Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?

[james bond]

Don't you get it? You have to prove the Creationist account didn't happen since verifiable evidence is no longer relevant to science. LOL

They may not have evidence, except they have reasons why it makes sense to them to think it occurred.

There is no lol to this when it is your soul on the line.. One cannot prove an unprovable God, but we have evidence that God created Adam and Eve. The atheists do not have proof that this did not happen nor have evidence of abiogenesis. The scientific experiments are against it.

Thus, there should be no argument as to what the truth is. One side just keeps accusing the other of believing in magic.

 

[progressive hunter]

"The assumption that there was no supernatural occurrence during the beginning is unscientific."

. . . but, the counter assumption. . . that there were supernatural occurrences IS somehow scientific?

Don't you get it? You have to prove the Creationist account didn't happen since verifiable evidence is no longer relevant to science. LOL

They may not have evidence, except they have reasons why it makes sense to them to think it occurred.

yeah that evolution ended the need for verifiable evidence a long time ago, but at least the bible thumpers admit its based on faith where the evos think its fact and want tax money to teach it

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'll make a deal with you guys. Keep your religion out of my schools, and we won't preach evolution in your churches.

 

[RandomPoster]

Don't you get it? You have to prove the Creationist account didn't happen since verifiable evidence is no longer relevant to science. LOL

They may not have evidence, except they have reasons why it makes sense to them to think it occurred.

There is no lol to this when it is your soul on the line.. One cannot prove an unprovable God, but we have evidence that God created Adam and Eve. The atheists do not have proof that this did not happen nor have evidence of abiogenesis. The scientific experiments are against it.

Thus, there should be no argument as to what the truth is. One side just keeps accusing the other of believing in magic.

I am agnostic. The way I see it, Evolution is a hell of a lot more verifiable than Creationism or any other religious based system. I realize that using verifiable facts to support your beliefs may be considered an outdated practice in this postmodern world we live in, except my money's on evolution.

 

[james bond]

I am agnostic. The way I see it, Evolution is a hell of a lot more verifiable than Creationism or any other religious based system. I realize that using verifiable facts to support your beliefs may be considered an outdated practice in this postmodern world we live in, except my money's on evolution.

I think I presented enough in the OP, but if it was too long, then I have post #279. Evolution is not verifiable. Except for microevolution, there is no scientific method used to verify it. It's circular thinking and logic and circumstantial or forensic evidence. Sorry to say they have pulled the wool over your eyes. There is a reason why everything their different writers wrote over a period of 1500 years contradict everything that is written in the Bible. Everything from the universe to multiverses, creation vs eternal universe/big bang, natural selection vs macroevolution, and more. Even for non-related end of the world stuff has been contradicted. The Cambrian explosion alone disproves evolution.

 

[james bond]

If the OP had listened to it, which I don't expect him to anymore than he should expect others to listen to his over hour long video, he would have learned that the leader of the human genome project was a home schooled, born-again Christian.

I remember way back when I studied biology and anthropology, humans used to have their own phylogenic family, and biologists and anthropologists were debating whether or not to throw us in with the apes, as we were more similar, (except for language and culture,) than dolphins are similar to whales, yet those are in the same order?

Well, then they finished the genome project, which essentially ended the debate. The genome project just reinforced the "theory" of evolution. Now. . . humans are considered just another of the Great Apes, not any different or outside of the order that contains Chimpanzees, Gorillas and Orangutans.

I've talked about people like Dr. Francis Collins. He's been duped by fake science based on circumstantial evidence. What he and BioLogos presents is genome based. Why don't you explain it to us since it is anthropological; it's about ancient DNA.

This is one of the reasons why I was upset you didn't read my links nor watch the vid in the OP. If you really were an archaeologist or majored in archaeology, then I would have had to struggle through articles such as the following to understand what you were arguing. I've argued with a biologist on another forum and people with my level of education. Generally, it takes up time to read Nature and Science articles and scientific peer-reveiwed papers. Instead, I find that you do not present any of their arguments nor briefly express what they are trying to say or represent. It means that you're not what you say your are. It's a waste of my time and I'm less than impressed. If you could have just thought of one argument that was your own, then I would've accepted that. Instead, its more of the same spiel and memes.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Formulate a logical argument instead of making empty threats on a forum.

