it some respect.
Skinnerism
If eat then ****.
Socrates
I am ****. But I know I am ****.
Solipsism (1)
All this **** is a creation of my imagination.
Solipsism (2)
The only thing I can be sure of is that my **** happens.
Spockism
The **** of the many outweighs the **** of the few... or the one.
Spockism, Reformed
The **** of the one outweighs the **** of the many.
Dr. Spockism
Encourage your child to make **** happen.
Spoonerism
Hit shappens.
Stalinism
The state treats you like ****.
Stoicism (1)
This **** is good for me.
Stoicism (2)
**** happens -- deal with it.
Sturgeon's Law
90% of everything is ****.
Subgenius
**** happens -- SO WHAT? GIVE ME SOME SLACK!
Surrealism
**** is shiny and shaped like a Buick.
Taoism
The **** that happens is not the true ****.
Televangelism
Your tax-deductible donation could stop this **** from happening.
Thermodynamics: First Law
The **** that happens cannot be created or destroyed.
Thermodynamics: Second Law
When **** happens, it happens from a place of more **** to a place of less ****.
Thermodynamics: Third Law
Disorder is the inevitable result of **** happening.
Totalitarianism
**** doesn't happen unless we say so.
Trekkism, The Original Series
To boldly **** where no **** has happened before.
Trekkism, The Motion Picture(s)
This **** is happening again.
Trekkism, The Next Generation
This **** happens again every week.
Trekkism, Deep Space 9
**** happens on the other side of the wormhole.
Trekkism, Voyager
**** happens on the other side of the galaxy.
Twelve-Step Programs
God, grant me the serenity to deal with this ****.
Unitarianism
There's only one ****, but you can have it happen any way you want.
Unix
**** Happened. Core dumped.
Ursism
**** happens in the woods.
Utilitarianism (1)
Do that which generates the greatest **** for the greatest number.
Utilitarianism (2)
Let's make the best of this ****.
Vacuum
That **** sucks
Vandalism
I'm gonna wreck this ****!
VMS
Want to make **** happen? No Privilege for Attempted Operation.
Voodooism
**** doesn't just happen -- somebody dumped it on you.
Voyeurism
Look at that **** happening.
Waldoism
Where *is* that little ****?
Xeno's paradox
It's logically impossible for **** to happen.
Yuppieism
It's my ****! All mine!
Zen
What is the sound of one **** happening? PU!
Zoroastrianism
**** happens half the time.

[Sun Baked]

Download Greg the Bunny searches for God, and finds him (http://www.gregthebunny.org/video/g_06_god_dsl.rm) (Real Player 3.72MB)

And the length of the last post...

[gooddog]

How manicheean of you.

You presume too much.

I have read the bible babble much more carefully than you suppose.

I have a brother who is a well-known priest.

An assemblies-of-gawd preacher's daughter demolished my virginity in a Florida motel room,

I lived next door to a jehovah's witness temple,

I've done extensive coursework in religion and philosophy, philosophies of science , and have an M.S. in theoretical physics.

Above all, I am quite conversant with UHF as well as VHF telegawdism.

The xians I love practice a visceral kind of situational ethics and have enough humanity left in them (in spite of catechisms and "churching") to laugh at the little man in the pulpit when he begins to wax hitlerian. Their xianism is nominal at best. All the ones who take the allegedly lovely teachings of jesus literally , become vicious and virulent.

It should serve as a wake up call to you and your Bio credentials, that your argument is a sieve :

By pretending that the present system of interrelated mechanisms is the only one there ever could be, you negate, at the start, the entire concept of evolution.
Then, based on this presupposition of correctness of your view, you arrive (not surprisingly) at the correctness of your view, after a nice circular walk.

Anyone who has actually studied evolutionary science at the molecular, biological, and cosmic scales , has heard of a trait or sub-system proliferating due to advantages other than the one it confers at the present time. Like feathers for display and warmth prior to flight.

Many of the intervening elements and their interrelationships , in a primitive Earth, may well be long supplanted by their "offspring" (at the molecular level as well as the level of organisms). This is where the right questions wait to be asked. This is where the scaffolding may be inferred from the marks it may have left on the current structure.

Your argument makes as little sense as if you denied the gradual construction (and , YES, even the E_V_O_L_U_T_I_O_N) of a cathedral's final form with all of it's stresses and strains and it's parabolic arches and flying buttresses --- on the grounds that the entire edifice can only stand if it all exists at one time.

An argument just like yours could just as easily be made to deny the evolution of second and third generation stars and even the various evolutions of stellar atmospheres and strata.

But creationists shy away from such fields because they seek to attack where the public is most vulnerable . ... biological science.

The public has seen to many mushroom clouds and too much footage of Neil Armstrong to be fooled about physics, chemistry and astronomy.

But how many of us know a codon from a leader sequence, an active repressor from an inactive one, transposition from transduction, eukaryotes from prokaryotes or can distinguish between transcription and replication or even RNA from DNA.

Your practice of pre-loading the dice is a hackneyed scam pulled by the average telepreacher on the average telezombie.

I think, in the internet, you will have a little more difficulty with that B.S. and may have to upgrade your rhetoric to all-new-B.S.

Looks to me like your are going through college, but college isn't going through you. Such are the effects of evangelism on the otherwise healthy mind.

In the ethical arena, you make mistakes as well.

You judge us too carelessly .

It is no great crime for us to denounce a pathogenic meme when we find it.

It is our civic duty to object, expose, and denounce such rhetorical scams and you ought to thank us for doing so. Somebody has to take out the trash.

It remains for you to explain to us whether it was a resistant strain of self-imposed ignorance that posessed you to foist such a phoney argument on us, or if you did it just for the sheer pleasure of it.

We are not parroting Ph.D.'s nor are we injuring you when we denounce charlatans -- unless you are a professional charlatan yourself.

We simply feel repulsion at the chicanery we see all around us as it tries to infiltrate into very valuable and essential institutions that we need for our survival.

Heresy is a virtue and only a tyrant would criminalize it.

Try opening your own mind to the existence of nature and the respect for and love of physically verifiable facts.

And if you should find our morals wanting still, then how about affording us a little of that xian forgiveness we hear so much about,

...cicut et nos demitimus debitoribus nostri....


---gooddog

[Durandal7]

Originally posted by krossfyter

Trekkism, The Original Series
To boldly **** where no **** has happened before.
Trekkism, The Motion Picture(s)
This **** is happening again.
Trekkism, The Next Generation
This **** happens again every week.
Trekkism, Deep Space 9
**** happens on the other side of the wormhole.
Trekkism, Voyager
**** happens on the other side of the galaxy.

kross, you forgot
Trekkism, Enterprise
**** goes down on another Enterprise.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Durandal7

kross, you forgot
Trekkism, Enterprise
**** goes down on another Enterprise.


haha yeah... forgot! my bad.


;)