Creationist schools and universities

[AV1611VET]

modern day creationists are wilfully ignorant.

Wez awl kaint bee is smot is th avridge bair, kin wee?

They chose to not be literate in the sciences.

Maybe we weren't called to be literate in the sciences.

Maybe we like music, or bowling, or fishing, or driving taxis, or cooking for a living.

Have you ever read Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12?

The skewed and bizarre universe is one that creationists live in as it’s as incoherent as a Dali painting.

[sarcasm] Let's all run down and sign up for a science degree, just to make those in their ivory towers happy. Then, when everyone gets victimized by the Law of Supply and Demand, academia can triple their tuition, like the parliament did in England. Then, when those who aren't predisposed to science start failing their classes, they can leave school in debt for something they should never have ventured into in the first place. [/sarcasm]

Stop trying to upsell us your demon-signed college degrees.

 

[Brightmoon]

Wez awl kaint bee is smot is th avridge bair.
Maybe we weren't called to be literate in the sciences.

Maybe we like music, or bowling, or fishing, or driving taxis for a living.

Have you ever read Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12?

[sarcasm] Let's all run down and sign up for a science degree, just to make those in their ivory towers happy. Then, when everyone gets victimized by the Law of Supply and Demand, academia can triple their tuition, like the parliament did in England. Then, when those who aren't predisposed to science start failing their classes, they can leave school in debt for something they should never have ventured into in the first place. [/sarcasm]

l love music , I’m also a dancer and an artist ! I just happen to be scientifically literate enough to actually have a degree in biology . I love the arts and the sciences . I just have a low tolerance for (nonsense). CF won’t let me use the more accurately descriptive word. I’ll take you literally- ivory is a great building material . People in Siberia used mammoth tusks to build huts as there are very few tall trees . So I’ll keep my ivory tower,thank you very much!

 

[AV1611VET]

So I’ll keep my ivory tower,thank you very much!

Well, when you're looking down on us ignits, just remember Who is looking down on you.

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

l love music , I’m also a dancer and an artist ! I just happen to be scientifically literate enough to actually have a degree in biology . I love the arts and the sciences . I just have a low tolerance for (nonsense). CF won’t let me use the more accurately descriptive word. I’ll take you literally- ivory is a great building material . People in Siberia used mammoth tusks to build huts as there are very few tall trees . So I’ll keep my ivory tower,thank you very much!

You don't get it. Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept. When you say creationism is nonsense, you also say your art and dancing is nonsense. You don't understand creationism deals with the fundamentals. You are throwing the fundamentals out. Throwing out the constitution of your mind, the constitution of common discourse. It can only turn out bad.

 

[Speedwell]

You don't get it. Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept. When you say creationism is nonsense, you also say your art and dancing is nonsense. You don't understand creationism deals with the fundamentals. You are throwing the fundamentals out. Throwing out the constitution of your mind, the constitution of common discourse. It can only turn out bad.

I think I'm finally beginning to get it. Your idea of "creationism" has nothing to do with the "creationism" of right-wing fundamentalist Evangelical Protestants here in the US. They are ardent Determinists and hate subjectivity. Those are the only creationists we are familiar with, the kind we are used to argue against. Pardon the confusion.

 

[AV1611VET]

You don't get it. Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept. When you say creationism is nonsense, you also say your art and dancing is nonsense. You don't understand creationism deals with the fundamentals. You are throwing the fundamentals out. Throwing out the constitution of your mind, the constitution of common discourse. It can only turn out bad.

I'm amazed at how people fail to think things through and take them to their [theo]logical conclusions.

If they did that, three-fourths of their questions would be answered before they asked them.

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

I think I'm finally beginning to get it. Your idea of "creationism" has nothing to do with the "creationism" of right-wing fundamentalist Evangelical Protestants here in the US. They are ardent Determinists and hate subjectivity. Those are the only creationists we are familiar with, the kind we are used to argue against. Pardon the confusion.

It is the same creationism, but who, created, what, when are variables in creation theory. The actual mechanism of creation is choosing. The creationist conceptual scheme is explained in the OP.

 

[Speedwell]

It is the same creationism, but who, created, what, when are variables in creation theory. The actual mechanism of creation is choosing. The creationist conceptual scheme is explained in the OP.

LOL! Variables? There are no variables in a creation account that is 100% accurate literal history.

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

I'm amazed at how people fail to think things through and take them to their [theo]logical conclusions.

If they did that, three-fourths of their questions would be answered before they asked them.

It's because people are in fight mode.

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

LOL! Variables? There are no variables in a creation account that is 100% accurate literal history.

That's how it works with any theory. Paley also applied creationism to a watchmaker making a watch first, and then to organisms. Watch, organisms, different variables.

