Creation Thread

[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.

[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.

[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!

[eric (^__^)]

So what created the creator?

He was carved from a bigger idol.

[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.

[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]

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?

[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]

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.

[Farbin Kaiber]

It's the wikipedia quote guy.

[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

[assoutE12]

more specificly, keep religion out of my science class.

Inteligent design is fucking bullshit.

[Hallen]

Believing in magic and ghosts is one thing, and while I think to indoctrinate your kids with this crazyness is child abuse.

Keep that shit the fuck out of my schools!

You also have to understand that there is a lot of "shit" taught in schools today that many of the rest of us do not like. I have spent a lot of time "undoctrinating" my children after being at public schools. Revisionist histories, overdramatization of the roles of minor historical figures, social studies that cross the boundaries into political agenda's and doctrine, etc. In MY opinion, that crap is also "child abuse", to use your poorly phrased terminology. So, if you don't believe in religion, fine, keep your trap shut and don't try to foist your version of life on me, just as I expect religious people to do the same.

There is always a choice about which schools to send your children to and you can get involved with the school to enact change. It isn't easy and takes a lot of time, but that is pretty normal.

I don't believe that creationism should be taught in public schools because it is religion. There is a difference between scientific fact and scientific hypothesis and what religion is. Religion REQUIRES faith and that is something that public schools should not be teaching. That is what the millions of church organizations are for. Your child can receive all the religious history and creationist ideas there. In fact, it will be taught much better there than it ever will in a public school because... well because it is a public school where nothing gets done very well. There is plenty of fact to back up many of the things in the bible. This is basic archaeology and is something that public schools should teach. You can't try to hide religion. It is part of all of our cultures and societies. To extricate religion from history or social studies is a travesty and I would go so far as to argue that it is in itself a religious choice, ie, the religion of the atheist.

Add to that the millions of variations on religious sects, and you face an impossibility of teaching them in schools. If you introduce one, you have to try and at least introduce them all. While not all scientific theories can possibly be taught either, there is basic groundwork and basic skills can be taught. There is an element of faith when it comes to some of the more advanced and "out there" scientific theories too. You have to believe that the physicists really do know their stuff because honestly, I don't have the brain power or the schooling to understand it. However, science has proven that they are both right and wrong at times and that single fact is enough to validate a lot of stuff. Nothing we have now can prove the existence or the nonexistence of God, that is the part that requires faith. We can prove in many, many ways that people believe in God and that fact should never be ignored by public schools.

I guess the main point is that pubic schools are pretty generic and have to focus on the basic skills and fact based knowledge to prepare children for life. It is the parent's responsibility to insure that their child also gets the teachings on aspects of life that public schools should not and do not teach. That is always the case whether you are talking economics or religion.

[Farbin Kaiber]

He's referring to shit like "the bible stated that the earth was round" when in fact it's a sphere. There's a handfull of extremely vague references that can be misunderstood to be science.

Oh, that explains those crazy Christian Scientists that think they can pray away sickness and God wants them not to use traditional medicine.

Or, crazy Jehovah's Whiteness' that will not get a transfusion because they think the spirit lies in the blood due to some reference in the bible and they took it SOOO literal.

People need to dig a lil deeper than the text, and find the emotion/spirit/soul of what the words emoted by the person placing them there for the ages to try and grasp.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Read it.

Besides, Dawkins is the world's most notorious atheist. I don't think anyone can change his mind (or mine).

Ok, but serious, remember, Stephen Hawking changed his mind and was man enough to type it into a box for us to hear.