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.
MrConspiracy
Ok, i get that. But the original post does say
"Most all creationist claims have been soundly refuted decades ago, but then new generations of creationists come up, the veritable "suckers born every minute"
It just riled me up a bit. I apologise it hurt everyone so much.
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
So what do you call this other than a cop out?
Almost every time you used the word faith it was as an excuse for not having a good reason for something, but believing it anyway. Aren't you being a little dishonest?edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
solomons path
The thread should focus on the dishonesty of their tactics, as the OP outlined, to promote theology over science. I've noticed, as usual, that my post (bottom of page 3) chronicling the movements tactics is once again ignored by creation/ID proponents.
If ID has any merit to it, why can't it stand on it's own merits and research? Research, which is non-existent to this point, by the way. If the concept has evidence to back it up, why can't respondents post such . . . as opposed to clinging to thoroughly refuted criticisms of Evolutionary Theory? Why do those at the leading edge of the movement have to resort to trying to manipulate public opinion, as opposed to publishing their "breakthrough" findings?
From the link titled "Wedge Document" at the bottom of page 3:
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
Wedge Document
It's clear this entire movement is nothing more than an attempt to promote their theism over modern scientific study and return us to the dark ages, where superstition reigned. This movement is no different than the attitude that science has dealt with for hundreds of years.
daskakik
MrConspiracy
Ok, i get that. But the original post does say
If you get that then what were you expecting?
"Most all creationist claims have been soundly refuted decades ago, but then new generations of creationists come up, the veritable "suckers born every minute"
Where you able to disprove that?
Did you really expect me to disprove this? they've been soundly refuted? So are you stating that ID is definitely false then? That it's been completely disproved?
It just riled me up a bit. I apologize it hurt everyone so much.
I don't think anyone was hurt.
MrConspiracy
Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
So what do you call this other than a cop out?
Almost every time you used the word faith it was as an excuse for not having a good reason for something, but believing it anyway. Aren't you being a little dishonest?edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
Simply.. No.
Can i ask.. do you think science explains everything?
solomons path
MrConspiracy
Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
So what do you call this other than a cop out?
Almost every time you used the word faith it was as an excuse for not having a good reason for something, but believing it anyway. Aren't you being a little dishonest?edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
Simply.. No.
Can i ask.. do you think science explains everything?
Not Wert, but to answer you . . .
No.
The difference is science just says "we don't know". There is no need to fill the gaps with gods, aliens, giant computer programmers, or any other supernatural or other-worldly explanations.
greavsie1971
solomons path
The thread should focus on the dishonesty of their tactics, as the OP outlined, to promote theology over science. I've noticed, as usual, that my post (bottom of page 3) chronicling the movements tactics is once again ignored by creation/ID proponents.
If ID has any merit to it, why can't it stand on it's own merits and research? Research, which is non-existent to this point, by the way. If the concept has evidence to back it up, why can't respondents post such . . . as opposed to clinging to thoroughly refuted criticisms of Evolutionary Theory? Why do those at the leading edge of the movement have to resort to trying to manipulate public opinion, as opposed to publishing their "breakthrough" findings?
From the link titled "Wedge Document" at the bottom of page 3:
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
Wedge Document
It's clear this entire movement is nothing more than an attempt to promote their theism over modern scientific study and return us to the dark ages, where superstition reigned. This movement is no different than the attitude that science has dealt with for hundreds of years.
But some science is the same. Why just point out ID? A lot of scientisis rule out creationism without even studying it. It's the same thing. You make out this just happens in ID, when it happens in all walks of life like politics for example.
MrConspiracy
solomons path
MrConspiracy
Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
So what do you call this other than a cop out?
Almost every time you used the word faith it was as an excuse for not having a good reason for something, but believing it anyway. Aren't you being a little dishonest?edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
Simply.. No.
Can i ask.. do you think science explains everything?
Not Wert, but to answer you . . .
No.
The difference is science just says "we don't know". There is no need to fill the gaps with gods, aliens, giant computer programmers, or any other supernatural or other-worldly explanations.
Well then what do you fill it with? Nothing?......:S
Surely the mind must wonder if there's the "we don't know" floating around... where does yours wonder to?
greavsie1971
reply to post by solomons path
What caused the big bang. Never heard a scientist propose it could be created. That avenue never gets mentioned. Yet we have something from nothing.
It is not false at all.
solomons path
MrConspiracy
solomons path
MrConspiracy
Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy
i'm sorry for having an opinion that you can't understand/believe. when it comes to faith, especially to do with the origins of life.. i'm going to have a tough time by myself.
So what do you call this other than a cop out?
Almost every time you used the word faith it was as an excuse for not having a good reason for something, but believing it anyway. Aren't you being a little dishonest?edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
Simply.. No.
Can i ask.. do you think science explains everything?
Not Wert, but to answer you . . .
No.
The difference is science just says "we don't know". There is no need to fill the gaps with gods, aliens, giant computer programmers, or any other supernatural or other-worldly explanations.
Well then what do you fill it with? Nothing?......:S
Surely the mind must wonder if there's the "we don't know" floating around... where does yours wonder to?
Yes the mind wonders . . . but, without empirical evidence to support the "wondering" there is nothing to study scientifically. You seem to want to blur the lines between philosophy and science, or not understand where that line is drawn.
To borrow a quote from Indiana Jones (Last Crusade) and replacing "archeology" with the word "science" . . .
"Science is the search for facts, not "truth" . . . If you are looking for "truth", philosophy and theology are down the hall."
solomons path
The thread should focus on the dishonesty of their tactics, as the OP outlined, to promote theology over science. I've noticed, as usual, that my post (bottom of page 3) chronicling the movements tactics is once again ignored by creation/ID proponents.
If ID has any merit to it, why can't it stand on it's own merits and research? Research, which is non-existent to this point, by the way. If the concept has evidence to back it up, why can't respondents post such . . . as opposed to clinging to thoroughly refuted criticisms of Evolutionary Theory? Why do those at the leading edge of the movement have to resort to trying to manipulate public opinion, as opposed to publishing their "breakthrough" findings?
From the link titled "Wedge Document" at the bottom of page 3:
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
Wedge Document
It's clear this entire movement is nothing more than an attempt to promote their theism over modern scientific study and return us to the dark ages, where superstition reigned. This movement is no different than the attitude that science has dealt with for hundreds of years.
solomons path
greavsie1971
reply to post by solomons path
What caused the big bang. Never heard a scientist propose it could be created. That avenue never gets mentioned. Yet we have something from nothing.
It is not false at all.
Absolutely false and you don't seem to be that familiar with big bang theory, if you believe it states what caused it. The theory states it happened. Not what, if anything, came before or what the cause was. There is ample evidence (background radiation, expansion, etc.) to say that it happened, though.
So the answer to your question is "we don't know".
greavsie1971
solomons path
greavsie1971
reply to post by solomons path
What caused the big bang. Never heard a scientist propose it could be created. That avenue never gets mentioned. Yet we have something from nothing.
It is not false at all.
Absolutely false and you don't seem to be that familiar with big bang theory, if you believe it states what caused it. The theory states it happened. Not what, if anything, came before or what the cause was. There is ample evidence (background radiation, expansion, etc.) to say that it happened, though.
So the answer to your question is "we don't know".
Exactly, 'we dont know' but creation is not an option?
I never suggested science stated what caused it, That was my point. Science does NOT know.edit on 16-9-2013 by greavsie1971 because: (no reason given)edit on 16-9-2013 by greavsie1971 because: (no reason given)