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.

 

Most Americans Believe In Creation

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


Creation means there is a God and evolution means there is no God. This is clearly shown in textbooks and evolution literature. Most americans believe in God and therefore creation, by any means.
We have no science for evolution. Evolution requires observable and testable evidence which we none, therefore it is a faith. And the minority brough evolution into textbooks.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by ppkjjkpp]


Um hate to burst your bubble there skippy but that was a VASTLY wrong statement.


Which part?




posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


Then how praytell do you back up some of the statements you have made? I am not attempting ad hominium, just well, speaking.
Have dealt with you before.
Remember?



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Creation means there is a God and evolution means there is no God. This is clearly shown in textbooks and evolution literature. Most americans believe in God and therefore creation, by any means.


This is why letting people like you vote on science would be a joke idea. As bad as letting people vote on the diagnosis of cancer.

Evolution doesn't rule out god. It just appears to rule out what you think god did.


Evolution doesn't rule out God? Show me a textbook that even mentions the possiblity of God.
See this is the lie evolutionists are feeding Christians. It doesn't include God at all. The textbooks say, In the beginning there was nothing.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by ppkjjkpp]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
Then how praytell do you back up some of the statements you have made? I am not attempting ad hominium, just well, speaking.
Have dealt with you before.
Remember?


Aye, I do. You might remember I don't read minds.

D'ya wanna expand on that?

Why I am an atheist or something?



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


Evolution is not the denial of an higher power.
Some like to pretend it does but I really don't see it.
I haven't seen a line that says "And there is no god btw".

But one part was correct.
Creationism does require a god.

And while I do admit to the belief in a god I am almost completely positive it is not what you think of when you say the word god.

And I think creationism is a crock, another way for us to continue to pretend we are so great and wonderful.
But that is my view.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Evolution doesn't rule out God? Show me a textbook that even mentions the possiblity of God.
See this is the lie evolutionists are feeding Christians. It doesn't include God at all. The textbooks say, In the beginning there was nothing.


Science textbooks focus on science, not religion.

I also hear that textbooks on chemistry, maths, and electrical engineering don't mention it either.

...



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Evolution doesn't rule out God? Show me a textbook that even mentions the possiblity of God.
See this is the lie evolutionists are feeding Christians. It doesn't include God at all. The textbooks say, In the beginning there was nothing.


Science textbooks focus on science, not religion.

I also hear that textbooks on chemistry, maths, and electrical engineering don't mention it either.

...


The origin of life is a reasonable question. But it can't be answered because it is out of the realm of science. So why does evolution leave science to answer this?
If it's possible that evolution has God, then why do the textbooks say something completely unscientific by stating in the beginning there was nothing.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


Evolution is not the denial of an higher power.
Some like to pretend it does but I really don't see it.
I haven't seen a line that says "And there is no god btw".

But one part was correct.
Creationism does require a god.

And while I do admit to the belief in a god I am almost completely positive it is not what you think of when you say the word god.

And I think creationism is a crock, another way for us to continue to pretend we are so great and wonderful.
But that is my view.



No there is no line that says 'there is no god' but they say in the beginning there was nothing and from nothing we have something which implies there is no God. Big Bang?



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
The origin of life is a reasonable question. But it can't be answered because it is out of the realm of science. So why does evolution leave science to answer this?


It is a reasonable question. And science is well equipped to answer it. Indeed, it is much better equipped than books written by goatherders, fuzzy feelings, and voices in ya head.


If it's possible that evolution has God, then why do the textbooks say something completely unscientific by stating in the beginning there was nothing.


Who says 'in the beginning there was nothing'?

