Creationists Will Destroy ATS

reply to post by Astyanax

ON weekends I'm on a lot of different forums; and what's killing them is fighting, not discussing.

My mom is a teacher and she complains all the time how issues are bisected into pro and con so that a conversation becomes a shouting match.

In our family we don't have a problem with evolution or creation because we see both those features -- design and energy versus breakage and change -- everywhere.

So, there's no conflict no reason to have an agenda. Somebody assembled the dna codes in the first place, otherwise we wouldn't have fords and ipods. Decay and dissolution occur everwhere, otherwise we wouldn't have genetic changes over time.

I'm just tired of the fighting back and forth, and so I stay out of these threads. I don't want to fight, not at school and not here and not at home.

But thanks for the u2u invite.






[edit on 30-5-2008 by sarcastic]

reply to post by Astyanax

Originally posted by Astyanax "I predict that in the end, the creationists will make ATS uninhabitable for anyone truly interested in FTs."

Like all the other "predictions" that evolutionist make. This one will also fail. Why? Because a Creator behind the Unversed opens the door for just about anything to be possible. Why the Bible even says, "with God all things are possible"!
Evolution, and materialist on the other hand. Greatly limit the possibilities. The conditions for life to spontaneously generate are extremely hard to find in our universe. But if "God just did it." He could have just created beings floating in space! (angels!). Materialist see the Universe as having distances to great for space travel. But with creationist. There are other dimentions that aliens can visit us from. With creationist speed of light, and distances, aren't yet understood by science. And according to creationist own beliefs. They have! Monsters, Dragons, Demons, Giants, alien and human halfbreeds, abductions and sex, flying saucers, Universal Wars, political conspiracies to take over earth. etc. etc. etc. All start with and finish with the creationist, world view.
You are walking on very thin ice with this, OP. Because it is plainly the materialist mind set. Of, "the material is all there is, and all there ever will be". Carl Sagan Is the limiting, mind set, world view. That kills the imagination, and possibilities!

Maybe I'll find time to read your whole post?

Originally posted by Howie47
Like all the other "predictions" that evolutionist make. This one will also fail.

*Snicker, Snicker*

I agree with the rest of your comment, though. Either you have something substantial or you don't. Can one's beliefs and arguments stand up to scrutiny? It's either a yes or no. As has already been pointed out, 'the fundie tag team' only consists of a few mainstay and vocal members. If we run anyone off then that reflects on the people who can't withstand opposing views. There are so, so many threads critical of Christianity but we stick it out, debate, and don't make threads crying about it. If someone runs off or is irritated by opposing views, then that says something about their inability to cope- not their opponents.

I couldn't agree more with the OP. In the words of Christopher Hitchens, "Religion poisons everything."

Here is their Almighty Lord God speaking. Remember, this is the ruler of time and space, and the entire universe, with it's hundreds of billions of galaxies:

2 Samuel 12:11:
Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

So much for "family values". Apparently God is into wife-swapping. If you think the ruler of the universe (assuming there is one) would say something so stupid, you're not very bright, are you?

Originally posted by mr-lizard
At the end of the day... what does religion solve?

Nothing...

what does science solve? Because "I never saw no miracle of science
That didn't go from a blessing to a curse"

Creationism is based on a few fact-less books that are still doing the rounds, people will still defend those idea's with violence and hatred and igorance...

that's a very generalized statement. Fact-less implies devoid of facts. Which most of the religious books are not. Just from my own personal experience, i've never seen a book more obstinately supported than "On the Origin of Species".

Darwin was one of the best non-fiction writers of his day; just like Dan Brown.~

This backwards mentality should stop, we are in the 21st century and millions and millions of people still die through war, violence, disease, poverty etc... and all the god-botherers can do is say 'oh well it's god's will' and crap like that.

All big proponents of Social Darwinism my friend; i would think you'd be thrilled. That stuff is all for the best!~

It's the way this world is suppose to be!~

Just have sex with as many people as you can, have lots of kids, destroy your weaker enemies and die already. I'll be rooting for you, because I know how important it is to you.~

Seriously, either i'm missing the point of you are.

When will people wake up and actually help each other instead of spouting off a few verses from their book of choice.

