Christianity taking over planet?

[Powerman]

no1 pretty much summed up what I was going to say re: ID vs. evolution. It seems that, by not allowing ID to be taught in the classroom, or even mentioned, that the evolutionists are the ones stifling information.

That's because ID isn't science. See the other thread. If ID were science then we would teach it. There is currently no other theory that explains our existence so we teach what we have.

 

[no1tovote4]

That's because ID isn't science. See the other thread. If ID were science then we would teach it. There is currently no other theory that explains our existence so we teach what we have.

Once again ID does not have the status of a Scientific Theory, however there are those among them that do not attempt to state such but simply use the Scientific Method in an attempt to make tests that disprove the Theory of Evolution. That is science and well within the paramaters of the Scientific Method. The assumption is that all IDers fall in the same camp, when it is clear that not all do. To not mention that some scientists are working towards an attempt to disprove the theory of evolution and to teach it as truth is simply denying portions of the scientific method and leaving our children with a lack of understanding of that method. That same lack of understanding that makes some believe that ID is valid as a Scientific Theory.

 

[Nuc]

no1 pretty much summed up what I was going to say re: ID vs. evolution. It seems that, by not allowing ID to be taught in the classroom, or even mentioned, that the evolutionists are the ones stifling information.

Broadly speaking there is one theory of evolution and thousands of creation stories. Should they all be taught, or just the Judeo/Christian/Muslim one? If so why?

 

[elephant]

Don't worry my protests aren't even needed. The internet will eventually destroy religion including Christianity. The free flow of ideas is the last things religions want. Give it a few decades and you'll see Christianity and other religions take a nose dive.

The internet is a great way to spread Christianity, too. The written word was a high tech at one point - it was used to spread religion. And printing press was used to spread Christianity. Why will the internet be any different?

I am pretty sure you are an idiot.

 

[Hobbit]

Broadly speaking there is one theory of evolution and thousands of creation stories. Should they all be taught, or just the Judeo/Christian/Muslim one? If so why?

No, simply a general ID theory. At some point, a few of the more commonly accepted 'designers' may be listed, but the general theory is that *something* but nothing in particular, created life on this planet.

 

[Powerman]

No, simply a general ID theory. At some point, a few of the more commonly accepted 'designers' may be listed, but the general theory is that *something* but nothing in particular, created life on this planet.

So pretty much the theory has no substance to it whatsoever. How about we just say that at some point *something* as you call it created life on this planet and then ...it evolved. What a fucking concept! Why do people think that things can't evolve if they are created? That's fucking stupid.

 

[Powerman]

The internet is a great way to spread Christianity, too. The written word was a high tech at one point - it was used to spread religion. And printing press was used to spread Christianity. Why will the internet be any different?

I am pretty sure you are an idiot.

You're missing the point. When the printing press was invented we were obviously at a much more primitive stage in civilization with regards to science and technology. Also the internet is can reach a massive audience much faster than books could because of transportation at the time.
The more educated people are in science the less likely they are to believe in literal accounts of the bible. You won't run into too many people who are well versed in science that claim that the earth is 6000 years old. If the creation story is mythical(which it is at least from a literal standpoint) then that doesn't lend much credibility to the rest of the book. Genesis is a farse. There is no literal truth to it from a scientific standpoint. People are beginning to realize this and many people of faith even outright reject it. The less credible the bible is, the more likely people are to not believe it. That makes sense to me.

 

[Gunny]

You're missing the point. When the printing press was invented we were obviously at a much more primitive stage in civilization with regards to science and technology. Also the internet is can reach a massive audience much faster than books could because of transportation at the time.
The more educated people are in science the less likely they are to believe in literal accounts of the bible. You won't run into too many people who are well versed in science that claim that the earth is 6000 years old. If the creation story is mythical(which it is at least from a literal standpoint) then that doesn't lend much credibility to the rest of the book. Genesis is a farse. There is no literal truth to it from a scientific standpoint. People are beginning to realize this and many people of faith even outright reject it. The less credible the bible is, the more likely people are to not believe it. That makes sense to me.

I think it's YOU missing the point. You've ranted and ranted thread after thread, and everyone picks your arguments apart, and you still persist. To what point? You have accomplished nothing.

 

[Powerman]

I think it's YOU missing the point. You've ranted and ranted thread after thread, and everyone picks your arguments apart, and you still persist. To what point? You have accomplished nothing.

You're right. I don't know why I'm wasting my time. There is nothing to pick apart because I only propose truth. Disagreeing with simple facts is not picking apart an argument.

Do you think ID is science? Because it isn't. Maybe you should reconcile yourself with that fact. How could it be science? It's faith. And there is nothing wrong with faith but there is a time and place for everything and the time for magic apples and talking snakes isn't in science class.

 

[Gunny]

You're right. I don't know why I'm wasting my time. There is nothing to pick apart because I only propose truth. Disagreeing with simple facts is not picking apart an argument.

Do you think ID is science? Because it isn't. Maybe you should reconcile yourself with that fact. How could it be science? It's faith. And there is nothing wrong with faith but there is a time and place for everything and the time for magic apples and talking snakes isn't in science class.

Again, you have posted NO facts. Your truth, based on your biased beliefs is not necessarily THE truth.

You have repeatedly ignored several ESTABLISHED facts from thread to thread.

One, evolution is not a theory. It is not a theory of origin.

