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.

 

Creationism's Legacy: Anti-intellectualism

page: 13
31
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by lifeform
 


creationism may be another possibility, but there's no real evidence for it. it's not a falsifiable theory, therefore it's not science. the anti-intellectualism is those trying to get it taught as if it is comparable to evolutionary theory. this attempt thereby trieds to validate creationism as a mechanism for diversification and a science. clearly creationism is not.

they could however more accurately try to get creationism as an alternative to the big bang, although they'd run into the whole "not science" block again.




posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Alrighty people. Looks like we've all gotten past discussing theory and it only took 12 pages. No lets get back to the deal at hand, the conspiracy of spreading anti-intellectualism. Considering the worst case scenario, could this be a NWO conspiracy, or just a political one, to secure general power over the people just to make them vote for certain parties. I don't know what to think about who might be behind this movement if there is someone.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf
Alrighty people. Looks like we've all gotten past discussing theory and it only took 12 pages. No lets get back to the deal at hand, the conspiracy of spreading anti-intellectualism. Considering the worst case scenario, could this be a NWO conspiracy, or just a political one, to secure general power over the people just to make them vote for certain parties. I don't know what to think about who might be behind this movement if there is someone.



i'm just quoting you because i'm tired and wont remember all the points of your post so if a mod wants to remove the quoted part at a later time it's cool with me.

as others have stated, this isn't really a debate in most european countries, so really it'd have to be someone located in america. i'd say it was then politically motivated, to control those who follow judeo-christian beliefs . control for what? i am not sure, probably for acquisition of a large power base to gain a stranglehold on america, it's ideologies,it's money, it's resources.etc.. who's behind it? well....somebody who's all about jesus i guess, i dont want to say far right because not all far right siders or right siders in general are jesusfreaks or even religious at all....


edit to add: bed time for me...so no more responses fromme tonight.

[edit on 30-10-2008 by optimus primal]



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf

AndI believe that guy on youtube is venomfangx. He's well nutz.


Oh God....

Venomfangx


Yikes!

He is nuts, but he is also very Christian



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Read Michael Talbot's "The Holographic Universe".

The quote below is from a review by Damien Nash this astonding book. Really really a excellent read, expand your grey matter.

The quote below is from here: www.amazon.com...




This is one of the most provocative books I have read in years. In the first few chapters Mr. Talbot describes the emerging holographic paradigm in science, drawing on David Bohm's work in quantum physics and Karl Pribam's work in neuroscience. I found both descriptions to be fascinating, and especially enjoyed the historical context for the work of these two seminal thinkers. As a person with a master's degree in neuroscience and chaos/complexity theory, I found a couple of his simplifications misleading, but would give him high marks for his overall comprehension of the conclusions of Pribam and his followers.

The remaining 2/3 of the book is a discussion of how the holographic paradigm may provide a rational basis for interpreting a wide variety of phenomenon located around the fringes of established science. He looks at everything from strange historical "miracles" like stigmata and appearances of the Virgin Mary to modern psychic abilities and '___' experiences, from out-of-body and near-death-experiences to UFO abductions. In addition, he compares language used in the modern scientific discussion of holography with the language used by ancient mystical traditions.

Mr. Talbot's writing style is unusually clear and lucid. All of this makes for a highly engaging book. It kept me up late every night for more than a week. I am a person who has had an OBE/NDE (out-of-body, near-death-experience), and can tell you that his description of such events is an astoundingly accurate portrayal of what I experienced.

I am also a scientist, and know that most of my highly rational, empirical colleages would have trouble accepting a majority of Mr. Talbot's conclusions. This work addresses something so completely out of the realm of everyday experience for most people, and probes a world that is normally invisible to the five senses. Hence, objective, empirical science -- as defined by a conventional theorist or practicing technician -- simply cannot address these experiences. They are outside the range of focus of the tool that Western minds currently rely on. I believe there is an extraordinary synthesis happening among the realms of human experience, one that can validate each individual's story, however unusual, and also one that honors all the different ways of knowing. I see Mr. Talbot's work as one of the more important bridges yet constructed between traditional science and spirituality, between rational discourse about repeatable, empirically verifiable phenomenon and the quirky, esoteric or mythological elements of personal experience that actually define most people's experience of reality. This book is a "must read" for any passionate seeker of truth.


