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 visible_villain
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
I already sent in a "Letter to the Editor" and I'm just going to copy and paste that here as I think that sums up my thoughts on this
It is suprising to me that people react so strongly to the notion the universe was created by an intelligent power, perhaps even instaneously.
All we have to the contrary is about 150-years of scientific prejudice as well as our old friend the platypus, as well as other examples that the evolution of species from some sort of 'primordial soup' is nonsense.
Why the overwhelmingly negative reaction to the 'creationist' viewpoint ? I don't understand it.
Warning signs that suggest deception. Based on the book by Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World. The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:
Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts.
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").
Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.
Quantify, wherever possible.
If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
Occam's razor - if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.
Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?
Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse
I already sent in a "Letter to the Editor" and I'm just going to copy and paste that here as I think that sums up my thoughts on this
It is suprising to me that people react so strongly to the notion the universe was created by an intelligent power, perhaps even instaneously.
All we have to the contrary is about 150-years of scientific prejudice as well as our old friend the platypus, as well as other examples that the evolution of species from some sort of 'primordial soup' is nonsense.
Why the overwhelmingly negative reaction to the 'creationist' viewpoint ? I don't understand it.
That same "Scientific Prejudice" is what is allowing you and I to post on an internet forum, using computers powered by electricity.
ID and creationism are not science
Originally posted by optimus primal
quoting partial sentences is a horrid way to debate
i said id and creationism are not science
... they are not falsifiable, ie you can't test it
quoting partial sentences is a horrid way to debate, and honestly just bad form.
make no mistake, this thread is about evolution, not how or why life was first created.
Abiogenesis
Primordial soup" redirects here.
... the absurd mishmash of propaganda and willful ignorance that refuses to acknowledge the scientific method
Why are people still discussing this?
Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by americandingbat
... the absurd mishmash of propaganda and willful ignorance that refuses to acknowledge the scientific method
I would be most happy to debate this issue with you, honorable colleague !
Would that be the topic? "The theory of Intelligent Design is an absurd mishmash of propaganda and willful ignorance."
After the tournament maybe?