You're so right, Words are pointless; Jesus Christ, Martin Luther King jr. , ADOLF HITLER; those guys were all wasting their time. They never changed anything.~

We need action and not words t o solve our world's ills.

Targeting off all the creationists is the right place to start, it's all their fault. I'm glad the OP is taking some action in this regard and that the rest of you fine individuals are ready to support the cause.~

I'm sorry if my post seems a bit caustic; but this thread is less than objective and warrants people getting a bit hot under the collar.

[edit on 5/30/2008 by JPhish]

Just like the OP mentioned the Creationist will destroy ATS I consider this a True statement.

I want to point out that the OP is a creationist because he created this thread and issue.

I want to point out that the original conspiracies were all created as well so the people that created them are creationist and they are going to destroy ATS.

ATS may have not been the original creator of the conspiracies but it was created as an information outlet do to the creationist.

---------------

Back to the original OP post now that I got out of the way that everyone is a creationist that has an original idea.

Creationist create something to lead the people in the direction of idea's of what they created. Now when we say Satan Created this world understand that he created the world to lead you in the direction of his ideas.

The creation of the conspiracies of the Reptiods, Greys, Nortics, Winged Draco's etc. were created to lead you in the direction of their idea's. Their idea's lead you down the wrong path away from the Truth because Satan created this world and wants to lead you away the Truth by you following his flow of ideas.

The conspiracies were created, the OP said that there were experts on a single field that pertained to a certain one of the conspiracies and that's all they stuck to. Those are the people that are no service to humanity that are relaying false information.

I want to ask you.... How can they be an expert with this information and how long have they know this?? WHOS SIDE ARE THEY REALLY ON. Take into considertion that Satan Created this world and leads you from the Truth as much as possible.


NOTICE MOST OF THEM SAY MAYBE WE WILL NEVER KNOW THE TRUTH OR THERE IS SOMETHING THAT CAN NOT BE EXPLAINED OR THEY SAY WE ARE HAVE NOT EVOLVED ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND. HOW DO THEY KNOW??????

Does this prove the OP?

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by Howie47
Like all the other "predictions" that evolutionist make. This one will also fail.

*Snicker, Snicker*

Hmm, I read it that way.

As has already been pointed out, 'the fundie tag team' only consists of a few mainstay and vocal members. If we run anyone off then that reflects on the people who can't withstand opposing views.

Admission of said "team"(gang?). Maybe they tired of constant bombardment and the LACK of debate. You can only bang your head against the wall so long and realize what a futile activity it is.

If someone runs off or is irritated by opposing views, then that says something about their inability to cope- not their opponents.

Opponents?

Onelook:

Opponent:

# noun: a contestant that you are matched against
# noun: someone who offers opposition
# adjective: characterized by active hostility

Does that look like an active sharing of ideals?

Granted I've seen rabid atheists as well and it does nothing for discussion.

Originally posted by intrepid

Granted I've seen rabid atheists as well and it does nothing for discussion.

Just peruse the 9/11 board and you see the same thing there. When a topic becomes polarized, the same patterns emerge. I'm not sure there are organized "teams" so to speak, but the polarization leads to non-stop parroting of the same talking points.

In fact, I was in on what may have been one of the precursors to the forums we have now back in 1994 during the O.J. Simpson trial. The board quickly became divided into two groups: OJI and OJG. Every discussion turned into a rehashing of the same points over and over.

While this forum in particular, is specificly set aside for the topic of creationism, and I have no argument about the discussion and debate of such things within this forum, I do agree with the OP about the ABS boards in general.

I've been here for a long time now. I've seen the things that he has. I'm not sure that I'd label it 'the creationists', but rather, it seems that there is a large influx of people who are focused on the topic of religion, and bring those issues into discussions in the forums about politics, news, ufos, cryptology, techology, etc, etc etc etc etc etc.

While I understand that many religious people see the world through the veils of their religion, this board isn't about religion. I am not here to discuss religion primarily and I suspect that a great many people aren't either.

I'm not disinteresting in religion, but I feel that the constant focus on religious aspects, implications and beliefs in regards to every topic is destroying the original environment of these boards, and destroying my, and other people's interest in participating.