This is yet another theory of "the beginning" and to me was a revolutionary concept.

All different ways of looking at things.

I can't recommend this book highly enough.

We need to teach our kids to "think outside the box".

Michael Talbot sadly died shortly after writing this book.

I consider this book revolutionary and Michael Talbot a real genius.

Explains how we are all interconnected. Like grains of sand making up the beach we call "universe". Now think of universes within universes (like Men In Black) all mind boggling and yet so fantastic.

Possibly just possibly we are all "Gods". David Icke wasn't so far off.

Absolutely fantastic read.






[edit on 30-10-2008 by ofhumandescent]



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform

so you agree yourself evolution dos'nt explain how life started or that there is'nt a god.

so why are you against teaching creation in school? it would be no different to teaching the lightning striking 'soup' theory. creation dos'nt threaten evolution and visa versa, you would'nt be unteaching children about evolution is you taught creation.

they don't mix, they both try to explain different occurences.

people keep saying "but we are talking about evolution" so why was creationism even mentioned, or why was evolution offered as a better theory, when both explain different things.

creation theories are overlooked due to people like yourself not seeing past the bible explaination. if anyone mentions a creation theory you instantly assume they are religous.



I can see where you are going here and I agree with you to some extent.

I agree that scientific explanations of the origin of life should be taught in science class.

But I think you misunderstand slightly.

When it is said that Creation should not be taught in school, almost all of us are implying Creationism.

The Christian account of the origin of life.

The Creationist theory of the origin of life should NEVER be taught as an alternative scientific theory unless there is hard science to back it up.

And there is not ... That's the argument that so many people have said so many times ... Creationism is philosophy pure and simple ... maybe that's where it should be discussed ... in philosophy class

Any theory on the origin of life ... what ever it is ... that has no scientific evidence backing it up should be discussed in philosophy classes only ... this includes religious classes.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by Good Wolf

AndI believe that guy on youtube is venomfangx. He's well nutz.


Oh God....

Venomfangx


Yikes!

He is nuts, but he is also very Christian


Man ... that guys scares the crap outs me ... look into his eyes when he rants ... he really really really means and believes all that he says.

He also deletes or bans any comments on his vids that don't praise him or agree with him.

Poor form that ...

Thunderf00t gives him a good basting ... they have quite a feud going ... some of it is very funny stuff ...

Actually Thunderf00t presents some great rebuttals against Creationist arguments (as posted by Good Wolf earlier ... thanks for those mate ... they where great!)

[edit on 30/10/08 by Horza]



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Alright, so I'll repeat my first comments as we have seemed to get back to the task at hand. It isn't the NWO or a conspiracy in general, imo. It's a product of piss poor science eduation in the country combined with us being BY FAR the most religious, with a growing trend towards fundamentalism, of the Industrialized countries. Preachers make their followers think evolution=Atheism or evolution=satan. It's these kind of people who are preyed on by the likes of Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, and Ray Comfort. If there is any conspiracy, its that people like them really know they're saying complete BS. Yet, it gets them a few million a year, so hey.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Horza

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by Good Wolf

AndI believe that guy on youtube is venomfangx. He's well nutz.


Oh God....

Venomfangx


Yikes!

He is nuts, but he is also very Christian


Man ... that guys scares the crap outs me ... look into his eyes when he rants ... he really really really means and believes all that he says.

He also deletes or bans any comments on his vids that don't praise him or agree with him.

Poor form that ...


Yeah during the whole mess he had with Thunderf00t over copyright infringement, he also deleted two of my videos, despite the fact I never used any of his images anywhere. I only decided to not get his account deleted because he got the public mudslinging he deserved.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ofhumandescent
 


I have read that book and I agree it was fantastic


Another pretty good one was The God Theory which was written by a physicist. Read that one?



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Horza
 


I am going to have to go back and view some of those rebuttals then


Venom to me is very similar to many other extreme Christians I have encountered. It is like they all share the same dark hive mind when they have ascended in ranks.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Ok ... So Good Wolf, the OP, has asked to get back on topic.

