It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A few questions for the hardcore creationists

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2006 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Okay, so im going to drop af few questions here.
I will only accept answers that you can back up with a valid source, a scientific source, from at NON-BIAS website, book or the like.

1. First of all, are people like Kent Hovind reliable sources?

2. Are ALL dating methods faulty?

3. Did men and dino's co-exist?

4. How was Noah able to collect all animals, were the earth one big land mass?

5. Is Irreducible complexity really a valid argument? Is there really anything that is Irreducible complexity?

5 simple questions. And if you answer using a bias'ed source i must assume you are unable to read.

To aswer me these 5 questions you creationists must know, you need to look it up in scientific sources, do this for me, and will give you a BIIG hug




[edit on 16-5-2006 by Jugg]




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 03:49 AM
link   
congrats, you'll get absolutely nowhere with this thread.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 04:30 AM
link   
I hope I will.

Think man think! Look at the questions i have posed, my requirements to the source, what do you think im trying to do here?

I dont want answers to these questions, i already know the answers.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   
look, if someone is willing to believe this stuff, let 'em. people don't have to validate their beliefs, to you or anyone else. sure, i think it's a bit silly myself, but there's no reason to isolate anyone and say 'you're wrong because of this this and this'...it serves no purpose but to start an argument, and you're not going to change anyones mind.

ps - yes, i'm being terribly mature. i know it's weird.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
People should have to validate their beliefs if they wish to push those beliefs as facts and force those beliefs into every aspect of our live's in whichever way's they can.

I understand that they can't answer these questions in the factual sense or through using validated scientific sources, as such don't exist. They will however turn to thier prescious bible and say SEE! It says so right here in such and such verse. Which is usually followed by five minutes of huffing and puffing with a scary beady eyed look that seems to stare right through you.

Personally, I think we should isolate them and ridicule them. FFS, atleast the adults. I understand the kids don't know any better and are more influenced by what their friends and family believe's. But god damn, the adults should atleast have a somewhat tiny ammount of common sense in them.

If it starts an argument, so be it. So what. They feel they have every right to push their beliefs upon the rest of mankind in some religous attempt to "save" us, then we to have every right to argue thier silly pagan originated beliefs. If they wish people to stop attacking thir beliefs, then they can stop trying to push their beliefs as facts. Respect works both ways. They want it, they can earn it. If we use the past 2,000 years of their history as an indicator, I'd say this will never happen.

PS : I'm far from mature. Ask anyone on ATS


[edit on 16-5-2006 by Prot0n]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 05:51 AM
link   
ok, great. i'm glad you feel that way.

that's solving what problem exactly? you're enlightening who now?

give it a rest. if you know they're wrong, then accept it. what do you care what they have to say?



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   
I don't care what they say. Up untill they start trying to push it as fact upon people. Why should we not question them when it get's to this point? Sure, we COULD dispense with the ridicule, but that's what make's it fun. People debate. No harm in debating an issue, especially when one side is trying to push that issue as fact. If they feel that me using thier god's name in vain is an insult towards their belief system, all I can say is boohoo.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   
agreed, but not every creationist feels the need to preach, either - only the ones insecure enough in their faith that they feel they need everyone to believe it so that they might validate it that way.

ridiculing an entire group based on the actions of a few is very much akin to racism - and that's a huge glowing sign reading "stay away", isn't it? be careful with the things you say and assume.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Ridiculing creationists is nothing like racism.

Racism is based on the color of skin, creationism ridiculing is based on people not willing to face the facts, the ignorance and so forth.

But this thread is going off track.

Let som creationists say something.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I'm not including the followers as a whole. I understand not all of them feel the need to regurgitate garbage and pass it off as fact. Threads like this do atract those type of people however, and I personally see no problem with question those type of people. I don't view it as akin to racism at all. If this were so, everyone can be viewed as psuedo-racist's.

Attacking the belief system seperatley is also in my eyes fine. It's a ridiculous belief system. Just as they ridicule scientific progress and point and laugh at discoveries while rolling their eyes saying yea right ok, I also point and laugh at what they believe in. FFS, 90% of them don't even know thier bible, I've posted awhile back ago a few example's. One guy I argued with just kept calling me an idiot. I kept providing a few verses for him to look at and he wouldn't hear of it. Probably 98% don't even understand where their beleifs came from or the symbols they use. None of them follow all of their dieties "laws" and yet claim too. They have this idiotic belief that if they commit sin, it's ok. They can repent it away. While some of them will sit there and say that non-believers have no morals and don't have to uphold morals.

But I do agree with you. If I were to label them all as a whole and attack it as a whole, it could be viewed akin to racism. Since threads like this don't necessarily attract those people who don't feel the need to push these sort of question as facts, I fail to see how your point fits in to this thread.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
the thread title is not indicative of its content. someone who is merely willing to answer some questions proposed by a scholar is not going to see this thread as an attack until they open it.

that's my point.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 06:33 AM
link   
They open it, see if for what it is ... great ok. What's the problem then? They can choose to play along or leave the thread.

