Heh, I'm pretty sure only one of us does. I'm not psychic, it's just that we've already gotten the answer from three different people. Yet you are still convinced that they're going to change their answers! Poor Just.
Upvote
0
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.
Oh...wait....we haven't heard the last from this. Be patient because we both know what's coming.
I'm so glad not to be him right now. From the very beginning of this thread he has been proven wrong and it's only gotten worse for him with more voters. And now that people are explicitly stating that the definition of Darwinism he posted aligns with their Christian school lessons, he is in even worse shape! He understands that this refutes his notion that evolution is inherently atheistic, so he just keeps asking them the same question over and over in the desperate hope that they'll change their answer.
I'm so glad not to be him right now. From the very beginning of this thread he has been proven wrong and it's only gotten worse for him with more voters. And now that people are explicitly stating that the definition of Darwinism he posted aligns with their Christian school lessons, he is in even worse shape! He understands that this refutes his notion that evolution is inherently atheistic, so he just keeps asking them the same question over and over in the desperate hope that they'll change their answer.
Denial is the wonder drug for some.
LOL. Your evasion and leading and misleading questions is a great example of why the challenge to atheistic creationism being taught in our schools will prevail. There's not going to be such evasion in the courts.
Please provide the posts in which I am evasive. I suspect you will decline this challenge.
As I suspected (two other Christian-educated people have given the same answer). Would you agree that this disproves Just's desperately-maintained belief that the definition I posted is inherently atheistic?
Thanks.
Are you saying that this was, or was not, taught.....
"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. "
There were no conclusions in your class that naturalistic mechanisms were the impetuses behind the creation of all of life we observe today? And that they were not totally sufficient in and of themselves as the driving force behind Darwinist evolution? (Not abiogenesis).
What other impetuses were provided other than entirely naturalistic impetuses, if any?
You begin the thread with evasive leading and misleading questions, evading the issue. The question isn't about God being mentioned, or not mentioned, in the classes, those are your evasive questions. The question is, and always has been, about teaching exclusively the sufficiency of only, totally, completely, solely naturalistic mechanisms to produce all of life we observe today from a single life forms of long long ago.
Well, it's still small sample, but the statistics are in your favor so far.
Your question is about whether or not it was entirely naturalistic forces, not whether or not is is a natural process. We were taught that evolution is a natural process yes, much like how gravity or the nervous system is a natural process. I'm tired of this KGB interrogation and am going to watch Sunday afternoon baseball.
I think you'll find that I formulated this poll before you started saying that sciences classes were teaching atheistic creationism implicitly. Thus the questions do not reflect this. In any case, followup questioning in the thread has refuted your contention of an implicit atheist metaphysic.
Science classes are teaching atheistic creationism, implicitly.
It seems that when questioned beyond your leading and misleading questions, that the issue of all life being only, totally, completely, totally, solely the result of naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago isn't a view that one can reconcile with....
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Those folks always seem to disappear when specifics about what they were taught is discussed.
Next!!
Or maybe they just get tired of answering the same question over and over after they state that the wiki definition aligns with what they were taught. Three different people have already explicitly answered yes when asked if that definition is what they were taught in Christian schools, so I'm no exactly worried here. But your misplaced confidence is amusing to me.
When questioned further, they seemed to not want to talk about it though, for some reason. Yes, there's much more to the story than your leading and misleading questions.
But, but..............................the questions are leading and misleading.
So basically, once your poll didn't get the results you wanted, you looked up ways to try to make it out to be flawed.
So basically, once your poll didn't get the results you wanted, you looked up ways to try to make it out to be flawed.
It was obvious from the beginning that it was based on leading and misleading questions. I pointed that out several days ago.
Well, it's still small sample, but the statistics are in your favor so far.
Your question is about whether or not it was entirely naturalistic forces, not whether or not is is a natural process. We were taught that evolution is a natural process yes, much like how gravity or the nervous system is a natural process. I'm tired of this KGB interrogation and am going to watch Sunday afternoon baseball.
Then how would you word these questions then, retaining the option of people making choices which don't agree with your position? These aren't leading questions, sorry, in fact of anything just because your position was listed first it should have a slight advantage over the other answers.
In any case I have had extensive training in locating leading questions, bad polls, and the like, and this shows none of the signs. Get over it, you were wrong.
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?