NationStates Jolt Archive

Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created. You don't honestly expect me to believe that my ancestors were angels, and that the universe was created by God throwing pieces of metal together on a piece of tarmac, like creationists claim, do you? If they were, that would mean we could fly, and I don't see us hanging out in the clouds, now, do I.

In reality, creationists are engaged in a vast theist conspiricy of silence. If creationism wasn't real, then they would have to live with the consequenses of their actions in stead of just going off to heaven. Did you know that Moses renounced creationism on his deathbed?? This doesn't speak well for the "theory", does it.

Third, creationists try to put across their beliefs as fact, but really they are only a theory. Why would they be this desperate if there was real proof? Besides, everybody knows that creationism is immoral. The Dictionary of Fred lists creationism as "creationism (n) - 1: the fundamentalist belief that the universe was created as the bible describes; 2: immorality". Immoral people lie. Therefore, the creationists are bound to lie in their arguements, so should never be trusted.

Also, the universe follows basic rules of order. If creationism was real, that would be imbalance and disorder. Therefore, creationism can't be right.

Also, there are many things that creationists can't explain every minute detail of. If they don't prove all of them, that means their theory(!!) is wrong.


The arguement against creationism (I like to call it "creationism's bane" ; ) ) is Googleism. Googlism is based on the tenate that once, Fred had a vision of creationism being wrong after googling "free downloadable hampster porn", and that therefore googling for free downloadable hampster porn caused him to have a vision of creationism being wrong, which proves that creationism is wrong.

Thankyou for listening, and Fred bless.



EDIT 472. Logical falacy list removed.

Oh, that's great.

Thanks for the laugh.

And you accept that you are enhanced monkeys. :rolleyes:

Creationism isn't wrong, it's just misunderestimated.

When I saw the title on the Nationstates mainpage, all I saw was "Creationism is Wrong!" Only after coming to the actaul thread did I notice the rest of the title.

Funny stuff.

Creationism isn't wrong, it's just misunderestimated.

This comment has been commendiered by Feil for potential sigging purposes once I get tired of my current one. If you wish to file a complaint, you may telephone my cat.

I don't believe it is possible to know for sure if Fred does or does not exist therefore he can not bless me

(for those that don't get it look at his closing line)

I don't believe it is possible to know for sure if Fred does or does not exist therefore he can not bless me

(for those that don't get it look at his closing line)

Oy! 'T'is UpwardThrust! I don't recal seeing you respond to one of my posts since I broke my skull against a wall of ignorance in a debate over the validity of atheism back here about a month ago.

By the way, Fred loves you anyway.

EDIT: Edited for spelling, grammar, and forgetfulness.

It's no longer creationsim rather the new term the relegious right uses now to con creationism into your US schools is "Intelligent Design".

Oy! 'Tis UpwardThrust! I don't recal seeing you respond to one of my posts since I broke my scull against a wall of ignorance in a evo vs creationism debate back here about a month ago.

By the way, Fred loves you anyway.
Prove to me Fred exists!

I think you made fred up!

Prove to me Fred exists!

I think you made fred up!
Do not denounce Fred, for He is Almighty.

Prove to me Fred exists!

I think you made fred up!

Burden of proof? What burden of proof?! There's no burden of proof here!

Do not denounce Fred, for He is Almighty.
Well if Fred is almighty let him come down here and stop me from condemning him as a sadistic asshole!

Infidelic fool, do not doubt or attempt to dishonor Fred. If you gazed upon Fred, he would surely strike you down where you stood for your sins against Fred and his church.

Infidelic fool, do not doubt or attempt to dishonor Fred. If you gazed upon Fred, he would surely strike you down where you stood for your sins against Fred and his church.


Jeses H. W. Bush! Fred's just a nice fellow who happened to transcend because he saw a vision after googling for hampster porn, not some sadistic maniac! Sadists don't go around blessing people, y'know...

Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created. You don't honestly expect me to believe that my ancestors were angels, and that the universe was created by God throwing pieces of metal together on a piece of tarmac, like creationists claim, do you? If they were, that would mean we could fly, and I don't see us hanging out in the clouds, now, do I.

In reality, creationists are engaged in a vast theist conspiricy of silence. If creationism wasn't real, then they would have to live with the consequenses of their actions in stead of just going off to heaven. Did you know that Moses renounced creationism on his deathbed?? This doesn't speak well for the "theory", does it.

