Good luck Texas. - Page 3

Sailor Steve · 03-27-09, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

When you really look at it it is more than just some soup called chance.

When you really look at it? Look at it how? Please explain, using reason.

03-27-09, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Darwin did not write a book the titled The Evolution of Species. No he titled it The ORIGIN of Species.

No he didn't .
Cretinists can't even get something that simple right .

Digital_Trucker · 03-27-09, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

No he didn't .
Cretinists can't even get something that simple right .

At least Creationists can spell

Stealth Hunter · 03-27-09, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

(pr. def. beliving in something unprovable) Does anyone here really think aliens know about Darwins theory of the Origin of species?

If they could pull off warp drives, the creation of synthetic life, and also advanced space travel, I'd say they probably have a good idea that life is changing and always has been. They might not call it "evolution", but they'd certainly have some sort of word for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

But it still doesn't answer where they came from now does it?

No, and it's not supposed to. The Theory of Evolution simply states that life has changed over the aeons to survive the environment. Abiogenesis deals more with the origins of life.

Although, you still have a problem if you believe god created everything: where's the evidence for a god? Which god should we believe in?

If I believed the Bible as fact, then I would also have to believe that everything was created by a magical and invisible sky wizard just 6,000 years ago, man came from dust and woman from that man's rib, our species is filled with problems because a talking snake convinced the duo to eat from a cursed apple tree, and a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father came here to Earth to die for our sins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Kapt Z look out the window into space, the oceans, the land, your own body don't you ever wonder how it all came to be?

We all do. But if we don't know (scientists and followers of science), we simply say, "We don't know, and we're probably not going to find out any time soon". We don't shout, "WE HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS! <INSERT NAME OF GOD/RELIGION HERE> IS THE ONLY TRUE WAY TO GO! THE <INSERT RELIGIOUS TEXT/BELIEF HERE> IS THE ONLY TRUE BOOK!"

Creationists are essentially trying to overrule what scientists have known for a century now with their own mythology and legends. That's all it comes down to. Hell, we built the modern polio vaccine using evolution and natural selection (along with their principles), but they still deny its existence.

If we start teaching Christian creation, then we had better start teaching Greek creation, Roman creation, Norse creation, Gaelic creation, Egyptian creation, Islamic creation, Jewish creation, Ancient Russian creation, Mayan creation, Aztec creation, Navajo creation, Iroquois creation, Inca creation, and even Easter Island creation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Myself I believe in the intelligent design of YHVH.

I'll stick with Zeus and the Deities of Olympus, thank you. Though Odin and his friends aren't a bad lot to go with, either.

The thing I always liked more about the Greek gods than any other gods in today's religions is that they lived at a physical place. It was said if you went to the top of Mount Olympus, you could meet Zeus, Hera, Hermes, and all the others and actually see them. With the Christians, Jews, and Muslims, there god is just sort of... there. I mean, he's supposedly all around us, omnipotent and omniscient.

Stealth Hunter · 03-27-09, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

At least Creationists can spell

You forgot a period there, mate.

Digital_Trucker · 03-27-09, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

You forgot a period there, mate.

Pardon me, but isn't

a punctuation mark?

Stealth Hunter · 03-27-09, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Because a certain theory relies heavily on science to arbitrarliy add zeros to time. Because they say for creatures to evolve it MUST take a gazillion of years right?

It takes time. There is no specific way to calculate it as of yet, however, when trying to determine possible future evolutionary paths (which in its own right is very difficult).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Even if it were correct evolution science still does not answer where we came from or how 'something' came from 'nothing'.

It's not supposed to. Once again, that's dealing more with abiogenesis and the scientific debate of the origins of life, which has nothing to do with evolution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

If we were created by I.D. 6,000 years is plausible.

That's a steep "if" you just used there. If you find evidence for ID, come tell us. If you can confirm something along the lines of ID exists using the scientific method, come tell us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

We should be able to discuss it

Not until you confirm its existence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

, to reason with one another rather than one side calling the other stupid, ignorent, or blind.

It's stupid to think the Earth is 6,000 years old because we know it's not 6,000 years old. The oldest rock on the planet is over 4 billion years old. It's stupid to think snakes can talk because they don't possess vocal chords to begin with. It's stupid to think that a global flood happened because we know from geology no such event ever did occur.

Creationists in general hold stupid beliefs, are ignorant because they are ignoring the facts, and rely on blind faith to back their position in the whole debate and not tangible evidence.

Stealth Hunter · 03-27-09, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Pardon me, but isn't

a punctuation mark?

We could create an Orwell-esque language using nothing but emoticons.

Max2147 · 03-27-09, 08:46 PM

If they insist on including ID (Creationism in disguise) in science classes, then they ought to include Evolution in Sunday School. After all, ID/Creationism's scientific merit is no greater than Evolution's religious merit.

For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything about Evolution that denies the existence of God. It's perfectly possible that Evolution occurred under divine oversight or even divine guidance. Evolution only clashes with religion if you insist on taking every word in a religious text literally, but to me that's silly because that implies that God is bound by physical reality.

Rockstar · 03-27-09, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

No he didn't .
Cretinists can't even get something that simple right .

What was it called then? Last I looked the full name of the book is

The Origin of Species
by Means of Natural Selection,

or

The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

First Edition

by Charles Darwin

Digital_Trucker · 03-27-09, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

We could create an Orwell-esque language using nothing but emoticons.

UnderseaLcpl · 03-27-09, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max2147

If they insist on including ID (Creationism in disguise) in science classes, then they ought to include Evolution in Sunday School. After all, ID/Creationism's scientific merit is no greater than Evolution's religious merit.

For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything about Evolution that denies the existence of God. It's perfectly possible that Evolution occurred under divine oversight or even divine guidance. Evolution only clashes with religion if you insist on taking every word in a religious text literally, but to me that's silly because that implies that God is bound by physical reality.

Who's "They"? Nobody can tell churches what to teach in Sunday School, and our tax dollars don't pay for them.

I'm of a similar opinion about evolution, though. To me it is an even more impressive method of creation. Could be that the universe is a machine designed to produce life, which through evolution produces something else. Or something completely different, who knows?

GoldenRivet · 03-28-09, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

translated... "good one!... you might be onto something, i approve... i know you're just joking though."

03-28-09, 03:21 AM

Quote:

What was it called then? Last I looked the full name of the book is

See , even with a second attempt you still can't get it right .

Quote:

At least Creationists can spell

The word I used is correct.
It relates to cretins who wish to challenge scientific theories with heavily edited and mistranslated ancient myths of doubtful provenance .

Digital_Trucker · 03-28-09, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The word I used is correct.
It relates to cretins who wish to challenge scientific theories with heavily edited and mistranslated ancient myths of doubtful provenance .

According to Webster's dictionary, the "word" you used isn't a word.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

translated... "good one!... you might be onto something, i approve... i know you're just joking though."

Pretty good translation.

03-27-09, 08:46 PM	#39
Max2147 Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 714 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	If they insist on including ID (Creationism in disguise) in science classes, then they ought to include Evolution in Sunday School. After all, ID/Creationism's scientific merit is no greater than Evolution's religious merit. For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything about Evolution that denies the existence of God. It's perfectly possible that Evolution occurred under divine oversight or even divine guidance. Evolution only clashes with religion if you insist on taking every word in a religious text literally, but to me that's silly because that implies that God is bound by physical reality.