Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?

[toobfreak]

Not how I recall it. Wallace wrote to Darwin, but Darwin had been formulating he theories for decades by then. The only thing Darwin got from Wallace was the push to publish.

Nah. Darwin sat on his theories for years unable to prove them and fearful of ridicule over them until Wallace came along freely telling him everything while out afoot amongst the islands of Malaysia doing the actual dirty leg work, until a friend of Darwin's reading Wallace's letters told Darwin that Wallace could publish at any time beating him to the punchline taking all the credit and that spurred Darwin to go forth and finaslly publish his theories. Of course, he made no mention of Wallace.

At some point later, for about ten years, Wallace got almost equal recognition for the theories from the general community, but as time went on, Wallace slowly got rubbed out of collective memory because Darwin was a silver spooned elite university trained scholar from a rich family and Wallace was basically just some highly motivated boob amateur with as butterfly net.

 

[JoeBlow]

I provided you with a test gif. It is a scientific test that shows something with intelligence behind it doesn't just pop into existence. However, the non-scientific atheists believe that the universe, Earth, and everything in it did. How can anyone who uses science believe that? It's they who use philosophy and are stupid asf .

I admit that we don't know how or why the universe happened. Scientists speculate because science can't yet see all the way back to the Big Bang.

Your proof rests on "a test gif". Like seriously brah! That's ridiculously not scientific. You realize that, right?

 

[Wuwei]

Nah. Darwin sat on his theories for years unable to prove them and fearful of ridicule over them until Wallace came along freely telling him everything while out afoot amongst the islands of Malaysia doing the actual dirty leg work, until a friend of Darwin's reading Wallace's letters told Darwin that Wallace could publish at any time beating him to the punchline taking all the credit and that spurred Darwin to go forth and finaslly publish his theories. Of course, he made no mention of Wallace.

At some point later, for about ten years, Wallace got almost equal recognition for the theories from the general community, but as time went on, Wallace slowly got rubbed out of collective memory because Darwin was a silver spooned elite university trained scholar from a rich family and Wallace was basically just some highly motivated boob amateur with as butterfly net.

Sort of the opposite of Crick and Watson getting all the publicity and Rosalind Franklin who did the grunt work fading out of the picture.
.

 

[james bond]

It was a lifetime of observation that convinced Darwin but I doubt you have spent much time observing anything but your Bible.

I wish. I'm the one who observes, tests, and uses science, but would love to know and quote the Bible. The atheist side was proven to believe w/o all three I mentioned first.

 

[james bond]

Your proof rests on "a test gif". Like seriously brah! That's ridiculously not scientific. You realize that, right?

It goes to show you're not very observant lmao. What else did I have? The KCA, the start of space time, and the CMB which showed there was a beginning. It forced atheist scientists to stop believing in an eternal universe, another lie. The atheist scientists somehow rule science today without a cosmological argument, but it's the stupidest thing ever.

 

[Colin norris]

Your post just goes to show you don't know at all about science. I must've said a million times facts are something BOTH sides can use. I've mentioned it several times, but you have poo poo in your ears and brains. You don't even know what is true, i.e. facts, or not.

Creation science shows what is true as it has been validated. Evolution has not been validated nor has any hard evidence. It's not observable nor testable. It doesn't have any hard evidence of long time fossils. Just assumption. And assumption has made an ASS out of you, but not me .

You don't believe in evolution, has no evidence or validated yet it's me who me who's got no brains?
You're just and brain dead delusional God botherer.

 

[JoeBlow]

It goes to show you're not very observant lmao. What else did I have? The KCA, the start of space time, and the CMB which showed there was a beginning. It forced atheist scientists to stop believing in an eternal universe, another lie. The atheist scientists somehow rule science today without a cosmological argument, but it's the stupidest thing ever.

You say stuff, but you don't back it up with science, just your opinion. EPIC FAIL!

 

[Wuwei]

You don't believe in evolution, has no evidence or validated yet it's me who me who's got no brains?
You're just and brain dead delusional God botherer.

He attacked your character with a laughing emoji. That means his argument must have a profound merit.

 

[james bond]

You don't believe in evolution, has no evidence or validated yet it's me who me who's got no brains?
You're just and brain dead delusional God botherer.

I'm smart enough to know it's a lie if it's not observable nor testable. Observable and testable are what we have on Earth that is real. Even a person who claims they've "seen" a ghost has observed something. Evos claim a bipedal ape and nobody has seen one lol. This proves you are stupid as abu afak .