Third, creationists try to put across their beliefs as fact, but really they are only a theory. Why would they be this desperate if there was real proof? Besides, everybody knows that creationism is immoral. The Dictionary of Fred lists creationism as "creationism (n) - 1: the fundamentalist belief that the universe was created as the bible describes; 2: immorality". Immoral people lie. Therefore, the creationists are bound to lie in their arguements, so should never be trusted.

Also, the universe follows basic rules of order. If creationism was real, that would be imbalance and disorder. Therefore, creationism can't be right.

Also, there are many things that creationists can't explain every minute detail of. If they don't prove all of them, that means their theory(!!) is wrong.


The arguement against creationism (I like to call it "creationism's bane" ; ) ) is Googleism. Googlism is based on the tenate that once, Fred had a vision of creationism being wrong after googling "free downloadable hampster porn", and that therefore googling for free downloadable hampster porn caused him to have a vision of creationism being wrong, which proves that creationism is wrong.

Thankyou for listening, and Fred bless.



EDIT 472. Logical falacy list removed.ahhh... but you were Created... when the ingredients were mixed, (sperm and egg) it started the process that created YOU.

or are you saying you were born of a chimpanzee and as you grew up, you turned hu... errr.... wait... that does kinda explain my hairy back and my love of bananas...
:eek:

Infidelic fool, do not doubt or attempt to dishonor Fred. If you gazed upon Fred, he would surely strike you down where you stood for your sins against Fred and his church.
It is blasphemous heretics like you who make me sick!

Now, bow down and repent yourself in the eyes of Fred!

It is blasphemous heretics like you who make me sick!

Now, bow down and repent yourself in the eyes of Fred!
All know that HANK is the one true god! if you don't believe me GOOGLE IT

All know that HANK is the one true god! if you don't believe me GOOGLE IT

Hank? Don't make me laugh. He is but an ant compared to Boo!

Hank? Don't make me laugh. He is but an ant compared to Boo!
http://www.topanga.net/dspitzer/hank.htm

See he will kick your ass! (and dbz nice)

This devolution of my poor thread makes me sad... creating random false gods is so... pedestrian. :(

This devolution of my poor thread makes me sad... creating random false gods is so... pedestrian. :(

Do you dare question Boo, the Miniature Gigantic Space Hampster/God?

(Play the Baldur's Gate series(Not Dark Alliance!) to find out about Boo. Not made up.)

theory

Even if you are trying to prove creationism wrong with logic, reason, or science (which will never work, you can't fight stupidity, ignorance, and faith with logic, reason, and science [respectively]), you still give it credit by calling it a theory.

Creationism is not a theory. Plain and simple. I'm so fucking tired of saying it. You wanna be stupid, ignorant, or faithful, go ahead, but don't delude yourself or try and bullshit other stupid, ignorant, and faithful people. It's not a theory, neither in scientific terms or layman's terms. It's random, pie-in-the-sky, Grade-F, B movie, bullshit.

End of rant.

http://www.topanga.net/dspitzer/hank.htm

See he will kick your ass! (and dbz nice)

I saw that on Albino Blacksheep next to all of the Blood Ninja cyber stories. Those are flippin' hillarious.

Even if you are trying to proove creationism wrong with logic, reason, or science (which will never work, you can't fight stupidity, ignorance, and faith with logic, reason, and science [respecively]), you still give it credit by calling it a theory.

Creationism is not a theory. Plain and simple. I'm so fucking tired of saying it. You wanna be stupid, ignorant, or faithful, go ahead, but don't delude yourself or try and bullshit other stupid, ignorant, and faithful people. It's not a theory, neither in scientific terms or layman's terms. It's random, pie-in-the-sky, Grade-F, B movie, bullshit.

End of rant.
Well its not the definition of a scientific theory ... the problem is our language has deluded far enough that it can be a theory without being a scientific one

I saw that on Albino Blacksheep next to all of the Blood Ninja cyber stories. Those are flippin' hillarious.
Hmmm had not caught it there before but I am a fan of albino

Well its not the definition of a scientific theory ... the problem is our language has deluded far enough that it can be a theory without being a scientific one

But it's not a theory in laymen's terms either! It's random crap!

Ideas pulled out of one's ass != conjecture, opinion, or position

"Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created."

Since when did your personal preferences ever have bearing on the truth of anything?

Remember math? Multiplication? We all hated it, but it was still around, and still true, although we didn't like it.

"Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created."

Since when did your personal preferences ever have bearing on the truth of anything?

Remember math? Multiplication? We all hated it, but it was still around, and still true, although we didn't like it.

