Creationism's Legacy: Anti-intellectualism

reply to post by noobfun

---

Or that for heavier elements to be available we need 3 or 4 generation star dust from their massive novae. Otherwise all we have is hydrogen and helium, and those kind of events of course take more than 10,000 years to happen then the earth to form from that material.

I examined in my 'Why Creation?' thread that to deny these simple cosmological facts (let alone all the other sciences) is to call God a liar.

[edit on 10/29/2008 by Good Wolf]

Pls check out... www.abovetopsecret.com...

Interested in your thoughts....ok?

Also, no pickin'...big shoulders, here...I'll look it over

OT

reply to post by Good Wolf

---

sssshhhhh dont get too sciencey you know how that thinking, logic and evidence stuff is like kryptonite

start simple to get the thread going then pull that out ^_^ when they wonder into the ambush ... i mean debate ... dam now i did it

reply to post by noobfun

---

lol, my bad. I get started and I take off like a bottle rocket.

But, let's not ball up the entirety of Creation into under the category of anti-intellectualism.

"Creation" does not equal "anti-intellectualism." Belief in creation does not mean you don't try to understand and learn things.

Alright, let me explain further. I am talking creation in it's purist form. I am talking about spiritual creation, not necessarily about an all powerful bearded god. This doesn't rule out a Christian god, however. We are talking about the origin of "all," the "spark" that set everything in motion, and the "spark" that still drives things. We are talking about that spark that exists in all of us, the ability to create.

Spirituality is as real to some people as is their physical body. The spirit is evident with experiences like "OOBEs," past lives, and ghostly phenomena. "Aunt Velma's" body died a long time ago, but why does Aunt Velma still walk the halls of her old house? Her body is buried in some cemetery.

Belief in spirituality and creation is very far from anti-intellectualism, or a more crude term like stupidity. Knowing that there is a spiritual side to life is actually opposite of stupidity, it is actually a deeper understanding of things, than just the physical universe.

Think about this; would that cheese sandwich have created itself had you not been there to think about it, and make it (create it)?

Troy

[edit on 29-10-2008 by cybertroy]

reply to post by Good Wolf

---

Like I just said, no one knows what others believe. You may have your idea of what creationism is, and then someone who wholeheartedly believes in what they call creationism can have an entirely different perspective. You might change your mind if you could see inside theirs. Sure you can give me a textbook definition of what creationism means, but once you go about to disprove it you have already overlooked the possibility that maybe you have interpreted it differently than someone else. Maybe you have the idea that nothing can happen outside the realm of science as we know it. Or maybe you believe that anything is possible. But how can you try to disprove something that is up for interpretation. Like I said you have your "proof" and they have their "proof" but this is going no where. I'm just curious, why does it even matter? Also I don't believe the creationism theory or the evolutionary theory should be taught in schools since I have seen flaws in both, but then again schools are just a joke anyways so I will sit in class and listen to your evolutionary theory just as I sit in church and listen to their creationism theory and then I will laugh at the ridiculousness of both sides.

reply to post by noobfun

---

Noobfun,

I have seen your posts…some of which are quite impressive…the Lord has given you a keen brain!

OT’s got a question for you….

Are you a relative of an orangutan?

Are you more than an animal?

Are you just a survival–of-the-fittest-kinda-guy?

Are you someone’s fertilizer when you die?

Is this frail existence…it?

Please don’t answer…please don’t…I DARE YOU TO NOT!!!!!

Just think about these questions…please put some time on it….watch…let life bring to you what it does, ok?

We have a record here on ATS….let this post sit for 365 days….then respond…take the challenge ok?

When life happens..please read the gospel of John 10 times, without bias…ok?

OT prayin’!!!!!!!!!

I agree with everyone that says creation theory, spirituality, and other esoteric principles are not necessarily anti-intellectual.

It depends. Strict Creationism is anti-intellectual because it is in direct contrast to scientific reasoning in many respects. But an intelligent rational man can experience esoteric and mystical things and explore it with a rational and intelligent mind.

reply to post by cybertroy

---

But I've already said, this conspiracy only pertains to the creationist agenda to suppress science in schools. Taking creationism out of context is not going to help us in this discussion.

reply to post by OldThinker

---

You mentioned "I have to tell you the accusatory tone calling Stein a ‘fool’ over and over doesn’t present the most intellectual milieu for open discussion…"

at 0.13 into the very first video Ben Stein says, "if they are so sure that they are right, what are they afraid of. ..... Let the other guy talk and then blow him out of the water and say you fool you didn't know this this and this."

My clear understanding right from the beginning was that this video was just doing what Stein told them to do.

You are right, not the most intellectual milieu for open discussion, but it looks to me as if Stein has zero interest in intellectual discussion.

reply to post by cybertroy

---

That's not what most would consider creationism. I could say that the big bang created our universe, but that's not creationism.

And concerning spiritualism, why could that not be described as a natural force just like any other that we lacked understanding of in the past? Sorry, but I fail to see how that would change the debate.

The idea that unknown spiritualism somehow trumps known science is a bit ridiculous in my opinion.

I agree with Good Wolf, and it's something I see all the time.
For example, inventing unfounded 'science' and forgetting known facts in order to explain stories such as Noah's Ark.



Our universe runs on cause/effect. The only plausible cause for a sandwich is that someone made it. However, the cause of our Universe is unknown, as we do not have enough information to form such a clear cut conclusion (say that 5x fast ).

I belive that we should use what we know, and not deny it to substantiate what we don't know.
Isn't that the purpose of this thread?

