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.

 

Should "Creationism" be considered a sign of insanity?

page: 11
44
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Our goal is a direct connection with Yahweh? The arch programmer, highly intelligent, yet wholly instinctive. I say we are better off taking his place, but that is just my opinion. That might be your angle, but am not sure. Plus, isn't connecting with Yahweh the same concept as a final solution. Once one has gained absolution, a final sun of sorts is achieved. Does this not necessarily limit one's conception of God, reducing God to binary. Besides, Jesus/Yeshua is like an artificial matriarch in my eyes, at least as taught by the church and possibly not the original teachings. Besides, did not Jesus want a new covenant? Abolishing Yahweh? Moreover, I see Jesus as a loving queen bee with male parts, he, he. Turn men into eunuchs and awe women by "exCITING" them. Ya know, putting up a mirror to the "perfect" inner nature of women. I find it no mere coincidence that you have bee in your handle, or that you have butterflies in your avatar. Jesus is a beautiful woman, at least of the phantom variety, who bites your head off when "harvested." The ultimate whore, taming all that which makes it hard for the vainly ideal to live life. Very civilized. Just one aspect of my views, and far from the whole kit and kaboodle. But i am being provocative to get you to challenge your assumptions, because everybody's core values expand to affect everybody. Sorry if I was offensive. I suppose I intended to be, but moreso to just be provocative. To force you to challenge yourself.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
SaturnFX yours is one of the most arrogant threads I’ve ever seen on ATS. Yeah of course anyone who doesn’t think like you should a: be considerd mad, b guilty of pedalling false information. Atheist hero’s like Stalin & Chairman Meow both thought like that!!! Only problem is they were kinda mad themselves!

Creationalism makes sense as far as the rate of evolution is still not understood by our current understanding of chance mutilation being evolutions the primary driving force.

So far it does seem something has manipulated chance, in order to cause life to evolve.
Also science has yet to demonstrate (in the laboratory) how life came from e.g. mud-lava & lightening. They’ve had at least 60 years, and still no breakthrough demonstration.
In fact only recently (after hollowing out an existing orgasm and using most of its cell structure) were they able to create any type of artificial life form at all.

PS Your word test "sparkle" would be better as "arrogant" or "totalitarian".



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I don't think religious individuals are insane.
I don't think creationists are insane, though I think that evidence clearly points to the fact that they are misinformed and incorrect.

I will stand by the idea that someone can have a theistic world view and still agree with science, including evolution, just because science will not and can not address the idea of an undetectable supernatural force that one would be able to call a God. There is no way to prove that God does not exist. (Though at the same time you can not prove He/She/It DOES exist)

However, I feel like creationism has no place in an educational setting. There is no evidence to support the idea of a young earth and in fact the evidence drastically opposes the idea. (This does not mean that one can not believe that a God created the protobacteria that eventually were to lead to humans) Ultimately, a school is a place where one should develop critical thinking skills that are based on logical reasoning with evidence that supports theory.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by orwellianunenlightenment
 


Question myself about what? You know absolutely nothing about me or what a long, wearying fight it has been to "deprogram" from all the lies we are taught as children and young adults. You giggle and scorn as you try to cleverly dig some kind of "truth" out of me. What do you want to hear? That I believe that you're right? Not likely. You sound in serious need of prozac. You don't so much sound provocative as you do delusional.

Happy that you provoked a response?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
If I tried to convince you that Mount Rushmore was a natural creation cause by years of wind and water errosion you would say I was completely mad but... you tell me every single living cell and molecule in this universe were cause by an accidental explosion and just by chance evolved into what we see before us today.