It makes about as much sense as, "We were created because a book says so'. And you do realize this isn't a serious disscussion on Creationism, don't you?

Even if you are trying to prove creationism wrong with logic, reason, or science (which will never work, you can't fight stupidity, ignorance, and faith with logic, reason, and science [respectively]), you still give it credit by calling it a theory.

Creationism is not a theory. Plain and simple. I'm so fucking tired of saying it. You wanna be stupid, ignorant, or faithful, go ahead, but don't delude yourself or try and bullshit other stupid, ignorant, and faithful people. It's not a theory, neither in scientific terms or layman's terms. It's random, pie-in-the-sky, Grade-F, B movie, bullshit.

End of rant.


I could back down, or even say that I agreed with you all along, but I figure I'll just quote from the text of a speech I gave last spring, because that is easier...

Young Earth Creationism as a scientific theory is scientifically unsupportable. Nearly every aspect of science, from cosmology to paleontology, has conclusively proved the age of the universe to be in the billions of years. Freedom of religion grants individuals the right to believe otherwise, but to believe otherwise is a strictly religious belief. Young Earth Creationism belongs in religion class or philosophy class. It should be taught as religion, not as an evidence-supported theory. Yet, in direct violation of the scientific method, Young Earth Creationists insist that their believes should be taken as a scientific theory. They do not even modify their claims when overwhelming evidence suggests that they are incorrect, thus placing them entirely outside the scope of science.

Intelligent Design, while less ridiculous, is so vague as to hardly qualify as a theory. (How did this designer create or shape the existing world? What did he use to accomplish this? Why is it that certain beings can be obviously imperfect, yet adequately adapted to their environment, so long as a competitor is not present?) Intelligent Design attributes that which science cannot explain (or, as is sometimes the case, what it falsely assumes science cannot explain) to the inexplicable actions of an unobservable being. Furthermore, it is one of the very few so called scientific theories in existence that claims that the universe does not follow predictable rules; Intelligent Design claims that the laws of physics can be temporarily ignored if one invokes the name of God. It's last claim is its most contemptible. It asserts that somehow Intelligent Design resulted in a course of development exactly like the one evolution theory predicts. Like its more simpleminded counterpart Young-Earth Creationism, Intelligent Design is only a valid topic for study when it presented as a religion, alongside the creation beliefs of Hinduism and the creation myths of the ancient Greeks. Religion should be kept where it belongs: in Sunday school, in religion and philosophy class, even in sociology or history class. It must remain firmly out of science class—for the sake of the integrity of our scientific curriculum, and for the sake of the integrity of reason itself.

But it's not a theory in laymen's terms either! It's random crap!

Ideas pulled out of one's ass != conjecture, opinion, or position

Technically I could say that suggesting we're all here via the theory of evolution is just as valid (or not valid) as creationisim.

You were not there, you did not see it happen. Actually, nobody has come forward and said they observed the evolution of our species. You have so called "proof" that consists of a bunch of bs about how some single cell magically became a human over a period of time (and yes I am over simplifying it, I have taken the courses and found it to still be BS), and that is pretty much it.

Intelligent design is a very valid theory, and is present in a lot of the world around you. You don't have to be a religious whacko to believe it either. Not to delve into Star Trek theology, but in one episode of TNG they find that we were created by a much superior race, etc and so forth...

And in what historical book did you find that moses renounced his views on creation? Iirc the only book of jewish history that survived that period is the bible, and it says nothing of the sort.

"Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created."

Since when did your personal preferences ever have bearing on the truth of anything?

Remember math? Multiplication? We all hated it, but it was still around, and still true, although we didn't like it.

Try reading the title of the thread before commenting on it... that way you will avoid re-stating my points, which I made with sarcasm and humor, in a firm, matter-of-fact tone.

Technically I could say that suggesting we're all here via the theory of evolution is just as valid (or not valid) as creationisim.

You were not there, you did not see it happen. Actually, nobody has come forward and said they observed the evolution of our species. You have so called "proof" that consists of a bunch of bs about how some single cell magically became a human over a period of time (and yes I am over simplifying it, I have taken the courses and found it to still be BS), and that is pretty much it.

/snip star trek being used as an argument about science...[/quote]

You could say so, but it would just make you look like an idiot and make me accuse you of a strawman attack and of having a rediculously poor understanding of the scientific method.


And in what historical book did you find that moses renounced his views on creation? Iirc the only book of jewish history that survived that period is the bible, and it says nothing of the sort.

It. Was. A. Parody.

