The creationists are BACK

[JBeukema]

http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/evo_science.html

 

[JBeukema]

Morphological and Molecular Evidence for a Stepwise Evolutionary Transition from Teeth to Baleen in Mysticete Whales

 

[Vargulf]

The U.S. ranks 48th in the world in mathematics and science. Too much religion dumbs down the populace. One just has to look at the Muslim nations. Religion is akin to brainwashing. The followers are fed the nonsense from infancy onward by parents, family, priests, rabbis, imams, mullahs, ayatollahs, pastors, and other assorted preachers. When the followers encounter science and rational teachings, they put up their blinders and turn away. Creationists just dumb down their followers.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why do non believer hate unalienable rights? Once you can disprove the God Theory you will be proving that the state gives rights, and if the state can give rights they can take them away.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Why do non believer hate unalienable rights? Once you can disprove the God Theory you will be proving that the state gives rights, and if the state can give rights they can take them away.

We're talking about US taxpayer dollars being used to fund public science classes. the only things that should be taught in science classes are, well, science.

If you want to teach your kids I.D. fine, if you want your church to fine, but it's not fine that you want my money to teach your beliefs to my future kids.

 

[JBeukema]

Why do non believer hate unalienable rights?

Why do you hate honest and love to lie?

Once you can disprove the God Theory you will be proving that the state gives rights, and if the state can give rights they can take them away.

So god must exist because you need him to exist to defend you fallacious claims?

You've yet to demonstrate how either
A) your god's existence -> rights

or

B) your god's non-existence -> no rights

The FF, at least, were smart enough to realize how stupid your claims are and argue that rights came from 'nature'

 

[Uncle Kenny]

The U.S. ranks 48th in the world in mathematics and science. Too much religion dumbs down the populace. One just has to look at the Muslim nations. Religion is akin to brainwashing. The followers are fed the nonsense from infancy onward by parents, family, priests, rabbis, imams, mullahs, ayatollahs, pastors, and other assorted preachers. When the followers encounter science and rational teachings, they put up their blinders and turn away. Creationists just dumb down their followers.

That's funny. Counter to actual statistical evidence as well. The U.S. has it's highest academic success in, wait for it, religiously sponsored schools, even in urban areas. The U.S. has actually dropped like a stone academicly since religous studies and all mention of the potential of God has been prohibited in public schools.

Of course, even trying to make this cause and effect relationship does prove that education has left at least one child behind...In addition look at the top nations on the list, they all have a dominant religion that isn't atheism.

 

[Uncle Kenny]

Why do non believer hate unalienable rights? Once you can disprove the God Theory you will be proving that the state gives rights, and if the state can give rights they can take them away.

We're talking about US taxpayer dollars being used to fund public science classes. the only things that should be taught in science classes are, well, science.

If you want to teach your kids I.D. fine, if you want your church to fine, but it's not fine that you want my money to teach your beliefs to my future kids.

By nuetral and unbiased observation, hypothesis of ID is as reasoned and founded as most "science" that is considered legitimate based on the artificial "A-Religious" model that people seem to accept in the absence of any other "A-religious" model. Since evolution is as unproven and less intutive or adapted than ID, why wouldn't you have to just teach your kids evolution?

Make the argument that makes one of these faith based theories more "science" than the other that isn't based in your opinion, please.

 

[AllieBaba]

Heard of it, it is an a-religious process isn't it? Doesn't that eliminate any prospect of "proof" without suspension of that little prohibition as stated earlier?

Really, by that standard, prove evolution or the big bang or gravity even. Do we need to stop teaching any of those?

This is the aggravating part. We are debating science with you and you've "heard" of the scientific method?

It's not "anti-religious". The Scientific method makes no provisions for the supernatural as the existence of supernatural forces can not be falsified.

For ID to be a valid scientific theory, you would first have to identify (which IDers refuse to do) the Intelligent Force and then be able to prove that they don't exist (null hypothesis) before you could create your hypothesis.

The scientific method is basic science.

Other than that, watch the NOVA series on Dover. It's readily apparent who the bad actors were, and it wasn't the evolution side. The ID side almost got slapped with contempt by a W. Bush appointee.

As for your last bit, science is working daily to further support the theories of gravity and evolution. It is unlikely they will ever be 100% "proven". That's the general idea behind scientific theory. You change the concepts as you learn more.

A-religiopus isn't necessarily "anti-religious", please quote me accurately in future when ranting. As my wife is a scientist (Microbiologist) and I am an engineer, I do differ to her on scientific method, but as I haven't said anything contrary to accepted method I don't see the frustration in my request. No one has to identify the source of the Big Bang to forward the theory, but for design the principal is different in some way? What way? The catalyst is the greatest variable in play isn't it? What would cause stationary matter to violently expode with such force? Unless someone has defined the nature of that force specificly, what is the difference?

