NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: Why oh why do some people who call themselves "christians" advocate teaching "intelligent design" as science? It most obviously is nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to teach religion as "science," something I find totally incredible. There is nothing, nothing in the Bible which even hints that you have to supress science in order for people to believe in God. So why do it? I'm serious ... why???


Intelligent Design Derailed (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/opinion/22thur1.html?th&emc=th)


Published: December 22, 2005
By now, the Christian conservatives who once dominated the school board in Dover, Pa., ought to rue their recklessness in forcing biology classes to hear about "intelligent design" as an alternative to the theory of evolution. Not only were they voted off the school board by an exasperated public last November, but this week a federal district judge declared their handiwork unconstitutional and told the school district to abandon a policy of such "breathtaking inanity."

A new and wiser school board is planning to do just that by removing intelligent design from the science curriculum and perhaps placing it in an elective course on comparative religion. That would be a more appropriate venue to learn about what the judge deemed "a religious view, a mere relabeling of creationism and not a scientific theory."

The intelligent design movement holds that life forms are too complex to have been formed by natural processes and must have been fashioned by a higher intelligence, which is never officially identified but which most adherents believe to be God. By injecting intelligent design into the science curriculum, the judge ruled, the board was unconstitutionally endorsing a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity."

The decision will have come at an opportune time if it is able to deflect other misguided efforts by religious conservatives to undermine the teaching of evolution, a central organizing principle of modern biology. In Georgia, a federal appeals court shows signs of wanting to reverse a lower court that said it was unconstitutional to require textbooks to carry a sticker disparaging evolution as "a theory, not a fact." That's the line of argument used by the anti-evolution crowd. We can only hope that the judges in Atlanta find the reasoning of the Pennsylvania judge, who dealt with comparable issues, persuasive.

Meanwhile in Kansas, the State Board of Education has urged schools to criticize evolution. It has also changed the definition of science so it is not limited to natural explanations, opening the way for including intelligent design or other forms of creationism that cannot meet traditional definitions of science. All Kansans interested in a sound science curriculum should heed what happened in Dover and vote out the inane board members.

The judge in the Pennsylvania case, John Jones III, can hardly be accused of being a liberal activist out to overturn community values - even by those inclined to see conspiracies. He is a lifelong Republican, appointed to the bench by President Bush, and has been praised for his integrity and intellect. Indeed, as the judge pointed out, the real activists in this case were ill-informed school board members, aided by a public interest law firm that promotes Christian values, who combined to drive the board to adopt an imprudent and unconstitutional policy.

Judge Jones's decision was a striking repudiation of intelligent design, given that Dover's policy was minimally intrusive on classroom teaching. Administrators merely read a brief disclaimer at the beginning of a class asserting that evolution was a theory, not a fact; that there were gaps in the evidence for evolution; and that intelligent design provided an alternative explanation and could be further explored by consulting a book in the school library. Yet even that minimal statement amounted to an endorsement of religion, the judge concluded, because it caused students to doubt the theory of evolution without scientific justification and presented them with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory.

The case was most notable for its searching inquiry into whether intelligent design could be considered science. The answer, after a six-week trial that included hours of expert testimony, was a resounding no.

The judge found that intelligent design violated the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking supernatural causation and by making assertions that cannot be tested or proved wrong. Moreover, intelligent design has not gained acceptance in the scientific community, has not been supported by peer-reviewed research, and has not generated a research and testing program of its own. The core argument for intelligent design - the supposedly irreducible complexity of key biological systems - has clear theological overtones. As long ago as the 13th century, St. Thomas Aquinas argued that because nature is complex, it must have a designer.

The religious thrust behind Dover's policy was unmistakable. The board members who pushed the policy through had repeatedly expressed religious reasons for opposing evolution, though they tried to dissemble during the trial. Judge Jones charged that the two ringleaders lied in depositions to hide the fact that they had raised money at a church to buy copies of an intelligent design textbook for the school library. He also found that board members were strikingly ignorant about intelligent design and that several individuals had lied time and again to hide their religious motivations for backing the concept. Their contention that they had a secular purpose - to improve science education and encourage critical thinking - was declared a sham.

