Battle Against Teaching Evolution in Texas Begins: Should creationism win out, textbooks throughout

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by SevenThunders
 


There is no evidence for Creationism or ID. Behe's argument of irreducible complexity is demonstrably wrong. Just look up Ken Miller on YouTube. You'll see it debunked quite nicely. And keep in mind that Ken Miller is a Christian.




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
It's quite sad when one extreme wins over another extreme. Evolution IS intelligent design, whether or not you want to believe it.

I know it goes against your core beliefs as atheists, and it shakes your faith to the foundation but someday you're just going to have to deal with it.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by metro
It's quite sad when one extreme wins over another extreme. Evolution IS intelligent design, whether or not you want to believe it.

I know it goes against your core beliefs as atheists, and it shakes your faith to the foundation but someday you're just going to have to deal with it.




Evolution is NOT intelligent design just because you say so. Prove to me how evolution could be intelligently guided, and provide a plausible mechanism for the same. What's that? You can't? Oh.

What am I going to have to deal with? Oh yeah, nothing, because I'll just be dead at that point...lol, rather it is the religious that will have wasted much of their lives in pursuit of a pointless myth.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by metro
 


I'm an atheist and I have no problem with you believing evolution was a method of creation.. in fact thats what I used to believe before I became an atheist.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by metro
 


metro,

Long ago I could see the whole 'god' nonsense for what it is....a belief system that seems to provide some solace to those who don't wish to think for themselves, but want others to think for them.

Once you allow someone else to think for you, then you give up control to them.

THAT is the simple fact, the basis of religion...in today's terms.

It relates to a political example. You've heard, no doubt, of the politics of fear? Well, hope that seems familiar, because that's exactly what religion has done, for thousands of years...instill fear, and thus, exert control.

Politics and religion are cousins....brother!



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
This is a stupid argument. You know what belongs in science classrooms? SCIENCE. Religion, is not science, its religion. Evolution on the other hand IS science. Theoretical or not its science, and if you look carefully half the things you learn in science are theoretical. Example: Gravity. The theory of gravity is still a theory, but you'll still learn it in science. But in reality creationism is going to win, who's surprised? Its Texas.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by keeb333
 


I think evolution can be considered intelligent design outside of religion. How soon we forget that a blob of fat and protein is running our body. What if evolution is self intelligent in a sense? I get the feeling people tend to view it like a computer, just brute forcing it's way through mutations. But it's not the mutations that are special, it's the underlying system. In fact, it's the underlying system of everything. The reason fractals are seen at almost every scale of existence. Or think about it this way, what's more important; you the individual or your DNA? The DNA moves on, hopping from parents to children, while each person attempts to reproduce again.

I think evolution is doing a pretty good job of keeping things in balance. Sure it could be better, but it could be a lot worse. The very existence of life is amazing, much less a world this developed. I believe I'm a smart guy, but when it comes down to it what you're reading is the sum of electrical reactions drawing on recorded sensory experience. We are more computer than we realize, it's just that the subconscious takes care of a lot of that. Evolution is alive in a sense, growing and moving across the world, it may not be a biological entity like we normally assume, but in the same sense that you can't put a finger on your consciousness or where your internal monologue takes place, the evolution of species is an intelligent force. It adapts, it learns, it stores past information, it messes up, but it's mistakes are soon forgotten, while it's triumphs live on in dominance. I can only assume that the jump humans made in thought is only another step on a larger ladder. We may be the pinnacle, but for better or worse, we're moving in some direction.

I don't think this concept needs religion, but I personally think God is responsible for it. Think about how many elements there are, and then realize the entire known universe is made of only those puzzle pieces. And then think about how each element is only comprised of three particles (proton, neutron, electron). Imagine creating a system which begins with very few pieces and a 'relatively' strict set of universal laws, which sprang into this. Beautiful. It can make a tree seem like a work of art, if you'd only shift your mind to see it that way.

Sorry if I rambled, there's a lot on my mind. But all in all I don't see the need for both sides to be against each other. It's ok to partially agree and be fine with it.

[edit on 7-4-2008 by Parabol]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Parabol
 

www.dailygalaxy.com...


DNA has been found to have a bizarre ability to put itself together, even at a distance, when according to known science it shouldn't be able to. Explanation: None, at least not yet.


Here's an argument for the process of evolution not being random. It seems DNA exists with a purpose. What do you think?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
I think that's part of it's intelligence. My college biology courses were insane, I can't believe how complicated, but yet so simple, the entire DNA process is. I believe it's just an extension of our own trial and errors. We remember past choices and outcomes which influence our future decisions. DNA has a memory in the sense that unused portions can be reactivated. The information is still there, it's just not in use. I believe our definition of intelligence is far too narrow and short sighted. Our intelligence is not greater than this system, it is a part of it.

EDIT: I don't believe evolution is random at all. It has room for it, and allows it, much like our creative endeavors to strike up an original idea. I would say that evolution guides itself fairly well, as each individual plays out it's plan. Ha, or something like that.

[edit on 7-4-2008 by Parabol]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by keeb333
 


Perhaps if you saw someone raised from the dead or healed miraculously you would change your viewpoint. Jesus lives! Those who saw his resurrection were willing to die for what they saw.

Besides the science that you worship changes it's foundation every couple of generations or so. It's about as stable as this years fashion trends. Why I believe it was the Scientific American that published a debunking of the Wright brothers heavier than air flight after they had already demonstrated it in front of many witnesses.