Even in the forums that are set aside to discuss such things, the focus and intent is rarely kept to, but rather, each discussion ends up being simply a discussion about religion rather than say, conspiracy or whatnot.

reply to post by intrepid


So in your opinion this discussion board should be a place of polite platitudes and clichés. A place where no difference of opinion can be offered. A place where stupid remarks and ideas can't be pointed out as such. Even mocked if the poster refuses to see the error of their thinking?
Do you want this discussion to run as if it was in grade school?
And tag teaming goes on by everyone, who agrees with or disagrees with any point of view, in every discussion!

I've been here for a long time now. I've seen the things that he has. I'm not sure that I'd label it 'the creationists', but rather, it seems that there is a large influx of people who are focused on the topic of religion, and bring those issues into discussions in the forums about politics, news, ufos, cryptology, techology, etc, etc etc etc etc etc.

reply to post by Jadette


The problem is, what you see as religion; is to many people their world
or Universe view.

reply to post by Howie47


No but I think it SHOULD run without antagonism, condesention and, in some cases, outright hostility.

Originally posted by intrepid
Does this prove the OP?

I don't know why it would. Me being amused by something that was sardonically accurate? If so, guilty as charged. It made me laugh. No tag team effort, though. I have only spoken to Howie once ever as the U2U logs will prove.

Admission of said "team"(gang?).

Not at all as placing the phrase in quotes was something I assumed would obviously imply I am repeating the accusation- not confirming it.

Masons defend their organization against conspiracy theorists, 9/11 truthers unite in their forum, Atheists and Christians both have a certain camaraderie with those who share their beliefs, etc. The same faces jump into certain threads but not once did I ever automatically assume there was some behind the scenes plot going on among them. Coincidentally, I've seen the familiar band of evolutionists in just about every thread in this O&C forum. Amusingly enough, the same members who are now making accusations of a Christian tag team.

Looking at everyone's friends list it will become obvious that people naturally migrate towards those they have common beliefs with. However there is no need to make false accusations in an effort to get people in trouble. If there is evidence of a tag team going on, then let's see it. All I ever see are baseless accusations.

Maybe they tired of constant bombardment and the LACK of debate.

Surely you have seen the threads. We debate our hearts out. It looks like the whining is coming from the other side with threads like 'Religiouis Extremists Taking Over ATS,' 'Creationists Will Destroy ATS,' 'ATS Atheist Thrashing Service,' etc. It's just whining and ranting, sans substance. Anti-Religious Threads far outweigh threads concerning criticism of evolution but I don't see us protesting or making false accusations.

You can only bang your head against the wall so long and realize what a futile activity it is.

But is that because we preach instead of debating? No. It is because both sides are set in their ways. Both sides.

Opponents?

Why do you have issues with the word 'opponent?' I didn't say enemy or adversary. I said opponent. Keeping up with the formal debate forum, I have often seen the involved members say things like 'What my opponent is implying...' I don't see an issue needing to be made out of my use of the word opponent. It is a very respectful term because you are placing the one who is disagreeing with you on an equal level as yourself although they have an opposing view.

[edit on 5/30/2008 by AshleyD]

Originally posted by intrepid
No but I think it SHOULD run without antagonism, condesention and, in some cases, outright hostility.

Funny, I see constant attacks on Christianity filled with antagonism, condescension and outright hostility all over ATS on a daily basis.

Seems to me that we are talking about one isolated forum here when in reality the atheists/evolutionists/Christian bashers have plenty of power overall on this website. I try to stay out of things because I see overwhelming "tagteams" on the other side and often find myself outnumbered 5 or more to 1.

I didn't want to get involved in this thread so I'm going to leave now. It's at the point where a Christian can't make a point without being accused of something.

Have at it and I'll go about my business.

Frankly I am consistently amazed that right here in the 21st Century, in a modern society where scientific evidence is open to review by the whole of the populace and the basics of the Scientific Method are taught in grade schools as a "given", that this debate even exists.

That citizens of one of the most technologically-advanced nations on Earth, with wide access to facts and evidence as close as your local library (or even closer via the Internet) still choose to rely on a single book of stories written by primitives in search of a stable society that would put them in charge, a book at least partially plagiarized from earlier sources and continually edited by religious "authorities", as the benchmark for determining the whole of their reality, is at once laughable upon the face of it, saddening because the intellectual capacity supposedly given to them by their "Creator" is set aside to languish in favor of blind faith, and also frightening because of the sheer numbers of said people who exist and the political power they wield.