 

[james bond]

You say stuff, but you don't back it up with science, just your opinion. EPIC FAIL!

Man, you are dumb as abu afak . The CMB which I just stated is observable and testable.

Get off the science board and stay on the dumb as abu afak board lol.

 

[JoeBlow]

Man, you are dumb as abu afak . The CMB which I just stated is observable and testable.

Get off the science board and stay on the dumb as abu afak board lol.

Then you should be able to link whatever the fuck you're talking about to a real science site.

 

[Wuwei]

Then you should be able to link whatever the fuck you're talking about to a real science site.

You have got him on the run. When he is boxed in he starts insults. He can't talk about real science because you will crush him. You are right in keeping the topic on the lack of science in creationism. He wants to control the conversation and keep it on evolution which has nothing to do with the bible.
.

 

[Wuwei]

JoeBlow I can't talk to him because he got so frustrated that he put me on ignore. The coward.

 

[alang1216]

Nah. Darwin sat on his theories for years unable to prove them

Evolution is not something you can prove, it isn't math. What Darwin did was amass an overwhelming mountain of evidence that support ToE.

and fearful of ridicule over them

As I recall, his was was deeply religious and Darwin was in no hurry to hurt her.

until Wallace came along freely telling him everything while out afoot amongst the islands of Malaysia doing the actual dirty leg work,

work that Darwin had already done decades before.

until a friend of Darwin's reading Wallace's letters told Darwin that Wallace could publish at any time beating him to the punchline taking all the credit and that spurred Darwin to go forth and finaslly publish his theories. Of course, he made no mention of Wallace.

True but I don't believe he stole any of Wallace's work. He had enough of his own.

At some point later, for about ten years, Wallace got almost equal recognition for the theories from the general community, but as time went on, Wallace slowly got rubbed out of collective memory because Darwin was a silver spooned elite university trained scholar from a rich family and Wallace was basically just some highly motivated boob amateur with as butterfly net.

Darwin also had evidence to back him up, Wallace did not.

 

[alang1216]

There is no mistaking God when you meet Him.

Alas, the majority of people on this planet would not agree, that is why there are so many religions.

 

[toobfreak]

Evolution is not something you can prove, it isn't math. Darwin also had evidence to back him up, Wallace did not.

Wrong on all counts. Wallace PROVED evolution, Darwin could not. Wallace had such proof they named the Wallace Line after him.

David Attenborough did a 1-2 hour special on Wallace years ago you should watch. He was so compelled by Wallace's contributions he personally set forth to correct the situation and got a statue or painting of Wallace commissioned to give Wallace the recognition he deserved right next to Darwin!

Alfred Russel Wallace: Evolution’s unsung hero

Why do we airbrush out some of history’s most important scientists, wonders Quentin Cooper.

www.bbc.com

 

[toobfreak]

Alas, the majority of people on this planet would not agree, that is why there are so many religions.

You totally misunderstand. Quite the exact opposite is true. Please stick to things you know something about.

 

[alang1216]

Wrong on all counts. Wallace PROVED evolution, Darwin could not. Wallace had such proof they named the Wallace Line after him.

View attachment 567412



David Attenborough did a 1-2 hour special on Wallace years ago you should watch. He was so compelled by Wallace's contributions he personally set forth to correct the situation and got a statue or painting of Wallace commissioned to give Wallace the recognition he deserved right next to Darwin!

Alfred Russel Wallace: Evolution’s unsung hero

Why do we airbrush out some of history’s most important scientists, wonders Quentin Cooper.

www.bbc.com

I'm not trying to take anything away from Wallace. They both independently stumbled on the ToE. Darwin was first and had the most evidence. Non-scientists to this day still doubt evolution despite all the evidence. Wallace would never have had the impact in his day that Darwin did.

 

[alang1216]

You totally misunderstand. Quite the exact opposite is true. Please stick to things you know something about.

Did Mohammed met God's messenger? Did he understand?

Don't think that because you have faith, you have knowledge.

 

[toobfreak]

I'm not trying to take anything away from Wallace. They both independently stumbled on the ToE. Darwin was first and had the most evidence. Non-scientists to this day still doubt evolution despite all the evidence. Wallace would never have had the impact in his day that Darwin did.

Darwin was spurred to publish his findings because Wallace had so proven everything through direct field research and was sending all his findings to Darwin. Darwin was a schmuck. He knew Wallace was a vital part of the research and proof yet did not include him in his papers nor even told Wallace he was going to publish. So I piss on Darwin.