Alright, smartass. I'll see you in the Bull Ring. You're in big trouble, mister. I just woke up, though, so gonna make breakfast and feed the birds and whatnot. Maybe watch the sun come up with a hot beverage. The early bird catches the worm. Or so they say.

 

[MisterBeale]

If the OP had listened to it, which I don't expect him to anymore than he should expect others to listen to his over hour long video, he would have learned that the leader of the human genome project was a home schooled, born-again Christian.

I remember way back when I studied biology and anthropology, humans used to have their own phylogenic family, and biologists and anthropologists were debating whether or not to throw us in with the apes, as we were more similar, (except for language and culture,) than dolphins are similar to whales, yet those are in the same order?

Well, then they finished the genome project, which essentially ended the debate. The genome project just reinforced the "theory" of evolution. Now. . . humans are considered just another of the Great Apes, not any different or outside of the order that contains Chimpanzees, Gorillas and Orangutans.

I've talked about people like Dr. Francis Collins. He's been duped by fake science based on circumstantial evidence. What he and BioLogos presents is genome based. Why don't you explain it to us since it is anthropological; it's about ancient DNA.

This is one of the reasons why I was upset you didn't read my links nor watch the vid in the OP. If you really were an archaeologist or majored in archaeology, then I would have had to struggle through articles such as the following to understand what you were arguing. I've argued with a biologist on another forum and people with my level of education. Generally, it takes up time to read Nature and Science articles and scientific peer-reveiwed papers. Instead, I find that you do not present any of their arguments nor briefly express what they are trying to say or represent. It means that you're not what you say your are. It's a waste of my time and I'm less than impressed. If you could have just thought of one argument that was your own, then I would've accepted that. Instead, its more of the same spiel and memes.

So now the human genome project is fake?

Listen buddy, genetic science has nothing to do with anthropology. I do not know anything about it. Nor is it "circumstantial". They have ACTUAL PHOTOS of genes. I SHIT YOU NOT.

It is a second, completely different discipline of science, which confirms the "theory" of evolution. It is why the scientific world and society does not take you seriously, none of your hypothesis accords with the rest of reality.

Sorry.


You can sit there and slander and call anything that does not reinforce your POV, fake, or false till the day your die, it does not, however, lessen the reality of it's truth.

Folks will see, you do not know what you are talking about.

 

[hjmick]

Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?


Not no, but absofuckinglutely not, no ******* way, no how.

 

[progressive hunter]

I'll make a deal with you guys. Keep your religion out of my schools, and we won't preach evolution in your churches.

how about we keep both religions out of schools??

 

[progressive hunter]

If the OP had listened to it, which I don't expect him to anymore than he should expect others to listen to his over hour long video, he would have learned that the leader of the human genome project was a home schooled, born-again Christian.

I remember way back when I studied biology and anthropology, humans used to have their own phylogenic family, and biologists and anthropologists were debating whether or not to throw us in with the apes, as we were more similar, (except for language and culture,) than dolphins are similar to whales, yet those are in the same order?

Well, then they finished the genome project, which essentially ended the debate. The genome project just reinforced the "theory" of evolution. Now. . . humans are considered just another of the Great Apes, not any different or outside of the order that contains Chimpanzees, Gorillas and Orangutans.

I've talked about people like Dr. Francis Collins. He's been duped by fake science based on circumstantial evidence. What he and BioLogos presents is genome based. Why don't you explain it to us since it is anthropological; it's about ancient DNA.

This is one of the reasons why I was upset you didn't read my links nor watch the vid in the OP. If you really were an archaeologist or majored in archaeology, then I would have had to struggle through articles such as the following to understand what you were arguing. I've argued with a biologist on another forum and people with my level of education. Generally, it takes up time to read Nature and Science articles and scientific peer-reveiwed papers. Instead, I find that you do not present any of their arguments nor briefly express what they are trying to say or represent. It means that you're not what you say your are. It's a waste of my time and I'm less than impressed. If you could have just thought of one argument that was your own, then I would've accepted that. Instead, its more of the same spiel and memes.