I am astonished that in an age and society where any one person has all the freedom in the world to review the hard, real, tangible evidence in favor of evolution, in favor of an expanding universe with a measurable and determinable time of origin, in favor of an ancient Earth (and entire Solar System) formed from the leftovers of earlier and less stable astronomical bodies, that any person could simply dismiss said evidence to favor Scriptures for which very little, if any, hard evidence exists (the historical record suggesting some locations and players in the Bible may once have existed is in NO WAY proof of the Bible's mystical assertions or of supposed "miracles" perfomed by the varied figures noted in its pages).

To deny a literal mountain of empirical evidence because one's personal religious authority figure interprets your holy book of choice to mean the Earth is only 6,000 years old is, in my considered opinion, delusional. It not only denies hard evidence for Evolution but also relegates the sciences of Geology, Archaeology, Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology, at least in the minds of the Faithful, to the same "fringe fantasy" realm where mainstream science, in its own self-delusion, puts the paranormal.

The argument I hear is always the same, that if the evidence for evolution does not fill in every hole, does not close every gap in our understanding of the (mostly) linear progression of life on Earth, then none of it can be valid and the Bible is therefore true because it very specifically puts the whole thing into words supposedly written, or directly inspired, by God. It's a conceit unfortunately shared by Science where paranormal subject matter is concerned, that the mass of eyewitness accounts, radar-visual sightings, photographs, video, UFO landing evidence, etc. etc. etc. mean nothing because Science doesn't have a piece of material to analyze, a body to dissect, or an instrument to measure "psychic" energy.

Personally my beef with Creationism, ID, etc. is that their proponents essentially want to break down what most Constitutional scholars agree is a clear line of separation between Church and State. I do NOT want these subjects taught in public schools as a "legitimate" alternative to evolution because at their center lies a fundamental belief in a Supreme Being, and their teaching crosses the Constitutional "line in the sand"--essentially an endorsement and promotion of religion by the State. Creationism especially is egregious in this; as I've stated, I find Creationism in its "pure" form (the 6,000-year age of the Earth) to be ignorant and abhorrant.

ID is another matter; basically Creationism Lite, it forwards the possibility of initial creation of life but does not necessarily rule out the evolution over time of that life. Still, it crosses the Constitutional line. I think neither of these or their derivatives should be taught as fact in public schools (though most Creationists I've known believe there should be no "public" schools to begin with, and that Christianity should indeed be the official State Religion). Likewise, speculation on the paranormal should also not be taught as "fact".

I believe it is up to parents to raise their children in their belief system of choice, or better yet, to allow their children to grow independent of such "belief" systems until they're old enough and informed enough to make their own choices.

As to the thoughts of the OP, Astyanax, while I applaud your well-thought-out post and agree with some of your points, I have to disagree with some as well--whether there is "collusion" on the part of some "groups" within these boards matters not. Like-minded people will seek each other out for support, especially in places where heated debate and argument are the order of the day. Just as Creationists come together to argue against Evolution, so too do Evolutionists, Conservatives, Liberals like myself, and even Fringe Theorists, provide support for one another. Part of it is a desire to find those whose "reality" is familiar to our own. Part is a competitive desire to be the "Best" proponent of a particular theory or philosophy. Part is reaction to what X Group percieves as hostility towards their interests. Regardless of motivation, the real problem lies in overall hostility within the environment of this website. Discourse here is tough, no-holds-barred, often hurtful and abusive (whether noted as such by mods or not) and frankly, usually circular in nature. Most posting members here have their opinions and their beliefs and no amount of "discussion" will change that. I'm as guilty as the next person. Best thing to do is accept it and do your best to hold your own, and hope that casual visitors keep an open mind. If you feel openly insulted let the mods deal with it.

BTW...

Originally posted by Clearskies
Degenerate offshoot?
From what? My Christianity is not comparable to another?

Technically, any sect calling itself "Christian" that is not a recognized part of the Roman Catholic Church is indeed an "offshoot", being that the RCC was and is the First "organized" Christian religion.

And, Catholic doctrine includes acceptance of Evolution as scientifically provable fact. I should know, I attended a Catholic school for seven years where it was taught to us regularly.