If you can skip by 20 clear logical falacies straight to an equally clear bald-faced lie, maybe science isn't the only subject you need a refresher course on.

Creationism is wrong because I don't like the idea of being created.

That really *does* seem to be the intellectual level on which most Darwinists operate once you get past the handwaving. :D

Congratulations on capturing the essence of their "logic". ;)

That really *does* seem to be the intellectual level on which most Darwinists operate once you get past the handwaving. :D

Congratulations on capturing the essence of their "logic". ;)

You havn't read much of what I have written on this forum, have you...

I'm into secular humanism, science, holding people's imaginary gods to the same moral standards I hold people to, and evil things like that.

Try reading my self-quote on page 2.


EDIT: On the other hand, I made somebody happy, at least.

That really *does* seem to be the intellectual level on which most Darwinists operate once you get past the handwaving. :D

Congratulations on capturing the essence of their "logic". ;)

As opposed to the intellectuals who believe cloudman made everything because an old fiction book says so.

Everyone knows Boo is the one true god.

You know, I was going to laugh at this thread, then I read the rest of it. Now I'm just going to sigh, and walk away, then probably laugh somewhere along the line. Maybe come back and post something, but I doubt it. Ic ould point out the holes in your theories, then you could point out your theories in mine...and we would end up back in the beginning. I love circular logic. Oh what the hell, might as well.


Intelligent Design, while less ridiculous, is so vague as to hardly qualify as a theory. (How did this designer create or shape the existing world? What did he use to accomplish this? Why is it that certain beings can be obviously imperfect, yet adequately adapted to their environment, so long as a competitor is not present?)

Ummm...how did the Big Bang happen? How did on the chance that hell has frozen over did we beat odds that number in the ridiculously large in order to evolve into the beings we are today? How did cows come from the freaking sea? How do you explain the function of the human body? You realize that outside of the human body, organic chemical reactions that normally occur inside the human body don't happen. Well, they don't happen as they do in the human body, even when conditions are near exact.

Intelligent Design attributes that which science cannot explain (or, as is sometimes the case, what it falsely assumes science cannot explain) to the inexplicable actions of an unobservable being. Furthermore, it is one of the very few so called scientific theories in existence that claims that the universe does not follow predictable rules; Intelligent Design claims that the laws of physics can be temporarily ignored if one invokes the name of God. It's last claim is its most contemptible. It asserts that somehow Intelligent Design resulted in a course of development exactly like the one evolution theory predicts.

WRONG! Sorry, but the 'Intelligent Design Theory' as you call it says that yes, the world does follow a predictable order. The order of course, can be messed with by it's creator, just as a computer programmer can change the programming. Quite logical unless I missed something...correct? Assume for one second that the universe and all things in it were created, doesn't it make sense that a creator should be able to change the rules of his creation? Can't we change the ways our machines work, change the way institutions report their finances? Follow me here? Besides, what's wrong with intelligent design resulting in something that resembles what you claim evolution to be? considering the that intelligent design, is well, intelligent, don't you think he would be able to do it anyway the creator wants?

Like its more simpleminded counterpart Young-Earth Creationism, Intelligent Design is only a valid topic for study when it presented as a religion, alongside the creation beliefs of Hinduism and the creation myths of the ancient Greeks. Religion should be kept where it belongs: in Sunday school, in religion and philosophy class, even in sociology or history class. It must remain firmly out of science class—for the sake of the integrity of our scientific curriculum, and for the sake of the integrity of reason itself.

Why? You've told me what should happen, but you still haven't told me why? I mean, you should be eager for creationism/Intelligent Design/whatever the hell you want to be taught so that you, in your almighty knowledge that is never questioned, conquer this damned ignorance that has scourged out planet since it's creation? Hmmm...doubt it, considering that, like I said, it's been around for since the beginning of civilization...but oh well.

Created not by "GOD", but by your parents.
And do not give me that crap of my parents, grandparents, great grand parents etc... were created by "GOD".
Creationism (LOL), try evolutionism.
Get some brains and use them.

In Soviet Russia, monkeys are evolved from you!

That really *does* seem to be the intellectual level on which most Darwinists operate once you get past the handwaving. :D

Congratulations on capturing the essence of their "logic". ;)



Personally, I'd rather be created by an Eternally Holy Being than evolve from slime in the sea. But that's just me ;)

Personally, I'd rather be created by an Eternally Holy Being than evolve from slime in the sea. But that's just me ;)

So what? There's a lot of things I'd rather weren't, it doesn't make it so.