Fairytale?

[tanzanos]

Every single member of the KKK is a creationist!

 

[FishFace]

No professional Creationist is a racist. Anyone who studied the bible will know that all of humanity is "of one blood". Also, your youtube video was absolutely irrelevant.

No true... I mean, No professional scotsman fallacy.

 

[RichardT]

No true... I mean, No professional scotsman fallacy.

Maybe I should say "no professional Creationist that I know".

 

[FishFace]

Maybe I should say "no professional Creationist that I know".

And by gum, you've rubbed shoulders with a few?

 

[MarcusHill]

Maybe it would be better to say that most racists are also creationists.

Not really. There are so many racists and so few creationists worldwide that even if every creationist were a racist (which isn't true), you still couldn't say most racists are creationists.

 

[MattTheAgnostic]

Not really. There are so many racists and so few creationists worldwide that even if every creationist were a racist (which isn't true), you still couldn't say most racists are creationists.

Everyone is racist, but to differing degrees (don't tell me you havn't seen a little old asian woman driving and thought "Oh God no!"). Most people realise that it's unacceptable and that's the important thing.

 

[Blayz]

Why is everyone ignoring the elephant in the room? or maybe it got discussed when I wasn't looking.

"professional creationist"

[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]???

What does a professional creationist do, exactly, apart from "teach"? And what does it pay? I am a professional evolutionist and get a 6 figure salary and a company car...is it better than that?

 

[Aron-Ra]

Why is everyone ignoring the elephant in the room? or maybe it got discussed when I wasn't looking.

"professional creationist"

[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]???

What does a professional creationist do, exactly, apart from "teach"? And what does it pay? I am a professional evolutionist and get a 6 figure salary and a company car...is it better than that?

Oh yes, definitely. Professional creationists run the gammit of incomes, but successful ones can become millionaires easily just by offering to pray for the poor fools who send in donations. Many scams are available for market, and you can make your own books and videos to sell with no authority or research of your own required. You can buy a degree for a $100.00 or you can just make up your own credentials. You can sell your own miracle cure snake-oil on the side if you like. No matter how incredulous you are, you'll still always find powerful polititians and gullible young women who'll treat you like a competant authority and a moral spiritual and civic leader sometimes even after you've been busted for and improper handling or aquisition of funds, or various crimes against your own assumed morality.

 

[Schroeder]

Well, we are definitely apes. That's objectively verifiable. The SUB-jective part is trying to decide whether we're different kinds of apes or not. Why should any of that cause us to doubt whether we're related to other apes?

no not definitely. SO the guestion is are we related to any of the apes now exsisting. amazing how we can adjust.

Wrong. Everyone is an ape. Care to challenge me on that?

NO. your mind is set. And your way of doing it really doesnt prove it either. similarities dont convince me.

I remember that I showed an illustration to you to prove how closely related carnivores are, and to show that there was more variety within the canine species than there is between the canid species.

you showed skulls and it was hard to tell that one of them was a dog skull. i think the only way we did know or could know was that it was a species around now and we have seen it alive, so we knew it was before we saw the skull. I just pointed out how different a skull could look in the same species and or how close one could outside a species. SO if we dont see it alive or around it COULD be hard to say we are right in saying what it is or was.

Yes, I remember learning about that in my anthropology class. The only explanation I can give you for that is that those were Imperial Englishmen from the 1800s. A couple centuries earlier, when they were all creationists, they said that native Americans were sub-human animals too. The British empire was at one time the most arrogant and disrespectful ethnocentric conglomeration of elitists there ever was. Fortunately they're past that stage now, and America stepped in to fill they left open.

I love the ALL creationist which has no baring today. Love how you are throw in those little words and phrases to make a certain BAD light to a peticuliar group or person. Makes me think you need help besides your evidence. Your insecure with the findings. JUST because one claims to be one thing or another doesnt make them that. IT is there ACTIONS that tell us what they are. BUT to think like that you have to be a bit more OPEN minded towards groups you may dislike.