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by Howie47

 

No but I think it SHOULD run without antagonism, condesention and, in some cases, outright hostility.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make in my post on page 4. No one gives the respect to the opposition's opinion that they desperately seek for their own opinions. I ask those arguing at the moment to PLEASE read what I posted on page 4.. I feel that it gives some valuable insight from a third party perspective of the Creationist vs. Evolutionist debate as well as many other posts I see here on ATS daily.

This isn't about pointing fingers and name calling, it's about providing solid proof, evidence and information from credible sources. It's about being able to keep an open mind and accept other's opinions for what they are and responding with an intelligent and respectful rebuttle. The way everyone bickers here is no more intelligent or mature than what you might find on an elementary playground. I'm not trying to give a "holier than thou" impression here.. I'm just stating the facts. If you want to make your point, give us intelligent, supported responses. Respect everyone's opinion instead of simply branding it as WRONG. History proves many times that what many once thought to be completely true were ultimately deemed false. Nobody is right or wrong.

Are we not here to DENY IGNORANCE? If you do not approach a debate with an open mind and a willingness to hear the other side of the debate, you are inevitably denying yourself of knowledge and information to an extent. Thus you are REMAINING IGNORANT!

How can one come to a conclusion about anything without knowing the facts no matter what point of view they are presented in? In these heated debates people must realize that there is truth to both sides of the subject of discussion. A mutual respect and understanding for eachother's opinions must be present in order for us to have a discussion of any intellectual worth!

Originally posted by AshleyD

Maybe they tired of constant bombardment and the LACK of debate.

Surely you have seen the threads. We debate our hearts out. It looks like the whining is coming from the other side with threads like 'Religiouis Extremists Taking Over ATS,' 'Creationists Will Destroy ATS,' 'ATS Atheist Thrashing Service,' etc. It's just whining and ranting, sans substance.

Really?

Science, meet your maker

The Gullibility of Evolutionists

Do I need to go on?

You can only bang your head against the wall so long and realize what a futile activity it is.

But... is that because we preach and do not debate? No. It is because both sides are set in their ways. Both sides.

Then what is the point? I would think religious folk would take the high road, was I wrong?

*snip*

Thus the reason that I used the term "discussion". This is a discussion board. Debate, that's a different puppy and I'm very familiar with it. Check my panel. The thing with debate is that you can argue, yes ARGUE, a side of a debate that you don't necessarily agree with. That being said, it's one on one. Not an us against you all type of deal.

[edit on 30-5-2008 by intrepid]

Originally posted by jbondo
Funny, I see constant attacks on Christianity filled with antagonism, condescension and outright hostility all over ATS on a daily basis.

I see it, too. I see it quite often as a matter of fact. Even the OP of this very thread was ridiculing me last week by calling me a 'cweationist' several times in another thread. Instead of getting riled I simply diffused the situation with humor. What I am not going to do, however, is create a thread crying about it. This thread is a perfect example of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. It's nothing but the victim mentality and poor-little-abused-us attention seeking that I despise. You either have a backbone or you don't. Your views can either withstand criticism or they cannot.

But sinking to whine-fests, tag team accusations, and pointing the finger when I've seen the same ones making the accusations act ten times worse makes me lose my sympathy and lunch.

reply to post by intrepid


Perhaps "discussion" is a better term than debate for the point I was trying to make.

It's just the way in which people are approaching these discussions. They always end up becoming hostile arguments and preach fests from all sides. I suppose much of what I say will fall upon deaf ears, but at least I can say I tried.. Right?

This one is easy

Originally posted by AshleyD
I see it, too. I see it quite often as a matter of fact. Even the OP of this very thread was ridiculing me last week by calling me a 'cweationist' several times in another thread. Instead of getting riled I simply diffused the situation with humor. What I am not going to do, however, is create a thread crying about it. This thread is a perfect example of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. It's nothing but the victim mentality and poor-little-abused-us attention seeking that I despise. You either have a backbone or you don't. Your views can either withstand criticism or they cannot.

Ashley, read the part below, then read your words above. Irony, not just for pressing clothes anymore.

But sinking to whine-fests, tag team accusations, and pointing the finger when I've seen the same ones making the accusations act ten times worse makes me lose my sympathy and lunch.