I wouldn't call it trickery.
why?
Because God knows what I'm going to type before I even type it!
God is always one step ahead. He knows what you're are going to do.
Okay, a lot of the time he doesn't like what you do (or I do) that's sin.
But if you walk the walk and talk the talk (which is a very hard thing to
do) then you are on your way.
If you break one of the commandments (and there are MORE then 10 read
the Bible folks) you break them all...in God's eyes.
To God, if you steal it is the same to him as killing someone.
God is the judge. Be careful what you post. He is watching as well.
Why am I typing this? Because I believe in the One True God, and I know
that He is watching what I type too.
Guys, all of this arguing would be over if y'all just read the Bible:
especially the Book of Genesis.
Originally posted by orfeoGotta agree with ya there, Orf. I've all but given up debating the topic of evolution on these forums. I feel like I keep hitting a brick wall of dogma -- no willingness to accept any weaknesses in the theory; questioning Chuck (Darwin) seems to be the equivalent of questioning Christ for an evangelical. It is ironic that Science, which was meant to be the embodiment of a questioning mind and the hallmark of critical thinking and academic inquiry has become the very thing it seeks to destroy – closed-minded and intolerant fanaticism.
Half the time it's not so much 'fighting' as 'fighting back'.
Seriously, I find that I am generally a lot more tolerant of people's right to believe in evolution than THEY are of my right to doubt it.
Okay… maybe a little harsh, so I’ll add a disclaimer: there have been the odd occasions where I could rationally bounce ideas, angles and insight with an evolutionist without the trepidation of being belittled, insulted and having my intellect questioned.
1 edit
Originally posted by HalitoseJust hang on there. I have absolutely no objection to people believing what ever they want. My objection is to the politicisation of science by the Fundies where they try to dress up their metaphysics as science and even try to insist that it is taught along side mainstream science as part of the cirriculum. Each mindset should stick to what it does best: science should stick to describing and explaining the physical reality of the world, religion should stick to how we should live in the world as humans together (and who we're allowed to stone as the evil ones)😉
Gotta agree with ya there, Orf. I've all but given up debating the topic of evolution on these forums. I feel like I keep hitting a brick wall of dogma -- no willingness to accept any weaknesses in the theory; questioning Chuck (Darwin) seems to be the equivalent of questioning Christ for an evangelical. It is ironic that Science, which was meant to be the ...[text shortened]... ionist without the trepidation of being belittled, insulted and having my intellect questioned.
Originally posted by TheSkipperTop post! Good darts all round
Well, if in order to understand the 'evidence' for the creation myth(s) you need to be a Christian (or, at least some sort of God botherer) then why are you fighting with all these atheists about it?
Perhaps your time (and all creation myth apologists time) would be better spent proselytizing to scientists so they can see/understand all the secret ev ...[text shortened]... could not possibly understand? I get a definite "render unto Caesar..." vibe from this.
Originally posted by orfeoI think we're all very tolerant. Personally I regard creationists who try to dress their metaphysics as science with the same contempt as a theist would regard a 'scientist' who devised a conclusive proof for the non existance of god (with apologies to Douglas Adams)
Half the time it's not so much 'fighting' as 'fighting back'.
Seriously, I find that I am generally a lot more tolerant of people's right to believe in evolution than THEY are of my right to doubt it.
Originally posted by aardvarkhomeI wasn't thinking of these forums particularly with my comment, but I'd still query your opinion of the tolerance in these forums.
I think we're all very tolerant. Personally I regard creationists who try to dress their metaphysics as science with the same contempt as a theist would regard a 'scientist' who devised a conclusive proof for the non existance of god (with apologies to Douglas Adams)
It generally doesn't require an exposition of 'creation science' around here to get sarcastic comments. All it takes is an expression of doubt about evolution. I'm pretty sure that I personally haven't gone around advocating creation science (as distinct from creationism) here, because I know very little about it.
