29-10-2002 03:15									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I believe the pope even accepted the big bang...few catholics are hard core creationists.

	29-10-2002 03:24									#92
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

The Catholic Church does allow that evolution may be true, stipulating that if it is, it is certainly the Will of God. How they can then still use Old Testament justifications for their dogma seems paradoxical, but there it is.

	29-10-2002 03:37									#93
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Last I heard, Hawaii's education system was turning towards creationism (or perhaps away from "evolutionism," gah I hate that word).

	29-10-2002 03:55									#94
	Put an end to popups!

Yeah, yeah, I know this is also somewhat OT, but apparantly, a school board in Georgia recently incorporated creationism into its curriculum.

	29-10-2002 04:05									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

sad

	29-10-2002 04:13									#96
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by CyberGnu Jon, of course they would pass you. As long as you passed the class where evolution was taught, you could theoretically get a PhD. The problem is more fundamental: If you still believe in creationism, you are not PhD material... You have obviously not learned to think critically, to evaluate sources and theories. As such, you should not get a PhD.

Hmmm.... so you would refuse to give someone a PhD because of their religious beliefs?

That is very sad. I hope you never reach a position of authority.

	29-10-2002 04:32									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

If you can't explain the origin of life, how can you explain the evolution of life?

If Physics cannot explain the origin of the Universe, how can it explain its development? Exactly.

The "Origin of Life" is easily explained with chemistry and statistics just like life's development is easily explained with the evolutionary sieve.

	29-10-2002 04:46									#98
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

For the purposes of this thread, let's use a standard definition of creationism. That is:

Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible.

A web search tells me that there are such things as Muslim and Hindu creationism systems, but as yet no one has reported running into practitioners.

As an aside, the Theory of Evolution does not address in any way the idea of the existence of deities of the deist (watchmaker) sort or even an interventionist god (that may have guided evolution). It does, however, discredit all origin myths that I've heard. Evolution is not the only field of study that does so, at least in the case of the book of Genesis. Archeology and geology, to name two, do as well. Edit: somehow I missed Kepler's post. Sorry to be redundant.

Rogan Josh, are you and your wife French?

Last edited by Ironikinit on 29-10-2002 at 04:59

	29-10-2002 04:52									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Wouldn't the Muslim system be identical to the Judeo-Christian, since Islam states it is the continuation of those religious philosophies?

	29-10-2002 05:09									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by CyberGnu Come to think of it, I actually reject your assertion in itself. I don't have to understand something to form the conclusion:

No, you don't. You can form any conclusion you wish. It does mean that you are unlikely to have a correct conclusion if you don't understand it.

quote: If the experts in the field say one thing, and the hoi polloi disagree because of religious dogma, I have to conclude that the hoi polloi are stupid. There isn't much else to it.

They are stupid for disbelieving a theory based on religous dogma, not for not believing in the theory.

quote: So, for example, if Rogan Josh says that matter + antimatter != 0 because of a charge symmetry difference, and I respond with "Ben Franklin said that all man are created equal, therefore Rogans assertion that matter is not equal to antimatter must be false, and his entire claim is crap", that would label me as eminently stupid.

You would be stupid for discounting RJ based on your Ben Franklin reply, not for disbelieving what RJ said.


If I didn't believe in evolution because it didn't make sense to me it does not make me stupid. Being doubtful is very different to being stupid! However people are calling those who do not believe in evolution stupid, when in fact all they are being is critical. Would you blindly accept RJ's statement? I'd hope you'd want to know a bit more about it before you call someone else stupid for not believing it.

	29-10-2002 05:17									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin It seems to me that those who purport to believe in evolution often don't know what that entails. Highlighted by those who say things like "We are no longer evolving", or "We are the most highly evolved species".

Well correct, but this is more of a statement on the state of education rather than the integrity of the theory of evolution. Let's face it anyway, at the level we have studied evolution, and the knowledge we have that it is a working theory, saying that evolution is false is like saying that clocks don't work via an electronic/mechanical mechanism but rather by a divine timekeeping force. Come on, you can see it on so many levels. And before the creationist rant about 'microevolution', the same applies to eukaryotic as well as prokaryotic cells. The rules do not change, only the effects mutation have...

	29-10-2002 05:21									#102
	Tired of ads?

I believe the theory, its not the theory I'm questioning, but the lack of tolerance of those who do not believe it.

Are you so hard on people who don't believe Big Bang theory, but rather believe some other possibility is waiting to be found?

	29-10-2002 05:25									#103
	Suffering from ads?

I'd be hard on people who believe General Relativity is a conspiracy on the part of the physics community to discredit Christianity, if such people existed.

I have no problem with skepticism, but it irks me when people use false-science to promote their political/relgious views.

	29-10-2002 05:25									#104
	Tired of ads?

The harshness comes because they have stuck to their line without properly assessing the arguments. And in the case of a proper impartial assessment, I can't see any way how creationism can seem more feasible, let alone be a defensible position...