As it stands I have a Ph.D and two masters degrees in science and engineering. I can confidently state that everything you believe about the universe will be proven wrong within a hundred years or so. Evolution has resisted the trend only because it is unthinkable for hard core atheists to admit to the existence of a designer.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenThunders
reply to post by keeb333
 


As it stands I have a Ph.D and two masters degrees in science and engineering. I can confidently state that everything you believe about the universe will be proven wrong within a hundred years or so. Evolution has resisted the trend only because it is unthinkable for hard core atheists to admit to the existence of a designer.


Good. Than as a scientist you understand that the purpose of science is to seek out knowledge, and that as our knowledge and understanding grow, it is only logical that theories are reevaluated in the context of current knowledge. If the state of scientific understanding in 200 years is no further along that it is today, then I would be scared! I can confidently agree that in the next hundred years or so, everything we believe about the universe now WILL be proven wrong (or much of it, anyway).

But you know what still won't be proven right? Anything supernatural.

P.S. If a plausible natural explanation that holds up under rigorous and repeatable testing for a phenomenon that is currently thought to be supernatural is set forth in the future, then the said phenomenon will no longer be "supernatural". All of religion stems from the days when man made up stories to explain the world around us, and as we have discovered the real truth, the stories have gradually fallen by the wayside. The same will eventually happen with the current crop of myths, once humanity has a fuller knowledge of the universe.


P.P.S. I don't worship anything, especially science!


[edit on 7-4-2008 by keeb333]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by keeb333
 


Think of it like this. I think it was a science fiction author who said this, but any sufficiently advanced civilization's science will seem like magic to the primitives.

God is the ultimate technologist. He knows the inner workings of the machine he created and can do as he wills. From his perspective it's not supernatural. He simply has capabilities that far exceed ours. But we are answerable to Him and that's where things get tricky.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenThunders
reply to post by keeb333
 


Think of it like this. I think it was a science fiction author who said this, but any sufficiently advanced civilization's science will seem like magic to the primitives.

God is the ultimate technologist. He knows the inner workings of the machine he created and can do as he wills. From his perspective it's not supernatural. He simply has capabilities that far exceed ours. But we are answerable to Him and that's where things get tricky.


keeb, the quote is from Sir Arthur C Clarke...."Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (1961)

So....you have missed the point, unless you're trying to claim that your 'god' is some sort of technologically advanced something that wishes to laugh at us, and show us how stupid we are??

Is that your point?


[sp]


[edit on 4/7/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I didn't realize that creationism was "Religion", I thought it was just good old common sense. Darwin, like Einstein, like the world is flat, etc., are just political manipulations to dumb down society.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReelView
I didn't realize that creationism was "Religion", I thought it was just good old common sense. Darwin, like Einstein, like the world is flat, etc., are just political manipulations to dumb down society.


Reelview....huh?!

creationism is a Religion, it is part of a theistic view that invades and corrupts and continues to infect normal thinking.

Perhaps I misunderstood, or you were just trying to be funny. Either I am wrong, or you're not funny....pick one.

WW



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


In one hand, you have the idea of a purely coincidental theory on life based on random events.

In the other, you have the idea of the total opposite, where life has a purpose and a greater cause. One which was designed by a creator.

It's called a spectrum. And you're on one end of it. Pure blue.

And you're so arrogant to tell me that your extreme is more right than the other? And then preach about knowledge and enlightenment? Has not the past taught you anything?

Science is a study of observation. One that delves deeper and deeper with the eyes. It is but one part of your being as a human. Spirituality is the other half. The feeling. Science cannot feel. Science can only see. And what is sight but only what your mind interprets?

If theres anything I know for sure, is that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

I'm sorry you equate everything that has to do with your spiritual side to the corrupt organized religions of today. They weren't always like that. There is nothing corrupt about your spirit - unless you willingly give in to the 'dark side'.



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by metro
 


I truly think, and I profoundly apoloize if I let you misinterpret my positon....

the constant 'drumbeat' of religion, trying to impart its nonsense into anyone's head, is the point of my trying to stop this nonsense!!

'religion' has been the 'drumbeat' for generations...and it is interferring with the developement of our species...homo sapien...

What I wish to say is very simple....there is no need to subscribe to a particular religion, because it is all BS....but if you want to believe, then all means, believe, since that is your right!!

Live by the ideals that your religion tells you to...except!!! YOU don't, most of you!

Most of you do not abide by the principles you claim to hold so dear....



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by SevenThunders
 


Glad you keep the faith, Seven, i try to, as well. I, personally, was
"miracled" out of death a couple times, and am lucky; so i hold on to my
beliefs. But i listen to non-believers, cause they matter to me. They have
good argument against God.

But, like my Marine father told me, "There are NO atheists in foxholes" lol



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by riley
 

Oh I don't know Riley,
Maybe because some people really detest the idea of evolving from monkeys.
How's about, you think what you want, and I'll think what I want. Okay. The End.

Edit: Please don't respond. I have no desire to hash out this discussion with you.

[edit on 8-4-2008 by sizzle]



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle
reply to post by riley
 

Oh I don't know Riley,
Maybe because some people really detest the idea of evolving from monkeys.

but thats not what ToE says..

How's about, you think what you want, and I'll think what I want. Okay. The End.

No probs with that.. just dont think it's okay to teach my children your religion in a science class.

Edit: Please don't respond. I have no desire to hash out this discussion with you.

Please don't respond and then ask me not to.. thats antagonistic in itself.


[edit on 8-4-2008 by riley]





new topics
top topics
 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join