 

[Schroeder]

Oh yes, definitely. Professional creationists run the gammit of incomes, but successful ones can become millionaires easily just by offering to pray for the poor fools who send in donations. Many scams are available for market, and you can make your own books and videos to sell with no authority or research of your own required. You can buy a degree for a $100.00 or you can just make up your own credentials. You can sell your own miracle cure snake-oil on the side if you like. No matter how incredulous you are, you'll still always find powerful polititians and gullible young women who'll treat you like a competant authority and a moral spiritual and civic leader sometimes even after you've been busted for and improper handling or aquisition of funds, or various crimes against your own assumed morality.

What is the point of this when it is OBVIOUSE ALL groups are like this all people are like this. Creationist dont hold the patent for it.

 

[FishFace]

no not definitely.

Yes, we are definitely apes, by definition. Apes are members of the family Hominidae, and that we are.

SO the guestion is are we related to any of the apes now exsisting. amazing how we can adjust.

Watch this short video. Now explain the patterns Ken Miller explains, with regard to what he says at the end about a deceptive God.

you showed skulls and it was hard to tell that one of them was a dog skull.

But if you take a whole skeleton, it's a bit more obvious, hmm? And if we look at genetic evidence, as in the video, the point becomes clear as day.

 

[Aron-Ra]

We are definitely apes. That's objectively verifiable. The SUB-jective part is trying to decide whether we're different kinds of apes or not. Why should any of that cause us to doubt whether we're related to other apes?

no not definitely.

Not only definitely, but definitively, yes, you are an ape.

SO the guestion is are we related to any of the apes now exsisting. amazing how we can adjust.

All the evidence indicates that we are, and nothing but nothing implies otherwise.

Everyone is an ape. Care to challenge me on that?

NO. your mind is set. And your way of doing it really doesnt prove it either. similarities dont convince me.

You should know that I'm not talking about "similarities". I can do much better than that! My mind may be "made up", but that doesn't matter, and my mind can change if given a reason anyway. Because my mind isn't closed. I can still be reasoned with. What about you?

you showed skulls and it was hard to tell that one of them was a dog skull. i think the only way we did know or could know was that it was a species around now and we have seen it alive, so we knew it was before we saw the skull.

Nope, there were fossil skulls in there too. I remember including an amphicyonid specifically to further illustrate the point.

I just pointed out how different a skull could look in the same species and or how close one could outside a species. SO if we dont see it alive or around it COULD be hard to say we are right in saying what it is or was.

I told you there was often more variation within a single species than between closely-related species. But that was also meant to illustrate how we could determine whether different species were closely-related or not. The most dramatically-different ones in that set were posatively confirmed to be the same species!

Yes, I remember learning about that in my anthropology class. The only explanation I can give you for that is that those were Imperial Englishmen from the 1800s. A couple centuries earlier, when they were all creationists, they said that native Americans were sub-human animals too. The British empire was at one time the most arrogant and disrespectful ethnocentric conglomeration of elitists there ever was. Fortunately they're past that stage now, and America stepped in to fill they left open.

I love the ALL creationist which has no baring today. Love how you are throw in those little words and phrases to make a certain BAD light to a peticuliar group or person.

What are you talking about?

Makes me think you need help besides your evidence.

I don't. My evidence alone is way more than enough. I have a lot more evidence than you have faith, and I think you already know that.

Your insecure with the findings.

I'm way more confident in my own position than you ever were in yours. Which is really sad because your position matters so much to you, and I would drop mine in a moment if the evidence didn't support it as the only possible option.

JUST because one claims to be one thing or another doesnt make them that. IT is there ACTIONS that tell us what they are.

Wrong. When you categorize anything, (doesn't matter what it is) you have to group items by the total collective tally of traits held in common by every member of that set without making exceptions for certain ones. You can say you are whatever you want. But do you meet the criteria? That is the question.

BUT to think like that you have to be a bit more OPEN minded towards groups you may dislike.

Don't misunderstand me. I don't dislike creationists because they believe differently. I dislike creationism because it is entirely dishonest and has no positive attributes whatsoever.

 

[Loudmouth]

NO. your mind is set. And your way of doing it really doesnt prove it either. similarities dont convince me.