No one believes that this thoroughgoing repudiation of intelligent design will end the incessant warfare over evolution. But any community that is worried about the ability of its students to compete in a global economy would be wise to keep supernatural explanations out of its science classes.
Amen!

They want a theocracy. What is so hard to understand?

i couldnt be bothered to read all that. why dont you just let them think what they want instead of moaning about it? :confused:

All that over a two line disclaimer stating a fact?
Sheesh, I beleive in evolution, and I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O
'Sides, all of my science teachers have givin some sort of disclaimer at the beggining of the year about this since I was in 8th grade, I think. Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
Is that an 'endorsement of religion'?
Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.

They want a theocracy. What is so hard to understand?
no, they want their theocracy, if all of the sudden the US was a Muslim state, I doubt they would be happy.


*not that there is anything wrong with Muslims, just that I have a feeling that if we ended up with "God in America again" and it wasn't their specific version of God then they would be really really mad.

Im from England and we dont get much trouble with this. Im not a religious person (I belive in the Philosophy of Satanism but i wont go into that again.. already been flamed about it by morons). One of my science teachers is a creationist but he doesnt teach it. Though he has some very could arguments for it, he belives in both which is odd, Evolution and Creationism (e.g. God made evolution possible. yadda yadda). Some of its messed up. But he belives whole heartedly in it so im not gunna say anything bad about him.

Each to there own at the end of the day. Im not bothered what people think as long as they dont try to teach me it.

All that over a two line disclaimer stating a fact?
Sheesh, I beleive in evolution, and I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O
'Sides, all of my science teachers have givin some sort of disclaimer at the beggining of the year about this since I was in 8th grade, I think. Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
Is that an 'endorsement of religion'?
Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.
It's sad that people still do not understand the diff between the "street" use of the word theory, and its scientific application. If this is no biggie, should we require or encourage teachers to explain that gravity is just a theory? That the earth goin' around the sun is just a theory?

Fucktards of age, and kiddies who didn't do their homework in elementary school, look up the scientific definition of a "theory". I'm embarrased for you.

Why so some Christian Conservatives in America want their theocracy?

no, they want their theocracy, if all of the sudden the US was a Muslim state, I doubt they would be happy.


*not that there is anything wrong with Muslims, just that I have a feeling that if we ended up with "God in America again" and it wasn't their specific version of God then they would be really really mad.

Gee thanks for that clarification. I was actually talking about a theocracy under the tenants of Ra the Sun god but now that you've said "they want their theocracy" instead of "a theocracy" it is much clearer. We both know that "they" means Christians but without that tiny clarification I was way out in left field. What I meant to say was that "The Christian religious right wing in the United States of America (which is situated on Earth) wants to establish a Christian theocracy in place of the current government of the United States of America"

PS: By Earth I mean the planet Earth and not any old piece of earth. Thus the capital 'E'.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

Though he has some very could arguments for it, he belives in both which is odd, Evolution and Creationism (e.g. God made evolution possible. yadda yadda). Some of its messed up. But he belives whole heartedly in it so im not gunna say anything bad about him.

I think that is what Darwin also believed.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.
This guy has got to be a spoof.

Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
That's the key difference. Evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life, but ID proponents say that their belief is just as good and as scientific as evolution. This is clearly not the case.

Why so some Christian Conservatives in America want their theocracy?

I'm not sure what you are asking from that wording. Do you mean "Why do some Christian Conservatives in America want their own theocracy?"

