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.
I can do that if you like, but right now you haven't given us anything to discuss. As you know, a claim that can be made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
If the very obvious evidence within this very forum is not discernable by you then I have little hope you could offer a rational response, or even that you understand what I was talking about.
Good thing we don't do this. Cutting edge science is usually reserved for upper level undergraduate or post-graduate work, not grade school. The basics of science which are taught in high school are well supported by the evidence.
No, I don't. Apparently none of the millions of biologists who work in the field professionally are aware of it either. But someone who thinks that "Asogenesis" is a real world is here to tell all of them what's up. Let's see your math.
Creationism isn't in conflict with these either since it's not a scientific theory. It's religious mythology so of course there's no conflict with real science in the mind of anyone who understands how these things work. I can see that someone who thinks that "Asogenesis" is a scientific field of study might be confused, but don't project that on to others.
Now you're just making stuff up. Please post some references to peer-reviewed scientific work that shows that evolution requires miracles or a designer.
Why should I? If I misspell a word that will be your focus and you will discredit anything I have to say based on my spelling. Insulting me is not going to prove your point. I have shown that I am just as eager to find fact and truth as anyone else, but if you insist upon insults when I share what I understand, believe or have seen then we have no further conversation because you are proving to be even more cloedminded than you accuse the creationists of being.
I'm sorry, I don't remember "it's OK to lie if everyone else is doing it" as something Jesus taught. Heck, my parents were smart enough to see through "but everyone else is doing it". Why do creationists think that particular excuse is going to make God any happier when they're doing it in his name?
I never said this, I merely pointed out that both sides have people willing to lie to prove their points, but I never said it was fine.
Quote:
And those examples are? Come on, don't leave us in suspense.
I'm not sure your logic is all that reassuring. We see small gradual changes in systems without designers all the time. Why is something that's actually observed illogical? When someone's "logic" conflicts with the real world, I'll take reality any day.
Irreducible complexity, once concept discussed in the article, has been soundly rejected by real scientists.
You can say this all you want, but for some reason if all you do is assert without providing any evidence it it's less than convincing.
I had more to share but I get tired of your insults. As for the founding fathers got to www.wallbuilders.com .
Why? And which systems?
Well, there was the Dover trial for once. Went to court all right. You know, that's the one where the judge ruled that Intelligent Design is not science, and is relabelled creationism.
(There's a NOVA documentary about the whole thing, if anyone's interested. It's available on YouTube and on their website if you do a bit of Googling.)
Except for, among others, Catholics. There's 1.2 billion or so throughout the world, so you might have heard of them.
But as a naturalist, I still disagree with your claim. I have no problem with philosophy. I did have lessons in philosophy in high school - two years, with the option of either 3h/week or 6h/week (I chose 6). I'm all for teaching kids about philosophy and critical thinking. I'm unconvinced, however, that this has anything to do with the crea/evo debate.
Bacterial Flagelim, or however it is spelled.
So you are not willing to acknowledge all the scientists who have been threatened with loosing their jobs and being discredited at all levels just for wanting to look into Biblical accounts from a scientific perspective? You do realize there are just as many accredited creation scientists as there are evolutionary scientists and possible more dont you? Oh not your not because they have been silenced or they loose their jobs.
I am an atheist/"evolutionist" and I would absolutely LOVE if kids were taught philosophy (metaphysics and naturalism) in school. I don't think you would find many atheists who would be against teaching the principles and ideas in metaphysics.
However, if you are just masquerading the term 'metaphysics' as 'christianity', then of course there will be an issue. If you are going to teach kids about christianity, then you need to teach them about other religions in a 'Religion' class. Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that Religion=Metaphysics. It is merely a very very small subset of it and is better categorized as theology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
This is typical. The fear and distrust is so great that the accusation is hurled and subsequently argued against that I am "masqueradding the term 'metaphysics' as 'christianity'," regardless of the fact that I made no mention whatsoever of religion or Christianity. The distrust is offensive and, worse, reveals the level of paranoia on the behalf of the people who make such vapid accusations.
Do you not understand that the word "IF" is a conditional? I did not make any accusations. I was merely covering a potential rebuttal that is often cited. Since you are not substituting 'metaphysics' for 'christianity', then you can disregard the rest of the paragraph. That is the beauty of "IF".
What is 'typical' here is that you completely disregarded the fact that I am ALL FOR teaching kids philosophy (naturalism and metaphysics). I am an atheist and an "evolutionist". This goes against your following statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Evolutionists who are naturalists (which is most of them and most atheists) won't want this because they summarily dismiss any notion of a metaphysical and wish to impose their naturalist view upon everyone else as well. Many of them go as far as to blame metaphysics or supernatural beliefs for the ills of the world.
Let me repeat again: I WANT kids to be taught the philosophy of metaphysics as well as naturalism. I think you will be hard-pressed to find atheists who are against a philosophy education.
Also, my apologies for my "fear", "distrust", "paranoia", or any other ad hominem argument you will make. So let's just throw those kinds of arguments out the window. Thank you.
If you believe this then you are the one with the logic problems.
I'm trying to picture a group of pencil necked geeks in their white lab coats, armed with pocket protectors and taped glasses, diligently working long hours with one goal in mind......cure for cancer, nope. Perfect their global warming model, nyet. Genome mapping, wrong. Messing with creationists, you betcha. That's what's going to get them that coveted Nobel Prize.
Okay folks, at this point it is only apparent that creationists are not going to change their mind and evolutionists are not going to change theirs, so you're wasting your time now to continue arguing this subject because neither side is going to give and nothing is going to be gained, so with that in mind it's time to close this thread.
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.
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.
