23 Apr 2008, 5:18 am
23 Apr 2008, 2:55 pm
23 Apr 2008, 4:12 pm
23 Apr 2008, 4:15 pm
23 Apr 2008, 4:32 pm
history_of_psychiatry wrote:
that just goes to show how psychotic fundies are.
It could also be an isolated event.
I'm sorry it happened, too.
It's tragic if that is indeed exactly what happened, but that doesn't mean this one event
has global implications for all people who don't believe in evolution.
I mean, c'mon, the "evidence" for evolution is pretty scant.
Despite their initial bravado, when pressed for specifics, leading evolutionists including Richard Dawkins
always finally admit that they cannot explain exactly how inorganic matter became organic life.
That part is mere speculation, full of vague imagery,
yet they'll tell you quite loudly that it's science.
The most important part of practicing science is admitting what you don't know.
Many evolutionists need a refresher course in that tenet.
For they, like everyone else, simply don't know how life got started on Earth,
nor do they know for a scientific fact that life progressed upward in organized complexity all by itself.
If you're an admirer of Darwinism, call it a nice theory, but call it what it is.
23 Apr 2008, 4:46 pm
Anubis
Veteran
Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 136
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England
23 Apr 2008, 4:50 pm
Ragtime wrote:
history_of_psychiatry wrote:
that just goes to show how psychotic fundies are.
It could also be an isolated event.
I'm sorry it happened, too.
It's tragic if that is indeed exactly what happened, but that doesn't mean this one event
has global implications for all people who don't believe in evolution.
I mean, c'mon, the "evidence" for evolution is pretty scant.
Despite their initial bravado, when pressed for specifics, leading evolutionists including Richard Dawkins
always finally admit that they cannot explain exactly how inorganic matter became organic life.
That part is mere speculation, full of vague imagery,
yet they'll tell you quite loudly that it's science.
The most important part of practicing science is admitting what you don't know.
And evolutionists, like everyone else, simply don't know how life got started on Earth,
nor do they know for a scientific fact that life progressed upwards in organized complexity all by itself.
Hmmm...
We cannot explain exactly how life was created, no. I doubt we will for a long time. We can determine, though, that evolution did occur, by some divine power of God(in which case it would be intelligent design), or nay. Evolution is more a study of how life forms have changed, and how natural selection has meant that animals with certain characteristics, are also most likely to survive, and animals with unsuitable characteristics, will likely die out. It is not a definitive study of life. It mainly tries to explain how animals evolved. We don't know for certain how life is made possible out of chaos. We don't know exactly how evolution occurs, or how beneficial mutations can occur. We just know that they happen.
There is much less proof for biblical creation, due to the age of the earth, the universe, fossils, inconsistencies, etc.
Fundamentalists who can't tolerate other beliefs really let the sane believers down.
24 Apr 2008, 6:12 am
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Legato wrote:
Holy crap... I knew God was f***ed up, but goddamn that bitz is whacked! That was the first time I read that, and I just walked three paces further away from Judeochristian dogma.
Hmm.... I actually find it funny because it is a 2 page long threat and is pretty thorough.
My favourite part is when he takes a breath to say, in the middle of infinite curses:
47: "Because thou servedst not the LORD thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things;"
24 Apr 2008, 9:40 am
24 Apr 2008, 10:03 am
Anubis wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
history_of_psychiatry wrote:
that just goes to show how psychotic fundies are.
It could also be an isolated event.
I'm sorry it happened, too.
It's tragic if that is indeed exactly what happened, but that doesn't mean this one event
has global implications for all people who don't believe in evolution.
I mean, c'mon, the "evidence" for evolution is pretty scant.
Despite their initial bravado, when pressed for specifics, leading evolutionists including Richard Dawkins
always finally admit that they cannot explain exactly how inorganic matter became organic life.
That part is mere speculation, full of vague imagery,
yet they'll tell you quite loudly that it's science.
The most important part of practicing science is admitting what you don't know.
And evolutionists, like everyone else, simply don't know how life got started on Earth,
nor do they know for a scientific fact that life progressed upwards in organized complexity all by itself.
Hmmm...
We cannot explain exactly how life was created, no. I doubt we will for a long time. We can determine, though, that evolution did occur, by some divine power of God(in which case it would be intelligent design), or nay. Evolution is more a study of how life forms have changed, and how natural selection has meant that animals with certain characteristics, are also most likely to survive, and animals with unsuitable characteristics, will likely die out. It is not a definitive study of life. It mainly tries to explain how animals evolved. We don't know for certain how life is made possible out of chaos. We don't know exactly how evolution occurs, or how beneficial mutations can occur. We just know that they happen.
I agree that beneficial mutations occur, but it has not been shown that animals changed from one species to a more complex one.
That part is mere speculation.
Therefore, those who say that we "know" that human life evolved from inorganic biomatter is simply arrogant, and goes beyond the data we have.
Last edited by Ragtime on 24 Apr 2008, 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
24 Apr 2008, 10:07 am
24 Apr 2008, 10:09 am
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
I agree that beneficial mutations occur, but it has not been shown that animals changed from one species to a more complex one. That part is mere speculation.