To be fair, I've probably had less vindictive directed at me as opposed to witnessing it happen to others, but people still manage to leap to all sorts of conclusions about what my views are - views they know they don't like.
Originally posted by orfeoI think the problem is that creationists and IDers are so black and white - any slight sign that there might be issues with a theory like evolution and the whole thing is wrong!
I wasn't thinking of these forums particularly with my comment, but I'd still query your opinion of the tolerance in these forums.
It generally doesn't require an exposition of 'creation science' around here to get sarcastic comments. All it takes is an expression of doubt about evolution. I'm pretty sure that I personally haven't gone around advocating c ...[text shortened]... to all sorts of conclusions about what my views are - views they know they don't like.
So, people trying to defend the theory against such onslaught tend to get a bit dogmatic themselves.
Doubt is good.
Doubt is how science works.
Doubt keeps us questioning and looking for more answers.
Are there problems with evolutionary theory? Probably - I'm not an expert in the field.
The key question for me though is - is there a model or theory that better explains speciation over time? If there is then we should all be using it and I think most scientists would agree.
Originally posted by orfeoI'm sure the odd sarcastic comment and robust remark gets flung in all directions. Generally I see it as a good sign when both sides of an argument engage in debate. Beneath the robustly held (intolerant) positions adopted I'm sure there's a lot of communication. There are very few debaters I feel antipathy towards and I usually ignore them.
I wasn't thinking of these forums particularly with my comment, but I'd still query your opinion of the tolerance in these forums.
It generally doesn't require an exposition of 'creation science' around here to get sarcastic comments. All it takes is an expression of doubt about evolution. I'm pretty sure that I personally haven't gone around advocating c ...[text shortened]... to all sorts of conclusions about what my views are - views they know they don't like.
Originally posted by aardvarkhomeIt seems to vary from thread to thread.
I'm sure the odd sarcastic comment and robust remark gets flung in all directions. Generally I see it as a good sign when both sides of an argument engage in debate. Beneath the robustly held (intolerant) positions adopted I'm sure there's a lot of communication. There are very few debaters I feel antipathy towards and I usually ignore them.
I only have one person so far on my brand new 'ignore at all costs' list.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI'll explain where the extra water comes from as soon as you explain for me the evidence of a worldwide flood.
Numbskull, the only floods that happen nowadays are local floods. The extra water that is present is removed from other places. Where do you get the extra water in a worldwide flood?!
And don't give me this 'the bible tells me so' crap.
Give me some actual evidence.
Originally posted by NosracGet your hand off it Carson (and I don't mean the bible either) you'll go blind ...
I wouldn't call it trickery.
why?
Because God knows what I'm going to type before I even type it!
God is always one step ahead. He knows what you're are going to do.
Okay, a lot of the time he doesn't like what you do (or I do) that's sin.
But if you walk the walk and talk the talk (which is a very hard thing to
do) then you are on your way.
If you br ...[text shortened]... this arguing would be over if y'all just read the Bible:
especially the Book of Genesis.
Originally posted by HalitoseThat's harsh.
Gotta agree with ya there, Orf. I've all but given up debating the topic of evolution on these forums. I feel like I keep hitting a brick wall of dogma -- no willingness to accept any weaknesses in the theory; questioning Chuck (Darwin) seems to be the equivalent of questioning Christ for an evangelical. It is ironic that Science, which was meant to be the ...[text shortened]... ionist without the trepidation of being belittled, insulted and having my intellect questioned.
I'm willing to accept weaknesses in any theory including evolution.
I'm just waiting to see some first, and I'm also waiting to see any scientific alternatives.
Originally posted by KellyJayGotta love his unwillingness to answer a direct question.
It starts with the assumptions you have about the beginning of life.
If you believe for example that there is no God, god, gods than
life holds no sway towards making that claim. If you believe that
God did create the universe and all life fully complete, life is a
grand piece of evidence for God. It is all the same evidence, it is
how you want it to b ...[text shortened]... right away in the formation of our world views,
we are creatures of it, like it or not.
Kelly