Why Is Darwinism So Dangerous? (5)

[Loudmouth]

The dissent from Darwin is questioning the view that all of life is completely, totally, only, solely by naturalistic means, which is a basic teaching of Darwinism.

That list is not a dissent from Justlookinlaism.

Are you ready to discuss science instead of your made up nonsense?

 

[justlookinla]

That list is not a dissent from Justlookinlaism.

Are you ready to discuss science instead of your made up nonsense?

I'm ready to discuss any and all creationist views, including Darwinism.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm ready to discuss any and all creationist views, including Darwinism.

How can I have a discussion with someone who can't tell the difference between creationism and science?

 

[justlookinla]

What i would do is suggest that here, in this science class, we're going to discuss evolution; and you will be graded on your understanding of what evolution is, but we all realize some of you will not accept it as being true. You will only be required to understand what it is. We will not be discussing whether there is or is not a God; we will be discussing the history of life as deducted from the physical evidence.

Would you be presenting the view that humanity is the result of solely, completely, totally naturalistic processes. Would you teach that natural processes are capable, and is the only valid explanation, of the creation of humanity from a single life form from long long ago?

 

[Loudmouth]

Would you be presenting the view that humanity is the result of solely, completely, totally naturalistic processes. Would you teach that natural processes are capable, and is the only valid explanation, of the creation of humanity from a single life form from long long ago?

No one teaches Justlookinlaism.

 

[justlookinla]

How can I have a discussion with someone who can't tell the difference between creationism and science?

This is a creationist sub-forum, it it not? Let's discuss the various views of creationism, including the view that you're a cosmic accident of creation.

 

[Split Rock]

The solution would be to allow intelligent design to be taught alongside Darwinism.

What would you teach concerning intelligent design? There is not even an intelligent design theory.

 

[justlookinla]

No one teaches Justlookinlaism.

Many reject the teaching that humanity is a big cosmic accident. For example....

"We at BioLogos believe that God used the process of evolution to create all the life on earth today. While we accept the science of evolution, we emphatically reject evolutionism. Evolutionism is the atheistic worldview that says life developed without God and without purpose."​

 

[Loudmouth]

Many reject the teaching that humanity is a big cosmic accident.

Then that means many people reject Justlookinlaism.

I guess you can stop preaching Justlookinlaism now.

 

[justlookinla]

How can I have an adult conversation with someone who doesn't know the difference between creationism, science, and views?

You don't even have the vocabulary necessary to have a discussion.

Tell me how you're an accident of creation and what creative philosophy you follow which explains your existence.

 

[bhsmte]

How can I have an adult conversation with someone who doesn't know the difference between creationism, science, and views?

You don't even have the vocabulary necessary to have a discussion.

Vocabulary isn't the issue, but will power is. The will power to recognize reality and acknowledging, you were very wrong about something.

Some get there after a while, but on their own time and very rarely on these boards. Others, only dig in deeper and have to deal with cognitive dissonance for the rest of their lives.

 

[justlookinla]

Then that means many people reject Justlookinlaism.

I guess you can stop preaching Justlookinlaism now.

LOL! I shouldn't be enjoying this, but I am.

"We at BioLogos believe that God used the process of evolution to create all the life on earth today. While we accept the science of evolution, we emphatically reject evolutionism. Evolutionism is the atheistic worldview that says life developed without God and without purpose."

You disagree with evolutionism also?

 

[justlookinla]

Vocabulary isn't the issue, but will power is. The will power to recognize reality and acknowledging, you were very wrong about something.

Some get there after a while, but on their own time and very rarely on these boards. Others, only dig in deeper and have to deal with cognitive dissonance for the rest of their lives.

Where has the discussion on the various views of creationism, including atheistic Darwinist creationism, gone?

 

[Loudmouth]

LOL! I shouldn't be enjoying this, but I am.

"We at BioLogos believe that God used the process of evolution to create all the life on earth today. While we accept the science of evolution, we emphatically reject evolutionism. Evolutionism is the atheistic worldview that says life developed without God and without purpose."

You disagree with evolutionism also?

I disagree with Justlookinlaism, which is what they are referencing.

Of course, you can't deal with this topic honestly. You refuse to discuss the actual science, and instead distort the truth. Why is that?

 

[bhsmte]

Where has the discussion on the various views of creationism, including atheistic Darwinist creationism, gone?

Discussions on all threads tend to lead to different things and that is to be expected.

If you don't like it, you can always choose not to participate.

 

[Loudmouth]

Where has the discussion on the various views of creationism, including atheistic Darwinist creationism, gone?

We are not discussing atheistic Darwinist creationism, otherwise known as Justlookinlaism. Only you are discussing it.

We are discussing the scientific theory of evolution. When are you going to address the scientific theory?

 

[Split Rock]

Where has the discussion on the various views of creationism, including atheistic Darwinist creationism, gone?

You seem to be having a "discussion" with yourself about a topic, "atheistic Darwinist creationism," that you made up.

 

[justlookinla]

I disagree with Justlookinlaism, which is what they are referencing.

Of course, you can't deal with this topic honestly. You refuse to discuss the actual science, and instead distort the truth. Why is that?

What truth have I distorted?

 

[Delphiki]

The idea of an accident presupposes that there is some kind of entity whose plan had failed at some point as opposed to no entity at all.

Even so, how is an accident necessarily a bad thing? Potato chips were an accident. Plenty of good people in the world were accidents.

And if accidents are a bad thing, does that somehow make them an impossibility?

I never understood this whole "you believe it was all an accident" argument from any angle I've ever seen it played.

 

[justlookinla]

Discussions on all threads tend to lead to different things and that is to be expected.

If you don't like it, you can always choose not to participate.

Oh no, I can assure you I'm going to participate.

Since this is a sub-forum about creation and evolution, it would follow that the discussions would be about creation and evolution.

Maybe not. What's your view on Alabama winning yet another national championship this year?