There's just nothing in it, it's myth and relies on nothing but faith. Why is faith given credence when it is just a state of mind? To quote Nietzsche 'A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith proves nothing'...

	29-10-2002 05:29									#105
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I personally don't care if someone chooses not to accept evolution as fact, that's their right. What I won't accept is their attempt to foist creationism on public education, or discredit evolution in it, because of their religious agenda. Evolution isn't an agenda, it's the accepted scientific model, and us such, there is no question it should be taught in school science courses and at the exclusion of all theories that aren't accepted by the scientific community. The same goes for teaching scientific geology as opposed to young-earth "geology."

	29-10-2002 05:32									#106
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I'd be hard on people who believe General Relativity is a conspiracy on the part of the physics community to discredit Christianity, if such people existed.

This is the thing that is really buggin me though. People are always bringing it back to that issue (of religous dogma being the reason for skepticism). You are the fourth person of five replies to me to do it. Quite amusingly PH was the only one to stick to the science and ignore the religion. (Edit - was and not is .)

Why do people feel that not believing a scientific theory (that happens to disagrees with a religion, namely christianity) is based on the belief that religion must be right? Can't someone disbelieve evolution simply because they think it is wrong? Why always bring it back to the religious issue when its not being raised?!?!

Would you tell an atheist they are stupid for not believing in evolution? So why say it to an open-minded christian?

	29-10-2002 05:33									#107
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Faith begs no proof, you can seek one or the other without approval from either.

That God created the universe is self-evident to all but the self-important.

Since evolution is a fairly recent theory I suppose it is safe to say that creationism in some form or another has been universally accepted during the bulk of human history.

	29-10-2002 05:36									#108
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

And now has been found to be left wanting severely...the amount of time is not relevent, I mean, how long was the earth thought to be flat for as well? The same analogy, you will find...

Yes, faith requires no proof. So therefore it cannot be taken as evidence or a substitute for it...

	29-10-2002 05:37									#109
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Boris, my impression is that Muslim creationism is much the same as standard Christian creationism: young Earth, etc.

	29-10-2002 05:40									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I have never had any problem with evolution being taught in a classroom. I just take issue with the current evolutionary paradigm that is so blatantly loaded with unwavering dogma that it is of little use intellectually.
As I have stated previously, there is plenty of good science to be found in Darwin and Lamarck and so forth , it's just that finding this good science becomes a colossal task in and of itself because of all the rubbish you have to dig through in textbooks. If evolution were taught honestly, I doubt that anyone but the most conservative of creationists would take issue with it. Which is the crux of the issue really, not evolution itself, at least for most. I think this lack of intellectual honesty is going to come back and bite some of the evo-fundies in the butt one day.

PS- My rejection of currrent evolutionary theory has nothing to do with my religious teachings. As was stated previously, evolution is really religion-neutral. I simply take issue with it intellectually, not philosophically.

	29-10-2002 05:41									#111
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison And now has been found to be left wanting severely...the amount of time is not relevent, I mean, how long was the earth thought to be flat for as well? The same analogy, you will find... Yes, faith requires no proof. So therefore it cannot be taken as evidence or a substitute for it...

And I need no evidence nor substitute for my faith. You are welcome to the fruit of your proofs.

	29-10-2002 05:42									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I'd be hard on people who believe General Relativity is a conspiracy on the part of the physics community to discredit Christianity, if such people existed. I have no problem with skepticism, but it irks me when people use false-science to promote their political/relgious views.

a number of physicists doubt GR

Jon Miller

	29-10-2002 05:43									#113
	Support Apolyton

monkspider, read up about Neodarwinian evolution. You will find that much has been found since the times of Darwin, especially with the advent of our current knowledge of genetics and biology. Look at the evolution of bacteria acquiring resistance to an antibiotic. Look at acquired immunity within higher organisms, including affinity maturation. Even how the immune system fights disease is a remarkable piece of evolution at work, and not on a bacteriological level.

I don't spout any dogma on the evolutionary stance. I just find it hard to comprehend how you can hold the opinions you do monkspider, yet still embrace Christian doctrine?

	29-10-2002 05:44									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov I personally don't care if someone chooses not to accept evolution as fact, that's their right. What I won't accept is their attempt to foist creationism on public education, or discredit evolution in it, because of their religious agenda. Evolution isn't an agenda, it's the accepted scientific model, and us such, there is no question it should be taught in school science courses and at the exclusion of all theories that aren't accepted by the scientific community. The same goes for teaching scientific geology as opposed to young-earth "geology."

but it is taught as an agenda

Jon Miller

	29-10-2002 05:46									#115
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison monkspider, read up about Neodarwinian evolution. You will find that much has been found since the times of Darwin, especially with the advent of our current knowledge of genetics and biology. Look at the evolution of bacteria acquiring resistance to an antibiotic. Look at acquired immunity within higher organisms, including affinity maturation. Even how the immune system fights disease is a remarkable piece of evolution at work, and not on a bacteriological level. I don't spout any dogma on the evolutionary stance. I just find it hard to comprehend how you can hold the opinions you do monkspider, yet still embrace Christian doctrine?

