Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That looks interesting, Richard, but I’m not sure what I’d think of debating this in a Yahoo group format. I’ve always thought Yahoo groups work best for discussions that revolve around the ability to upload files there, such as art communities. For debates, I really prefer being able to view multiple posts on a single page the way is possible at a forum, and how easy it is to quote other people’s posts at one.
You can. You don't even need a yahoo account to join. You can join from whatever account you want and you could decide to simply post from the website here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/
Also, when you reply a message, it becomes a thread. For example, check this out.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/15295
Go to the bottom of the page and you'll see who replied to the "thread".
Perhaps if less people left for that reason there would be more intelligent conversation
Do you have any suggestions about a creationism/evolution forum I could join that’s closer to the way this board was in 2004 and 2005?
I’ve been looking at http://www.evcforum.net/ a little, but I don’t know if there’s anything better than that out there.
Hey, one side are begging us to provide rational response to trolls, the other are trying to get us to ignore them! What are we to do!
4: Ive seen supporters of evolution claim here dozens of times that the theory of evolution has never been used as support for racism. This claim is simply false, as Ive already pointed out in this thread. Blayzs first reply shows the typical response that supporters of evolution here have to this idea.
I have seen that a lot in other places to. The mentality appears to be very seductive for those who are seeking approval from others. Its pretty sad imho.I've known Christians on here that were always kind and would not have been rude or mocking to others become so when they walked away from religion. They seemed to join the herd, so to speak.
1: Supporters of evolution are quick to point out that evidence against evolution should not be considered evidence for biblical creationism, because biblical creationism is not the only alternative to evolution. However, when creationists mention the fact that famous scientists of the past such as Isaac Newton were biblical creationists, supporters of evolution say that this is not significant because these people lived before Darwins time, and biblical creationism was the only thing anyone would believe in the absence of the theory of evolution. I dont think I need to point out the inconsistency between these two claims.
: Whenever supporters of evolution challenge creationists about not accepting the theory, they define evolution in the most basic terms that existchange in allele frequency as a result of mutations and natural selectionand ask creationists how they can reject something that can be observed happening in the present. This argument is used even against creationists who do accept evolution by this definition, but do not accept common ancestry. The fact that supporters of evolution also expect creationists to accept common ancestry is only mentioned as long as specific instances of it are being discussed (such as the relationship between humans and other primates), and then as soon as the discussion returns to more general terms, supporters of evolution continue to accuse creationists of rejecting evolution by its much more basic definition. Ive seen this strawman used against almost every creationist who currently posts here.
: Most atheists at this forum claim that there is no conflict between evolution and religion, because evolution is no reason not to believe in god. However, whenever the actual existence or non-existence of a god is discussed with any of these posters, the same people claim that since the theories of evolution and abiogenesis can explain lifes origin and development without involving a god, god becomes an unnecessary entity that is ruled out by Occams Razor. Richard Dawkins has explained this in the greatest detailfor a person who calls themselves a scientist to believe in god is similar to a scientist believing in homeopathy: you cannot trust someone to be capable of performing science in an unbiased manner when they simultaneously believe something so completely unsupported. The same people who claim this should not also be trying to win support for evolution with the argument that it does not conflict with religion.
: Ive seen supporters of evolution claim here dozens of times that the theory of evolution has never been used as support for racism. This claim is simply false, as Ive already pointed out in this thread. Blayzs first reply shows the typical response that supporters of evolution here have to this idea.
It used to be that people would occasionally come to this forum as creationists, and as a result of their participation here, would eventually end up accepting evolution. I remember this happening in the case of Dracil and MySavior.
If I had joined this forum in its current state when I was still a creationist, however, seeing the theory of evolution supported by arguments such as these would have convinced me that it relies on these sorts of fallacies for support.
Participating in this forum now when I was a creationist would have convinced me to remain a creationist for as long as I was posting here; I am completely certain of this.
As far as Im concerned, the only thing being accomplished here nowadays is making the theory of evolution look bad in front of people such as RichardT, who probably would have accepted it months ago if this forum were still the way it was when I joined it four years ago. I joined this forum in order to try and get creationists to accept evolution, and Im not sure its worthwhile for me to continue participating here now that were accomplishing the opposite. I dont really expect these problems to be fixed, but I think its still worth pointing them out so that if I do end up disappearing from this forum permanently, people here will understand the reason for it.
4[/B]: Ive seen supporters of evolution claim here dozens of times that the theory of evolution has never been used as support for racism. This claim is simply false, as Ive already pointed out in this thread. Blayzs first reply shows the typical response that supporters of evolution here have to this idea.
quote]
Point number four becomes irrelvant if we look at our faith's own past, the Klan uses a wrong intrepreation of the word of God to justify there own hate. Or one could look at the problems the Latter Day Saints have had based on Joseph Smith's writtings and people's skin colour.
What is the point of this?Some of you have probably noticed this already, but I thought I should point out that Ive pretty much stopped posting in this section of CF, for the reasons I described in this thread. However, I might continue to post in the Origins Theology section, since the problems I mentioned here dont seem to be as bad there.
I hope that by mentioning this, I wont cause a huge influx in people posting in that section wholl cause these same problems to start happening there. Im mostly just mentioning this as a suggestion for people like USincognito, who have stopped posting in the creation/evolution section for the same reasons that I have.
I might still lurk here occasionally, to see whether things here are improving yet. But until they do, if you want to contact me you should either do so privately or post in OT.
This is off topic here since pointing out the absurdity of some of your claims does not actually support evolution but those posts were completely legit. It is your extreme Biblical literalism that paints God as a bungler who was according to your previous statement "forced" to repent of his creation even though you said it was perfect and it is your claim that the great evil came from the mating of the "sons of God" with the daughters of men. I know you are still bent out of shape because you failed so miserably to answer the questions you asked for that you ended up asking the mods to close the thread but that doesn't mean that our characterization of your view of the Genesis myth was not valid.Hey --- you think that's bad --- check out Posts 327, 328, and 329 here. And if that's not good enough, I've just recently had my life threatened. I've even had to have admin clean up my guestbook.
Try walking in my shoes for awhile and put up with what I have to put up with.
4[/b]: I’ve seen supporters of evolution claim here dozens of times that the theory of evolution has never been used as support for racism. This claim is simply false, as I’ve already pointed out in this thread. Blayz’s first reply shows the typical response that supporters of evolution here have to this idea.
quote]
Point number four becomes irrelvant if we look at our faith's own past, the Klan uses a wrong intrepreation of the word of God to justify there own hate. Or one could look at the problems the Latter Day Saints have had based on Joseph Smith's writtings and people's skin colour.
It is true that the theory of evolution has been used to support racism but I have personally seen the Bible used for this purpose much more often especially during the civil rights debate of the 60's. The most racist people I have ever met were Southern Baptist creationists who were good at quoting the Bible to support their racist beliefs. The point that should be made is that the use that misquided people make of a scientific theory or a religion have no relationship to the validity of the theory or the religion. BTW you should look into the role that Southern Baptist churches played in the rise of the Klan sometime.
Don't know.
Aggie, as much as I like you, you need to grow a thicker skin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?