Creationists

[The Irish Ram]

Modern medicine= chemotherapy
Tomorrow's medicine= cancer vaccine

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

Yesterday's science wasn't very relevant to the last kid that contracted polio. He stayed crippled. A vaccine was relevant to me. I never contracted polio.
Your approach is kind of like the sign in the café:
All meals free, tomorrow.
Today's chemotherapy is only relevant until a vaccine is discovered.
Calamine lotion was relevant for the itch of chickenpox only until a pox vaccine made it irrelevant.
There was no relevance to the scientific view that the sun circled the earth. Relevance arrived with the scientific discovery that the earth circled the sun.

Science is as relevant as it's next discovery. Not that prior discoveries aren't important or relevant at the time, but they are only relevant until something better, or more relevant is discovered.

OH look! 10 dimensions!

 

[newpolitics]

Modern medicine= chemotherapy
Tomorrow's medicine= cancer vacine

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

It is amusing to watch people trying their best to discredit science, simply because it is a threat to their own belief structures, which I assume are based on the bible. It is actually really pathetic, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Modern medicine= chemotherapy
Tomorrow's medicine= cancer vaccine

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

It is amusing to watch people trying their best to discredit science, simply because it is a threat to their own belief structures, which I assume are based on the bible. It is actually really pathetic, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Is that directed at me? Do you think I am anti science? I'm not. I love science and think it compliments the Bible very well. And thank God for research. It makes us better, less sick, less stupid, faster, cleaner, prettier. Now my make-up makes me look better without having to use whale sperm. Science is a good thing.

So do you disagree with my belief that science is only as relevant as it's next discovery or are you still pouring gunpowder in your wounds, and charting your path, as the sun circles the earth?

 

[UltimateReality]

There was nothing intellectually dishonest about my rebuttal.

However ...

I did not respond to what Provine said. I clearly responded to what you said. You made NO citation of Povine in the post I responded to, nor any post prior.

Nor have you disavowed your post since (except, perhaps now). So Jackass, you indeed said all that you clearly said, and it is still 100% made-up-nonsense ... including your notions of material high priesthood.

You are delusional if you don't think that the science community is not affected greatly by the likes of Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald. These are your high priests of your religion.

So, are you now expanding things to say that not only is evolution a religion, all of science is religion? That the seeming implication of this post.

Come on guys, do you really not know this stuff? Materialism is a world view just like Theism is. Evolutionary theory is component of Materialism. It is also safe to say that all Materialists believe in Evolution by default.

Materialism: The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.

 

[UltimateReality]

So, are you now expanding things to say that not only is evolution a religion, all of science is religion? That the seeming implication of this post.

That is their favorite trick -- though they mostly use it on themselves. You know, if science is just another religion, then it is a matter of personal preference what to believe.

Aha, methinks you are confusing the theory of evolution with actual science.

 

[UltimateReality]

There was nothing intellectually dishonest about my rebuttal.

However ...

I did not respond to what Provine said. I clearly responded to what you said. You made NO citation of Povine in the post I responded to, nor any post prior.

Nor have you disavowed your post since (except, perhaps now). So Jackass, you indeed said all that you clearly said, and it is still 100% made-up-nonsense ... including your notions of material high priesthood.

You are delusional if you don't think that the science community is not affected greatly by the likes of Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald.

So what if Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald have a great effect upon "the science community"?

These are your high priests of your religion.

It's disingenuous to assert that science is a religion with high priests. It is nothing but a lame attempt to assert that science has no greater relevance to reality than superstition.

And there you go doing it too!! You are confusing your materialist beliefs and the theory of evolution with actual science. Nice try homeslice.

 

[UltimateReality]

Modern medicine= chemotherapy
Tomorrow's medicine= cancer vacine

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

It is amusing to watch people trying their best to discredit science, simply because it is a threat to their own belief structures, which I assume are based on the bible. It is actually really pathetic, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Wow, you get the golden Loki award. Science is continually supporting Theism. It is the theory of evolution that is being called into question everyday. Oh well, you can just throw out that part that doesn't have any evidence or call it something different when your tennents are proven wrong. Christianity doesn't have that luxury so it is amazing that even with modern science it is becoming even more relevant.

I'm sorry to say, as much as they believe it in their twisted simple minds, Materialists do not have the market cornerned on science. In fact, in the timeline of the history of man, 99.9999 of the knowledge of science we have was gained by men who believed in God. It is amazing the delusions of grandeur you Materialists have!!! There is alot more to science than your pathetic TOE!!! Can you say... living in a bubble??

 

[UltimateReality]

From Dembski:
"As a probabilist, I've had to do my share of combinatorics, a branch of mathematics concerned with counting possibilities. The problem is that in genetics and proteomics, the possible gene and protein products are immense, and so the challenge, always, is to find some biologically meaningful path through these combinatorial spaces. So, when Shapiro invokes natural processes that operate in combinatorial fashion, he is in fact explaining nothing about protein evolution but merely restating the problem. The problem is how to navigate through those vast oceans of combinatorial possibility that are genes and proteins. Saying that this happens in "combinatorial fashion" adds no insight.