So now the human genome project is fake?

Listen buddy, genetic science has nothing to do with anthropology. I do not know anything about it. Nor is it "circumstantial". They have ACTUAL PHOTOS of genes. I SHIT YOU NOT.

It is a second, completely different discipline of science, which confirms the "theory" of evolution. It is why the scientific world and society does not take you seriously, none of your hypothesis accords with the rest of reality.

Sorry.


You can sit there and slander and call anything that does not reinforce your POV, fake, or false till the day your die, it does not, however, lessen the reality of it's truth.

Folks will see, you do not know what you are talking about.

that still doesnt prove we came from a rock,,,

 

[james bond]

If the OP had listened to it, which I don't expect him to anymore than he should expect others to listen to his over hour long video, he would have learned that the leader of the human genome project was a home schooled, born-again Christian.

I remember way back when I studied biology and anthropology, humans used to have their own phylogenic family, and biologists and anthropologists were debating whether or not to throw us in with the apes, as we were more similar, (except for language and culture,) than dolphins are similar to whales, yet those are in the same order?

Well, then they finished the genome project, which essentially ended the debate. The genome project just reinforced the "theory" of evolution. Now. . . humans are considered just another of the Great Apes, not any different or outside of the order that contains Chimpanzees, Gorillas and Orangutans.

I've talked about people like Dr. Francis Collins. He's been duped by fake science based on circumstantial evidence. What he and BioLogos presents is genome based. Why don't you explain it to us since it is anthropological; it's about ancient DNA.

This is one of the reasons why I was upset you didn't read my links nor watch the vid in the OP. If you really were an archaeologist or majored in archaeology, then I would have had to struggle through articles such as the following to understand what you were arguing. I've argued with a biologist on another forum and people with my level of education. Generally, it takes up time to read Nature and Science articles and scientific peer-reveiwed papers. Instead, I find that you do not present any of their arguments nor briefly express what they are trying to say or represent. It means that you're not what you say your are. It's a waste of my time and I'm less than impressed. If you could have just thought of one argument that was your own, then I would've accepted that. Instead, its more of the same spiel and memes.

So now the human genome project is fake?

Listen buddy, genetic science has nothing to do with anthropology. I do not know anything about it. Nor is it "circumstantial". They have ACTUAL PHOTOS of genes. I SHIT YOU NOT.

It is a second, completely different discipline of science, which confirms the "theory" of evolution. It is why the scientific world and society does not take you seriously, none of your hypothesis accords with the rest of reality.

Sorry.


You can sit there and slander and call anything that does not reinforce your POV, fake, or false till the day your die, it does not, however, lessen the reality of it's truth.

Folks will see, you do not know what you are talking about.

I didn't say that; you did Mister Fakir (sarcasm). The human genome project was completed in 2003. How does it confirm the ToE? You do not explain. Just what are we looking at? The X and Y sound familiar.

You just avoided ancient DNA which relates more to the point you were trying to make of monkeys to humans, but I'm sure you'll get to that after we discuss the genome.

 

[james bond]

Formulate a logical argument instead of making empty threats on a forum.

Alright, smartass. I'll see you in the Bull Ring. You're in big trouble, mister. I just woke up, though, so gonna make breakfast and feed the birds and whatnot. Maybe watch the sun come up with a hot beverage. The early bird catches the worm. Or so they say.

Watch the sun come up is thanks to God. He created the sun, moon, and planets on the 4th day. Not evolution. How did the sun form? How did it end up so that it is in the middle of our solar system and we revolve around it? That's a suggested start.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Watch the sun come up is thanks to God. He created the sun, moon, and planets on the 4th day. Not evolution. How did the sun form? How did it end up so that it is in the middle of our solar system and we revolve around it? That's a suggested start.