Then a tiger is not a cat because it is different than any other cat, no matter how many similarities they share.

You ignore the fact that species are organized by the characteristics they share. If this were not the case then there would not be one taxonomic group other than species. If you want to convince me and Aron-Ra that humans are not apes then list for us the features that gorillas, chimps, bonoboes, and orangutans share that are not found in humans. It's that simple.

you showed skulls and it was hard to tell that one of them was a dog skull. i think the only way we did know or could know was that it was a species around now and we have seen it alive, so we knew it was before we saw the skull. I just pointed out how different a skull could look in the same species and or how close one could outside a species. SO if we dont see it alive or around it COULD be hard to say we are right in saying what it is or was.

Without DNA, you are correct. It is difficult. However, we now have neanderthal DNA and it thus far demonstrates that anatomically modern H. sapiens and neanderthal contemporaries were separate species.

 

[Aron-Ra]

If you want to convince me and Aron-Ra that humans are not apes then list for us the features that gorillas, chimps, bonoboes, and orangutans share that are not found in humans. It's that simple.

You can't limit it to just them. You have to include fossil apes too, like Sahelanthropus, Paranthropus, Gigantopithecus, Oreopithecus, Australopithecus, Ardipithecus, Kenyanthropus, Sivapithecus, Lufengpithecus, Dryopithecus, and so on.

But even that's only if you're limiting this discussion to the "great" apes. Remember, we're only talking about apes in general, a much larger category. So we should also include gibbons and siamangs as well as proconsul, which was apparently the root of all apes. Remember there were once about fifty different species living all at the same time, and a heckuva long time before the first appearance of any of the species that are around today.

Sure, there are differences between different groups of apes, just like there are differences between people or cultures. If we concentrate on differences, we can isolate any one man apart from all other men. Focusing only on differences leads to prejudice. So we observe similarities instead, with quite the opposite result.

 

[tanzanos]

Don't forget that chimps are so close to us that we can inter transfuse our blood. Now how much closer can we get from being 'blood relatives'lol

 

[Schroeder]

Not only definitely, but definitively, yes, you are an ape.
All the evidence indicates that we are, and nothing but nothing implies otherwise.
You should know that I'm not talking about "similarities". I can do much better than that! My mind may be "made up", but that doesn't matter, and my mind can change if given a reason anyway. Because my mind isn't closed. I can still be reasoned with. What about you?
Nope, there were fossil skulls in there too. I remember including an amphicyonid specifically to further illustrate the point.
I told you there was often more variation within a single species than between closely-related species. But that was also meant to illustrate how we could determine whether different species were closely-related or not. The most dramatically-different ones in that set were posatively confirmed to be the same species!
What are you talking about?
I don't. My evidence alone is way more than enough. I have a lot more evidence than you have faith, and I think you already know that.
I'm way more confident in my own position than you ever were in yours. Which is really sad because your position matters so much to you, and I would drop mine in a moment if the evidence didn't support it as the only possible option.
Wrong. When you categorize anything, (doesn't matter what it is) you have to group items by the total collective tally of traits held in common by every member of that set without making exceptions for certain ones. You can say you are whatever you want. But do you meet the criteria? That is the question.
Don't misunderstand me. I don't dislike creationists because they believe differently. I dislike creationism because it is entirely dishonest and has no positive attributes whatsoever.

Aron i injoy at times your post but i do not have time to go into details and as you know i am not all that informed on this so i will let it go. And you saying you do not dislike creationist is funny it is certain you dont like them. everything in you post says you dont. For you to say they are entirely dishonest just shows your dishonest, because you cannot prove it and i am sure they all arent. They are only dishonest to you becasue there findings dont match yours. I really dont care one way or the other the theory is not needed in science for science to work. But some of your post is why i dont go here much anymore. You saying what you believe is more this or that bla bla bla. One last JAB. i would think yours is more to you since it has cost you a few marriages. But i am just guessing this. What has your BELIEF given you in life. mine peace of mind and freedom from bad past problems. yours WHAT? Even if mine is wrong and made up, it worked. THOUGH i am 100% sure its not made up.