Again I am not in either camp particularly, I am certainly not arguing the merits of either against the other. I am simply pointing out what I see as inequitible in the very arrogant positions. As ID isn't being argued currently I am pointing to failings in popular science and the argument that one theory is valid where another is not based more on faith deviation than objective criteria.

Of course I am also pointing out some of the more "faith based" reasoning that passes for actual science and gets defended with religious zealous by those who expouse it. See the human evolution questioning in previous discussion.

You mean defer, I presume?

Psst..it isn't zealots who challenge the evolution theory of creation. Rather it is the moderates who disagree with the anti-Christian(ity) zealots.

 

[Gadawg73]

The U.S. ranks 48th in the world in mathematics and science. Too much religion dumbs down the populace. One just has to look at the Muslim nations. Religion is akin to brainwashing. The followers are fed the nonsense from infancy onward by parents, family, priests, rabbis, imams, mullahs, ayatollahs, pastors, and other assorted preachers. When the followers encounter science and rational teachings, they put up their blinders and turn away. Creationists just dumb down their followers.

That's funny. Counter to actual statistical evidence as well. The U.S. has it's highest academic success in, wait for it, religiously sponsored schools, even in urban areas. The U.S. has actually dropped like a stone academicly since religous studies and all mention of the potential of God has been prohibited in public schools.

Of course, even trying to make this cause and effect relationship does prove that education has left at least one child behind...In addition look at the top nations on the list, they all have a dominant religion that isn't atheism.

I went to a religous high school.
They taught evolution as FACT.
ALL religous universities and colleges teach it AS FACT except 3 in America.

 

[AllieBaba]

And again the anti-Christian left confuses evolution with creation theory. They can't seem to keep them straight.

 

[Gadawg73]

And again the anti-Christian left confuses evolution with creation theory. They can't seem to keep them straight.

So everyone that believes creation theory is not science is "anti-Christian"?

 

[RDD_1210]

If you could reason with religious people there would be no religious people.

 

[Marie888]

A little background. We have had many school boards in Georgia cave in to the religous whackos in the last decade over putting labels on all Biology books concerning evolution.
"Evolution is a theory only and there are other theories that are in the scientific community concerning the origins of life" type BS was on all Biology in many school districts.
I know, this stuff is so crazy but remember we are in Georgia where folks would believe the Spaghetti Monster is to be worshipped first and foremost if their preacher or Republican representative told them so. Science be damned.
Well sports fans, the creationists are backagain under the disguise of "intelligent design" claiming that there beliefs are science.
Now anyone with just a high school education knows full well, yet many will not publicly admit it because of worrying about getting the business in Sunday school, that creationism and intelligent design is not science but they keep plowing forward even if it is with a one legged mule after the Dover Pa. case.
Yesterday our Governor Sonny "Doesn't" Perdue announced that he, and his power house Republican buddies in the Legislature, want to make the State School Superintendent an appointed position. The religous right is behind it. Evolution is and has been their main target.
More to come folks.

Yep, more to come!.... Part 1 of 12 - Unlocking the Mystery of Life


Lies in the Textbooks
FreeHovind - Watching Video: Lies in the Textbooks


We all know that "man" can and is capable of lying for "self" agenda. Science is great, and I applaud and thank those scientists who work to serve others with the integrity enough to know they don't know it all. Evolution theory (in general) has not been proven, and will not. What came first, the chicken or the egg?

.

 

[konradv]

A little background. We have had many school boards in Georgia cave in to the religous whackos in the last decade over putting labels on all Biology books concerning evolution.
"Evolution is a theory only and there are other theories that are in the scientific community concerning the origins of life" type BS was on all Biology in many school districts.
I know, this stuff is so crazy but remember we are in Georgia where folks would believe the Spaghetti Monster is to be worshipped first and foremost if their preacher or Republican representative told them so. Science be damned.
Well sports fans, the creationists are backagain under the disguise of "intelligent design" claiming that there beliefs are science.
Now anyone with just a high school education knows full well, yet many will not publicly admit it because of worrying about getting the business in Sunday school, that creationism and intelligent design is not science but they keep plowing forward even if it is with a one legged mule after the Dover Pa. case.
Yesterday our Governor Sonny "Doesn't" Perdue announced that he, and his power house Republican buddies in the Legislature, want to make the State School Superintendent an appointed position. The religous right is behind it. Evolution is and has been their main target.
More to come folks.