Hmmm... who's insane???
edit on 6-12-2010 by Soldier of God because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Listen, if you carefully read my words, I said they were an ASPECT of what I believe, far from the whole kit and kaboodle. Those words could not even convey what I believe. And I do not think you are some simpleton in need of reprogramming. I think you are quite bright based on what you have written. We might just disagree. I didn't even say I was right. It was a litmus test. JESUS CHRIST!!!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


As a former Creationist I don't think one has to be insane to believe this stuff. In fact I think believing in Creationism is very similar to holding a belief in other conspiracy topics. For instance - the moon landing. Every shred of evidence points to us having landed on the moon yet there are people who deny it. It works the same way with Creationism. Many Creationists are just being lied to the way I used to be before I actually looked into the evidence on the Evolution side. See the Creationists lie and claim they are giving you all you need to know about Evolution in order to make your mind up but all they give you are strawmen which they then conveniently knock down.

I do think that we should keep it out of science classes.



Should it be made a crime to purposefully teach a known falsehood under the guise of truth?


Yes, absolutely. Its already a breach of the First Amendment to teach a religious viewpoint as science in a classroom so it should definitely be a crime as well.
edit on 6-12-2010 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Liberal1984
Creationalism... mutilation...


I have to ask, are you George W. Bush?

they are typically called creationism and mutation, respectively.

Mutilation tends to significantly decrease fitness, mutations tend to have no effect, although negative effects and very rarely positive effects do occur. It is also not the driving force of evolution - that is like saying that the roads in a country are the driving force of cars. No, the driving force of cars are the engines, and the engine of evolution is natural selection (Through survival of the fittest or, more accurately, non-survival of the least fit), and mutations simply allow for novel variations within fitness.

Unless you're talking purely molecular evolution, which is simply about change and is mostly an attempt to understand how long stuff has taken. It's still in its infancy, though, really.

edit on 6/12/2010 by TheWill because: Only half post posted.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by orwellianunenlightenment
 


Didn't you understand me? That's what the wink was for! You asked for a response. Didn't you enjoy the seeming result? I tried to make it entertaining for ya!

p.s. I thought you were the one with a sense of humor

edit on 12/6/10 by jennybee35 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Fair enough. I am sleep deprived, and yes, I do suffer from bouts of depression. If it means anything to you, I believe religion and science are both severely limited. I like your mystery too, LOL.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by orwellianunenlightenment
 


Well, maybe I went too far, but so did you!! I was just trying to match your sense of the ridiculous!




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Mirrors can be enlightening, can they not? Or at least educationally shattering.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Liberal1984
 


The theory of abiogenesis. The guy at the forefront of this last year got the nobel prize for physiology/medicine. It is widely accepted as the most valid origin of life



He has shown in his laboratory that certain catalytic RNAs can indeed join smaller RNA sequences together, creating the potential, in the right conditions for self-replication



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Liberal1984
SaturnFX yours is one of the most arrogant threads I’ve ever seen on ATS.

Considering you have a registration date of 2005, I take that as a honor...thank you
I wonder if I should get a medal or something for having the most arrogant thread ever on ATS...perhaps some sort of eye that is a ball (get it...so you can roll the eye...nevermind)

Yes, I am arrogant when I think the entire universe was not created for my viewing pleasure...how dare I think like that. heh...and moving on..


Yeah of course anyone who doesn’t think like you should a: be considerd mad, b guilty of pedalling false information. Atheist hero’s like Stalin & Chairman Meow both thought like that!!! Only problem is they were kinda mad themselves!

its Mao...Chairman Meow is the name of my cat...and he attends the cat-lick church (ba dum tshee)

Shall I name the rulers in history that used religion? Mao and Stalin did what they did despite their athiest viewpoints. Typically, an athiest will see more value in life than a religious person, because life is all the universe gives...no candy and ice cream at death, no 72 virgins..we can speculate and hope, but as far as it is known...death leads only to rotting.

It reads: God with us.

Hitler = bigtime christian.



Creationalism makes sense as far as the rate of evolution is still not understood by our current understanding of chance mutilation being evolutions the primary driving force.