 

[Aron-Ra]

Aron i injoy at times your post but i do not have time to go into details and as you know i am not all that informed on this so i will let it go.

Why? Why run from what you already suspect? Why not take on my challenge and know for sure? Which is more important; believing something you already suspect may not be true? Or finding out for certain what really is true? I would rather find out I've been wrong all my life, than to go on believing a beloved lie.

And you saying you do not dislike creationist is funny it is certain you dont like them. everything in you post says you dont. For you to say they are entirely dishonest just shows your dishonest, because you cannot prove it and i am sure they all arent.

I said creationism is entirely dishonest, because it is, and I can prove that easily! But you already know that, don't you?

They are only dishonest to you becasue there findings dont match yours.

Prove it. I'm betting you can't list any such "findings" because that was just an excuse you made up on the spot.

I really dont care one way or the other the theory is not needed in science for science to work.

Yes of course theory is critically necessary for science to work. How is it that you still don't know what I theory is after all the many times I myself have explained it to you?

But some of your post is why i dont go here much anymore. You saying what you believe is more this or that bla bla bla. One last JAB. i would think yours is more to you since it has cost you a few marriages. But i am just guessing this.

You creationists; always absolutely wrong about absolutely everything 100% of the time. One would think you'd learn to stop jumping to conclusions the way you do.

I was married only once, more than a decade ago. She was raised Catholic, an evolutionist all her life. She was already a pantheist when we got together, and it was she who first taught me about Gilgamesh and Zoroaster and other such things, and awakened my mind to intellectual pursuits. She has a MENSA level intellect, one of the most brilliant women I've ever known. Her and I are still very good friends, and our stance on creationism, the religious right, and their intent on subverting science and other such things is now and has always been identical. But it takes more than that to make a marriage work. Generally, when a 30 year-old biker tattooist marries a 19 year-old TV actress and lingerie model, its a pretty fair bet that its not going to last forever -especially when you move someone so uncommonly gorgeous out to the big city.

What has your BELIEF given you in life. mine peace of mind and freedom from bad past problems. yours WHAT?

I have that too, and I didn't have to imagine any invisible friends or magical anythings to get it. We all decide for ourselves whether we can cope on our own or whether we need a crutch. I don't. You shouldn't either.

Even if mine is wrong and made up, it worked. THOUGH i am 100% sure its not made up.

I don't think you are that sure. You've always shown a pronounced lack of confidence in your own position. That's why you're running away now. You wanna keep on believing things that you already know can't bare scrutiny. So at some level, you already know you're living a lie. My belief doesn't let me fear any truth, because my belief the pursuit of truth, and not any mere assumption that I just have to believe. My belief neither requires nor desires faith, and can withstand any test without it. In fact it dares me to try to believe in anything else. I can't because my belief isn't some inconsistent fable made up by ignorant savages. My belief is demonstrable at all levels. Its real, and has practical application in the real world. Your belief is nothing but a psychological placebo -by your own admission!

 

[Schroeder]

Why? Why run from what you already suspect? Why not take on my challenge and know for sure? Which is more important; believing something you already suspect may not be true? Or finding out for certain what really is true? I would rather find out I've been wrong all my life, than to go on believing a beloved lie.
I said creationism is entirely dishonest, because it is, and I can prove that easily! But you already know that, don't you?
Prove it. I'm betting you can't list any such "findings" because that was just an excuse you made up on the spot.

I dont suspect it not true i know it is true. Well creationISM, in that case its not so bad, though still not intirely true.

Yes of course theory is critically necessary for science to work. How is it that you still don't know what I theory is after all the many times I myself have explained it to you?

I know what theory is, its used to guess at something were not sure of in hopes it might clear it up. in a rough since. the theory of evolution may be usefull in thinking but it is not needed. if we threw it out today it wouldnt make science harder or worse off.

You creationists; always absolutely wrong about absolutely everything 100% of the time. One would think you'd learn to stop jumping to conclusions the way you do.

I thought is was creationISM, now its creationist.

