Should We Teach Creation As Science In Public Schools?

[toobfreak]

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

Wrong again. I have no faith. Do I need faith in the Sun being warm and yellow? No.

 

[alang1216]

Wrong again. I have no faith. Do I need faith in the Sun being warm and yellow? No.

My bad, I didn't realize you were an atheist since you wrote:
"God was never "born." God has neither beginning nor end. He is his own cause existing wholly unto himself."

Or do you have empirical or experimental evidence for a God with these characteristics?

 

[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.

Sorry Alang, but my statement above you disagree with is not MY opinion, that was the opinion of David Attenborough who is an expert on the matter and did extensive research on it as detailed in his two hour long BBC special on Wallace and Darwin. He was the force behind having a statue made giving Wallace official recognition right alongside Darwin. If you want to argue, argue with him.

 

[Colin norris]

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 .

And your a mountain of knowledge.
No evidence.. what was our appendix and tail bone used for if There's no evolution

 

[james bond]

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

Lol, nobody believes in the atheist eternal universe lie anymore. Atheists and their scientists are usually wrong.

You don't sound like the science type, so will link it for the ones who are -- The Discovery of the Microwave Background Radiation | Shortform Books.

 

[JoeBlow]

Lol, nobody believes in the atheist eternal universe lie anymore. Atheists and their scientists are usually wrong.

You don't sound like the science type, so will link it for the ones who are -- The Discovery of the Microwave Background Radiation | Shortform Books.

So what does the MBR have to do with proving god? We don't know yet how and why the universe was created.

 

[Wuwei]

So what does the MBR have to do with proving god? We don't know yet how and why the universe was created.

Also who cares about the "eternal universe" of Fred Hoyle? That was abandoned 50 years ago.
.

 

[james bond]

So what does the MBR have to do with proving god? We don't know yet how and why the universe was created.

The creation scientists and I know how and why the universe, Earth, and everything in it was created. At least, you got the creation part right. The CMB shows that there was a beginning and with KCA, it proves there is a God. We are created in the image of God.

 

[james bond]

And your a mountain of knowledge.
No evidence.. what was our appendix and tail bone used for if There's no evolution

We do not have any vestigial organs as every organ was found to be useful. You're behind the times. See how much I know over you?

People need to die. Why is it that people need to die?

 

[JoeBlow]

The creation scientists and I know how and why the universe, Earth, and everything in it was created. At least, you got the creation part right. The CMB shows that there was a beginning and with KCA, it proves there is a God. We are created in the image of God.

Nobody disputes that there was a beginning of this universe. So creation people didn't invent anything there. What is KCA?

 

[Wuwei]

Nobody disputes that there was a beginning of this universe. So creation people didn't invent anything there. What is KCA?

Kalam Cosmological Argument is the thing that roughly says there must be a first cause. And that is god.

 

[Wuwei]

The creation scientists and I know how and why the universe, Earth, and everything in it was created. At least, you got the creation part right. The CMB shows that there was a beginning and with KCA, it proves there is a God. We are created in the image of God.

The KCA only defines the word "God" as a first cause. It doesn't prove anything else. Neither the CMB nor the KCA show that we are created in god's image. That is not science.

 

[james bond]

Nobody disputes that there was a beginning of this universe. So creation people didn't invent anything there. What is KCA?

>>Nobody disputes that there was a beginning of this universe.<<

It means the atheists and their scientists were wrong about an infinite universe. Just based on that creationists win.

KCA is Kalam's Cosmological Argument. Since you don't know, we can stop here.

 

[Wuwei]

It means the atheists and their scientists were wrong about an infinite universe. Just based on that creationists win.

KCA is Kalam's Cosmological Argument. Since you don't know, we can stop here.

Hubble et al discredited Fred Hoyle many decades ago. Why are you bringing that up now?
Scientists don't give a toot about the KCA. It is not science.

 

[Wuwei]

KCA is Kalam's Cosmological Argument. Since you don't know, we can stop here.

JoeBlow
james wants to give up because he doesn't know how to argue against science. He will probably put you on ignore like he did with others that have a better understanding of science. It is quite consistent with creation "science" which ignores science that doesn't support their lost cause.
.

 

[JoeBlow]

>>Nobody disputes that there was a beginning of this universe.<<

It means the atheists and their scientists were wrong about an infinite universe. Just based on that creationists win.

KCA is Kalam's Cosmological Argument. Since you don't know, we can stop here.

Science is about observing and updated knowledge. Theists used to think the world was flat until science definitely proved otherwise.
Now, for the KCA, "1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven, and then there's the catch-22 part of it. Then if god exists, it had to have a creator... And if god had no creator, then the KCA premise is wrong.

 

[james bond]

Science is about observing and updated knowledge. Theists used to think the world was flat until science definitely proved otherwise.
Now, for the KCA, "1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven, and then there's the catch-22 part of it. Then if god exists, it had to have a creator... And if god had no creator, then the KCA premise is wrong.

>>Theists used to think the world was flat until science definitely proved otherwise.<<

LMAO. You are wrong again and a loser. The Bible was the first to explain the Earth was spherical. I think it was the atheists who thought it was flat since they contradict the Bible so often. We had Flattie Hollie who changed her false beliefs when I pointed it out.

I'm sick of explaining it to people who don't understand, so I started to dub them losers. It doesn't matter how much evidence that I have, but they still won't understand.

>>Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven,Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven,<<

LMAO on LMAO. You are still wrong and continue to be a loser lol. Name one thing that began to exist and didn't have a cause. Go ahead show a contraction and everyone will be convinced you are right and not a loser lmao. I'm wasting my time with losers as I'm a winner.

 

[Wuwei]

The Bible was the first to explain the Earth was spherical.

Nowhere in the bible does it say the earth is spherical. NOWHERE. Circular like a pancake, yes. Spherical No.

 

[JoeBlow]

>>Theists used to think the world was flat until science definitely proved otherwise.<<

LMAO. You are wrong again and a loser. The Bible was the first to explain the Earth was spherical. I think it was the atheists who thought it was flat since they contradict the Bible so often. We had Flattie Hollie who changed her false beliefs when I pointed it out.

I'm sick of explaining it to people who don't understand, so I started to dub them losers. It doesn't matter how much evidence that I have, but they still won't understand.

>>Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven,Whatever begins to exist has a cause" is not proven,<<

LMAO on LMAO. You are still wrong and continue to be a loser lol. Name one thing that began to exist and didn't have a cause. Go ahead show a contraction and everyone will be convinced you are right and not a loser lmao. I'm wasting my time with losers as I'm a winner.

"Name one thing that began to exist and didn't have a cause." = god, or does god have a creator?

Theists thought the world was the center of the universe until proven by science that it wasn't. Theists are a dumb lot.

 

[Wuwei]

"Name one thing that began to exist and didn't have a cause." = god, or does god have a creator?

If god was created by another god, that god also must have been created. It leads to an infinite number of gods creating each other in turn. The question is why did the god who created our universe not create another god to continue the pattern. Why was he satisfied in creating a bunch of crappy people that he had to destroy in a flood?

.