Well I was a fundamentalist christian for more than a decade so I'm going to answer your questions.

Are you a relative of an orangutan?
Yes

Are you more than an animal?
No

Are you just a survival–of-the-fittest-kinda-guy?
Survival of the fittest is an awful interpretation of evolution/NS/Adaptation.

Are you someone’s fertilizer when you die?
Somethings anyway.

Is this frail existence…it?
Yep.

I know these answers to be accurate except for the last one as it is only speculation, the rest are verified by the evidence, which John 10 has not. Nobody even knows who wrote "John".

It's all bent. The Catholic Church is gay. If if not gay, a bunch of paedophiles. The two groups overlap incidentally.

The Catholic church does not want us to think for ourselves, the Catholic Church wants control over what we can debate and maybe more critically, how. Of course the 'creationist' lobby do not respect the creation of the big bang, they do not want us understanding it, rather follow them when they get their big willies into little girls and boys.

reply to post by amazed

---

Well said.

reply to post by amazed

---

You are a good man...

Very observant...

Thank you for pointing that out...

Doubt OT will ever meet B Stein....But if so, I'll challenge accordingly...


Good Wolf, thx for a great thread!!!

OT out!


When you have time pls come over to... www.abovetopsecret.com...

GW, Sorry you were a FUNDAMENTALIST... therefore your (old) perspective was very very limited...your perceptive of faith is more than distorted...

You are a good man...pls look further... ok...here.. www.tonycampolo.org... top one...

OT dares you...

Have a great night my brother...enjoy!

OT sleepy

Hey OT ^_^ not seen you about for a bit maybe we are just missing each other or im so busy jumping on the crazies i didint notice a sane person in the corner

sorry i just gotta


OT’s got a question for you….

you have deffinatley met my dad if your asking this, yes he looks like a white orangutan just with shorter arms

yes they are a distant relatives as are all animals, but chimps and banoboes are closer

no, we are animals

we are capable of things many other animals are not, we can think in ways other animals cant(as far as we know although there is some evidence higher primates has an understanding of self). this doesnt put us above animals it only makes it part of what the human animal is capable of


i feel the desire or need to procreate to protect those that need protecting teach those willing to learn help those who need help nurture those that need it yes i fit perfectly with the survival of the fitest principles of mutual survivability displayed by group living animals

my body? sure im worm food unless i get cremated then im plant fertaliser only or really annoying if i get blown in someones face

tell ya when i get to the end of it and find out my self, ill with hold judgment until i die or someone finds some evidence

i have thought about it, ive been an atheist(or at the very least agnostic) for 16 years ive understood exactly what that meant to me for about 13 of those

i dont think a couple more hundred days will change that but hey you never know till it happens i guess

Unfortunately, the agenda to put Creationism and I.D. on par with Evolution is the epitome of anti-intellectuallism. The simple fact one is a complete guess, based on tradition and mythology, and the other is supported by questioning, research, and substanciated data . . . is all that needs to really be said. The fact that there is not ONE experiment or set of data that points to Creationism or I.D., is at the very heart of the OP.

I would like the myth of Santa Claus taught in schools (in science and sociology) because that's where I tell my 5yr old that presents come from, as well as, millions of other adults. This theory has stood the test of time and is widely taught, therefore must have some truth to it. Furthermore, no one has ever found me a suitable theory (without holes) where all of the toys come from and why some kids don't get presents. Sure, I know about manufacturing, supply and demand, and corporate brainwashing . . . but, that doesn't explain how it all started or why I feel so strongly that he is guiding my purchases to taylor to my son's wish list.

Next . . . take C/ID's arguments . . . they can't argue FOR their side without invoking the name of the supernatural . . . which immediately moves the debate to philosophy (which has no business being taught in science class) . . . so, they can only show what evolution and abiogenesis DON'T prove or their holes/questions. Whether it is by reducing "What is Theory" to an argument of semantics (even when the definition has remained unchanged for years) or pointing out "holes" in the fossil record. Unfortunately, for them, this just shows their ignorance of the the scientific method, it's terminology, and nature's processes.

Faith-based structures are by definition (of faith) anti-intellectual pursuits. You are meant to believe, in spite of physical evidence to the contrary. I, myself, have no problem with religious people choosing to believe in fairy tales or believing something because they were brought up to believe. However, I do have an issue with religions sticking their nose into science and trying to hi-jack it to further their antiquated agenda and dwindling influence. The religious simply have changed tactics . . . where in the past the would have tortured, demonized, or supressed those that think this way . . . now they are trying to join. Unfortunately, you can't join the scientific community until you move past hypothesis and into theory. A guess based on tradition and holes in another "competing" theory . . . is not a theory.

So . . . where are the links to research done by proponents of I.D.? Without those I.D./Creationism, isn't even a theory . . . so this shouldn't even be a debate. AND . . . the fact that it is a debate, amongst so many, shows the C/ID legacy of anti-intellectuallism in the movement. Science must follow method . . . belief alone doesn't equate to science or a theory.

-_- yes thanks for that .........


you do realise the catholic church agrees with Evolution?
that it was a catholic priest that gave us the big bang(and i mean the universe creation one)?

yes homosexual and pedophile over lap the same as hetrosexual and pedophile over lap

there are homosexuals and hetrosexuals that does not make them pedophiles, only bieng a pedophile makes you a pedophile ..... and only the pedophile group of those three are bad people

PASS. Another sermon is not going to change anything. BTW I was fundamental then I was very liberal on biblical interpretation (I didn't even believe the Jesus was a divine dude), then I was agnostic.