So, in light of that, I hope no one minds if I repost something that I put down earlier.

The thread was moving so fast that some of the questions posed from the information I posted were not answered by the "other side"


This also directly answers the OP and *hopes* gets us back on track

Firstly:
The Creationism/I.D. movement is also predominantly an American phenomenon.

45% of Americans believe that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." and 58% of American's believe that Creationism should be taught in science classes in one way or another.

Taking into consideration the religious demographics of America and the influence they have on American politics, I take this viewpoint:

The reality about the Creation/I.D. movement is that it is a politically, not scientific or intellectually motivated movement.

Their agenda is to replace the teaching of evolution with Creation science or, at the very least, offer it as an alternative SCIENTIFIC explanation for evolution/abiogenesis.

This is to encourage a greater level religious belief within our population which will therefore give political strength to the conservative political movements in American society therefore increasing the chances of religiously based legislation's to be passed and made law.

This is what the far right religious movements in America want.

Let me be clear with this - America is NOT clearly a secular society.

It constantly rests on a knife edge of being a theocracy.

As stated before, a huge level of the American population believe in the Creationist version of the origin of species.

A large percentage of these believers, and this is fact not opinion, have a low level of education.

These believers also, unfortunately, through pride and ego, have a mistrust, dislike and even hatred of the educated, intellectual and scientific world.

The leaders of the Creation/I.D. are acutely aware of this and, like any good campaign manager, will always try to secure and reenforce the support of their base.

This is why the use anti-intellectual propaganda ... quite simply ... smear politics!

This excites and unifies their base, giving them more power to try to fulfil their agenda's.

Ya see ... Unlike what Thunderf00t suggests, I think that Creationist leaders know exactly what they are doing.

Lets take Ben Stein for example.

Stein is very aware that what he is saying is pure dis-information (that "Darwinism" can't explain thermodynamics, gravity or the origin of lifw so it's validity has to be questioned ... HAHAHAHAHAhahahaah ... heh) and he is very aware that anti-intellectualism will make him money.

He does this on purpose, on Christian TV shows and FOX news, because he knows the believers watch these shows, and then they will buy/watch his documentary.

Now the fundamental Christians take full advantage of Stein's perceived intellectualism to say to their base "See! This smart guy here, a lawyer and a speech writer for our glorious presidents, even says that evolution and the scientific community should be questioned."

Creationist leaders even go so far as to suggest that there is an anti-religious agenda within the scientific community!

SMEARS!

They say these kind of things regularly because they know that their base will feel threatened ... and they know nothing gets the American people motivated than needing to protect their way of life!



The Islamic empire held these values too, up until fundamentalists rose to power.


Fundamentalism ... where ever it is and in what ever guise it comes in is the scourge of our society and the number one threat to peace, love and mung beans

Like you have posted already, Good Wolf:




No apparent, perceived, or claimed interpretation of evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
[Answers in Genesis] (Bold added by me)


This sums up the Creationists attitude towards science, knowledge and freedom.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
 


REALLY! You should have told Thunderf00t, he would've said something in his videos. VFX would've had to apologize to you to



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
While I don't think the tactic is specifically a NWO vehicle, I do think it's the direct result of their manipulation (whoever "they" are). IMO, this has more to due with church (general) not exhibiting as much influence as once before, but with plenty of money to get into politics. This seems to only be a political issue in the U.S., as others have pointed out, so I think it's unique to the sheeple following at the foot of the Evangelical Elite. Just like anything else it's the guys at the top that want science supressed and are funding and spooning feeding this agenda. And the congregation just eats up every rationalization. Big money means big clout, though. And it will advance the debate pretty far.

What boggles my mind is why does the "average" person go along with this idea of pushing it in public schools? You say "put your kid in a Christian/FaithBased school then". They claim they shouldn't have to. They "teach" kids in Sunday School ways to debate science teachers on evolution and how to bring I.D. into the classroom discussion. (Didn't mean ALL churches, but some do) When ruled against, they play the classic "we're being persecuted . . . science's/america's war on christianity".