I would guess they want a theocracy so they can outlaw abortion, homosexuality, stem cell research, etc. etc. and only allow practices and laws that abide by their interpretation of the Bible. I'm sure they would also like religion taught in the public school system and prayer incorporated into public events. Beyond that they could regulate any science or fields of thought that they believe contradicts anything in their belief system. Pretty much the motivation behind any theocracy. I am not one of them however so I can only speculate from their actions.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.


Its not redundant if you dont belive in God.

This guy has got to be a spoof.

He must be his location is "Trouser experience". Doesn't sound much like a right wing fundamentalist to me.

There is nothing, nothing in the Bible which even hints that you have to supress science in order for people to believe in God. So why do it? I'm serious ... why???

Read what happened to our good old friend Galileo, and you'll see why. Just because they don' HAVE to, doesn't mean they WONT, and push it as the word of God.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

I'm with you mate, at the end of the day thats where there all going.

Damn, I always knew my trouser experience was going to give me away.;)

This guy has got to be a spoof.
I hope so.
We need fresh meat around here.
:D :D

Read what happened to our good old friend Galileo, and you'll see why. Just because they don' HAVE to, doesn't mean they WONT, and push it as the word of God.

the da vinci code is just a story mate, dont believe everything it says.;)

the da vinci code is just a story mate, dont believe everything it says.;)

...Did I even MENTION Da Vinci?! :headbang:

I'm with you mate, at the end of the day thats where there all going.


I hope im going to hell. Becuase by God's word nearly every one of us is going to hell. Atleast we'll meet all our friends. Ill still be thinking about sex when im judged. Ohwell.

I'm with you mate, at the end of the day thats where there all going.

So God hates it when you're wrong, and will send you to hell for it? Sheesh, didn't realize he had such a strict stance on scientific education. Is He such a NAZI about grammar too? Are you going to hell because you used "there" when you meant "they're"?

Man, I'm going to have to start boning up. I mean, I don't even know latin! Crap, I wish they had told me this when I asked in school "When are we ever going to need this?"

But honestly, the whole thing is rediculous, I was an arrogant little bastard at school, I had a hard enough time being told what to think by teachers who followed the curriculum and I was banned from most Sunday schools. If they had tried to push both on me I would have said "well f--- this I'm going on welfare."

But if it does eventually happen, I have a better theory, a hybrid of the two, "Intelligent Natural Selection" where the weakest of all species throughout the history of the world had a moment of intellectual clarity and wondered to themselves "there's got to be more to the universe than this" and promptly flung themselves off a cliff or into the passing jaws of the nearest predator.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.
How long were those first days? There was no sun. Without a sun can there be a day?

How long were those first days? There was no sun. Without a sun can there be a day?


A day is a mesurement of time... so...yeah

How long were those first days? There was no sun. Without a sun can there be a day?

Good question, I think they still have days in England and they haven't seen the sun for god knows how long. If you continue to get get me thinking like this I'll start believing there might be a God.:confused:

I tend to think this breaks down into two seperate questions - why believe in literal biblical creationism, and why teach biblical creationism in public school.

I believe that people want their religion in the schools because they want their religion to be the official 'right' way to be. Nothing says 'officially right' better then public endorsement or practice. I think this is a fear issue -- people believe that their beliefs are 'the right ones' but want the re-assurance from an outside force that they are 'officially' right, because if you are not 'officially' recognized to be right, there is the unsettling possiblity you might be wrong.

I'm not sure at all why or how people can maintain a belief in creationism to begin with - but I rather imagine that in the end it boils back down to a combination of fear and arrogance -- most rationalizations for holding extreme ideologies do.

I favour an opt-out for parents who are worried about evo education in the schools -- give them a way to ease their fears about their faith without having to force their religion into the classroom -- just let them opt their kids out of the evo education.

Elicere

A day is a mesurement of time... so...yeah

A measurement based upon the revolution of the Earth. If there is no Earth, and no one yet who measures time that way, why use that system of dates? Yeah yeah yeah, a day is still an objective measure of time - well, hardly a very practical one. 86,400 seconds divided into various hierarchial groups of 60 because the Babylonians counted in base 60 is hardly a very intelligent time-measurement system to use.