Yep, more to come!.... Part 1 of 12 - Unlocking the Mystery of Life


Lies in the Textbooks
FreeHovind - Watching Video: Lies in the Textbooks


We all know that "man" can and is capable of lying for "self" agenda. Science is great, and I applaud and thank those scientists who work to serve others with the integrity enough to know they don't know it all. Evolution theory (in general) has not been proven, and will not. What came first, the chicken or the egg?

.

The egg, of course. Two lines of reasoning:

1) Evolutionary theory holds that all life developed from single cell organisms. An egg is a single cell, the model from which all life developed.

2) Accumulated differences in genetic traits leads to the eventual birth of the first chicken. However, the individual that laid the egg wasn't a chicken, but at best, an end-stage proto-chicken.

 

[konradv]

One can find in the fossils of the Karoo Formation in South Africa the evolution of the therapsid mammals from reptiles. Even to the point of tracing the evolution of the mammalian ear.

An ass and a horse have a very recent common ancestor. Recent enough that they can produce offspring, far enough back that the offspring is sterile. That alone is a pretty powerful proof of two species that share a common lineage.

The mapping of the genetics of mammals, including man, has shown us many insights into the relationships between the various species.

And ONE can find emperical PROOF of what YOU assert...NO?

To most scientists genetic-mapping IS empirical proof.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And again the anti-Christian left confuses evolution with creation theory. They can't seem to keep them straight.

So everyone that believes creation theory is not science is "anti-Christian"?

It's what Alliebaba does with everything, if you yourself aren't a hardcore christian who takes every word in the Bible as a fact that can't be questioned than you're anti-Christian.

It's a beautiful strategy, you can constantly play the victim card, something that requires no facts.

 

[Uncle Kenny]

The U.S. ranks 48th in the world in mathematics and science. Too much religion dumbs down the populace. One just has to look at the Muslim nations. Religion is akin to brainwashing. The followers are fed the nonsense from infancy onward by parents, family, priests, rabbis, imams, mullahs, ayatollahs, pastors, and other assorted preachers. When the followers encounter science and rational teachings, they put up their blinders and turn away. Creationists just dumb down their followers.

That's funny. Counter to actual statistical evidence as well. The U.S. has it's highest academic success in, wait for it, religiously sponsored schools, even in urban areas. The U.S. has actually dropped like a stone academicly since religous studies and all mention of the potential of God has been prohibited in public schools.

Of course, even trying to make this cause and effect relationship does prove that education has left at least one child behind...In addition look at the top nations on the list, they all have a dominant religion that isn't atheism.

I went to a religous high school.
They taught evolution as FACT.
ALL religous universities and colleges teach it AS FACT except 3 in America.

You went to a religious school that didn't have any classes in religion? I find that ironic and difficult to believe. Of course I don't believe they teach it as "fact" as it is generally taught as accepted theory, which is not the same thing. Teaching it as fact is irresposible and inaccurate as well as it isn't proven, not even well enough to be complete as a theory. I can only assume you are misrepresenting the actual teachings by virtue of intentional or mistaken characterization, but either way, no responsible entity would teach evolution as fact as it isn't. Also, religious instruction has no appearant detrimental effect on academic proformance as asserted by the poster I was responding to. On the contrary, it appears to have a positive effect even when it is completely seperate from sciences as most religous education seems to prefer, as you pointed to.

As an aside, was the graduation, literacy and college placement rate higher in that school than the local public school? Did they offer a religious course of study? Just wondering...

 

[Uncle Kenny]

And again the anti-Christian left confuses evolution with creation theory. They can't seem to keep them straight.

So everyone that believes creation theory is not science is "anti-Christian"?

It's what Alliebaba does with everything, if you yourself aren't a hardcore christian who takes every word in the Bible as a fact that can't be questioned than you're anti-Christian.

It's a beautiful strategy, you can constantly play the victim card, something that requires no facts.

Is that similar to the "it isn't science, it's belief" justification for believing the incredibly unlikely progressions that are being accepted by evolutionists in some cases? Kool-aid is Kool-aid, no matter who serves it or drinks it, eh?

 

[Dr.Drock]

So everyone that believes creation theory is not science is "anti-Christian"?

It's what Alliebaba does with everything, if you yourself aren't a hardcore christian who takes every word in the Bible as a fact that can't be questioned than you're anti-Christian.

It's a beautiful strategy, you can constantly play the victim card, something that requires no facts.

Is that similar to the "it isn't science, it's belief" justification for believing the incredibly unlikely progressions that are being accepted by evolutionists in some cases? Kool-aid is Kool-aid, no matter who serves it or drinks it, eh?

Has nothing to do what I was talking about, that's just a rant.

If you ask Allie any question at all about the Bible, she takes it as you being anti-Christian for you even "daring" to ask a question.

I'm talking about her individually, not all creationists.