Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is Creationism Dead?

page: 1
31
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+20 more 
posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   
It certainly seems to be on ATS.

There has been a dearth of new threads in this forum lately, and the ones that are still active are simple variations on the yes-it-is-no-it-isn't theme. Nothing new seems to be happening in this area at all.

Of course, the evolutionist side (that's my side, in case you were wondering) posts news of recent scientific discoveries that further substantiate evolutionary theory from time to time, because science is always advancing. But from the creationist side, there's been nothing but the same old same old ever since Michael Behe's spurious claims of irreducible complexity were blown out of the water nine years ago.

Unless a new Dark Age dawns upon the earth (or perhaps just in the USA), there is very little hope of political creationists and members of the Intelligent-design movement making any further headway in the culture. Without credible science to prove their claims, their cause is hopeless.

The realization of this seems to be affecting more and more creationists. They're losing heart. They're closing down their Noah's Ark 'museums'. They're giving up.

It is, of course, always unwise to count the religiously-motivated out, even when they're down. For all that, it is looking more and more as if creationism as a political movement is dead, and that is is dying as a belief system, too, although there will be places — mainly America and the Muslim world — where it will be maintained on life-support for a few years yet.

edit on 2/8/14 by Astyanax because: of a flatline.




posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

I'd say creationism is only dead in the minds of some who believe that once upon a time magical apes existed that could turn into humans if you throw a few million years at them.

magical apes or GOD, both require faith at the end of the day, for me I think I'll take faith in GOD as I really cant see a magical ape getting me to heaven.

each to their own of course, but considering more than half the world believes in a 'hereafter', the magical ape theory that corrupt governments try to indoctrinate us with at state run schools is probably closer to death than a GOD theory

edit on 2-8-2014 by Haxsaw because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax


Creationism started dying nearly two hundred years ago when the knowledge of Geology began to tear down the dogma.

I stopped debating E vs C ten years ago as the C's had run out of anything interesting to say other than, E would die so and didn't work and God did it.

Is C dead? No and I suspect it will continue on for many generations, becoming more and more isolated, denial bound, marginalized, laughed at until, many generations from now, it will becomes an odd little cult and a footnote to history.


+8 more 
posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Haxsaw




magical apes or GOD, both require faith at the end of the day, for me I think I'll take faith in GOD as I really cant see a magical ape getting me to heaven.


LOL wow, just wow.
Sorry but there is much much more to evolution than 'magical apes turning into humans'.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 01:58 AM
link   
FFS.

What is the purpose of this thread???

No new information, or news or discoveries.

Why can some people accept we are different with different beliefs. It whats makes the human race as diverse as we are. If you just want to believe the mainstream then fine. Just stop critisizing others beliefs cos it looks childish.

If you want the new information on creationism, look online, come back here THEN create a thread and discus it. There is plenty of it.

This is another evolutionist thread to bash creationists...and creationists can bash evolutionists.

This is ATS not kindergarten.

MODS this has been discussed 1000000 times on ATS....
edit on 2-8-2014 by pennydrops because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Haxsaw




magical apes or GOD, both require faith at the end of the day, for me I think I'll take faith in GOD as I really cant see a magical ape getting me to heaven.


LOL wow, just wow.
Sorry but there is much much more to evolution than 'magical apes turning into humans'.


There is much more to every belief than others make out. Its always the case. We understand our beliefs more than others, thats why we have beliefs. FFS.

For example, what about the magical first cell, created out of thin air containing the DNA for ALL life on earth we see today? ALL that software code, perfectly formed, those millions of links with not 1 out of place. How did the DNA form? Did the cell form first then the DNA in its nucleus...NO, the cell needs the DNA to form, how did the DNA form without the protection of the cell....MAGIC?...........easy, no matter what belief I choose to critizise, its easy.
edit on 2-8-2014 by pennydrops because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80
good to see you missed the point entirely, nothing you said negates what I said

keep on, keeping on



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:11 AM
link   
a reply to: pennydrops

You picked up a point that was nudging to get my attention as well, the lack of purpose to the OP.

But if I understand it, the idea of life coming from inorganic material, also shows a lack of purpose, so I suppose the style fits.

