The Dover trial

[Colter]

should have driven a stake through the heart of anti-science "education", but no, these people are determined to push America back to the Dark Ages. I'm glad I don't live there.

Revamped "Anti-Science" Education Bills in U.S. Find Success

Some more backward Christians confuse faith in God with faith in books about God written by humans. Im a disciple of Jesus and an evolutionist. Life certainly evolved after the creation event, that is proven in the fossil record.

 

[AV1611VET]

Some more backward Christians confuse faith in God with faith in books about God written by humans. Im a disciple of Jesus and an evolutionist.

And how were you discipled without books?

 

[Abraxos]

should have driven a stake through the heart of anti-science "education", but no, these people are determined to push America back to the Dark Ages. I'm glad I don't live there.

Revamped "Anti-Science" Education Bills in U.S. Find Success

This is a very very good thing.

I was always for teaching kids the full spectrum of the details for and against the theory of evolution and even climate change. And let the kids decide and come to their own conclusions.

Only by teaching one aspect is indoctrination not education.

 

[Colter]

And how were you discipled without books?

I wasn't discipled without books written by humans. Like the newspaper, I get some idea of world events but I don't assume God wrote it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What anti-science? Are you actually saying because a creationists science doesn't agree with yours/evolutionary, then they must be against science period?

Honestly, I don't see the logic unless it is to deceive, but maybe you can clear it up for me.

There's no such thing as "creation science".

You've been lied to and you swallowed it up like ice cream on a hot day.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Since we are on the subject of evolutionists smokescreens and deception, could you offer example that proves their whole agenda is not a smoke screen/deception. I mean we might as well go all the way with this.

What agenda?

Just a quick rundown on proof evolution is the reason for all life as we know it today will be fine.

You want a "quick rundown" of 200 years worth of scientific research done by thousands, if not millions, of people?

Myeah... that's not gonna happen.

 

[AV1611VET]

I wasn't discipled without books written by humans.

Why do I have to keep repeating myself to you, Colter?

For the second time, how were you discipled?

Don't tell me how you weren't discipled, tell me how you were.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's no such thing as "creation science".

I agree. Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

Creation is omnipotence in action; whereas science is myopic.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Evolution is profoundly religious as well.

It's not.

It's difficult to separate genetics from the selfish gene/survival of the fittest philosophy.

Indeed. About as difficult to divorce mass and gravity.
It's quite hard to ignore facts.

[qutoe]
My vote is for home schooling[/QUOTE]

Yep and in the US, many think like you do.
The result of which is that the overall quality of US education is among the lowest in the western world. Another result of which is, that more then half of all current university students working towards a PhD, are H1B-holding foreigners.

Not because the US is so popular for foreign students, mind you... But rather simply because these universities simply don't find enough qualified american students to enroll in those teams.

You guys like to think that you are at the very forefront of scientific and technological advancement and one could understand why you would believe that, look at how the world currently is - with the US being the current sole superpower.

But here's the thing... the current position of the US is the result of the work being done 20-30 years ago.

Silicon Valley, and alike, is being run by people who did their studies in the 60s and 70s.
But if you actually would look at the workforce that these people are hiring today: you'll already see the trend. A LOT of them are foreigners. It shows the same trend as the phd story. More and more foreigners and less and less americans are doing those things.

And when they get their PhD and / or experience, they return home taking their knowledge with them. These people are the guys that will start the businesses that will rule tomorrow. And they will be starting those businesses in their home countries.

Already we are seeing this shift happening. India, Korea, China, Japan,... all of them are rapidly gaining in terms of technological advancements. Already, we talk about a new silicon valley in China.


I'm not saying all this is the result of religions, but it certainly doesn't help.
It's the overall trend that should be alarming you folks, imo.

Anti-science sentiment is rising, education quality is dropping, less and less american students in university research programs and the amount of foreigners is rising fast, and the same goes for the new recruits in silicon valley.

