1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseI see -- they don't like the Theory of Relativity because they somehow think that it's an evil plot by liberals to get people to believe in "moral relativism".
Creationists getting tired of attacking Darwin and Dawkins?
Now they are after Einstein.
When will the BS end?
http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouse1.Darwinism is not sound.
Creationists getting tired of attacking Darwin and Dawkins?
Now they are after Einstein.
When will the BS end?
http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page
2.And the "creationist" are not the first ones saying this about Einsteins theory of relativity.
http://mars.superlink.net/~dialect/theory.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space
Originally posted by utherpendragonThey may be the first to argue against it because they don't understand that "relativity" and "relativism" have completely different meanings, though.
2.And the "creationist" are not the first ones saying this about Einsteins theory of relativity.
Originally posted by twhiteheadCreationists admit they don't know or understand the methodology of the creator. Darwin and his followers follow another religious dogma, while pretending to be scientists, arogantly asserting they know and understand, when clearly they don't.
If you actually knew anything about it, you wouldn't call it "Darwinism".
When people stop questioning current theory, they stop being scientific.
Originally posted by mtthwDo you assert that there is no relationship between relativity and relativism? That is other than the obvious root word similarity?
They may be the first to argue against it because they don't understand that "relativity" and "relativism" have completely different meanings, though.
Originally posted by normbenignNo meaningful relationship in the context that they were being used, yes.
Do you assert that there is no relationship between relativity and relativism? That is other than the obvious root word similarity?
The Theory of Relativity has absolutely no relevance to moral relativism, social relativism, cultural relativism etc. It's simply a statement of how the laws of physics work in frames of reference that are moving with respect to each other. Anyone who thinks it's relevant to issues beyond that doesn't understand it.
Originally posted by normbenignScientists haven't stopped questioning the theory of evolution. In fact the theory changes regularly based on new discoveries.
Creationists admit they don't know or understand the methodology of the creator. Darwin and his followers follow another religious dogma, while pretending to be scientists, arogantly asserting they know and understand, when clearly they don't.
When people stop questioning current theory, they stop being scientific.
There are many creationists that do claim to have more certainty than any scientist would.
Originally posted by twhiteheadDarwinism designates a distinctive form of evolutionary explanation for the history and diversity of life on earth. Its original formulation is provided in the first edition of On the Origin of Species in 1859. This entry first formulates ‘Darwin's Darwinism’ in terms of five philosophically distinctive themes: (i) probability and chance, (ii) the nature, power and scope of selection, (iii) adaptation and teleology, (iv) nominalism vs. essentialism about species and (v) the tempo and mode of evolutionary change.
If you actually knew anything about it, you wouldn't call it "Darwinism".
Originally posted by normbenignBut the questions that remain pertain mostly to the history of evolution, rather than the mechanism it employs.
Creationists admit they don't know or understand the methodology of the creator. Darwin and his followers follow another religious dogma, while pretending to be scientists, arogantly asserting they know and understand, when clearly they don't.
When people stop questioning current theory, they stop being scientific.
Originally posted by normbenignYou know this because you've read, digested and refuted every peer reviewed paper ever published concerning evolution, or is it because (wild stab in the dark here), it contradicts your religious beliefs?
Creationists admit they don't know or understand the methodology of the creator. Darwin and his followers follow another religious dogma, while pretending to be scientists, arogantly asserting they know and understand, when clearly they don't.
When people stop questioning current theory, they stop being scientific.