I was married only once, more than a decade ago. She was raised Catholic, an evolutionist all her life. She was already a pantheist when we got together, and it was she who first taught me about Gilgamesh and Zoroaster and other such things, and awakened my mind to intellectual pursuits. She has a MENSA level intellect, one of the most brilliant women I've ever known. Her and I are still very good friends, and our stance on creationism, the religious right, and their intent on subverting science and other such things is now and has always been identical. But it takes more than that to make a marriage work. Generally, when a 30 year-old biker tattooist marries a 19 year-old TV actress and lingerie model, its a pretty fair bet that its not going to last forever -especially when you move someone so uncommonly gorgeous out to the big city.

well thats to bad. In your other post way back when i could havce sworn you said you were in anbother marriage with more kids ect. Intelligence doesnt make you always right. I hardly think it subverts science seeing how science has worked fine all this time with christians in it. your the one that keeps saying they came up with your theory.

I have that too, and I didn't have to imagine any invisible friends or magical anythings to get it. We all decide for ourselves whether we can cope on our own or whether we need a crutch. I don't. You shouldn't either.

I didnt imagine it either i experinced it. again if all we do is eat and die later. who cares how you do it as long as it works. (thinking in your ideas).And my faith is hardly a crutch. would your belief help a druggy get clean, if so great, my faith does it to, so great what the big deal.

I don't think you are that sure. You've always shown a pronounced lack of confidence in your own position. That's why you're running away now. You wanna keep on believing things that you already know can't bare scrutiny. So at some level, you already know you're living a lie. My belief doesn't let me fear any truth, because my belief the pursuit of truth, and not any mere assumption that I just have to believe. My belief neither requires nor desires faith, and can withstand any test without it. In fact it dares me to try to believe in anything else. I can't because my belief isn't some inconsistent fable made up by ignorant savages. My belief is demonstrable at all levels. Its real, and has practical application in the real world. Your belief is nothing but a psychological placebo -by your own admission!

doesnt really matter what you think its what i think. my position is based on a lack of knowledge about the theory and everything in it. It hard not to show a lack of confidence in that situation. The point is everyhting i have read of yours hasnt convinced me to change my belief. NOT because i need the Cructh but because i dont see the evidence. AND all you will say is it becasue i cant because i need the crutch. AGAIN my point is your theory wether true or not doesnt mean anything in life at all. It doesnt help me nor hurt me, which is why i dont feel the need to dig into it for years and get it all understood or learned. IF we are here to survive, who cares HOW we manage to do it. long as were happy. I just know its not like this. I have a purpose, i not just a speck of nothing in time. I suppose we will just see in the end. enjoy your life. i enjoy mine

 

[Edx]

You creationists; always absolutely wrong about absolutely everything 100% of the time. One would think you'd learn to stop jumping to conclusions the way you do.

I thought is was creationISM, now its creationist.ne

Huh? What do you expect him to say? "You Creationisms; always absolutely wrong..."

?

 

[Aron-Ra]

I dont suspect it not true i know it is true.

No you don't. Every religion claims to "know" that theirs is the right religion and that theirs is the one true god. But the fact is none of you really knows what you pretend to.

You see, the difference between knowledge and mere belief is that knowledge can be tested by others. If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Well creationISM, in that case its not so bad, though still not intirely true.

Then show me one exception. I've challenged dozens of people to do that, but so far, no one has even tried.

I know what theory is, its used to guess at something were not sure of in hopes it might clear it up. in a rough since.

See? I told you you didn't know what a theory is. A theory is a field of study, a study of a given set of facts and laws, and it includes the hypotheses which explain them. I and others have detailed all of this for you many times before. But you always ignore the truth and twist it into some nonsense that you think you need to believe.

the theory of evolution may be usefull in thinking but it is not needed. if we threw it out today it wouldnt make science harder or worse off.

Yes of course it would. All avenues of agriculture would be severely effected, and medical science would be destroyed.

I thought is was creationISM, now its creationist.

Seriously, learn to read for comprehension. Then maybe I won't have to re-explain what a theory is again and again and again.

well thats to bad. In your other post way back when i could havce sworn you said you were in anbother marriage with more kids ect.

I've only ever had two children, from two different mothers, one of whom I married. Both of my kids live with me.