Seriously... if the US were a car, just about every light should be flickering like crazy on its dashboard.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And even if debated and proven fact, still they only have a few facts they "claim" proves evolution because it is there opinion it does.

Is that why christian biologists such as Francis Collins makes statements like "even if we wouldn't have a single fossil at our disposal, the fact of evolution would still be overwhelmingly supported by the genetic record alone"?

Hence we have the perfect example of deception/smokescreen. "see this is fact so evolution must be" when one doesn't equate to the other, the last part only opinion, but doesn't matter, some fall for it.

Hence the evidence that you are just repeating whatever nonsense you read on creationist websites or have been spoonfed to you by your local pastor.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Explain in your own words how exactly that proves evolution, and without assumption.

There are no assumptions in the fact that these virusses insert into host DNA.
There are no assumptions in the fact that these insertions can be inherited by off spring.


So there is no assumption in the fact that if 2 individuals shares an identical ERV, it is knock-down evidence that the individuals share a common ancestor in which the initial infection took place.

Not a single aspect of this entire process (from viral insertion all the down to the ERV achieving fixation in the genome of the population) is based on assumption.

It's all empirical fact.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not all science deals with the origin life.

Evolution doesn't deal with the origins of life.

Funny how you managed to undermine your own nonsense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Then why do evolutionists object so strongly to creationism, or even intelligent design?

For the same reason that an embryologists objects to Stork Theory or why a geographer objects to Flat Earth Theory.

They don't do it "strongly", granted. But off course, they don't need to, since nobody with lots of money is lobbying to get embryology taken out of science classes only to replace it with tales about storks....

As Ben Stein has shown, even the bare mention of God in a university science class can place ones tenure in jeopardy.

Ben Stein!! Classic!
What's next? A reference to the Hovinds? Or Ray "Banana man" Comfort, perhaps?

 

[HereIStand]

For the same reason that an embryologists objects to Stork Theory or why a geographer objects to Flat Earth Theory.

They don't do it "strongly", granted. But off course, they don't need to, since nobody with lots of money is lobbying to get embryology taken out of science classes only to replace it with tales about storks....



Ben Stein!! Classic!
What's next? A reference to the Hovinds? Or Ray "Banana man" Comfort, perhaps?

Now let's see, evolution has nothing do with the origin of life. Yet evolutionists have a save-young-minds reaction to the teaching of Creationism or Intelligent Design as a way of explaining the origin of life. And atheists feel obliged to poke of fun of Creationism and Intelligent Design on a Christian forum. Why not go tutor young minds in math? Save them from a life of retail employment.

 

[Colter]

Why do I have to keep repeating myself to you, Colter?

For the second time, how were you discipled?

Don't tell me how you weren't discipled, tell me how you were.

You keep repeating yourself because you don't listen in the first place. Everyone has this problem with you on this forum. You aren't a serious person and not particularly honest.

I was born again quite apart form the Bible books. I've learned things about God and God the Son from the current Bible book list as well as The Urantia revelation AND other Books.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Now let's see, evolution has nothing do with the origin of life.

Correct.

Yet evolutionists have a save-young-minds reaction to the teaching of Creationism or Intelligent Design as a way of explaining the origin of life.

Sure. For two reasons:
1. faith based beliefs systems - no matter the subject - have no place in science classes
2. these two ideas are posed as in direct opposition to BOTH the origins of life AS WELL AS evolution theory.

And atheists feel obliged to poke of fun of Creationism and Intelligent Design on a Christian forum.

First, not just atheists: quite a few christians here argue against, and also make fun of, creationism and alike.

Second, plenty of world reknown biologists, who have no issues with evolution theory, are christians. Francis Collins is a fine example.

Why not go tutor young minds in math?

Why do you pretend that it's one or the other?
Science education is about all science, not just biology. Physics, geology, chemistry, biology, math,...

