Brain Washed

[Freedom777]

Science, real science—the work that ferrets out empirical facts about the nature that surrounds us—has been co-opted by an ancient philosophical/religious doctrine the origins of which can be traced back to at least 400-700 years before Christ. Known today variously as scientism, evolutionism, metaphysical naturalism, and Darwinism, this doctrine has been so effectively interlaced with science that it is often difficult for the scientist, much less the layperson, to separate the two.

Though secular in perspective (Darwinists claim the natural world is all there is), Darwinism nevertheless functions much like a religion. Darwinists have their own creation story (macro-evolution), their own creed (the Humanist Manifesto), their own “messiah figures” (those who come claiming, “Come, follow us. We know the ways of life.”), their own clergy (those whose task it is to preach the “truth” as revealed by the high priests), and their own priesthood (those who pass down to the masses their latest ruminations in naturalistic thought).

Excerpt from © Gary L. Achtemeier, Ph.D.
[Last Modified: 10 March 2002]

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Oh fer cryin' out...

Once again we see the fallacy of equating evolutionary concepts with atheism.

Let me spell it out for you in nice big letters:

Evolution is NOT atheism.

If some people want to mix up evolution within their own philosophical ideals, then that's there problem.

Now, Freedom777, please think before you post any more of these. It's getting a little tiring.

 

[Arikay]

LOL Freedom, that was great.

Just as good as many of the conspiracy theories that claim the free masons and the illuminati are part of a secrect New World Order.

Are you sure you arent really a conspiracy theoriest?

 

[Zadok001]

Freedom777:

*choke*

That was rather humorous. I'd love to see you try to present evidence for this assertion. Traced back to 700 years before Christ? Darwinism? Righto.

Evolution is not a religion, no matter how much you want it to be.

 

[Cantuar]

Though secular in perspective (Darwinists claim the natural world is all there is)

No. They. Do. Not.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 07:46 PM Freedom777 said this in Post #1

Science, real science—the work that ferrets out empirical facts about the nature that surrounds us—has been co-opted by an ancient philosophical/religious doctrine the origins of which can be traced back to at least 400-700 years before Christ. Known today variously as scientism, evolutionism, metaphysical naturalism, and Darwinism, this doctrine has been so effectively interlaced with science that it is often difficult for the scientist, much less the layperson, to separate the two.

Though secular in perspective (Darwinists claim the natural world is all there is), Darwinism nevertheless functions much like a religion. Darwinists have their own creation story (macro-evolution), their own creed (the Humanist Manifesto), their own “messiah figures” (those who come claiming, “Come, follow us. We know the ways of life.”), their own clergy (those whose task it is to preach the “truth” as revealed by the high priests), and their own priesthood (those who pass down to the masses their latest ruminations in naturalistic thought).

Excerpt from © Gary L. Achtemeier, Ph.D.
[Last Modified: 10 March 2002]

AAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

I knew it was true...

 

[wblastyn]

Why do people allow this stuff to come out of their mouths.

 

[Doubting Thomas II]

Hold on to your hats, folks. Funny as the excerpt may be, it gets better! Gary L. Achtemeier, PhD., is a bona fide meteorologist. That's right! A real scientist! No wonder Freedom777 looks to him as an expert on evolutionary biology...he has letters behind his name!

It seems he is based in Athens, GA. Here are a couple of links unrelated to the question at hand:

www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-03/srs--***30502.php

www.srs.fs.usda.gov/disturbance/Nov2002PLR.pdf

Now, Freedom, tell me...is your excerpt, by any chance, from Achtemeier's address to the Christian Student Survival Conference, entitled "Evolution: Fact, Fallacy or Fantasy"? Though I haven't been able to link directly to the speech, it seems he was on the bill:

www.leaderu.com/cl-institute/cssc/survival02.html

Now that we've received the scientific lowdown from the meteorological community, do you have anything from a qualified biologist, or am I to assume that you are pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel? Do you guys even look into your sources before posting, or is it some kind of fundamentalist reflex action?

Pardon me while I step away from the computer to laugh myself into a coronary.

 

[euphoric]

Well, if he was a meteorologist, then he sure must be an expert.  Of course he's no former high school science teacher.

-brett

 

[Follower of Christ]

Whats REALLY funny is that if any REAL scientist tried to show any evidence that falsified evolution, he would be immediatley dismissed anyway.
AND probably would never be put in any real position again.

 

[Arikay]

Um, ok.

Well, in reality, if a Real Scientist showed Real evidence that falsified evolution im sure he may get some sort of Nobel Prize.
However, if a Real scientist showed False evidence Or Missunderstood the theory of evolution, and claimed it that the evidence or his missnderstandings falsified evolution, then, Yes, he might get laughed at.

Today at 09:31 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #10

Whats REALLY funny is that if any REAL scientist tried to show any evidence that falsified evolution, he would be immediatley dismissed anyway.
AND probably would never be put in any real position again.

 

[SplitRock]

Today at 11:31 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #10

Whats REALLY funny is that if any REAL scientist tried to show any evidence that falsified evolution, he would be immediatley dismissed anyway.
AND probably would never be put in any real position again.

