"US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists"

[Schroeder]

So let me get this straight, biotech demonstrates evolution, but it doesn't show evolution do be true. What are you talking about?

the theory of evolution states that evolution over time will create what we have today. as in we started with sinmple bacteria or whatever it evolved,(this is shown to be true) over millions of years this bacteria will change into a more complex system living corals or whatever they are called then int o fish into amphipians etc. This hasnt been shown. No mutation have been shown to prove this can happen. all the mutation ever shown only show slight changes. most bad some good alot only good in certain situations. the theory uses all this evidence of how evolution works to make it claim of al from ONE common ancestor. All the things you gave only speak of evolution and how it works and how it worked to do this or that. all current exsisting living species and none have changed into anything but a different species of what it already is. take any ring species show me any that has changed out of its class or group. the best it ever did was change into another species. merely on that it cant mate with the others.

 

[Schroeder]

In one sentence you have both said that evolution is true and that it isn't. Which one are you trying to say?

that you all and most of science seem to lump evolution in with being the theory OF evolution. they are different. evolution is a proven FACT. the theory is useing those evidences to come to the conclusion that all life arose from one common ancestor. honestly the only close one comes from ERV's which i think we still will find a lot more info on, abnd even then it is only going to show we evolved from apes(which i dont believe it does) still doesnt prove things evolve out of what they are. a fish cant evolve into an amphipian into a reptile. there is not one single observed evidence this is possible. unless you count bones and asumption and speculation. which they do which is why it is stil a theory.

 

[LittleNipper]

"A day after ordained Baptist minister Mike Huckabee finished first in the opening round to choose a Republican candidate for the White House, scientists warned Americans against electing a leader who doubts evolution.​

"The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming," University of Michigan professor Gilbert Omenn told reporters at the launch of a book on evolution by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).​

"I would worry that a president who didn't believe in the evolution arguments wouldn't believe in those other arguments either. This is a way of leading our country to ruin," added Omenn, who was part of a panel of experts at the launch of "Science, Evolution and Creationism."​

Former Arkansas governor Huckabee said in a debate in May that he did not believe in evolution."​

source​

The greatest strides that the United States made in the past were during the terms of Presidents who did not accept evolution.

 

[DaveISBG]

Let’s see according to the chart the lowest national debt as a percentage of the gross domestic product was during the years when Jimmy Carter was President. Yes I’m sure we all would like to go back to the long lines at the gas stations. Interest rates at 21%. Marginal tax rate at 70%. Highest misery Index ever recorded. America being humiliated for 444 days by the hostage situation in Iran. Which suggests that a low national debt doesn’t necessarily mean good times.

 

[LittleNipper]

You keep saying this. And you keep cowing from the challenge of presenting why this is so. Are you finally going to own up and present who treats evolution as a religion, and why we can be confident they are doing this?

I don't know; however, it is your icon that's wearing a cape. A cult is a cult is a cult.... Even when the term "science" is part of the title.

 

[arunma]

You keep saying this. And you keep cowing from the challenge of presenting why this is so. Are you finally going to own up and present who treats evolution as a religion, and why we can be confident they are doing this?

If I recall correctly, I've made a more general claim than this: specifically that many atheists employ a religious treatment of the natural sciences (including evolution). As evidence I have cited the American Atheists Logo, which, as the group specifically states, has a clear basis in science. Here we see that an atheist group gives special reverence to science, which in some sense resembles religiosity.

Truly scary. The buffoon we have in office now was elected by your ilk as well. It just blows me a way.

Actually this is quite incorrect. Mike Huckabee will be one of two Republicans I've ever voted for (the other being a Congressman). I tend to vote along party lines, and only abandon the Democratic party when they don't present a viable candidate. But maybe your definition of "my ilk" isn't what I think it is, in which case you're free to explain.

 

[Braunwyn]

But maybe your definition of "my ilk" isn't what I think it is, in which case you're free to explain.

Irrelevant, single issue, voting.

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Actually, Huckabee's belief in creationism is one of the reasons that I'll be voting for him, despite the fact that I despise the Republican party with quite the passion. Whether or not evolution is a religion, the fact is that it is treated as such by many atheist scientists and non-scientists alike, who venerate it as some icon of atheism.

Sure, he doesn't have that great of an economic policy. And his plan for Iraq is horrendous. But I figured I'd vote for him for no other reason than to break down an altar to Richard Dawkins. And besides that, why would I listen to "the scientists" position on political issues. What do they know about politics anyway?

You voting for him will do no such thing, Aside the people reading this thread no one will know or care why you voted for him. But go on anyway give it to the man you rebel you.

 

[Naraoia]

If I recall correctly, I've made a more general claim than this: specifically that many atheists employ a religious treatment of the natural sciences (including evolution). As evidence I have cited the American Atheists Logo, which, as the group specifically states, has a clear basis in science. Here we see that an atheist group gives special reverence to science, which in some sense resembles religiosity.