Oh, to the general question posed? Of course it's not dead, it never can be. It can never be proved false. Explain how the first particles, the cosmic egg, the first energy came into existence and perform a scientific experiment to prove it.

IT CANNOT BE DONE. True scientists know that.

People who think it can be have just found their own religion, not science.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I thought I might make a comment here but I would just be saying the same old thing as most replies have said.

There are two camps and then many sub camps in the relationship beliefs about humanity's origins.

Why are we at loggerheads and bickering, surely we are all grown up enough to listen to each others points and understand others views and then respect their choice.

I dont believe in evolution, the big bang and then abiogenesis as it stands, scientists are still working hard on finding answers, if creation was the wooden duck then why are scientists fighting so hard, why this thread,why the animosity.

If creationism was dead, why the thread, little victory dance? The I am better than you approach, well you can have it, you can be the winner, me I will allow you to believe that.

Me I will wait on answers to evolutions problems

Lack of a viable mechanism for producing high levels of complex and specified information. Related to this are problems with the Darwinian mechanism producing irreducibly complex features, and the problems of non-functional or deleterious intermediate stages. (For details see: "The NCSE, Judge Jones, and Bluffs About the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information," "Do Car Engines Run on Lugnuts? A Response to Ken Miller & Judge Jones's Straw Tests of Irreducible Complexity for the Bacterial Flagellum," "Opening Darwin's Black Box," or "Can Random Mutations Create New Complex Features? A Response to TalkOrigins");
The failure of the fossil record to provide support for Darwinian evolution. (For details, see "Punctuated Equilibrium and Patterns from the Fossil Record" or "Intelligent Design Has Scientific Merit in Paleontology");
The failure of molecular biology to provide evidence for a grand "tree of life." (For details, see: "A Primer on the Tree of Life");
Natural selection is an extremely inefficient method of spreading traits in populations unless a trait has an extremely high selection coefficient;
The problem that convergent evolution appears rampant -- at both the genetic and morphological levels, even though under Darwinian theory this is highly unlikely. (For details, see "Convergent Genetic Evolution: 'Surprising' Under Unguided Evolution, Expected Under Intelligent Design" and "Dolphins and Porpoises and...Bats? Oh My! Evolution's Convergence Problem");
The failure of chemistry to explain the origin of the genetic code. (For details, see "The origin of life remains a mystery" or "Problems with the Natural Chemical 'Origin of Life'");
The failure of developmental biology to explain why vertebrate embryos diverge from the beginning of development. (For details, see: "Evolving views of embryology," "A Reply to Carl Zimmer on Embryology and Developmental Biology," "Current Textbooks Misuse Embryology to Argue for Evolution");
The failure of neo-Darwinian evolution to explain the biogeographical distribution of many species. (For details, see "Sea Monkey Hypotheses Refute the NCSE's Biogeography Objections to Explore Evolution" or "Sea Monkeys Are the Tip of the Iceberg: More Biogeographical Conundrums for Neo-Darwinism");
A long history of inaccurate predictions inspired by neo-Darwinism regarding vestigial organs or so-called "junk" DNA. (For details, ] see: "Intelligent Design and the Death of the 'Junk-DNA' Neo-Darwinian Paradigm," "The Latest Proof of Evolution: The Appendix Has No Important Function," or "Does Darrel Falk's Junk DNA Argument for Common Descent Commit 'One of the Biggest Mistakes in the History of Molecular Biology'?);
Humans show many behavioral and cognitive traits and abilities that offer no apparent survival advantage (e.g. music, art, religion, ability to ponder the nature of the universe).
Of course, even these "top ten" still just scratch the surface. What would you add?


www.evolutionnews.org...

I respect your beliefs in evolution, just dont accept them myself



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:34 AM
link   
I usually stay far away from these threads as my belief system is never up for debate. It's one of the very few things in my life that will never be budged. I generally refuse to debate it because I am not open minded about it and there is no use in wasting my time or yours. Every other subject (99%) I do discuss because I may well change my views on it. I am not a church going Christian and I get disgusted (like many of you here) about how churches run themselves and how the ones who are supposed to be leading us... treat other people and their "flock". I do hold beliefs that are not considered main stream Christian beliefs. They are not things I was told to believe but things I studied on and came to the conclusion on by myself. Most "preachers" are out for money and power or worse.