In the past, I always had the sense that despite my disagreements with him, Shapiro was an independent thinker willing to take on the sacred cows of science. His recent replies suggest someone who is posturing and gesturing to maintain the intellectual high ground. And yet, on closer scrutiny, he is merely playing to the gallery of the scientific mainstream, which is so committed to naturalism that they couldn't discover a real instance of intelligence in nature if it hit them over the head (which it does repeatedly)."

 

[UltimateReality]

Quote: Originally Posted by UltimateReality
He spews a wild donkey guess on how the first cell formed, which is just speculation and not based in any science I know of.

Loki:
"It is well understood to be (informed) speculation, and your ignorance of science is an important point you should consider before you criticize any science"

This is truly sad that you consider his speculation science. If it really happened the way he says in the video it should be easy enough to do multiple experiments (real science) to confirm his speculations. Whoa! Wait a second!!! You mean he can't prove his speculations about the first cell with an experiment. Please don't think I am joyful that so many people like you Loki are misled. Quite the contrary. I think it is very sad, very sad indeed. It is even more said that you point to the ID theorists as the ones being brainwashed by their religion when you are so lost in your own "magic" explanations dressed up as "science" you can't see it.

And don't think I haven't noticed... you haven't answered anything.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHeSaUq-Hl8&feature=related]David Berlinski - Evolution destroyed in under 5 minutes - YouTube[/ame]

 

[UltimateReality]

Loki, please watch this short video and then give the non-strawman example he asks for at the end..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGaUEAkqhMY&feature=related]Dr. David Berlinski: Random Mutations (Clip 7) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Montrovant]

You are delusional if you don't think that the science community is not affected greatly by the likes of Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald. These are your high priests of your religion.

So, are you now expanding things to say that not only is evolution a religion, all of science is religion? That the seeming implication of this post.

Come on guys, do you really not know this stuff? Materialism is a world view just like Theism is. Evolutionary theory is component of Materialism. It is also safe to say that all Materialists believe in Evolution by default.

Materialism: The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.

And once again, you seem to be projecting beliefs onto people without a valid reason to do so. Are you really suggesting that belief in the theory of evolution equates to materialism? That no one with religious or supernatural beliefs accepts evolution?

Further, I wonder just how wide a definition you are using for religion. Just what falls within whatever definition you are using? In my post I asked YWC if he was equating science with religion. You didn't directly answer the question, but you quoted my post and went on to talk about evolution being a facet of materialism and compared it with theism, so are you saying that yet, science is a religion? Are you saying that only evolution within science is a religion?

Evolution can be correct at the same time as god(s) exist. There is no inherent conflict.

 

[UltimateReality]

We are not presenting it as a fact. We just say there is 0.00000.....000001 chance of it not being true, end even less chance of Christianity being something more than a myth.

Well, hallelujah!!! I'll take those odds. They are way better than the one in 1 x 10(n=80) chance that amino acids self-assembled.

How did you come up with that number?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1--tP49mOoE&feature=related]DNA by Design: "Doing the Math" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[UltimateReality]

So, are you now expanding things to say that not only is evolution a religion, all of science is religion? That the seeming implication of this post.

Come on guys, do you really not know this stuff? Materialism is a world view just like Theism is. Evolutionary theory is component of Materialism. It is also safe to say that all Materialists believe in Evolution by default.

Materialism: The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.

And once again, you seem to be projecting beliefs onto people without a valid reason to do so. Are you really suggesting that belief in the theory of evolution equates to materialism? That no one with religious or supernatural beliefs accepts evolution?

Further, I wonder just how wide a definition you are using for religion. Just what falls within whatever definition you are using?

Religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. If the shoe fits...

 

[UltimateReality]

Are you saying that only evolution within science is a religion?
Evolution can be correct at the same time as god(s) exist. There is no inherent conflict.

Many would disagree. Quote from Dr. Michael Ruse "But I am coming here and saying, I think that philosophically that one should be sensitive to what I think history shows, namely, that evolution, just as much as religion -- or at least, leave "just as much," let me leave that phrase -- evolution, akin to religion, involves making certain a priori or metaphysical assumptions, which at some level cannot be proven empirically. I guess we all knew that, but I think that we're all much more sensitive to these facts now. And I think that the way to deal with creationism, but the way to deal with evolution also, is not to deny these facts, but to recognize them, and to see where we can go, as we move on from there."

 

[LOki]

Modern medicine= chemotherapy
Tomorrow's medicine= cancer vaccine

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

Yesterday's science wasn't very relevant to the last kid that contracted polio. He stayed crippled. A vaccine was relevant to me. I never contracted polio.
Your approach is kind of like the sign in the café:
All meals free, tomorrow.

No. This is literally your point.

Today's chemotherapy is only relevant until a vaccine is discovered.

No. It's relevant because it works in objective reality; chemotherapy is not faith healing.