No, evidence points to that with the existence of homologous parts, and intermediate forms. Theories are speculations though Raggy, the issue is that they are speculations that can be compared to evidence and found inferior to other theories.
Listen, I'm sorry to offend your religious belief in evolution, but the data just isn't there.
What else can one do in honesty except admit that?
24 Apr 2008, 10:11 am
Ragtime wrote:
history_of_psychiatry wrote:
that just goes to show how psychotic fundies are.
It could also be an isolated event.
I'm sorry it happened, too.
It's tragic if that is indeed exactly what happened, but that doesn't mean this one event
has global implications for all people who don't believe in evolution.
I mean, c'mon, the "evidence" for evolution is pretty scant.
Despite their initial bravado, when pressed for specifics, leading evolutionists including Richard Dawkins
always finally admit that they cannot explain exactly how inorganic matter became organic life.
That part is mere speculation, full of vague imagery,
yet they'll tell you quite loudly that it's science.
The most important part of practicing science is admitting what you don't know.
Many evolutionists need a refresher course in that tenet.
For they, like everyone else, simply don't know how life got started on Earth,
nor do they know for a scientific fact that life progressed upward in organized complexity all by itself.
If you're an admirer of Darwinism, call it a nice theory, but call it what it is.
Yes, not all religionists are psycho. And yes, people have the right to believe in creationism or evolution. But there is "scant evidence" for evolution? It's been proven the elephant evolved from the mammoth. The modern day feline evolved from the saber toothed cat. Lizards, alligators, and even birds evolved from dinosaurs. We know this through scientific analysis. Genetic testing. Carbon dating. I don't believe Darwin's theory is 100% correct, but it is more than likely we evolved from apes. So if there is "scant evidence" for the theory of evolution, what is the evidence of creationism? The bible. That is all. Every religion and culture have their own creation stories as well. There are hundreds. No fact backs any of them up. So which is right? If adam and eve were the first 2 people on earth, their offspring must have inbred (and thus formed fundies!). Hindus, muslims, pagans, etc have their own creation myths.
24 Apr 2008, 10:12 am
24 Apr 2008, 10:24 am
Ragtime wrote:
Listen, I'm sorry to offend your religious belief in evolution, but the data just isn't there.
What else can one do in honesty except admit that?
What else can one do in honesty except admit that?
I don't have a religious belief, and the data IS there. The reason I am supporting evolution right now is because I watched a 2 hour video a few days ago by a biologist on evolutionary theory and I cited the facts as existing that he cited. Given my often neutral stance on evolution in the past and the fact that I am only defending the scienticity of evolution, I don't think that saying I have a "religious belief" is justifiable.
Quote:
Exactly. So, evolutionists shouldn't say that they know -- but they always do say that.
Making that false claim to unknowable knowledge is just plain arrogance from out of ignorance, and it is
the fierce will to belief what has not been proven. That is decidedly the opposite of scientific inquiry,
and therefore hurts their credentials in the minds of thinking people.
Making that false claim to unknowable knowledge is just plain arrogance from out of ignorance, and it is
the fierce will to belief what has not been proven. That is decidedly the opposite of scientific inquiry,
and therefore hurts their credentials in the minds of thinking people.
Well, you can hardly blame them as they are saying what the best scientific theories suggest to be true. Perhaps they are too hard-nosed, but if they accept that this is true, then for them to say it is true is not odd, especially given all of the theists who make even less scientific claims as true.
Quote:
Want to be a credible scientist?
Don't say man came from primordial soup when there is no way you could know that.
But evolutionists always claim up front that they know this for a fact.
Only when hard-pressed do they admit otherwise.
It's a fierce emotional attachment -- the exact opposite of honest scientific inquiry.
Don't say man came from primordial soup when there is no way you could know that.
But evolutionists always claim up front that they know this for a fact.
Only when hard-pressed do they admit otherwise.
It's a fierce emotional attachment -- the exact opposite of honest scientific inquiry.
Instead say "It is most likely that man came from primordial soup given our best evidence"? Their behavior is hardly non-credible in a world where the best scientific theories of the day are essentially treated as fact.
24 Apr 2008, 1:04 pm
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Listen, I'm sorry to offend your religious belief in evolution, but the data just isn't there.
What else can one do in honesty except admit that?
What else can one do in honesty except admit that?
I don't have a religious belief, and the data IS there.
The data is there for primordial soup turning into human beings?
In that case, please inform the leading authorities on the theory of evolution immediately,
because they all say (when pressed) that we don't have that data.
Last edited by Ragtime on 24 Apr 2008, 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
|
Difficulty leaving the house but did it today!
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
23 Dec 2024, 6:46 am |
| Trump endorses Mike Johnson for Speaker of the House |
13 Nov 2024, 4:19 pm |
| Childhood trauma support |
27 Nov 2024, 12:53 pm |
| Autism support groups |
Today, 3:18 pm |