Agreed though, this is getting off topic.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jugg

1. First of all, are people like Kent Hovind reliable sources?

2. Are ALL dating methods faulty?

3. Did men and dino's co-exist?

4. How was Noah able to collect all animals, were the earth one big land mass?

5. Is Irreducible complexity really a valid argument? Is there really anything that is Irreducible complexity?



1. A fair question
2. (imho) all are faulty to a certain degree...especially when you're investigating 30-40,000 years in the past
3. but which type of man (?)...Homo Sapiens has been around only less than 200,000 years.
4. Genetics and DNA storage with alien intervention ala Nefilim?
5. Another fair question...I think


So...how about instead of discussing the validity of the questions, some-one try to answer those questions and stay on topic?
.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jugg
Okay, so im going to drop af few questions here.
I will only accept answers that you can back up with a valid source, a scientific source, from at NON-BIAS website, book or the like.

1. First of all, are people like Kent Hovind reliable sources?

2. Are ALL dating methods faulty?

3. Did men and dino's co-exist?

4. How was Noah able to collect all animals, were the earth one big land mass?

5. Is Irreducible complexity really a valid argument? Is there really anything that is Irreducible complexity?

5 simple questions. And if you answer using a bias'ed source i must assume you are unable to read.

To aswer me these 5 questions you creationists must know, you need to look it up in scientific sources, do this for me, and will give you a BIIG hug




[edit on 16-5-2006 by Jugg]


Okay, I'll bite on your question. First of all though, I think the issue you are really trying to discuss is the existence of God, I could be totally wrong here but I take it you are an Atheist? Or possibly Agnostic? Nothing wrong with either one, but if you are then this entire debate is tainted because you have an idealogy that would refute or misinterpret any information (accurate or otherwise) that would counter your initial premise.
I'm not a creationist, but I believe in God. One of the questions I struggle with is reconciling the origin of man theories because in some ways they can run counter to each other. I think most people would tell you that they take their Creationism beliefs on faith, and just like anything else taken in faith it requires no physical evidence to believe.
I don't think all dating methods are faulty, I don't think they can hit on an exact date but they give a usable range thats statistically acceptable for this type of work.
I'm one of those people that really takes the bible as a story of useful parables that are part of a larger message, not some 100% historically accurate history book so your Noah question is irrelevent to me because I doubt it really happened. Or, if it happened, it wasn't on the scale that is displayed in the bible. It would be more like a guy building a boat and saving his family and his farm or something.
I would like to point out that I'm not trying to force any views on you and it's not up to any Creationist (which I'm NOT) to prove to you that their beliefs are valid. It just isn't, just like it's not up to you to prove to any Creationist. There's plenty of room for everyone in the world.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   
No im sorry, but there's no more room for creationism. All rooms are occupied.

Creationism is dangerous, religious extremists are a great danger to human freedom.

Islamic Terroism is in the name of god, christian terroism is in the name of god.
And in these days, its christian extremists (US forces, extremist organisations within the US) that kills the most.



[edit on 16-5-2006 by Jugg]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 11:35 AM
link   
You kind of sound like a troll...you wanted a debate but then just dismiss what I said with a "no more room at the Inn" type comment...okay, fair enough. Your loss...



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
look, if someone is willing to believe this stuff, let 'em. people don't have to validate their beliefs, to you or anyone else. sure, i think it's a bit silly myself, but there's no reason to isolate anyone and say 'you're wrong because of this this and this'...it serves no purpose but to start an argument, and you're not going to change anyones mind.

ps - yes, i'm being terribly mature. i know it's weird.


Im so glad that someone like 25cents finally came around. Is there really a purpose to our argueing back and forth? Has someone mind been changed through all this? I used to post quite a bit in this forum until I realized there was no purpose. I have my ideas you have yours.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by White Chapel
You kind of sound like a troll...you wanted a debate but then just dismiss what I said with a "no more room at the Inn" type comment...okay, fair enough. Your loss...


I didnt dismiss it, i just dont agree with you.

There's no room in society for religious extremists.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jugg
No im sorry, but there's no more room for creationism. All rooms are occupied.

Creationism is dangerous, religious extremists are a great danger to human freedom.

Islamic Terroism is in the name of god, christian terroism is in the name of god.
And in these days, its christian extremists (US forces, extremist organisations within the US) that kills the most.



[edit on 16-5-2006 by Jugg]


That quote is extrememly dismissive, like you were just waiting for someone to post something so you can say people that follow a religion don't deserve space on the planet. Get real man, you aren't going to talk people out of being religious, they will believe what they want to believe with or without your support so you might as well give up that fight right now, it's a lot of wasted energy.
I also never saw anything in my post that said anything about extremists, and your argument that the US military are Christian extremists is laughable considering there are military chaplan's on trial right now for leading christian prayers.
Fighting intolerance with more intolerance doesn't work, just look at the cluster-f that is Israel.
The sad thing is, you are either a troll or actually believe what you are typing and I'm not sure which is worse.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Extremists! There's plenty of room for religion, but not religious extremists!

And i see the US forces as christian extremists, though 99% proably isent. They are on a christian mission, from some guy, who saying he's doing what god want him to do.

If people would just go to church, do their prayers and so on, it would be fine by me! I would support i very much, as long as they keep it to them selfes, and dont try to convert people.

Im tired of religous extremists trying to save me, and saying im going to hell. Ill go to hell if i want to, not because they say it =)

edited to remove swearing

[edit on 17-5-2006 by masqua]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join