Maybe there are many like me who do the same. Maybe they don't feel right debating something they have a closed mind to. I don't know, but I do know that creationism isn't dead and most Christians are fully aware of what is happening because we were told in the bible what was going to happen.

The ones who do debate it, do so because we are supposed to spread the word. My line of thinking on that is that folks do know about God. If I come across someone who doesn't... Maybe I will share then if they are open to it. But to chase people all around only to repeat yourself over and over seems useless to me. There are few people left on the face of this planet who do not know about God regardless of their own belief system, country, race, etc. it's beating a dead horse to just keep ramming it down people's throats at this point in time IMO.

There will also be a "falling away" of the church the bible says. Meaning that people will stop believing, stop teaching, stop learning, etc. As people become more worldly they will not only turn away, they will never believe in the first place.

I do understand why some people have a bad taste in their mouths concerning Christianity. I do. Some of the most horrific actions have been done in the name of God/A God. Even today some calling themselves Christians do horrendous, spiteful things to others... Again in the name of God. These folks will have to answer for that IMO because Jesus would never condone such behavior, let alone having it done in His name.

I wish it were possible to stop the feuding that we see here and other places between those who believe and those who don't. I'm not sure we will ever see that and that is a tragedy.

I don't really want to debate my beliefs in this thread, I just wanted to share what I believe may be the reasons you are seeing what you are seeing. I realize that other members may mock my post and call me stupid for believing the way I do and say that ignorant people are waking up and that is why the creationism crowd is dwindling... and I understand your thought processes on that. I would only ask that you post to me in the same respects that I posted to you.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

It almost sounds like you miss it a little. Perhaps there are more meaty issues for you to gnash your teeth upon. If a creationist is your only worthy opponent, I would hope that a so-called evolutionist could do better.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: pennydrops

I agree but at least your are not over simplifying something into magical monkeys.

For the record i am not a staunch evolution believer just was taken back by that comment
Eta: you kinda are over simplifying things with the magic cell containing all the dna for all life. While yes it is kinda true what you are saying, still a rather simplification of the theory.
My biggest prob with creationism is the 6000 year timeline. Not saying you all subscribe to that but just don't see how people can stick to that
edit on ndSat, 02 Aug 2014 04:02:37 -0500America/Chicago820143780 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 04:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

I would say it will never be dead as a belief or a subject, it may undergoe reinterpretation in some group's and traditionalist methodist belief's will also survive.

Take the dust of the earth, god made all the creatures called soul's and it say's he made man from the dust of the earth then breathed life into him.

This could be interpreted as all flesh is regarded as dust (from dust to dust) and all soul and breath of life are regarded as of God then since all flesh is Dust an Ape is therefore Dust of the earth.

It could therefore be interpreted as the act of evolution being the hand of God molding the dust of the earth but man was only man when he finally imbued his divine soul in the form of the spiritual breath of life.

Time is the only stumbling block in such a reinterpretation and those of faith would see this as corrupting the word of God but to God how long is a day, some interpretations place it at 10.000 years but other's say it is as long as God want's it to be so could mean entire eternity's, also since he created an entire universe with a myriad possible other races also living like us and perhaps adam had brothers maybe he visited on Six Day's then came and stayed a short time after but once again the traditionalists will disagree and faith is non negotiable.

I actually both believe in God and the Idea the like Jesus said "there is nothing new under the sun" that the human race is far older than current anthropology admit's or that it may have been a re evolution/creation of a similar species that may once have predated us on this earth, after all though this will garner further argument were did the human like angel's come from if they where not of Adam or the fallen watchers who seem to have been genetically compatible with human's so that they liked the daughters of man and begot (inhuman) children by them, so perhaps a more evolved but corrupted earlier race of man and let us not forget the part of genesis that long before the idea of the holy trinity goes.

