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.
Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by OldThinker
Afraid of the truth? Don't be like that. I've sat through more sermons than I care to count. They don't do anything for me. Although I must admit, even being agnostic bordering on atheist the Mosaic sermons. They are some good messages, but even they are only feel good sermons.
Originally posted by saturnine_sweet
Ugh. ID and creationism aren't even the same thing. ID is based on science; granted, it isn't acceptable to atheistic naturalist religion, but it is a dissenting scientific viewpoint. There is no more faith in believing that science shows traces of a creative force than there is in believing that nature is a creating force, in and of itself. Neither have been proven, and neither are likely to ever be proven. Both have fact-based reasons supporting them. The most dangerous form of anti-intellectualism in the world is dogmatic fervor towards unprovable theories.
Originally posted by saturnine_sweet
reply to post by optimus primal
not especially off topic, no. You have to understand the origins of the theory, and how many times it has changed in the past hundred years, to see the huge flaws in it. Are there still any details of Darwin's theory that haven't been changed entirely to try to keep a failed hypothesis alive? I can't think of any, off hand
Originally posted by solomons path
reply to post by saturnine_sweet
RED HERRING:
One particular character is described or emphasized in a way that seems to throw suspicion upon that character as the person who committed the crime: later, it develops that someone else is the guilty party.
55% of this . . . (made up by the way)
Racist eugenics . . .
The OP is about creationism . . . if you can't argue FOR it . . . just make up or parade out things that have nothing to do with the issue to convolute and demonize the discussion . . . GREAT TACTICS! And you are the same people that say this should be taught in schools next to topics that have been upheld under rigorous testing?
What does Darwin's beliefs, regardless of morality judgement, have to due with what was/is being observed and the data collected to back it up. This is why creationism and I.D. fail in the realm of science . . . they can't stick to the subject. "Yeah . . . well Darwin was a racist" . . . yep that discredits, not only his, but every researcher since and the work they have done.
Originally posted by noobfun
reply to post by Good Wolf
its 4am lol i should have been asleep way way back
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
[
Funny thing is over 55% of SCIENTISTS say that evolution is tripe, trash, impossible, didn't happen, can't happen, won't happen...
Originally posted by saturnine_sweet
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
Wow. It must be nice to hide behind a screen to insult people. Else you'd have your ass kicked daily. I know those experiments VERY well. I also know genetics VERY well. And I know that yep! no experiments making life from nothing...not even with highly tweaked conditions. Just because you want to believe they prove something doesnt change the hard facts.
Originally posted by saturnine_sweet
reply to post by optimus primal
sigh. Abiogenesis isnt directly evolution, no, but it IS part of ID. Duh. Two, yes, adapting theories is basic science. But perhaps you should go read the actual scientific process, and try to apply it to what has been done with evolutionary biology. Its a farce. your arrogance doesnt change that, and being a prick to others doesn't make you right.