Save them from a life of retail employment.

Maybe you should first try and focus to raising the quality of overall education so that they even get qualified to take up research positions at your very own universities... as it stands now, more then half of doctorates in the US are foreigners with an H1B. And make no mistake, the reason for that quite literally is that these US universities don't have enough qualified american candidates.

Overall american education quality, is a bad joke.

 

[mark kennedy]

Creationists are anti-science.
Of course they will not say it that way. But seeing through their rhetoric the anti-science attitude is clear. They have concocted a word "evolutionism" in which they lump together everything they don't like. So they can play the "we love science" attitude while attacking nearly all the sciences nonetheless. Especially Kent Hovind uses/ used that phrase a lot.
Under "evolutionism" falls.

• cosmology, with the age of the Universe and the Big Bang
• astrophysics -- the age of the stars and the formation of stars
• nuclear physics: nuclear fusion is labelled as "never observed", atoms "evolving", not withstanding that we have fused atoms.
• nuclear physics: radio active decay with it's radio metric dating methods
• glaciology: ages of glaciers are rejected out of hand
• geology: every geologiocal formation is attributed to the Flood, ages are rejected out of hand
• dendrochronolgy: year rings can form weekly according to creationists
• thermodynamics, with it's open systems. For a creationist only the 2LoT counts

All we know about the creation of the universe is that it was, 'in the beginning'. The earth and the universe may well be billions of years old but life was created about 6000 years ago.

genetics, with his fused human chromosome nr 2, pseudogenes and ERV's

ERVs are the most bogus homology arguments I've ever seen. If you can assume 8% of the human genome is the result of dangerous viral infections of the germline, I guess you'll believe anything

• geophysics: plate tectonics gives a too old age for all the features on Earth
• planetary sciences

None of which makes any difference to me.

So, I don't see which science has not been under attack from creationists.

I think it's Darwinians who are laying siege to natural science, most creationists aren't worried about this kind of fallacious rhetoric. They certainly would be caught dead in a discussion forum like this one, I know, they PM me for time to time.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Creationists are anti-science.
Of course they will not say it that way. But seeing through their rhetoric the anti-science attitude is clear.

I'd say it's more like...Of course evolutionists *would* say it that way.

Creationists are anti evolution, and the only thing that is clear is the claim "anti science" is far from factual.

Anti science suggests that science has proven evolution to begin with, so all you end up with is nothing but a deception, one of many untrue tactics that sound good to someone who whats to believe in something other than a God/creation, and might even work as another deception in an arsenal of many, designed to push a false evolution to the unaware, but I suppose evolution needs all the help it can get. Been no holds barred up to now, why expect anything less now.

Anyone with any sense at all can see the deception in that, even the opposition if they want to. I'm actually surprised someone here would try to defend it.

 

[Speedwell]

Attempts to harmonize evolution with the Bible have led to crises of faith.

Then it shouldn't be attempted. It's a dumb idea anyway.

 

[Kenny'sID]

There are no assumptions in the fact that these virusses insert into host DNA.
There are no assumptions in the fact that these insertions can be inherited by off spring.


So there is no assumption in the fact that if 2 individuals shares an identical ERV, it is knock-down evidence that the individuals share a common ancestor in which the initial infection took place.

Not a single aspect of this entire process (from viral insertion all the down to the ERV achieving fixation in the genome of the population) is based on assumption.

It's all empirical fact.

You cite all but the relevant there... I just got through dealing with evolutionists deception. You cover all but what I actually asked, so it looks good to the unaware, and I do understand that's the only way you can make it appear evolution has a leg to stand on, but it's still an assumption those things prove evolution. Are you following me?

It's like I always say, they grab a few facts, then twist it into meaning it's proof of evolution and this is a perfect example of that.

Even after pointed out several times and putting the evidence right in front of you, you still can't catch on to the fact, that's exactly how they got you to believe what you do today....deception.