Creationists

[UltimateReality]

Are there really people posting and trying to convince us that Intelligent Design is NOT an attempt to shoehorn Christian Creationism into public schools? The Discovery Institute, that promulgates Intelligent Design, have clear Christian, theistic intent. Is that a coincidence?

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with anybody challenging the assumptions and theories of any scientist. I also have no problem with approaching Intelligent Design through the branch of philosophy known as metaphysics. That is far more appropriate.

Both creationism and ID infer a designer but the science community have no evidence showing a designer was not needed.

Therefore because there is no evidence proving this designer I believe in naturalism why do you place a higher standard for God and creation then you do naturalism ?

Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.

False. The science community has proven that your gawds are not a requirement for life.

You have not disproven that.

You are delusional. They have proven no such thing.

 

[UltimateReality]

Why do you bother wasting your time by posting such cut and paste nonsense.

Science and Archaeopteryx Overcome Creationism in South Korea: Scientific American

It seems that in actuality, the South Korean government in conjunction with forward looking scientists have blunted the efforts of fundie Christians to dumb-down the school system.

As we see, the ID movement is simply nothing more than promotion of fundie Christian polemics.

The school system is dumb-downed by thought of a designer,how is that ?

Clueless. The courts have protected the school system from science loathing fundie Christians attempting to force Christianity into public education.

You are so clueless about the history of our education system in the US and in England prior to that. It is the fundie evo's that are continually trying to force God out. Not the other way around bonehead.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

The school system is dumb-downed by thought of a designer,how is that ?

Clueless. The courts have protected the school system from science loathing fundie Christians attempting to force Christianity into public education.

You are so clueless about the history of our education system in the US and in England prior to that. It is the fundie evo's that are continually trying to force God out. Not the other way around bonehead.

Actually, religion and science were not always as mutually exclusive as they are today. Darwin played some role in the schism, as did religions general tendency to be uncomfortable with any idea that rocks the boat.

Over time, Christianity accepts some aspects of science that it initially rejected or suppressed, which is exactly why you have some Creationists that have abandoned the idea that the earth is only 6,000 years old, simply because there comes a point when you can only cover you eyes for so long. Now you have Creationists that still believe in creation but acknowledge that the earth cannot only be 6,000 years old.

Be that as it may, as many problems as I have with religion, I am not ignorant to its importance either. Some could argue reasonably that religion was in some respect responsible for science, because religious thought, or the contemplation of a force larger than one's immediate surroundings, brought humanity out of simply focusing on immediate survival and thinking about bigger things. Also, I've come the conclusion after careful consideration that many people need religion in order to have principles and at least behave somewhat like a decent human being. I don't need it for that, but many do. In other words, after many years of hating religion, I've come to terms with it.

 

[Hollie]

Both creationism and ID infer a designer but the science community have no evidence showing a designer was not needed.

Therefore because there is no evidence proving this designer I believe in naturalism why do you place a higher standard for God and creation then you do naturalism ?

Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.

False. The science community has proven that your gawds are not a requirement for life.

You have not disproven that.

You are delusional. They have proven no such thing.

Of course they have.

No gawds are required for the existence of life.

 

[Hollie]

The school system is dumb-downed by thought of a designer,how is that ?

Clueless. The courts have protected the school system from science loathing fundie Christians attempting to force Christianity into public education.

You are so clueless about the history of our education system in the US and in England prior to that. It is the fundie evo's that are continually trying to force God out. Not the other way around bonehead.

That's so silly. Christian creationists (under the different titles they have used in attempts to force their religion on others), have consistently been thwarted in their attempts to put religion into the public school system because religion is not science. You are desperately trying to dumb-down the education system. You have no viable alternative to the fact of evolutionary science yet you insist on thumping people with ancient fears and Dark Ages superstitions.

 

[daws101]

Oh you poor mental midget. As usual you didn't address the argument!!! In addition to being incredibly evil, you're response, or lack thereof, reveals some deep, psychological disorders. That would explain you being on disability and using taxpayer dollars to sit home eating Oreo's, watching Oprah, and attacking folks of all religions via your computer. It's pretty obvious you don't have a job.

Please back your statement that nature doesn't produce extreme precision-precision that can launch a spacecraft perfectly timed to reach the moon or mars. Are you saying this precision in items homo sapien creates come from something other than nature? Instead of just making attacks, why not attempt a thoughtful response of your own that you can't cut and paste from an atheist website?