Where is your evidence for such an accusation?  Can you give us some examples of scientists who were dismissed because they could show scientific evidence against evolution? 

Show us some evidence of the international conspiracy behind hiding the evidence against evolution.  Who is in charge?  Where is the headquarters of this organization?  Show us some letters or emails from this organization.  

If not, then do not use this as an argument.

 

[Cantuar]

Whats REALLY funny is that if any REAL scientist tried to show any evidence that falsified evolution, he would be immediatley dismissed anyway.
AND probably would never be put in any real position again.

A real scientist showing real evidence that falsified evolution would be in line for a Nobel PRize. That's what tends to happen to the people who cause genuine paradigm shifts. A scientist claiming to have falsified evolution on the basis that God did it because it says so in the Bible would be showing such ignorance for and disregard of science that he would deserve to lose his job as a scientist.

 

[Arikay]

You begin to wonder who the subject is really refering too.

 

[Doubting Thomas II]

If any scientist provided evidence that falsified evolution (after the work survived rigorous peer review and further confirmation from those learned in the field), he/she would shortly be having a very public get-together with the king of Sweden.

Don't ever underestimate the fierce competitiveness and desire for distinction within the scientific community. Legitimately overthrowing the central organizing theory of biology would virtually immortalize the person who accomplished it.

It's not that creationists are shy about trumpeting their "findings". It's that they understand that they aren't doing science; they're doing politics and religious propaganda. Thus, they smear their nonsense over the internet and in privately published books that are intended for the general public (who, we know, are overwhelmingly scientifically illiterate), rather than in actual scientific journals. To cover this embarrassing lapse of professional standards, they -- and their dupes -- scream censorship for all to hear. We (and they) understand, though, that it's really about standing and the quality of work done, about evidence and good science.

And, no, FoC...what's truly risible is the lengths you and guys like Freedom777 will go to camouflage the fact that you really don't understand biology and don't really care. Your thing is preaching and doing your best to ensure that your fellow-Christians don't understand evolution any better than you. After all, you both have amply demonstrated a refusal to learn, no matter how many times others have pointed it out to you, that evolution does not equal atheism. Undeterred, you have obstinately pressed on, a true soldier of God, unimpressed by reality if it conflicts with your reading of an ancient text. You've even had the gall to accuse fellow Christians, who happen to understand biology, of not really being Christians for no other reason than because they don't accept your (undoubtedly infallible) interpretation of the Bible.

For all your silly warnings to others about straying from the path of orthodoxy (at least as you see it), I'll issue one of my own. You'd better pray that if there is a just and wrathful god, it doesn't care more about the virtues usually associated with honest inquiry than it does about ancient blood sacrifices.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 12:51 AM SplitRock said this in Post #12



Where is your evidence for such an accusation?  Can you give us some examples of scientists who were dismissed because they could show scientific evidence against evolution? 

Show us some evidence of the international conspiracy behind hiding the evidence against evolution.  Who is in charge?  Where is the headquarters of this organization?  Show us some letters or emails from this organization.  

If not, then do not use this as an argument.

First of all, please do not tell me how to conduct myself unless you are a moderator and I am out of line.
Secondly, just because YOU dont like the possibility I present doesnt mean its invalid.
AND in the future I will expect that you will conduct yourself and YOUR presentations in the same maner that you would have me.
I have my eye on you.



''Buried Alive'' Jack Cuosso.

He is an orothodontist who is also a Forensic anthropologists.

Obviously his findings in the Neanderthal exhibit has little to do with evolution, BUT I found it amusing that there was an attempt to discredit him by one Colin Groves.


Now, lets see if I am correct and you dismiss him OR if you are as objective as you probably claim to be and ACTUALLY LOOK into it
I am betting on the former.

 

[Cantuar]

You mean this article?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/cuozzo_cg.html

I don't see an attempt to discredit him, just a disagreement with his conclusions. And a paragraph or two poking fun at his accusations of being followed and obstructed by the Great Atheist Conspiracy.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 01:02 AM Doubting Thomas II said this in Post #15

It's not that creationists are shy about trumpeting their "findings". It's that they understand that they aren't doing science; they're doing politics and religious propaganda. Thus, they smear their nonsense over the internet and in privately published books that are intended for the general public (who, we know, are overwhelmingly scientifically illiterate), rather than in actual scientific journals.

If a 6 day creationist EVER gets something against evolution published in a ''Scientific Journal'' of any kind it would probably cause me to have cardiac failure.

No wonder they turn to the Internet and private publishers.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

Today at 01:19 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #18




If a 6 day creationist EVER gets something against evolution published in a ''Scientific Journal'' of any kind it would probably cause me to have cardiac failure.

No wonder they turn to the Internet and private publishers.

Well, what do you expect from those who are intellectually dishonest and don't follow the scientific method in lieu of accepting unsubstantiated religious dogma? Of course they won't get published in scientific journals until they start doing science.

 

[seebs]

Creationists do just fine at getting science published, it's just when they have something that isn't science that they have a hard time. Of course, there aren't many examples...