I find it hard to beleive that there are those that hold Monkspider's opinions, and do not embrace Christianity

Jon Miller

	29-10-2002 05:47									#116
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

How do you figure that Jon?

	29-10-2002 05:49									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

ProVo H. - I find it hard to believe that such a good person as yourself so throughly hates a religion whose principal teaching is "love your neighbor as yourslf". Pay no attention to what the Falwell types tell you, that's what it's all about. Actually I can rather understand why you would come to resent the institution of christianity because of the actions of some of it's members, not it's teachings. Just remember that the symbol you cross out actually stands for all the ideals you and I fight for and hold most dear.

	29-10-2002 06:03									#118
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin Why do people feel that not believing a scientific theory (that happens to disagrees with a religion, namely christianity) is based on the belief that religion must be right? Can't someone disbelieve evolution simply because they think it is wrong? Why always bring it back to the religious issue when its not being raised?!?!

It always comes back to the religious issue because religious faith is often the reason that somebody rejects a scientific theory without any tangible evidence to the contrary. An atheist could say "I don't believe in evolution just because" just as easily as a theist could say the same thing, but pretty much everybody realizes that "just because" or "I just don't like it" isn't a very sound justification for a debate. That usually leaves only the justifications based on faith ("I don't believe in evolution because the Bible is infallible and runs contrary to evolution") or evidence ("I don't believe in evolution because it fails to satisfactorily explain [phenomenon X]"). The former justification is pretty much limited to use by fundamentalists, and the latter justification is pretty much limited to use by people who know what they're talking about (scientists and whatnot) of either the atheist or theist ilk. Since people in online debates usually don't really know what they're talking about, this means that at least nine times out of ten somebody debating against evolution (or most other scientific theories) is basing their justifications on faith, i.e. religion, and so it always comes back to the religious issue.

I don't care if somebody doesn't believe in evolution so long as they're not an ******* about it -- quite a few of my friends don't give two figs about evolutionary theory, can't be arsed to try to understand it, and don't particularly care what religious leaders or scientists think of the subject. They're apathetic skeptics, not morons -- they use the "just because" justification, but they don't expect anybody else to take it as dogma and so they're not *******s about it. Online debates (and debates in general) don't take the justifications of these apathetic skeptics into account, though, because you'd be hard-pressed to get an apathetic skeptic to participate in a debate. Of course, some people are just plain stupid and/or trollish and/or dogmatic and expect their "just because" argument to hold as much weight as a reasoned argument in an actual debate, but then they're engaging in a debate in bad faith (they're not really "debating" at all). Usually the "just because" argument is the sole territory of the apathetic skeptics.

	29-10-2002 06:17									#119
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by monkspider I have never had any problem with evolution being taught in a classroom. I just take issue with the current evolutionary paradigm that is so blatantly loaded with unwavering dogma that it is of little use intellectually. As I have stated previously, there is plenty of good science to be found in Darwin and Lamarck and so forth , it's just that finding this good science becomes a colossal task in and of itself because of all the rubbish you have to dig through in textbooks. If evolution were taught honestly, I doubt that anyone but the most conservative of creationists would take issue with it. Which is the crux of the issue really, not evolution itself, at least for most. I think this lack of intellectual honesty is going to come back and bite some of the evo-fundies in the butt one day. PS- My rejection of currrent evolutionary theory has nothing to do with my religious teachings. As was stated previously, evolution is really religion-neutral. I simply take issue with it intellectually, not philosophically.

Having taken biology courses that discuss evolution, I failed to see anything dogmatic about it. It seemed to me to a pretty clear presentation of what we believe to be scientific fact and what supports that fact. Could you support these assertions with examples? Personally, I've yet to see a question by Creationist about evolution that was not answered more than satisfactorally by evolutionists--at least from scientific standpoint. I have, however, seen Creationists repeatedly use the same flawed arguments when it is demonstrably shown the logic behind them do not hold water (Watchmaker, for instance).

quote: but it is taught as an agenda

Again, I've never seen this. How can anything taught in a science course that is based on scientific theory be an agenda? Its not a politics or sociology course, it's science. In every other scientific field, the prevalent and accepted theories are given the same treatment. Why should we make an exception for non-evolutionary theories just to satisify people with religious agendas?

	29-10-2002 06:25									#120
	Increase Your PM Length

More on Muslim creationism:

"[Muslim creationism borrows] typical arguments from ID or ICR: gaps in fossil record, 2nd law, paleontological fraud, probability of complex structure, …

But not indiscriminate copying. BAV omits flood geology and Genesis, and draws on Islamic tradition of perceiving a harmonious, complex universe as a clear sign of divine creation."

From http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cach...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8