In what sense? If I give special reverence to my mother for giving me life, is that also religious?

 

[LittleNipper]

In what sense? If I give special reverence to my mother for giving me life, is that also religious?

JESUS CHRIST said, " If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brother and sisters----yes, even his own life---he cannot be my disciple."

How much less science...............?

 

[InTheCloud]

How much less science...............?

Have you realized that John identified Jesus with the LOGOS. That Paul indentified Jesus with the Wisdom. That Jesus said that Truth will make you free.
That science is the product of the use of the LOGOS (reason/word), wisdom in the search of Truth. In a way by rejecting science you are rejecting Jesus.

 

[Vene]

JESUS CHRIST said, " If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brother and sisters----yes, even his own life---he cannot be my disciple."

How much less science...............?

How about you LN, do you hate your family? Why somebody would follow something so sadomasochistic is beyond me.

 

[arunma]

In what sense? If I give special reverence to my mother for giving me life, is that also religious?

I'm not sure I've adequately conveyed my point. As you know, atheists fall into at least two categories: those who are atheists out of apathy, and those who actively oppose theism. The latter tend to give their atheism the role that is normally filled by religion. And as I've already suggested, this form of atheism portrays itself as founded in science. For this reason, I say that atheists effectively worship science.

Have you realized that John identified Jesus with the LOGOS. That Paul indentified Jesus with the Wisdom. That Jesus said that Truth will make you free.
That science is the product of the use of the LOGOS (reason/word), wisdom in the search of Truth. In a way by rejecting science you are rejecting Jesus.

What? I'm quite certain that I disagree with this definition of religion as the use of reason and wisdom in the search of truth.

 

[Vene]

I'm not sure I've adequately conveyed my point. As you know, atheists fall into at least two categories: those who are atheists out of apathy, and those who actively oppose theism. The latter tend to give their atheism the role that is normally filled by religion. And as I've already suggested, this form of atheism portrays itself as founded in science. For this reason, I say that atheists effectively worship science.



What? I'm quite certain that I disagree with this definition of religion as the use of reason and wisdom in the search of truth.

What about those of us who just aren't convinced that any god(s) exist?

 

[LittleNipper]

How about you LN, do you hate your family? Why somebody would follow something so sadomasochistic is beyond me.

What Christ is saying, is that a christian's love of GOD should surpass that of any other individual to the point of making that love one shares with them seem as hate. I do not see this with regard to evolutionists---they seem to love "natural" science far too much. I may be wrong. Perhaps the "christian" evolutionist is still an infant in CHRIST. But the reality is that in many cases, I see such christians never maturing in their faith.

 

[Edx]

Mike Huckabee wont continue to increase the debt because he is a creationist, hell continue to increase the debt because he's a republican whose name isn't Ron Paul (not that I'm a Paulite, but he does seem to be the only candidate that really wants to curb spending)

Paul is also a Creationist, unfortunatly. And apparently against seperation of church and state. What a shame.

 

[LittleNipper]

Have you realized that John identified Jesus with the LOGOS. That Paul indentified Jesus with the Wisdom. That Jesus said that Truth will make you free.
That science is the product of the use of the LOGOS (reason/word), wisdom in the search of Truth. In a way by rejecting science you are rejecting Jesus.

Science is not scriptural. It is man trying to reveal for himself, disregarding divine revelation. I totally disagree with you.

 

[Edx]

Actually, Huckabee's belief in creationism is one of the reasons that I'll be voting for him, despite the fact that I despise the Republican party with quite the passion. Whether or not evolution is a religion, the fact is that it is treated as such by many atheist scientists and non-scientists alike, who venerate it as some icon of atheism.

Sure, he doesn't have that great of an economic policy. And his plan for Iraq is horrendous. But I figured I'd vote for him for no other reason than to break down an altar to Richard Dawkins. And besides that, why would I listen to "the scientists" position on political issues. What do they know about politics anyway?

Wow, you'd actually vote for a crappy candidate and see the country cumble just to spite Dawkins. Wow. Thats like an anti-wasted vote or something.

Ed

 

[Edx]

this is an awfull reason to vote for him. .

Holy Moly I agree with Schroeder about something!

 

[Daffaforce]

What Christ is saying, is that a christian's love of GOD should surpass that of any other individual to the point of making that love one shares with them seem as hate. I do not see this with regard to evolutionists---they seem to love "natural" science far too much. I may be wrong. Perhaps the "christian" evolutionist is still an infant in CHRIST. But the reality is that in many cases, I see such christians never maturing in their faith.

Although I can't speak for anyone else, I know that I, as an evolutionist, love my family far more than natural science.

And I'm pretty sure the same goes for the majority of people in C&E.