Evolution can have god stuck on like a parasite if you want to do so, so can the incidence of cancer, tsunamis, and potholes. Many do. Whatever floats ya boat.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


Your argument is based on wrong information. You are assuming that ALL Christians believe in creationism and that's simply not true. I know many, many Christians who don't believe in it, they believe in evolution. In fact, in my whole life, I've known very few that believe in creationism. There are approximately 26% of the population who call themselves "fundamentalist"; those are the ones who mostly believe in creationism. So you see, that the majority doesn't believe in it, they believe in evolution.
The other fallacy is that democracy doesn't entirely serve the majority. Democracy is also there to protect the minority.
Another fallacy is that America was founded on Christianity. Not true, many of the founders were Freemasons and much of the constitution was based on their beliefs - such as equality and brotherhood.
BTW, being nice is also a virtue of aetheists, Moslems, Jews, etc. You don't have to believe in God to be a nice person.
The Founders also believed that separation between church and state was vital. I agree with that and I don't want religion being taught to my child. You can worship all you want at your church. What you are advocating is theocracy and that simply goes against our Constitution.
Also, your theory would mean that Christians are forcing their beliefs on others.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
The origin of life is a reasonable question. But it can't be answered because it is out of the realm of science. So why does evolution leave science to answer this?


It is a reasonable question. And science is well equipped to answer it. Indeed, it is much better equipped than books written by goatherders, fuzzy feelings, and voices in ya head.


If it's possible that evolution has God, then why do the textbooks say something completely unscientific by stating in the beginning there was nothing.


Who says 'in the beginning there was nothing'?

Evolution can have god stuck on like a parasite if you want to do so, so can the incidence of cancer, tsunamis, and potholes. Many do. Whatever floats ya boat.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by melatonin]


Well all textbooks start out with the Big Bang which means something came from nothing. Nothing doesn't mean God or even leave the possiblility of God. They don't teach grade school children about string theory yet.

No science can answer origin of life because again it cannot be observer or tested.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Well all textbooks start out with the Big Bang which means something came from nothing. Nothing doesn't mean God or even leave the possiblility of God. They don't teach grade school children about string theory yet.


I doubt that a biology textbook starts out with the big-bang. Have you ever read one?

No, the big-bang theory doesn't say that. Again, educate yourself. BB theory applies from planck time onwards. Before that we have a singularity. As you note, work is on-going for before planck time with the likes of string 'theory'.


No science can answer origin of life because again it cannot be observer or tested.


Yes, it can. Here you show that you don't understand science. We can infer from data. Just the same as you people in the US like to send people to their deaths without observing them sticking the knife in.

We don't need to make a universe in the lab and observe it. We form scientific hypothesis, make predictions, and test them against the real-world data.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


Your argument is based on wrong information. You are assuming that ALL Christians believe in creationism and that's simply not true. I know many, many Christians who don't believe in it, they believe in evolution. In fact, in my whole life, I've known very few that believe in creationism. There are approximately 26% of the population who call themselves "fundamentalist"; those are the ones who mostly believe in creationism. So you see, that the majority doesn't believe in it, they believe in evolution.
The other fallacy is that democracy doesn't entirely serve the majority. Democracy is also there to protect the minority.
Another fallacy is that America was founded on Christianity. Not true, many of the founders were Freemasons and much of the constitution was based on their beliefs - such as equality and brotherhood.
BTW, being nice is also a virtue of aetheists, Moslems, Jews, etc. You don't have to believe in God to be a nice person.
The Founders also believed that separation between church and state was vital. I agree with that and I don't want religion being taught to my child. You can worship all you want at your church. What you are advocating is theocracy and that simply goes against our Constitution.
Also, your theory would mean that Christians are forcing their beliefs on others.

Creationism means that there is a God who created everything. Either by evolution or creation is irrevelant. I personally believe the Bible but thats just me.
Yes democracy protects the minority. If you're an atheist you are not to be discriminated against and I highly doubt you are. Because the majority Christians are the ones being attacked by the atheists.
But anyways whatever most people want is what they should have in a a democracy. Which is not where America is today on a number of issues. We don't give the presidential candidate with the least votes the presidency.
My point about being nice is that the one guy was saying that Christians aren't nice for telling people they will go to hell. I was just letting them know that the Bible tells us to be nice.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Count me in as one American who thinks "creationism" is a load of muck.