The real result of your response if you are truthful will reveal that even you, in all your glorious ignorance, can recognize design when you see it. Because after all, we know that spaceships, music, consciousness, and computers just come from natural selection acting on random mutations.

once again UR makes shit up .

How can you be so sure? Of course, what would one expect from someone who believes fairytales are facts.

this coming from a spewer of the worst kind of nonsense!

 

[daws101]

Your glory speaks in every language
Across the sky to every nation
You are beauty
Unimagined
This is who you are
You are the Lord of my salvation
You are the one who lights my way
Through the dark night
You will lead me
This is who you are


You hear the cry of every broken heart
You give the hopeless soul a brand new start
You lead the captive in Your freedom song
This is who you are
And in the night when all our hope is lost
You are the one who won’t give up on us
You hold the orphan in your loving arms
This is who you are

 

[daws101]

Your glory speaks in every language
Across the sky to every nation
You are beauty
Unimagined
This is who you are
You are the Lord of my salvation
You are the one who lights my way
Through the dark night
You will lead me
This is who you are


You hear the cry of every broken heart
You give the hopeless soul a brand new start
You lead the captive in Your freedom song
This is who you are
And in the night when all our hope is lost
You are the one who won’t give up on us
You hold the orphan in your loving arms
This is who you are

And yet the fundie will represent that ID is somehow different than creationism. They are obviously the same worldview. The court system has repeatedly held that ID is simply rebranded Christian creationism which is why ID has been disallowed in public schools.

This fundie can't prove anything she believes nor can she demonstrate that a designer was not needed. Her beliefs are based on vivid imaginations and nothing more.

Still waiting for a viable explanation that nonlife produced life. I am still waiting for a viable explanation that the first cell came into existence through natural processes.

Now listen to the crickets chirp or watch them try and change the subject.

asked and answered...if you say it has not, then you're changing the subject .
you have answered it yourself.

 

[daws101]

Wrong I don't reject real science and I gave you those priciples of real science. Lie about what ?

You sweeping miss the point when you propose that Christian creationism even remotely approaches any principle of science. I

It has been explained to you more times than I can count that religion is not science. Religious (Christian) creationism relies on supernatural intervention of specific sectarian gods which are, by definition, unseen, unknowable and absent any proofs.

How many more times does this need to be explained to you?

How is that ? language,technology,science was developed how ?

that's were not was...speaking of dumb downed

 

[daws101]

Oh you poor mental midget. As usual you didn't address the argument!!! In addition to being incredibly evil, you're response, or lack thereof, reveals some deep, psychological disorders. That would explain you being on disability and using taxpayer dollars to sit home eating Oreo's, watching Oprah, and attacking folks of all religions via your computer. It's pretty obvious you don't have a job.

Please back your statement that nature doesn't produce extreme precision-precision that can launch a spacecraft perfectly timed to reach the moon or mars. Are you saying this precision in items homo sapien creates come from something other than nature? Instead of just making attacks, why not attempt a thoughtful response of your own that you can't cut and paste from an atheist website?

The real result of your response if you are truthful will reveal that even you, in all your glorious ignorance, can recognize design when you see it. Because after all, we know that spaceships, music, consciousness, and computers just come from natural selection acting on random mutations.

once again UR makes shit up .

What did ur make up ? technology and science were the products of what ?

your answer is more proof of your reading and comprehension disablity.. the post has fuck all to do with your answer.

it's another of your world famous Non sequiturs: Definition of NON SEQUITUR
2: a statement (as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said.

 

[daws101]

This fundie can't prove anything she believes nor can she demonstrate that a designer was not needed. Her beliefs are based on vivid imaginations and nothing more.

Still waiting for a viable explanation that nonlife produced life. I am still waiting for a viable explanation that the first cell came into existence through natural processes.

Now listen to the crickets chirp or watch them try and change the subject.

The fundie chooses to maintain a position that he cannot defend, thus the absurd requirement that others must prove a negative: "prove the gods are not needed".

What the fundie chooses to ignore is that I have already proven the gods are not needed.

The fundie has not disproved my disproof.

As we can see, the "standard" offered by the fundie is completely ridiculous and simply reinforces the true poverty of his alleged argument.