...creation makes no sense...how does it make sense? we see things mutate. Some things mutate well and become advantagous, most of the time the mutations are horrible or add no advantage, and tend to die out. How does that make no sense, but "magic architect ghost did it" make sense?
It makes sense only if you are without common sense to begin with.



So far it does seem something has manipulated chance, in order to cause life to evolve.

seems to who? you? Who are you? it seems the exact opposite of that in every conceivable way.


Also science has yet to demonstrate (in the laboratory) how life came from e.g. mud-lava & lightening. They’ve had at least 60 years, and still no breakthrough demonstration.

Learn about what your asking first:

Now, counter me...since the dawning of religion (what...lets say anywhere from 6000 years, to 250k years depending on whatever you want to believe for the sake of argument...has any...ANY..evidence of creation been proven or demonstrated?
Not bad for a few dozen years of research. God is not needed.


In fact only recently (after hollowing out an existing orgasm and using most of its cell structure) were they able to create any type of artificial life form at all.

Impressive...but not part if your question...not even sure why you put that up.

Here is the thing...Science is not a religion...it doesn't pretend to start already knowing all the answers...science is the process of uncovering without bias to find answers based on evidence. the process is ongoing, and each step, once validated, is then added on. Religion starts with the initial notion that everything is unknowable, therefore we know the answer..magic.

PS Your word test "sparkle" would be better as "arrogant" or "totalitarian".
I think sparkle works fine. its shiny..and things only matter when its shiny in a culture of ADD
edit on 6-12-2010 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by orwellianunenlightenment
 


Yeah, I truly enjoy sparring on ATS, especially if the other person is intelligent enough to participate without getting personal and offensive! That way, maybe we all learn something, especially patience!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I've read it all going over the replies to this thread. Well when they, you evolutionists create your own scratch and then create life from it, then come and tell me about it. But I'll tell you what will happen first. The Great Creator is coming and very soon and too late you will see. Then you will know who the decieved are.

Truthiron.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


The sparkle of your post faded before I read it, a while ago on this site I was reading about how the smallest multi celled organism was a 7 celled parasite. The missing link is pretty compelling. And Creationism, or an invisible man in the sky watching everything I do creating me from him, judging me with impossible tasks makes as much sense as: Some dust in some warm water got struck by lightning and decided to live. (Or the scientific explanation.)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
No matter what way you try to finagle the hard sciences, you have to begin accounting for the fact that something ultimately came out of nothing.

Or perhaps, in the grander scope of things, there is no beginning nor end to anything. We were just thought up by a higher self at a particular point in time and began to exist.

This all coming from someone that is quite secular in regards to Christianity and modern religion as it stands.
edit on 6-12-2010 by immortal coil because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthiron
I've read it all going over the replies to this thread.

I see a sparkle of mistruth in that statement...not nice.


Well when they, you evolutionists create your own scratch and then create life from it, then come and tell me about it.

Will do...after all..the entire scientific community is desperately trying to appease you. no doubt when we do have all the answers, the collective scientific community will be knocking on your door (hope you have good parking space)

But I'll tell you what will happen first. The Great Creator is coming and very soon and too late you will see.

Ooh, predictions...sweet. Any date? Will the galactic federation of light be there also?

What if the creator turns out to be just a few extraterrestrials that wanted to experiment on a planet and see what happens?

and wait...if he/she/they come...why would anything be too late? sounds to me like it would be perfect timing..unless we like somehow proved something, then the creator comes and said he did it, that would certainly awkward..

God...making a new earth seem old just for the LOLs.
biggest troll ever.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthiron
I've read it all going over the replies to this thread. Well when they, you evolutionists create your own scratch and then create life from it, then come and tell me about it. But I'll tell you what will happen first. The Great Creator is coming and very soon and too late you will see. Then you will know who the decieved are.

Truthiron.


God is an evolutionist. Creationism movement is a tool of Satan to decieve the believers and make Christianity look ridiculous. Repent!



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join