It's all in the Buy-bull.

O_O



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Well all textbooks start out with the Big Bang which means something came from nothing. Nothing doesn't mean God or even leave the possiblility of God. They don't teach grade school children about string theory yet.


I doubt that a biology textbook starts out with the big-bang. Have you ever read one?

No, the big-bang theory doesn't say that. Again, educate yourself. BB theory applies from planck time onwards. Before that we have a singularity. As you note, work is on-going for before planck time with the likes of string 'theory'.


No science can answer origin of life because again it cannot be observer or tested.


Yes, it can. Here you show that you don't understand science. We can infer from data. Just the same as you people in the US like to send people to their deaths without observing them sticking the knife in.

We don't need to make a universe in the lab and observe it. We form scientific hypothesis, make predictions, and test them against the real-world data.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by melatonin]


Good job on attacking America.
Actually I have read many science textbooks starting from Grade 6.
They all started out with the Big Bang when the evolution chapter came up.
Science requires you to observe and test hypothesis which you can't. Honestly look up the definition of science.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant

And what is peer review if not a form of voting?


Peer review is, at its worst, a reactionary, super-conservative hindrance to the advancement of science. At its worst.

But a fact is a fact whether it is published or not.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Yes democracy protects the minority. If you're an atheist you are not to be discriminated against and I highly doubt you are.


Which shows you really don't know what it's like to be non-Christian. I live in the buckle of the Bible belt; I have to keep my religion a secret because people here are so prejudiced against non-Christians, my life/property/loved ones might be in danger. It's happened here before.

Anyway, you didn't really address the points in my post.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Good job on attacking America.


Don't worry, we used to do it too. You can apply the same analogy to much of forensic science. There's an important point there, it might have went over your head though.


Actually I have read many science textbooks starting from Grade 6. They all started out with the Big Bang when the evolution chapter came up. Science requires you to observe and test hypothesis which you can't. Honestly look up the definition of science.


Pity you didn't read them closer...

Without having the book, how can I know? I'm certainly not taking your word for it. What I do know is that none in the UK do, my partner is a biology teacher. Why would they mix physics with biology? Two different parts of science.

The observations are the data, the data can be used to test hypotheses.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
Yes democracy protects the minority. If you're an atheist you are not to be discriminated against and I highly doubt you are.


Which shows you really don't know what it's like to be non-Christian. I live in the buckle of the Bible belt; I have to keep my religion a secret because people here are so prejudiced against non-Christians, my life/property/loved ones might be in danger. It's happened here before.

Anyway, you didn't really address the points in my post.


If you included the next sentence, I tried to say, it's hard to see atheists being discriminated against because so many atheists are attacking Christians.
Well I agreed with some of your post. That democracy protects the minority as well. I never said it didn't. I said that what the majority wants is what goes.
I clarified what creationism meant, that God did it by whatever means, evolution or Bible based creation.
I see all the references to God in the federal governtment and it is logical to believe that Christianity was part of American foundation.
I'm not saying Christians force their beliefs on others. I'm saying the majority of people believe in God.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by ppkjjkpp]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Creationism would be fine if it did not start from an abstract idea and try to select data to prove itself right. As a belief it's fine but it's not the theological equivalent of the Theory of Evolution.

One is a best attempt to explain the available data and it's willing to be challenged.

The other is an assertion based on taking literally the oral traditions of a number of tribes that were passed down through generations, eventually written down, by mortals, some of them translated, by mortals, which were then vetted by a committee of mortals about 1700 years ago to come up with what in their mortal opinion was the best and most consistent publication to support their religion as it was perceived and practised at the time. For it to be literally true and a totally accurate history of the world and its followers up to that point would be a colossal coincidence.

Furthermore, Creatonism presents no opportunity to falsify it.

[edit on 24/1/08 by tayga]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join