Is the idea of a fundamental difference between science and philosophy (and why they are so), so hard to grasp?



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to posts by the members
 



Humans have been altering - on purpose - the DNA of thousands of animals for research purposes.

Eventually, one of these species may evolve to our level of intelligence... They will examine their DNA and find the anomalies/mistakes/alterations we have made.

They will then debate their origins on internet forums.

*imagine if those cows genetically engineered ton produce human blood ever evolved... they'd be confused;

They would have myths about a race of beings (us) who enslaved them for their milk and meat and who modified their DNA so the organs could be used by the 'Mannunaki' (us).

If there were no humans left; The cow people would even claim credit for building the pyramids, afterall they are the only intelligent species inhabiting the planet...

Like I say. We are Humans, We create and alter new lifeforms to suite our needs - we just don't do it from scratch... yet.

*Edit: We all know Darth Plagueis The Wise was the only one who could accomplish that feat of science. But that was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

[edit on 30-10-2008 by TruthTellist]



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Horza
 


Great post!

You can see it in politics, as well. Look at how the GOP has portrayed every dem candidate since Clinton . . . They always pull the "intellectual elitist" card. They consider it a smear and matter of trust that the "leftist" went to Ivy League Schools and had Rhodes scholarships, yet the Rep candidate went to Ivy League schools and yadda yadda . . . AND, the "reds" fall for it every time. Unfortunately, it furthers along this perception that being smart and accomplished, at some point, becomes a negative. The smart guy doesn't like you and can't be trusted. What's the old saying . . . "there's such a thing as being too smart"?



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Just thinking about the whole dealie, it seems to be a combination of political agenda and greed. I mean, think about the conspirators here. We have one in office at the moment (at least for another week or so) and if McCain gets in well have more creationists in office for another four years (dunno about the other party). That's the political side of the conspiracy. Then you have those who are just milking the anti-intellectuals willing to tithe.

Lastly, you have those who are messing with education (whom are supported by both the previous conspirators) like in the Kitzmiller vs Dover trail. Cases like this are examples the anti-intellectualism that I spoke about in the OP.

In case your not savvy about the K. vs D. trial, creationism was passed of as ID and was exposed as such.



It's good to know that there are people who will fight against this kind of fraud (end of clip).



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 
No but I'll check it out. Always looking for a good read.



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by solomons path
reply to post by Horza
 


Great post!

You can see it in politics, as well. Look at how the GOP has portrayed every dem candidate since Clinton . . . They always pull the "intellectual elitist" card. They consider it a smear and matter of trust that the "leftist" went to Ivy League Schools and had Rhodes scholarships, yet the Rep candidate went to Ivy League schools and yadda yadda . . . AND, the "reds" fall for it every time. Unfortunately, it furthers along this perception that being smart and accomplished, at some point, becomes a negative. The smart guy doesn't like you and can't be trusted. What's the old saying . . . "there's such a thing as being too smart"?


Yes! Exactly ... I forgot about that "intellectual elitist" smear that, for example, Bush used so effectively against Kerry.

And this is exactly how Creationist leaders smear evolution!

Nice one solomon's path



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


I guess I never saw it has part of the NWO plot, although nothing creates chaos like a "holy" war . . . we have zionists in Isreal, the middle east, "freedom-hating" Chinese and Russians . . . all that is needed is a shining beacon of Christianity to bring the ruckus. What drives people to church, historically, . . . fear, war, uncertain times. How do you ensure people grow up believers . . . teach it in school.

However, I've always viewed the movement they way I've viewed every other in Christianity's history. It is the evangelical notion that you must spread the word and convert the masses. If someone doesn't agree with you they are persecutor or demonic. Convert or get wiped off of the planet. Sure . . . this issue isn't as drastic as all of that. But, the Christian Right in America, likes to portray this notion "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or the suppressing of one" means that they should be able to fly their symbolism and have their rhetoric heard where ever they feel . . . and if people oppose . . . well, see above. This tactic demands that you fight fire with fire . . . so, it becomes politicized due to group think. My assesment of the situation, at least.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join