Seeing as I'm the guy with the planetery science and physics degree and seeing as I'm the guy who has sat on the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math board in the public school system. And seeing as I've a bit more experience in assessing said curriculum in the company of both the religious community as well as the science community on that same board, I'll decide how I'm gonna start it. I was just kind of waiting to see if and how you were gonna respond. I'll likely do it this evening or tonight. I'm getting ready to jump off here for a while.

Feel free to add to it what you want, though. I don't really care. It's not my first time on the ride, my friend. Hardly so. As I said, I've seen your argument more times than I care to recall.

Don't worry. I'll try my best to formulate, as you contend, a logical argument. Heh heh.

 

[james bond]

I got an idea for a simple experiment from Pedals. This bear became fully bipedal because he injured his front paw. From observation of bears and how they act in Yellowstone towards tourists, I thought they were more adept at being bipedal than apes or chimps. Can we tie one of an apes/chimps hands so it is disabled temporarily? Will it be forced to walk bipedal or will it have difficulties? I think it will have difficulties and use three legs. Obviously, we cannot document it being passed on, but it would show whether an ape can be fully bipedal or not.

Here's an example of apes and chimps. They seem more comfortable as quadrupeds despite the biased video.



Macroevolution debunked?

 

[dblack]

Macroevolution debunked?

Not so much.

 

[james bond]

They have ACTUAL PHOTOS of genes. I SHIT YOU NOT.

More evidence you do not know what you are talking about. Those are chromosomes, not genes. Put them together and they make up a gene.

No college student uses words like you. College students understand the requirements for an anthropology degree and part of anthropology is learning about genetics, genomes, and DNA. Before that, they formulate some kind of idea of what type of careers their interests point them to. Your words betray you. You do not state the kind of things that most basic HS students headed for college or university have interests in.

 

[james bond]

Not so much.

I am beginning to suspect being atheist/agnostic/non-believer in God has less to do with science and more to do with selfish desires, greed, and sexual freedom. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Not so much following the Golden Rule. Isn't that what Adam, Eve, and Lucifer did? They disobeyed God. There you go. Your simple, silly comment has been debunked into the lower regions.

 

[dblack]

Not so much.

I am beginning to suspect being atheist/agnostic/non-believer in God has less to do with science and more to do with selfish desires, greed, and sexual freedom. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Not so much following the Golden Rule. Isn't that what Adam, Eve, and Lucifer did? They disobeyed God. There you go. Your simple, silly comment has been debunked into the lower regions.

And I'm beginning to think being a Christian has lot more to do with accommodating the selfish desires, greed and sexual freedom of corrupt leaders. I'm not sure they can even recall the Golden Rule.

In any case, none of that has anything to do with your ignorant post. A bear learning to walk on its hind legs doesn't "debunk" anything.

 

[james bond]

And I'm beginning to think being a Christian has lot more to do with accommodating the selfish desires, greed and sexual freedom of corrupt leaders. I'm not sure they can even recall the Golden Rule.

In any case, none of that has anything to do with your ignorant post. A bear learning to walk on its hind legs doesn't "debunk" anything.

You must be talking about leftist Obama and the Clintons. We just had another Clinton friend commit suicide. It's not a coincidence when it gets over double digits. And Obama is not a monkey's uncle. The ancient DNA story is not true. That's two lies right there. What it is is statistics and with statistics, there are lies, bigger lies, and then there are statistics. Instead of ancient DNA, which secular/atheist scientists use to show closeness, if you go by molecules, then there are millions of differences between humans and apes. Those are better statistics. What I said which your ignorant arse did not understand was bears have more bipedalism than apes, but we do not look like bears. Even birds are more bipedal than apes haha. We did not evolve from birds either.

Anyway, you cannot refute this piece of science that I dropped on the atheists and their scientists here. Observable evidence is one. Being able to repeat it in experiments is another and we have seen humans from monkeys experiment fail time after time. Thus, this piece of macroevolution. Did. Not. Happen. And it won't happen in a million or billion years. We still have monkeys and apes acting like monkeys and apes. That is observable. That is testable, That is falsifiable.

Your stuff. Not at all.