Richard Dawkins Celebrates a Victory over Creationists

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Saying "God made us [full stop]" is not creationism, it is "stupidism". Creationism is science and science is creationism, it is unseprable, I don't see any victory over creationism, I see a victory over "stupidism", all creationists should be celebrating alongside Dawkins on this one. If people want to remain stupid, then they should not drag other people's kids along in public schools, but if they want it in private, good for them.




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I wonder how religious folk would feel if a group of atheists started a campain to teach science in Sunday School.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ARandomAfflictionOfSense
I wonder how religious folk would feel if a group of atheists started a campain to teach science in Sunday School.


seriously!

believe in your fantasies but that is no reason to try and force these innocent children with great potential to learn a ridiculous belief. if you're going to teach ID why not teach them that we may have come from aliens or a stork brought us here.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ARandomAfflictionOfSense
 


To compare atheism and religion is ignorant.

Science should be taught regardless and should have precedence above any religion. One uses a fictitious character to explain everything, and one uses testable theories that are continously evolving.

The fact that we have Sunday school is child abuse IMO. Think about it, children are taught from young ages that anyone that doesn't believe in their religion will be tortured and burn for eternity all because of their all loving god. When you sin this can and will happen too, unless you declare to your living god and do the recommended punishment assigned by child molesting priests.

The reality of any religion is that if we as people believed in nothing, and someone tried to sell the exact same story that all religious people believe now, no one would fall for it.

Seriously, it's like believing Harry Potter was a documentary.


Pred...



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Richard dawkins is an idiot. I have a degree in physics and a lot of what he states can be debunked, not only that he makes ridiculous analogies.

The unicorn is one example. Unicorn is a mythical creature by definition, whereas God is not.

Also scientific evidence is NOT a prerequiste for proof.

The most accurate theory in physics is QED, and it is still an approximation. Sixty years ago people thought the atom could not be split, yet here we do it every day. This guy is extremely ignorant and does not understand that most people who know physics know that there is an underlying designer.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by predator0187
reply to post by ARandomAfflictionOfSense
 


To compare atheism and religion is ignorant.

Did I compare the two in your veiw?I'm sorry but I think you miss understood me.Non religious don't impose their views in religious class so religious views need to stay out of science class.That is all.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Creationism should stay out of the Science class room and evolution out of the Comparative Religions'. Teach what should be taught in it's proper place. There is nothing wrong with either idea nor in informing the children of each ideas exsistance, if we framing the subjects properly.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Richard dawkins is an idiot. I have a degree in physics and a lot of what he states can be debunked, not only that he makes ridiculous analogies.

The unicorn is one example. Unicorn is a mythical creature by definition, whereas God is not.

Also scientific evidence is NOT a prerequiste for proof.

The most accurate theory in physics is QED, and it is still an approximation. Sixty years ago people thought the atom could not be split, yet here we do it every day. This guy is extremely ignorant and does not understand that most people who know physics know that there is an underlying designer.


There is no difference between a unicorn and god, they are both mythical, never seen, no evidence for and people that see them are usually crazy.

As for physicists thinking there is some sort of underlying designer, well that is just untrue. There are some powerhouses of physics that did not believe in a designer and probably knew a lot more than you and me combined, some included, the QED disigner Feynman, Hawking and the good old Einstein.

But, as most religious people do, they will believe what they want to and make up their own facts, but as for you being a scientist I find that hard to believe.

QED has a lot of things pointing to the randomness of the universe, like the probability wave and the fact that there are these crazy things called virtual particles popping in and out of existence as necessary.

Pred...



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ARandomAfflictionOfSense

Originally posted by predator0187
reply to post by ARandomAfflictionOfSense
 


To compare atheism and religion is ignorant.

Did I compare the two in your veiw?I'm sorry but I think you miss understood me.Non religious don't impose their views in religious class so religious views need to stay out of science class.That is all.


Sorry yes I misunderstood your post. My apologies.


Pred...
edit on 18-1-2012 by predator0187 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by troubleshooter
Dawkins is just selling popular books ... he has not been taken seriously by any real scientists and none of his books have gained favourable reviews. He is a scientist by profession who has failed to seriously address real philosphical and religious issues. Dawkins popularity and influence will not outlive him for long.