All theory whether religious or scientific, is just that ..... guesswork. To believe either requires faith. There is no theory of origin any more supported by fact than ID is.

So, your "truth" is actually your faith in scientific guesswork. That of course makes your faith superior to my faith in God HOW?

It doesn't.

 

[Powerman]

Again, you have posted NO facts. Your truth, based on your biased beliefs is not necessarily THE truth.

You have repeatedly ignored several ESTABLISHED facts from thread to thread.

One, evolution is not a theory. It is not a theory of origin.

All theory whether religious or scientific, is just that ..... guesswork. To believe either requires faith. There is no theory of origin any more supported by fact than ID is.

So, your "truth" is actually your faith in scientific guesswork. That of course makes your faith superior to my faith in God HOW?

It doesn't.

What kind of tortured logic would lead you to such ridiculous conclusions. Evolution is a theory. That's why it's called the theory of evolution. It isn't guesswork. For a theory to be accepted by the scientific community it has to be looked over numerous times by plenty of people before it is accepted. This has been the case with evolution.

And the whole thing about faith in science is just stupid. People believe science because there is a lot of proof to back up science. Faith is the belief in something BECAUSE there is no proof. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever for any religious belief to be considered fact. There is plenty of proof for science. I don't even know why I'm giving you the time of day if you are going to be this silly.

 

[Gunny]

What kind of tortured logic would lead you to such ridiculous conclusions. Evolution is a theory. That's why it's called the theory of evolution. It isn't guesswork. For a theory to be accepted by the scientific community it has to be looked over numerous times by plenty of people before it is accepted. This has been the case with evolution.

And the whole thing about faith in science is just stupid. People believe science because there is a lot of proof to back up science. Faith is the belief in something BECAUSE there is no proof. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever for any religious belief to be considered fact. There is plenty of proof for science. I don't even know why I'm giving you the time of day if you are going to be this silly.

Evolution is life's continual adaption to an ever-changing environment. It is scientific FACT, not theory, nor "tortured logic." It also is not inconsistent with religion.

I don't care how many time the sciwentif community looks over a theory. Theory is unsupported by actual fact, or it would be FACT, not theory.

Just stupid is your argument that any theory someohow trumps another just because it suits your personal biases.

You are ignorant on the topic you have chosen to champion, and you have repeatedly ignored FACT in favor of your FAITH that scientific guesswork is correct because your version of it supports your biases.

The fact that you choose to call a perfectly logical conclusion "stupid" says a lot.

 

[Powerman]

"I don't care how many time the sciwentif community looks over a theory. Theory is unsupported by actual fact, or it would be FACT, not theory."

Theories are based on facts and observations. Theories are very complex and contain an array of facts. No theory in the history of science has ever been proven 100% because of the fact they are so complex. But we teach other theories. Why not teach evolution?

 

[Gunny]

"I don't care how many time the sciwentif community looks over a theory. Theory is unsupported by actual fact, or it would be FACT, not theory."

Theories are based on facts and observations. Theories are very complex and contain an array of facts. No theory in the history of science has ever been proven 100% because of the fact they are so complex. But we teach other theories. Why not teach evolution?

Why not teach Christianity?

 

[Powerman]

Why not teach Christianity?

LOL teach Christianity all you want. Just don't do it in the middle of science class. That seems fairly logical to me.

 

[manu1959]

LOL teach Christianity all you want. Just don't do it in the middle of science class. That seems fairly logical to me.

which class would you like it taught in?

also....if you belive in ID should you be forced to sit in a science class teaching therories that can't be proven

 

[Gunny]

LOL teach Christianity all you want. Just don't do it in the middle of science class. That seems fairly logical to me.

You'll have to show me where I proposed THAT. Try reading my posts again with a little objectivity. I am not preaching exclusion. YOU are.

I am not saying you don't have a right to your beliefs, nor making insulting comments about them. Again, YOU are.

I am merely pointing out that your beliefs are no more founded on evidence/fact and/or logic than someone who believes God created the Earth. You argument is NOT more logical merely because it is yours.

 

[Powerman]

which class would you like it taught in?

also....if you belive in ID should you be forced to sit in a science class teaching therories that can't be proven

Stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid.....

No scientific theory can be proven 100%

Do you propose that we teach none of them?

And to answer your first question Christianity should be taught in private schools and at home. Public schools suck enough ass without wasting an hour a day to talk about religion. They need every minute they can get to learn about things like math, science, english etc...Religion can be taught at home.

 

[Powerman]

You'll have to show me where I proposed THAT. Try reading my posts again with a little objectivity. I am not preaching exclusion. YOU are.

I am not saying you don't have a right to your beliefs, nor making insulting comments about them. Again, YOU are.

I am merely pointing out that your beliefs are no more founded on evidence/fact and/or logic than someone who believes God created the Earth. You argument is NOT more logical merely because it is yours.

Wrong again. There is evidence of evolution. If there wasn't we wouldn't even be having this discussion. There is no evidence whatsoever that a supreme being created the Earth. That is a matter of faith. Not a matter of evidence. This is where your logic goes into the shitter. You are trying to say that nothing is more than something.

 

[5stringJeff]

MOD HAT ON

All,

There have been quite a few threads in here that have, as of late, devolved into a evolution vs. ID debate. Might I suggest that ID and evolution be limited to one thread, so that other threads stay on topic. This will allow everyone to discuss different topics. Thanks!

MOD HAT OFF