 

[Speedwell]

That's how it works with any theory. Paley also applied creationism to a watchmaker making a watch first, and then to organisms. Watch, organisms, different variables.

I don't believe Paley applied creationism to a watch. Paley's example of a watch was about detecting intelligent design. I'm not even sure that Paley was a creationist; his views on the literal inerrancy of Genesis are unknown to me.

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

I don't believe Paley applied creationism to a watch. Paley's example of a watch was about detecting intelligent design. I'm not even sure that Paley was a creationist; his views on the literal inerrancy of Genesis are unknown to me.

Saying you don't know if Paley was a creationist, the most wel known creationist, means you don't want to debate anything. Why don't you listen and study the OP. Creationism is without a doubt the greatest most practically useful conceptual scheme. With creationism you have your subjective opinions on the one side, your facts on the other side. Each validated in their own right. It's great. It's the top level intellectual understanding. Viewing your opinions and facts from on high, with the fundamental understanding of what opinions and facts are.

 

[Speedwell]

Saying you don't know if Paley was a creationist, the most wel known creationist, means you don't want to debate anything. Why don't you listen and study the OP. Creationism is without a doubt the greatest most practically useful conceptual scheme. With creationism you have your subjective opinions on the one side, your facts on the other side. Each validated in their own right. It's great. It's the top level intellectual understanding. Viewing your opinions and facts from on high, with the fundamental understanding of what opinions and facts are.

How so? I don't know if Paley was a creationist. Do you? Do you know that he believed that the creation stories of Genesis are 100% accurate literal history? He may well have; I just don't know.

That said, in my opinion Henry Morris is probably the best known creationist. He all but founded the movement.

If you want to debate the issue that belief in the literal inerrancy of Genesis is "without a doubt the greatest most practically useful conceptual scheme" then go ahead and lay out your arguments.

 

[Brightmoon]

You don't get it. Subjectivity is an inherently creationist concept. When you say creationism is nonsense, you also say your art and dancing is nonsense. You don't understand creationism deals with the fundamentals. You are throwing the fundamentals out. Throwing out the constitution of your mind, the constitution of common discourse. It can only turn out bad.

what are these fundamentals you keep prating on about? The ideas of Creationism are simply discarded science. We used to accept it and now we don’t because we have better data about various aspects of natural phenomena .

 

[AV1611VET]

The ideas of Creationism are simply discarded science.

What is it you discarded? an ion trail, plasma cloud, time crystals, microwave background, what?

Oh ... you said "science."

You don't need to discard it.

Just set it down and tell it to take a hike.

 

[Brightmoon]

What is it you discarded? an ion trail, plasma cloud, time crystals, microwave background, what?

Oh ... you said "science."

You don't need to discard it.

Just set it down and tell it to take a hike.

young earth , separate creation, oh you know the pseudoscience nonsense that fundies think is real. Remember that creationists positing separate creation once rejected atomic theory because the substance of a plant cannot be of the same substance of a man . Well that was their idiotic reason anyway . Creationists have now accepted microevolution because too many people know the truth about it. And they’ve actually accepted macroevolution but they call it some nonsense like “kinds”

 

[AV1611VET]

young earth , separate creation, oh you know the pseudoscience nonsense that fundies think is real

Can you believe they thought Pluto was our ninth planet at one time!?

I'm ashamed to admit it, but even I thought that too.

 

[Brightmoon]

Can you believe they thought Pluto was our ninth planet at one time!?

I'm ashamed to admit it, but even I thought that too.

. They redefined a definition that was originally very loose . The moon and large asteroids like Ceres were also once considered to be planets . The scientific community realized that they needed a better definition of planet . They just tightened up the definition to include only bodies that could clear their lanes gravitationally and neither the moon Ceres nor Pluto met the new criteria

 

[Nando Ronteltap]

what are these fundamentals you keep prating on about? The ideas of Creationism are simply discarded science. We used to accept it and now we don’t because we have better data about various aspects of natural phenomena .

It's in the OP, read the OP. There is no doubt about it if someone learns the creationist conceptual scheme, they will be twice better at science. Because you have the top level view of what a fact is. And you have the precise distinction between fact and opinion. So that provides you with more inspiration, when you can cultivate a feeling for a subject. Get to a level of confidence in the facts that is not too high and not too low.

You don't get into a mess confusing fact with opinion, like in social darwinism. The internet is full of supposed science fans, who regard emotions as factual. That's a total disaster. These people don't know how to distinguish facts from opinions. That's going to be terrible for science.

 

[Speedwell]

It's in the OP, read the OP. There is no doubt about it if someone learns the creationist conceptual scheme, they will be twice better at science.

That may be true in The Netherlands (though I hope not) but it certainly is not true here. Creationists here do very little science, and such that they do is bad. Mostly they just deny science outright because it conflicts with a literal Genesis.