Huh? What do you mean he hasn't been taken seriously? He is a SCIENTIST, and does not NEED to address philosophy or religion. Science is about physical evidence, not philosophy and guesswork.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Not sure I feel comfortable with:


Under the new agreement, funding will be withdrawn for any free school that teaches what it claims are "evidence-based views or theories" that run "contrary to established scientific and/or historical evidence and explanations".
To know a thing is wrong you need to show a thing is wrong and why.

Look at any subject on this site and when information whether it be wrong or right is suppressed it suddenly becomes the truth no matter. Hidden by some dark force.

I would be much happier if schools were told they must teach people how to learn and how to make sense of the information available and then let them decide. In fact with the internet, kindels and the like other than the social side I wonder if schools are really needed in the form they exist in today.

We churn out kids with degrees that have no idea how to apply the knowledge and stifle the more hands on kids making them go through excessive education that they do not want and will not use.

You cannot deny ignorance if you are not aware of it. In fact you become the ignorant.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by troubleshooter
Dawkins is just selling popular books ... he has not been taken seriously by any real scientists and none of his books have gained favourable reviews. He is a scientist by profession who has failed to seriously address real philosphical and religious issues. Dawkins popularity and influence will not outlive him for long.


Huh? What do you mean he hasn't been taken seriously? He is a SCIENTIST, and does not NEED to address philosophy or religion. Science is about physical evidence, not philosophy and guesswork.

I have read all of Dawkins books...
... Dawkins is doing philosophy in all his books not science and he is not good at it.

John Blanchard's book 'Does God believe in Atheists' is a good place to start if you want to see the flaws in Dawkins positions.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
as a Christian taxpayer who wants my taxes to represent me and my family I would like to see the stupid religion of evolution stopped being taught.
I know that wont happen so as a taxpayer I would like to see ID taught alongside evolution.
To all the peculiar people who would like to accept the earth was seeded by aliens, please tell me where did those aliens come from.
Evolution doesnt happen. it cant.

This absurd suggestion that taxpayers dont want to see ID taught in schools is fallacious and inane.
We dont live in a dictatorship....yet!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by skonaz
reply to post by Astyanax
 



Surely evolution could be designed intelligently ?


Try telling that to a duck billed platypus.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Can you be an evolutionist who believes in a creator and not get flamed even if you do not think that religion or creation should be taught in schools? I certainly hope the world of enlightened men are open to that.


edit on 18-1-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


I think a lot of evolutionists are open to that idea.
So do I, I'm open to it myself. It's just that in school the place to discuss these sorts of ideas is comparative religion or history classes, where they can be understood in their proper context as ideas stemming from religious belief which have their origins in historical societies. With any luck, if the child wishes to learn more, their proper place then becomes philosophy...



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bargoose

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Originally posted by kingofmd
This is the equivalent to Stalin claiming a victory over his dissenters, when he sent them to the gulags. Why not win the debate in an actual debate. Pretty sad when the only way your worldview will be accepted is when you completely silence the opposition.


You're not silenced. You still have the opportunity to go to church and practice your beliefs. But those beliefs have no place in a public school science classroom and you don't have the right to force them on other people's children.


Well then evolution and the big bang shouldn't be taught in a classroom either. It is only a theory. A belief. Just like someones belief in creationism.

I mean, the idea that nothing produced something, and then that some thing decided to organize itself into a highly complex universe for no real reason, is as absurd to me as the idea of creationism is to you.
One of the most important things to get to grips with when discussing the current scientific theories about the origins of the universe, and for many people one of the most difficult, is that many of us cannot understand those theories despite the fact that what we have heard about them is a dumbed-down version intended for popular media. In a way it's no wonder that so many people think that the theoretical physics of the origins of the universe, evolutionary biology and creation myths are all ideas which can be compared to each other.

Heads up people - I am just intelligent enough to know that, despite my extensive education, neither I nor around 97% of humanity can possibly understand current theoretical physics well enough to judge it for veracity. These days it just takes such a high IQ because the science requires both the known and unknown to be imagined in non-Euclidian space. I believe that modern evolutionary biology is a little easier, but nonetheless it still requires the absorbtion of vast amounts of data which must be available to recall immediately for the kind of comparisons that go into designing meaningful scientific enquiry. Then there's creationism...