Calamine lotion was relevant for the itch of chickenpox only until a pox vaccine made it irrelevant.

No. Calamine lotion is still relevant because it still work on the itch of chicken pox; it's not faith healing.

There was no relevance to the scientific view that the sun circled the earth.

No. The view that the sun circled the earth was not relevant to reality; it's not scientific, its superstitious.

Relevance arrived with the scientific discovery that the earth circled the sun.

No. You put the cart before the horse. The scientific discovery that the earth circles the sun is relevant to reality because, in fact of objective reality, the sun actually circles the earth.

Science is as relevant as it's next discovery.Not that prior discoveries aren't important or relevant at the time, but they are only relevant until something better, or more relevant is discovered.

Science has relevance to reality because objective reality is its validating criteria. Science is not superstition.

 

[LOki]

You are delusional if you don't think that the science community is not affected greatly by the likes of Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald.

So what if Provine, Dawkins and Douglas Theobald have a great effect upon "the science community"?

These are your high priests of your religion.

It's disingenuous to assert that science is a religion with high priests. It is nothing but a lame attempt to assert that science has no greater relevance to reality than superstition.

And there you go doing it too!! You are confusing your materialist beliefs and the theory of evolution with actual science. Nice try homeslice.

More made-up-nonsense.

Your retard credentials remain intact. Congratulations!

 

[LOki]

Looks like tomorrows science is irrelevant today, and yesterday's science is still relevant.

It is amusing to watch people trying their best to discredit science, simply because it is a threat to their own belief structures, which I assume are based on the bible. It is actually really pathetic, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Wow, you get the golden Loki award. Science is continually supporting Theism.

No. There is no evidence for a god, so there is no scientific support for the existence of a god. There is no logically valid neccessity to assert the existence of a god, so there is no scientific support for the existence of a god.

It is the theory of evolution that is being called into question everyday.

Of course. Everybody knows this. Every scientific theory is called into question everyday. That's the way science works. Science invites such questioning ... that's one reason why it's not religion.

Oh well, you can just throw out that part that doesn't have any evidence or call it something different when your tennents are proven wrong.

Intellectually honesty requires a scientist to accept the possibility of error, and discard erroneous beliefs in the light of better evidence and/or better understanding of the evidence.

Christianity doesn't have that luxury so it is amazing that even with modern science it is becoming even more relevant.

Christianity has no relevance in science.

I'm sorry to say, as much as they believe it in their twisted simple minds, Materialists do not have the market cornerned on science.

Of course not. Physicalists have a much stronger influence in the market of science. Idealists--particularly those of a spiritualist persuasion--and their superstitions have no currency in the market of science.

In fact, in the timeline of the history of man, 99.9999 of the knowledge of science we have was gained by men who believed in God

Entirely irrelevant.

It is amazing the delusions of grandeur you Materialists have!!! There is alot more to science than your pathetic TOE!!! Can you say... living in a bubble??

I take it back. I was in error.

It is amazing the delusions of grandeur the superstitious have!!! In fact, in the timeline of the history of man, 99.9999 of the knowledge of science we have was gained by men who invalidated retarded superstitions.

 

[LOki]

Come on guys, do you really not know this stuff? Materialism is a world view just like Theism is. Evolutionary theory is component of Materialism. It is also safe to say that all Materialists believe in Evolution by default.

Materialism: The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.

And once again, you seem to be projecting beliefs onto people without a valid reason to do so. Are you really suggesting that belief in the theory of evolution equates to materialism? That no one with religious or supernatural beliefs accepts evolution?

Further, I wonder just how wide a definition you are using for religion. Just what falls within whatever definition you are using?

Religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. If the shoe fits...

I'll get back to you on those Berlinski videos, but what I understand of his position already, he operates from faulty premises.

And apparently, so do you.

 

[Montrovant]

Come on guys, do you really not know this stuff? Materialism is a world view just like Theism is. Evolutionary theory is component of Materialism. It is also safe to say that all Materialists believe in Evolution by default.

Materialism: The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.

And once again, you seem to be projecting beliefs onto people without a valid reason to do so. Are you really suggesting that belief in the theory of evolution equates to materialism? That no one with religious or supernatural beliefs accepts evolution?

Further, I wonder just how wide a definition you are using for religion. Just what falls within whatever definition you are using?

Religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. If the shoe fits...

Ah. So of course, you use the widest, least meaningful definition in order to shoehorn evolution into the definition. By that definition, pretty much anything can be religion. It does not, however, mean that evolution is the same as Christianity, or Hinduism, or Judaism, etc.

 

[UltimateReality]

And once again, you seem to be projecting beliefs onto people without a valid reason to do so. Are you really suggesting that belief in the theory of evolution equates to materialism? That no one with religious or supernatural beliefs accepts evolution?

Further, I wonder just how wide a definition you are using for religion. Just what falls within whatever definition you are using?

Religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. If the shoe fits...

I'll get back to you on those Berlinski videos, but what I understand of his position already, he operates from faulty premises.

Of course he does.