Creation Thread

[assoutE12]

more specificly, keep religion out of my science class.

Inteligent design is fucking bullshit.

[Matt86es]

Call me when you find one of those "transition" animal skeletons,until then - I'm betting my soul I'm standing with those who are right.
Rant Off/// --Like it did any good anyhow.

Here is a very simple example of evolution in animals. You can see some of the physiological changes and the age of the fossils found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Horseevolution.png

[Farbin Kaiber]

It's the wikipedia quote guy.

[TwoJ's]

more specificly, keep religion out of my science class.

Inteligent design is fucking bullshit.

Come one man. Do you even know what intelligent design means? Sounds like you're getting it confused with Christian creationism. They are completely unrelated.

I agree with you that intelligent design should not be taught in a science class, but your attitude about it makes it clear that you don't know what you're talking about. While science does not support the idea of intelligent design, it also does not deny it. You cannot say with any shred of certainty that intelligent design is "fucking bullshit". For fucks sake, you can't even spell intelligent.

[CorvallisBMW]

Considering 'Intelligent Desgin' is just another word for Christian Creationism, coined by christians, I fail to see the difference between the two.

Same shit, different names.

[TwoJ's]

Considering 'Intelligent Desgin' is just another word for Christian Creationism, coined by christians, I fail to see the difference between the two.

Same shit, different names.

Sigh. Creationism is a subset of intelligent design. Intelligent design can mean that some sort of intelligence created life on a cellular level and that it evolved from there. It can also be interpreted as some being designing the universe in such a way that life could develop on a place like earth. It does not necessitate any religious affiliation whatsoever.

Just because the tern was coined by some Christian does not mean the whole study of it is owned by Christianity. The term God was used centuries before Christianity by many different religions, so is it owned by those other people/religions? Hell no.

This is all beside the point. assoute12 made a blanked statement that is fundamentally incorrect. He doesn't know what intelligent design is... do you?

[assoutE12]

Sigh. Creationism is a subset of intelligent design. Intelligent design can mean that some sort of intelligence created life on a cellular level and that it evolved from there. It can also be interpreted as some being designing the universe in such a way that life could develop on a place like earth. It does not necessitate any religious affiliation whatsoever.

Just because the tern was coined by some Christian does not mean the whole study of it is owned by Christianity. The term God was used centuries before Christianity by many different religions, so is it owned by those other people/religions? Hell no.

This is all beside the point. assoute12 made a blanked statement that is fundamentally incorrect. He doesn't know what intelligent design is... do you?

I know exactly what intelligent design is, its bullshit.
it is a piss poor attempt to vuagly disguise creationism as a scientific theory.
used by nut jobs as a basis for attacking the teaching of evolution. They act like there is some sort of debate in the scientific community over the theory of evolution, when in reality there is none.

You fuckers took evolution out of the required curriculum in Kansas a few years back, thankfully the school board was shit canned and everything was p
reversed.

[TwoJ's]

I know exactly what intelligent design is, its bullshit.
it is a piss poor attempt to vuagly disguise creationism as a scientific theory.
used by nut jobs as a basis for attacking the teaching of evolution. They act like there is some sort of debate in the scientific community over the theory of evolution, when in reality there is none.

You fuckers took evolution out of the required curriculum in Kansas a few years back, thankfully the school board was shit canned and everything was p
reversed.

Dense, stubborn etc. I see you still do not understand that real (not affiliated with religion) intelligent design does not refute evolution at all.

Let me be clear. I am not endorsing intelligent design. I actually feel that it is incorrect. But to say that it is complete bullshit is ignorant. No one can be even remotely sure either way. We should not discuss evolutionary theory with intelligent design. Rational people realize that evolution is real. ID is not even science, it is pseudo science. I am simply saying that it is possible that something created life on a CELLULAR level, or created the universe in a certain way. It is highly unlikely, but possible.

Your argument is superfluous because the two things you are discussing are not relative or contradictory.

[eric (^__^)]

So what created the creator?

He was carved from a bigger idol.

[devonjordan]

He was carved from a bigger idol.

No no, he was always there, and just got bored one day, made all of us.

Thats what kills me about the whole creationism thing. They can explain everthing that is here, with one creator, but when it comes to how the creator came about, there is no answer, he/she was just there. Why cant the universe be the creator? Just accept the fact that its here, its always been here, and will always be here. Just like your creator.

OMG the universe is the creator, FACK!

[Scotaku]

I always hate pointing out to the absolute diehards, in both camps, that there is a possibility that scientific study and evolutionary progress just might have been part of an intelligent design. It may have all been made to grow the way it does. One belief patently rejecting the other is only a symptom. The arrogant thought that one and one alone is absolutely right is the real problem.

[ragged325]

It's time for ragged325's Grand Unification Theory (GUT). This will explain why you don't have Heeter in here arguing creationism. It's because it's a weak argument. You have to close your eyes and believe. So instead, we'll see the social conservatives argue till they're blue about taxes and government waste (which is an argument they can win). It also explains why they don't care when you point out that their VP choice doesn't understand what saying no to a government earmark means. It's because what they really care about is electing someone that is one of them (trust me, they can tell). They get elected with a lot of rhetoric about taxes, but when no one's looking, they stop teaching our kids sex education and start teaching creationism. This explains why Republicans were not excited about McCain (pre-Palin) because they could tell he wasn't one of them.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Furthermore, I hate the fact that there are die hards who will not step into the other guys shoes, and, at least look at the angles with open eyes.

[TwoJ's]

I always hate pointing out to the absolute diehards, in both camps, that there is a possibility that scientific study and evolutionary progress just might have been part of an intelligent design. It may have all been made to grow the way it does. One belief patently rejecting the other is only a symptom. The arrogant thought that one and one alone is absolutely right is the real problem.

I completely agree with what you say. They are definitely not mutually exclusive. BUT, there is an issue that one is science and one is pseudo science.

[Farbin Kaiber]

TwoJ's, I would (IMHO) change "pseudo science" to a term more along the lines of "theory" because, as in Science, it just has not been proven. IF we were to take this to a fully fledged science based concept entwined conversation.