The fundie proceeds under the assumption that his takes and fables are true and then expects others to accept accept his unfounded "because I say so" claims.

Speak for yourself, I presented questions that add credibility to my beliefs but what can you offer to support your views ?

you presented shit. the non questions you've foisted efinition of FOIST
1a : to introduce or insert surreptitiously or without warrant b : to force another to accept especially by stealth or deceit
2: to pass off as genuine or worthy <foist costly and valueless products on the public
on us have no credibility
: Definition of CREDIBILITY
1: the quality or power of inspiring belief <an account lacking in credibility>

due to an enormous lack of quantifiable proof.
what has been presented to you as support for "our" view is evidence, that you reject because it runs counter to your willful ignorance.

 

[LOki]

Both creationism and ID infer a designer...

Correction: "Both creationism and ID PRESUME a designer..."

... but the science community have no evidence showing a designer was not needed.

Sure they do. It's not CONCLUSIVE evidence, but there is indeed evidence that a designer was not needed.

Therefore because there is no evidence proving this designer I believe in naturalism...

First, "proof" is NOT the standard applied--verifiable evidence and/or valid logic is the standard applied.

Secondly, there is no evidence, that is validated with even BASIC intellectual rigor, that petitions for the existence of this designer that creationism and intelligent-design PRESUMES.

why do you place a higher standard for God and creation then you do naturalism ?

We don't! We apply the exact same standard for both! EXACTLY the same.

In contrast, no evidence (of an intellectually rigorous nature) OR "proof" was required for you to hold your belief in the existence of this "designer" you posit--yet you demand "proof" (i.e.; conclusive and irrefutable evidence) for refuting your assertion of this "designer"--as if it should be considered valid in the first place. You (as typical of creationists and intelligent-design promoters) hold "materialism" or "naturalism" or "Darwinism" to an ENTIRELY different standard than you hold your own PREASSUMPTION.

Why is that? Why do YOU require a higher standard from "naturalism" than you do for this "designer" of yours and creationism?

Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.

This is just presumptive nonsense. It is a point that has been refuted a thousand times.

For the same reasons you've refused to address where the "life" of your "creator" came from, I predict that you'll just as resolutely refuse to address where the intelligence that accounts for the "complexity" of your designer came from.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"--Douglas Adams​

 

[UltimateReality]

Clueless. The courts have protected the school system from science loathing fundie Christians attempting to force Christianity into public education.

You are so clueless about the history of our education system in the US and in England prior to that. It is the fundie evo's that are continually trying to force God out. Not the other way around bonehead.

That's so silly. Christian creationists (under the different titles they have used in attempts to force their religion on others), have consistently been thwarted in their attempts to put religion into the public school system because religion is not science. You are desperately trying to dumb-down the education system. You have no viable alternative to the fact of evolutionary science yet you insist on thumping people with ancient fears and Dark Ages superstitions.

I think you mean "put it back in" pumpkin.

 

[UltimateReality]

Your glory speaks in every language
Across the sky to every nation
You are beauty
Unimagined
This is who you are
You are the Lord of my salvation
You are the one who lights my way
Through the dark night
You will lead me
This is who you are


You hear the cry of every broken heart
You give the hopeless soul a brand new start
You lead the captive in Your freedom song
This is who you are
And in the night when all our hope is lost
You are the one who won’t give up on us
You hold the orphan in your loving arms
This is who you are

Under Christian thought, humans have free will, which made it possible for them to choose sin, not God. Under evolutionary philosophy, there is no free will for humans.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Your glory speaks in every language
Across the sky to every nation
You are beauty
Unimagined
This is who you are
You are the Lord of my salvation
You are the one who lights my way
Through the dark night
You will lead me
This is who you are


You hear the cry of every broken heart
You give the hopeless soul a brand new start
You lead the captive in Your freedom song
This is who you are
And in the night when all our hope is lost
You are the one who won’t give up on us
You hold the orphan in your loving arms
This is who you are

Under Christian thought, humans have free will, which made it possible for them to choose sin, not God. Under evolutionary philosophy, there is no free will for humans.

That doesn't make any sense. I'm guessing the logic is that if life evolves then it doesn't have free will? You lost me.

 

[Hollie]

You are so clueless about the history of our education system in the US and in England prior to that. It is the fundie evo's that are continually trying to force God out. Not the other way around bonehead.

