I really don't care what anyone else thinks. As for these forums, it consumes roughly .01% of my time, and I use it basically to shore up my argument when I have occasion (very seldom sadly) to debate with a creationist.
My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits. So, for me, I dig science. My seven and four year old daughters are discovering the excitement with science as well. (My seven year old goes to a private school, and much to my chagrin, as her teacher was talking about dinosaurs, she raised her hand and stated that dinosaurs lived way before humans did... so we had to have a little talk that evening )
I do take exception when pseudoscience demands to be taught along legitimate, globally accepted real science. It is the height of human arrogance for a religious group to demand that a religious view be taught in the classroom as a viable alternative to real science. It should be left in a Eastern/Western religious studies course, where all creation stories are presented.
BTW, you do know this is the debate section of the forums.
Do you care what we think regarding science?
What honestly disturbs me is that I live on a planet with humans who actually believe in fairy tales and get away with it without having to have some sort of psychological evalution.
And I'm being completely serious.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I really don't care what anyone else thinks. As for these forums, it consumes roughly .01% of my time, and I use it basically to shore up my argument when I have occasion (very seldom sadly) to debate with a creationist.
My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits. So, for me, I dig science. My seven and four year old daughters are discovering the excitement with science as well. (My seven year old goes to a private school, and much to my chagrin, as her teacher was talking about dinosaurs, she raised her hand and stated that dinosaurs lived way before humans did... so we had to have a little talk that evening )
I do take exception when pseudoscience demands to be taught along legitimate, globally accepted real science. It is the height of human arrogance for a religious group to demand that a religious view be taught in the classroom as a viable alternative to real science. It should be left in a Eastern/Western religious studies course, where all creation stories are presented.
BTW, you do know this is the debate section of the forums.
Do you care what we think regarding science?
can I ask another question, generally speaking as well as specifically about creation/evolution....please don't get off topic with this, just a question to help me understand perspective here....
You say, "My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits." So the question is this, how much of what we believe, both inside and outside creation/evolution debate is the reading we do? For example, if all I read is creation, wouldn't I tend to be a creationist? Conversely if all I read is evolution wouldn't I tend to be an evolutionist? I wonder if there is anyone who divides their time fairly equally and what they believe....seems only natural to me, that reading only one argument would cement any tendencies of belief one has....
can I ask another question, generally speaking as well as specifically about creation/evolution....please don't get off topic with this, just a question to help me understand perspective here....
You say, "My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits." So the question is this, how much of what we believe, both inside and outside creation/evolution debate is the reading we do?
A lot of it, I'd say. Especially when the reading you do is fairly superficial. Like my quantum physics
For example, if all I read is creation, wouldn't I tend to be a creationist? Conversely if all I read is evolution wouldn't I tend to be an evolutionist? I wonder if there is anyone who divides their time fairly equally and what they believe....seems only natural to me, that reading only one argument would cement any tendencies of belief one has....
I can certainly agree with that. "If all you read" is the key, though... once you are exposed to different ideas (and not only caricatures of them), it's possible to evaluate them against each other. Of course, that also takes willingness to evaluate them. That much abused term "open mind" comes to mind
__________________ "There is much we do not understand about the history of life, and the same will be true of our grandchildren. But, then, if we knew all there was to know, scientific interest would cease. Textbooks may portray science as a codification of facts, but it is really a disciplined way of asking about the unknown." - A.H. Knoll, Life on a Young Planet
"Come on, put your bloody thinking caps on!" - Dr Tony Prave, geology lecture
A lot of it, I'd say. Especially when the reading you do is fairly superficial. Like my quantum physics
I can certainly agree with that. "If all you read" is the key, though... once you are exposed to different ideas (and not only caricatures of them), it's possible to evaluate them against each other. Of course, that also takes willingness to evaluate them. That much abused term "open mind" comes to mind
thanks for the answer, I'd love to discuss it further, but back to the OP question, thanks again and thanks to the OP for allowing the quick question.
can I ask another question, generally speaking as well as specifically about creation/evolution....please don't get off topic with this, just a question to help me understand perspective here....
You say, "My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits." So the question is this, how much of what we believe, both inside and outside creation/evolution debate is the reading we do? For example, if all I read is creation, wouldn't I tend to be a creationist? Conversely if all I read is evolution wouldn't I tend to be an evolutionist? I wonder if there is anyone who divides their time fairly equally and what they believe....seems only natural to me, that reading only one argument would cement any tendencies of belief one has....
I base what I think on the quality of what I read and study, not on the quantity.
I dont think there is a reasonable compariso between creo and evo anyway.
In all of the creationist literature that I have read, all I have seen is cra[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]imo. Its like reading Velikovski to find out about astro physics. But hey, if you know of something that I could read that has actual data, they I will look at it.
IF of course, creationist literature did have something real to say, then there would cease to be a debate at all. Because they'd have already won.