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 



Congrats students! You will get brainwashed by the Dawkins school of "non-science"! A win win for the most ignorant group of pseudo-scientists the world has ever seen.

It's a shame that much of science has turned from "what experiments prove" into "what scientists believe", but that's the world we live in.

Fortunately there is a ton of "real" science going on every day, which is why we see so many technological advances.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 02:08 AM
link   
Macro evolution is complete BS....there has only ever been micro-evolution of adaptions of some animals...

the case for macro evolution is completely destroyed by:
- the book 'The Case for a Creator' by Lee Strobel
- the Walter Veith science series amazingdiscoveries.tv...
- the fact that nature magazine admits all phylum were present at the Cambrian Explosion (ummm sounds like the story of creation to me)

all mainline evolutionist arguments and there origins of life issues have been thoroughly destroyed with scientific fact! The state of things is so stark for those who have looked into the science properly that it actually requires considerably more 'faith' to now believe in the typical understanding of evolution and life origins than what comes to us from God in the Genesis account. Science over the past couple of decades has moved much more toward creationism/ID and away from evolution as the science has enabled us to looking more closely at the cell and the universe around us and how it all fits in together.

nice little vid of Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins www.youtube.com...

check out this vid series www.youtube.com... to better understand the 'political' reasons in this issue
edit on 19-1-2012 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
as a Christian taxpayer who wants my taxes to represent me and my family I would like to see the stupid religion of evolution stopped being taught.
I know that wont happen so as a taxpayer I would like to see ID taught alongside evolution.
To all the peculiar people who would like to accept the earth was seeded by aliens, please tell me where did those aliens come from.
Evolution doesnt happen. it cant.

This absurd suggestion that taxpayers dont want to see ID taught in schools is fallacious and inane.
We dont live in a dictatorship....yet!


So given that you believe evolution to be a stupid religion and you want it to be stopped being taught then you must accept others think your religion is stupid and should also stop being taught?

What religion out the the many do you class as the correct one that should be taught. Good luck with that one.

You are happy for ID to be taught in biology classes, Are you just as happy to have alchemy taught in chemistry class? Should we teach how lightning is made by angry gods in physics class?

Why not fill all the empty churches in the UK and teach ID there in its proper place if you believe there are many people clammering to be taught it?

You pay taxes because you are required too and you probably dont live in the UK if you have to ask if we live in a dictatorship.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by borntowatch
as a Christian taxpayer who wants my taxes to represent me and my family I would like to see the stupid religion of evolution stopped being taught.
I know that wont happen so as a taxpayer I would like to see ID taught alongside evolution.
To all the peculiar people who would like to accept the earth was seeded by aliens, please tell me where did those aliens come from.
Evolution doesnt happen. it cant.

This absurd suggestion that taxpayers dont want to see ID taught in schools is fallacious and inane.
We dont live in a dictatorship....yet!


So given that you believe evolution to be a stupid religion and you want it to be stopped being taught then you must accept others think your religion is stupid and should also stop being taught?

What religion out the the many do you class as the correct one that should be taught. Good luck with that one.

You are happy for ID to be taught in biology classes, Are you just as happy to have alchemy taught in chemistry class? Should we teach how lightning is made by angry gods in physics class?

Why not fill all the empty churches in the UK and teach ID there in its proper place if you believe there are many people clammering to be taught it?

You pay taxes because you are required too and you probably dont live in the UK if you have to ask if we live in a dictatorship.



Ahm, I think comprehension should be taught in UK schools.
Read my post Einstein
Here is a clue " I would like to see ID taught alongside evolution."
and no, I dont live in the UK, who would want to live in that dump. Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester to name a few. Listen matey, you want to live on an estate and put up with all that crap, you are welcome to it.
Wouldnt live in the UK for quids and would never go there either. The UK is a shadow of what it once was.
Its a cesspit and you know it.

I would like to see everything taught in schools, the pros and cons as well.
Education is far more broader than science.
But you wouldnt understand that being in a Police State, Oh no wait a second. The Police are to scared to go on to most estates nowadays. Here is a clue...emigrate from that Island dump.
The land of shopkeepers.





new topics
top topics
 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join