Intelligence doesnt make you always right.

But it improves your odds, doesn't it? What does stupidity do for you?

I hardly think it subverts science seeing how science has worked fine all this time with christians in it. your the one that keeps saying they came up with your theory.

Christians yes, but not creationists. You keep forgetting that most Christians are evolutionists, and most evolutionists are Christian. Most of the pioneers of evolutionary science were initially Christian and many proponants of modern evolutionary theory are still Christians today. But none of these people are creationists. Creationists can be defined as the fraction of religious believers who reject science; not just the conclusions of science, but its methods as well. Subversion of science is literally what creationism is all about.

I didnt imagine it either i experinced it.

Is that the same way that all those Catholics in Latin America "experienced" their visitation by the holy madonna? How is it that Hindus claim to have experienced lord, Krishna? How is it they think they know him personally? What about all these other religious "experiences" among native American shaman, european witches, or polytheists of the Orient? Are they all "experiencing" their unique gods and spirits? Or are they only imagining these things just like you are?

again if all we do is eat and die later. who cares how you do it as long as it works. (thinking in your ideas).

You have no idea what my ideas are. But I can tell you that my "ideas" have been proven to work -and yours have been proven not to.

And my faith is hardly a crutch.

That is exactly what it is.

would your belief help a druggy get clean, if so great, my faith does it to, so great what the big deal.

Your belief does not help get "druggies" clean. Beleif in God might do that, (though I personally don't understand how) but any benefit anyone gains from religion comes from believing in gods or moral mandates from some other force, and not from denying science to blindly worship dogma instead.

In other words, evolution is not the same thing as atheism, and creationism is damned sure not the same thing as Christianity.

And my position isn't even a belief. Yours is definitely. But mine is not. My position is more of a philosophy concerned with how one might pursue truth. You'd rather not do that, and simply pretend like you already know what the truth is -despite the fact that you're proven wrong on every point every time.

You see, the real difference is this; some of us have a desperate need-to-believe, and some of us have instead only a desire to understand Theistic evolutionists have both. But they separate their untestable spiritual assumptions from their analysis of the facts and hypotheses of the natural world -because it is impossible to either support or disprove the supernatural, and such things can only be assumed on faith in lieu of evidence anyway. Yet they still believe that God is in control of all the seemingly random events of our lives, and they see evolution in the same light; that it, like every other system in nature, is part of God's design.

Rationalists like myself aren't like theistic evolutionist Christians, because we lack any "need" to "believe". Creationists aren't like the majority of Christians either, because they lack any desire to understand.

doesnt really matter what you think its what i think. my position is based on a lack of knowledge about the theory and everything in it. It hard not to show a lack of confidence in that situation.

And my position is based on considerable knowledge both of science and of religion, and particularly the Bible, and everything in it. Its hard to conceal confidence in that position.

The point is everyhting i have read of yours hasnt convinced me to change my belief. NOT because i need the Cructh but because i dont see the evidence. AND all you will say is it becasue i cant because i need the crutch.

That's true. It is because your version of religion is a crutch. More than that, religion stops a thinking mind. It wouldn't matter how much evidence you ever saw, or what quality of evidence that was. You wouldn't change your mind because faith forbids you to question your a-priori assumptions. But to prove the point, what evidence would you need to see? And why?

AGAIN my point is your theory wether true or not doesnt mean anything in life at all. It doesnt help me nor hurt me, which is why i dont feel the need to dig into it for years and get it all understood or learned.

It DOES help to understand evolution and it WILL hinder you not to -at least if it were that the rest of the world felt as you do.

IF we are here to survive, who cares HOW we manage to do it. long as were happy. I just know its not like this. I have a purpose, i not just a speck of nothing in time. I suppose we will just see in the end.

Once again, you're confusing your belief in God with the idolatry of worshipping the Bible as though that were God. Stranger still is that if your god really existed as fundamentalists depict it, then life truly would be pointless. But whether your god exists or not, you're still just a speck of nothing in time. But since your god evidently does not exist, then no, we won't see "in the end". We will see, or hear, feel, think, remember, dream, ...be ....nothing -ever again.