Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,095 posts, read 25,956,059 times
Reputation: 6128

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
Evolution and Intelligent Design should both be presented to students as unproveable theories.
well said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:39 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
What "known" facts are those - and how do they contradict the existance of a Creator?
By challenging you to provide evidence of a creator.

Scientists can provide evidence of evolution. Because evolution is simply that species evolve, or change, over time. And we can observe that that is so.

So now you need to provide tangible evidence of a creator.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
well said.
But why should Christians trust the government to do a good job of teaching creationism? So let the church be in charge of teaching creationism in church.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:44 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,808,044 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
well said.
Not well said.

Science is Science.

Evolution is science theory.

Intelligent Design is not scientific theory.

How do we know this? Because science theories are always subject to change as new evidence is presented. Intelligent design is not subject to change when new evidence comes up. Because it's based on creationism, which isn't empirical, because it's religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:48 AM
 
2,677 posts, read 2,611,747 times
Reputation: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
You are citing adaptation and variation within a species, which is a far cry from "speciation", which refers to one species evolving into an entirely different species.

Try again.
Give adaptation a billion years or so and see what you have. That's a LONG time, so long we really can't even get our minds around it, our lives don't even amount to the blink of an eye compared to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,513 posts, read 37,057,177 times
Reputation: 13985
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
You are the poster child for what is wrong with public education! Of course you believe that what you believe is the only information that should be presented, with everything else censored. And no doubt, your "students" will unfortunately end up with a similarly "closed mind".

Funny you should mention "Speciation" since it is the most preposterous element of Darwinist theories, requiring a mentality so flawed, such a mind should not be teaching anyone anything.

"Evolution" in the sense that organisms naturally mutate is a well observed phenomenon. Natural selection and survival of the fittest is also well demonstrated. Both are reasonable hypothesis' and evidence backed. Speciation, on the other hand, has no foundation in fact ... no evidence in support ... and is quite literally void of rational thinking and plain common sense. Far from scientifically based .. speciation is nothing more than the meanderings of a 19th century kook that's been adopted as the counter argument to the equally absurd notions of those who believe in the existence of a fellow with a white flowing beard floating amongst the clouds, preparing lightening bolts to cast at earthing sinners below.

Once you separate dogma from the science, what you will be left with is a more reasonable picture of reality. Mutation of genetic code is real, but cannot account for species change or added complexity of an existing species, simply becuase mutation is "subtractive" .. not additive. You don't get more genetic information through mutation, you get less. It's quite literally "damage" to segments of the code. The very idea is akin to believeing that you could take a Ford Escort ... wreck it, repeatedly .. and eventually wind up with a Farrari. Ain't gonna happen ... but that is precisely what you are "teaching" your unfortunate students.

Fast forward to the 20th Century, and leaving Darwin behind, we discoverd a little thing called DNA .. something Darwin had no idea even existed. And the structure and complexity of DNA is such that only a pure idiot could accept as being the result of a random process of "evolution". It's like some distant future explorer discovering a 1000 year old Swiss Watch and labeling it as a naturally occuring product of nature, constructed via random mixing of earth's metals over eons of time. The only real difference being that DNA is a Million fold more complex, and exponentially unlikely.

Moreover, scientific studies and experiments have uncovered some rather startling new information that has not really made it to the mainstream and certianly not to the textbooks used to "educate" the sheeple. In fact, some of this information litterally proves how preposterous Darwinian Evolution actually is (if common sense didn't accomplish the task).

What was proven was that contrary to what is still taught in schools, all the way up through advanced university study, "Genetic Control" is all wrong. A Dr. Bruce Litpton proved in the 1970's that genes do not dictate what a thing becomes, but is subject to outside environmental influences. Other studies and experiments performed showed the existence of instant species change through the rewiting of DNA code (additive) from information transmitted from sources outside the DNA code itself. Instant speciation ... not speciation from eons of negative mutation.

At the end of the day, the question of the origin of life is still unanswered. Nobody knows. Not the creationists or the evolutionists. What we should know is that whether you believe in the old man in the clouds with the white flowing beard ... or another fellow of similar description residing on earth in the 1800's ... both theories are equally relagated to the category of childish fairytale.
Good grief...Please, please stop trying to get science from your bible...It's not there folks...

Observed Instances of Speciation

Birth of New Species Witnessed by Scientists | Wired Science | Wired.com

Actionbioscience | Ring Species: Unusual Demonstrations of Speciation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,095 posts, read 25,956,059 times
Reputation: 6128
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
By challenging you to provide evidence of a creator.

Scientists can provide evidence of evolution. Because evolution is simply that species evolve, or change, over time. And we can observe that that is so.

So now you need to provide tangible evidence of a creator.
I have no issue with "micro-evolution" within species. "Macro-evolution" and speciation? BIG problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:53 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,513 posts, read 37,057,177 times
Reputation: 13985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
well said.
What, lies are good in your world?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,095 posts, read 25,956,059 times
Reputation: 6128
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss View Post
Give adaptation a billion years or so and see what you have. That's a LONG time, so long we really can't even get our minds around it, our lives don't even amount to the blink of an eye compared to it.
And the change over these billions of years can be observed?

I find it very odd that evolutionists of an atheistic mindset can trash the concept of faith in those who trust in God but be so dependent on faith to support there own flawed theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,049,604 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
And the change over these billions of years can be observed?
Of course it can. We have an entire fossil record documenting it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
I find it very odd that evolutionists of an atheistic mindset can trash the concept of faith in those who trust in God but be so dependent on faith to support there own flawed theory.
That's because you are considering a straw man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top