That's so silly. Christian creationists (under the different titles they have used in attempts to force their religion on others), have consistently been thwarted in their attempts to put religion into the public school system because religion is not science. You are desperately trying to dumb-down the education system. You have no viable alternative to the fact of evolutionary science yet you insist on thumping people with ancient fears and Dark Ages superstitions.

I think you mean "put it back in" pumpkin.

Pay attention DarK Ager and you may learn something.

Judge rules against ‘intelligent design’

‘Religious alternative’ to evolution barred from public-school science classes

Judge rules against

HARRISBURG, Pa. — In one of the biggest courtroom clashes between faith and evolution since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district Tuesday from teaching “intelligent design” in biology class, saying the concept is creationism in disguise.

U.S. District Judge John E. Jones delivered a stinging attack on the Dover Area School Board, saying its first-in-the-nation decision in October 2004 to insert intelligent design into the science curriculum violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

The above is just one of many instances where ancient fears and superstitions promoted by fundie christians under the guise and false label of ID have been exposed as fraud.

 

[Hollie]

Both creationism and ID infer a designer but the science community have no evidence showing a designer was not needed.

Therefore because there is no evidence proving this designer I believe in naturalism why do you place a higher standard for God and creation then you do naturalism ?

Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.

False. The science community has proven that your gawds are not a requirement for life.

You have not disproven that.

You are delusional. They have proven no such thing.

Your appalling lack of education in the biological and natural sciences is your own failing.

 

[Hollie]

Your glory speaks in every language
Across the sky to every nation
You are beauty
Unimagined
This is who you are
You are the Lord of my salvation
You are the one who lights my way
Through the dark night
You will lead me
This is who you are


You hear the cry of every broken heart
You give the hopeless soul a brand new start
You lead the captive in Your freedom song
This is who you are
And in the night when all our hope is lost
You are the one who won’t give up on us
You hold the orphan in your loving arms
This is who you are

Under Christian thought, humans have free will, which made it possible for them to choose sin, not God. Under evolutionary philosophy, there is no free will for humans.

Under fundie christian thought, such that it is, free will removes several attributes of omni-everything gods.

As usual, the religiously crippled dismantle their own arguments for the gods.

What a pathetic joke!

 

[LOki]

Question Gravity

Gravity: The Naturalistic explanation for things falling down to the ground undirected, randomly, and for no reason.

Arguments Against Gravity

15 QUESTIONS FOR GRAVITATIONALISTS

Newtonists MUST answer these questions!

BUT THEY CAN'T!!!

Teach the Controversy!


http://youtu.be/hjiFjIlAk1g?hd=1

 

[UltimateReality]

Both creationism and ID infer a designer...

Correction: "Both creationism and ID PRESUME a designer..."

... but the science community have no evidence showing a designer was not needed.

Sure they do. It's not CONCLUSIVE evidence, but there is indeed evidence that a designer was not needed.

First, "proof" is NOT the standard applied--verifiable evidence and/or valid logic is the standard applied.

Secondly, there is no evidence, that is validated with even BASIC intellectual rigor, that petitions for the existence of this designer that creationism and intelligent-design PRESUMES.

why do you place a higher standard for God and creation then you do naturalism ?

We don't! We apply the exact same standard for both! EXACTLY the same.

In contrast, no evidence (of an intellectually rigorous nature) OR "proof" was required for you to hold your belief in the existence of this "designer" you posit--yet you demand "proof" (i.e.; conclusive and irrefutable evidence) for refuting your assertion of this "designer"--as if it should be considered valid in the first place. You (as typical of creationists and intelligent-design promoters) hold "materialism" or "naturalism" or "Darwinism" to an ENTIRELY different standard than you hold your own PREASSUMPTION.

Why is that? Why do YOU require a higher standard from "naturalism" than you do for this "designer" of yours and creationism?

Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.

This is just presumptive nonsense. It is a point that has been refuted a thousand times.

For the same reasons you've refused to address where the "life" of your "creator" came from, I predict that you'll just as resolutely refuse to address where the intelligence that accounts for the "complexity" of your designer came from.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"--Douglas Adams​

The whole theory of evolution is based on a faulty preASSumption. The known outcome of evolution determines which data in so called experiments is kept and which is thrown out.