God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 26Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.…

This is one of the confusing contradictions in the book of Genesis where the story of Adam being made first was inherited at the time of the Babylonian exile, indeed the jewish religion that returned from Babylon was not the same exact religion that had gone with the people who went into captivity and a synthesis of works was what emerged, book's such as the book of Job and the story of Noah (Which I happen to believe though my mind is open to how wide the flooding was) were inherited and incorporated in the once glorious babylonian culture.

If you look again it say's Male and Female created together in OUR image, now this OUR was often siezed upon by Polytheists who claimed that God is actually the lord of a Pantheon and archangel's are essentially beings of power equivelant to God's but Christianity once and for all cleared that up as Jesus himself prayed to God and the Alpha and Omega told John of Patmos to stand up as he was a fellow servant and not his master.

Let us look again at that Male and Female in OUR image, the Angel's appear to be Human like and in part genetically compatible in the book of Enoch, it is a real text that was left out of the bible when it was compiled by early church.

It describes the Angel's and there offspring in one part where Enoch look's at Noah who has fair hair and skin, light eye's like the Nephilim and how he was comforted after thinking it was not his Son by an angel of the Lord (Maybe Noah's real father?) where Enoch and his people where dark haired and skinned, Of course we are all familiar with the story's by Abductees and Contactees of the UFO fraternity who believe in a human like race (or even odder several such races) called the Nordic type.

There was obviously a breech of some Law or Treaty that led to the breeding Program being stopped when the other more powerful faction found that the new (Old) race had genetically altered by Cross breeding with the Watchers whom had been meant to prevent the very thing they did (So who where they protecting the Race from only to become what they were not supposed to under there commander Semyazza).

I could Go on but I do believe in God and Jesus said "God is a Spirit" so since Flesh is Dust what is in the Image of god unless it is the SOUL which is the most important part of a being, the data store and the consciousness, also the part that may be possible to transferre or download using Quantum techniques.

Now for anyone wanting to correct me this is purely speculation and thought but it in no way describe's my faith, I am a believe in Jesus say no more.
edit on 2-8-2014 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 05:33 AM
link   
I lold

Why cant people get the fact that creation and evolution have nothing to do with each other

Abiogenisis is what u are thinking of

O well one day u will get it



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80


Dont get things twisted

I know people want to fake u out

Make this evolution vs creation

A false comparison

But that 6000 year thing is not creation either

U are being sold lies to manipulate your mind

Evolution doesn't equal creation doesnt equal 6000 years



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 07:03 AM
link   
While there are people attempting to teach children 'creationism' in the classroom in place of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection, while there are creation scientists and creation museums and themeparks, it's entirely an evolution vs creation issue.

And while there are people (usually Christians) attempting to substitute this knowledge that we've acquired over the past 150 yrs with a collection of superstitions fairy tales from a primitive and debased period in our history, there's an issue that needs to be and should be discussed.

I understand how much of an embarrassment creationists must be to the majority of Christians, but to ignore such ignorance is to let it breed and multiply to the detriment of us all.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: pennydrops


FFS.

What is the purpose of this thread???

The same as that of the forum as a whole: that is, to discuss the political terms of the origins and creationism debate. My contribution to that is my perception, based on long-standing participation in this forum and a general interest in the subject, that it is dying.


If you want the new information on creationism, look online, come back here THEN create a thread and discus it. There is plenty of it.

No, that's your job — as a creationist. Bring out the new stuff and let's have at it. Don't just say I'm wrong, prove me wrong.

That's exactly what this thread is for.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Haxsaw

Maybe you should take a middle school level biology class before commenting on any more threads. Even if you disagree with evolution you should at least understand it. You've taken time to get to know your evil imaginary sky man though haven't you?



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Let us not forget that there are a range of views on the topic of the origins and development of Life. Not all religious adherents are Creationists and not all staunch proponents of the scientific method are Evolutionists. An important view to consider, one which has not been mentioned yet in this thread, is that of Intelligent Design.

edit on 2/8/2014 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Id is encompassed in creation

So is

Simulation theory and some might even throw in hologram


Thats along with transDimensions beings

Some alien intelligence and an omnipotent

god reply to: Dark Ghost






top topics



 
31
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join