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.
Both sides do it.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by TheGreatDivider
...and this is why creationists get laughed at.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by muzzleflash
There are those who accept science and those who don't accept science because it conflicts with their personal religious/spiritual views. That's it. One side has the deck of cards and is ready to play, the other doesn't. The notion that there are two "sides" to the "debate" is a false dichotomy put forth by creationists and other ideologically driven people who have an agenda. There is no middle ground: you either understand the theory of evolution or you don't/won't.
edit on 2-8-2012 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Science is not about ignoring someone else because you assume they are wrong.
If you assume that you know everything, and those who disagree don't know anything, than you are promoting the exact same ideology you claim to oppose.
Religious organizations for centuries refused to listen to dissenting or conflicting voices.
And that is exactly what you are promoting.
How can I possibly consider your point of view when it is limited entirely to one side? I cannot.
Look I don't take the other side very seriously when it comes to specific details, however, I cannot and will not take anyone seriously who claims the other side is intellectually inferior, and doesn't even deserve the benefit of a proper and legitimate debate.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by TheGreatDivider
The ignorance is strong in this one. "Ignorance? From a creationist? Never!
Transitional Fossils
More Transitional Fossils
And Some More Transitional Fossils
Even More Transitional Fossils
BTW nothing in science is "proven", the fact you can't even get the most basic terminology right only serves to make you look even more ignorant.
If you're going to attack science, at least bother to educate yourself before hand.
Originally posted by TheJackelantern
Both sides do it.
Let me make this clear here.. It's not acceptable in general context for any side.. And this isn't an argument to excuse its usage. Right now the creationist movement is largely similar to that which happened in Afghanistan regarding the destruction of the education system. And it's also an arm of the movement to install a religious theocracy here in the United states. Yes the very same type of arguments and dishonesty to distort American history to appear to be founded on Christianity and how the US is a Christian nation to where freedom of religion only applies to their religion.. Do please tell us why I should respect that kind dishonesty to support an ideology that is growing to become a very destructive element of this country?
note: this isn't a generalizing statement.. it's addressing those who are, not those who aren't..edit on 2-8-2012 by TheJackelantern because: (no reason given)
My point is that I feel both sides are the same.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by TheGreatDivider
Ah, the ol' "the evidence is wrong!" argument Good night, I've had enough laughs for the evening.
Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
Darwin admitted that transitional fossils prove his theory to be wrong.
Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
Darwin admitted that transitional fossils prove his theory to be wrong.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Science is not about ignoring someone else because you assume they are wrong.
If you assume that you know everything, and those who disagree don't know anything, than you are promoting the exact same ideology you claim to oppose.
Originally posted by john_bmth
Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
Darwin admitted that transitional fossils prove his theory to be wrong.
Is that the best you can do? Quote mine Darwin? Not only are you flat out wrong, but try and pick someone who hasn't been dead for 150 years.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by TheGreatDivider
Ah, the ol' "the evidence is wrong!" argument Good night, I've had enough laughs for the evening.
Evidence is evidence.
It can be interpreted in multiple ways by multiple observers.