Creos have the advantage in a way. Its magic based, so you cant falsify it.
Evolution on the other hand, needs but one cambrian bunny discovered to sink it.
I base what I think on the quality of what I read and study, not on the quantity.
I dont think there is a reasonable compariso between creo and evo anyway.
In all of the creationist literature that I have read, all I have seen is cra[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]imo. Its like reading Velikovski to find out about astro physics. But hey, if you know of something that I could read that has actual data, they I will look at it.
IF of course, creationist literature did have something real to say, then there would cease to be a debate at all. Because they'd have already won.
Creos have the advantage in a way. Its magic based, so you cant falsify it.
Evolution on the other hand, needs but one cambrian bunny discovered to sink it.
I think this is off topic and would best be discussed somewhere else...that being said, a quick search under scientists that believe creation is a helpful start to finding some interesting information.
Another web search that will start you off is why scientists believe in creation...from these searches, cross references are a great way to learn more than you thought you could about those scientists who believe evolution is not the only possible answer.
I think this is off topic and would best be discussed somewhere else...that being said, a quick search under scientists that believe creation is a helpful start to finding some interesting information.
Another web search that will start you off is why scientists believe in creation...from these searches, cross references are a great way to learn more than you thought you could about those scientists who believe evolution is not the only possible answer.
Maybe we should start a separate thread....
You are right, about off topic i guess tho i notice our original poster does not seem to have ever come back to see if people responded to her honest question.
Go ahead and start a thread if you like. i will leave you with the thought that lumping all scientist together on the evo / creo topic is meaningless.
Finding someone who actually works in a field related to evolution, who beleives in creation would be extraordinary. Finding a p-chemist who believed in god / creation would not be. We have one in the dept here.
Well I think if you honestly want to know why people reject creation and instead choose to believe evoultion you need to read 2 Peter chapter 3 and pay close attention to verses 3 to 6
1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willinglyare ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.
I know many of you are going to think I am being a smart butt, but honestly I am not.
Question:
Why do you care what we believe as far as the BBT and Evolution goes? How does me believing GOD DID IT, affect your life?
Does it truly bother you that much? Why do you work so hard to try and prove to use God didn't do it?
Again no sarcasm intended, I'm just curious.
God Bless
Melissa
because if you teach ignorance in schools you end up retarding your next generation.
ID and creationim are thigns you are welcome to believe, but really help us nothing with explaining reality, in fact to hold these belife seriously most of the time, you have to deny reality.
if human kin dis to progress ANYTHING we should be denyign reality, and we cerainly should be teachign denying reality to our kids.
especially not ina public place where you affect other kids.
the concept of an ignroant amrican yough frightens me, you have the biggest military power in the world.
do i really want some people who believe that the earht can be ravaged, because it was given to us by god for that sole reason, or that we should be trying to learn mroe about livign things because we "shouldn't play god", in power?
do i really want people who believe that god will justify them when they fight wars, sittign behind the nuclear switch?
religions segregates, retards (that;s dogma for you) and mislead people (lying for jezus and televangelist begging for cash)
you can belive whatever the hell you want just don't let somehtign imaginary affect other people.
like prohibiting gay marriage because fo levidicus.
or force a woman to keep a child she cannot raise, because you think that a parasitic clump of rapidly dividing cells is a equal to a fully developed human being.
__________________ My picture shows why creationists lose when they say T-Rex ate plants, not Adam.
can I ask another question, generally speaking as well as specifically about creation/evolution....please don't get off topic with this, just a question to help me understand perspective here....
You say, "My bachelor's was in Biology, and I spend a fair amount of time reading science books as time permits." So the question is this, how much of what we believe, both inside and outside creation/evolution debate is the reading we do? For example, if all I read is creation, wouldn't I tend to be a creationist? Conversely if all I read is evolution wouldn't I tend to be an evolutionist? I wonder if there is anyone who divides their time fairly equally and what they believe....seems only natural to me, that reading only one argument would cement any tendencies of belief one has....
ig you did that, then you'd see how screwed up the ratio is.
you can spend 5 hours reading different articles which all rely ont eh predictions made by and subsequently confirm ToE or you cna spend 5 hours reading and rereading creationist arguments. which for the most parts are simple please designd for scientific illiterates, please and arguments that have been long bedunked and just keep being repeated.
like the bacterial flagellum.
the moon's distance /dust layer proves young earth.
a flood could account for the strata layers
all mutations are detrimental.
there are no transitional fossils.
ect
if you read all the articles, and then examined the rebuttals, you see that all the creationist argument can be roughyl split into 3 catagories
lies (quotemines and the like)
misunderstandings (strawmen and and ignorance)
shotty reasoning (false dichotomy and other false logic.)
__________________ My picture shows why creationists lose when they say T-Rex ate plants, not Adam.
)
Linear Mode