The whole concept of a year is an anachronism. We're not going to be on Earth forever or even much beyond the very near future. Megaseconds and gigaseconds are on the way in

I favour an opt-out for parents who are worried about evo education in the schools -- give them a way to ease their fears about their faith without having to force their religion into the classroom -- just let them opt their kids out of the evo education.

Isn't that rather an abuse of parental rights? Seriously, oppression of the young can only go so far. We give parents absolute, unchecked, uncoordinated freedom to teach their kids whatever bullshit and irrational ideologies they want - do we really want to take away from kids the education opportunities of public school as well? How are we ever going to have an intelligent, educated populace if irrational religious parents can take their kids out of any curriculum at the drop of a hat?

Stuff like this is what absolutely kills educational quality and standards - abstinence education, intelligent design, and now your good-intentioned but misguided proposal to give parents another level of isolating control of their kids' minds. I say, if they have such a problem with their kids being taught real science, take them out of science classes completely and thus prevent them from going to college, or head for a religious private school.

Because really, evolution isn't the only scientific issue religious people should be taking offence at. What about plate tectonics? Stellar, planetary, etc. formation? Most of high-level physics? Environmental/global warming issues? Neurology and its implications against mind-body dualism? Do we take kids out of any history course that examines other religions or criticizes the Crusades and Inquisition next?

All that over a two line disclaimer stating a fact?
Sheesh, I beleive in evolution, and I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O
'Sides, all of my science teachers have givin some sort of disclaimer at the beggining of the year about this since I was in 8th grade, I think. Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
Is that an 'endorsement of religion'?
Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.
Um ... you did actually read the article, did you not? The judge was a Bush appointee, and not noted for being excessively liberal. :p

I favour an opt-out for parents who are worried about evo education in the schools -- give them a way to ease their fears about their faith without having to force their religion into the classroom -- just let them opt their kids out of the evo education.

Why should their kids suffer a poor education just because the parents are scared that if they learn science, they might twig that it makes more sense?

If my religion decreed that some other well-established part of science, such as Einstein's theories of relativity, was wrong, would it be ok to take my kids out of physics lessons? Evolution is not a special case, there's no more reason to make it optional than there is to make any other part of science optional.

All that over a two line disclaimer stating a fact?
Sheesh, I beleive in evolution, and I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O
'Sides, all of my science teachers have givin some sort of disclaimer at the beggining of the year about this since I was in 8th grade, I think. Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
Is that an 'endorsement of religion'?
Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.
Um ... you did actually read the article, did you not? The judge was a Bush appointee, and not noted for being excessively liberal. :p

Why should their kids suffer a poor education just because the parents are scared that if they learn science, they might twig that it makes more sense?

If my religion decreed that some other well-established part of science, such as Einstein's theories of relativity, was wrong, would it be ok to take my kids out of physics lessons? Evolution is not a special case, there's no more reason to make it optional than there is to make any other part of science optional.

'Cause parents have the right to control their kids educations, both secular and religiously. We let parents opt their kids out of vaccinations for religious reasons, sex ed classes for religious reasons, health classes for religious reasons, and in some cases gym classes for religious reasons - why shouldn't we let them opt out of evo education as well?

As for the optional argument - having your kids in public schools at all optional. *shrug*

I'd much rather address the religious concerns of parents by letting them remove their kids from school situations they find religiously objectionable -- which affects only their kids -- then by constantly fighting over attempts to inject religious doctrines into the school system - which affects all the kids in the system, and often the community at large.

Elicere

Um ... you did actually read the article, did you not? The judge was a Bush appointee, and not noted for being excessively liberal. :p
I skimmed it, read around the bolded areas, but I didnt read the ENTIRE thing :P

Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.


If the judge had any bias it was reserved for the oft-repeated dishonesty of the board members who OUTSIDE the courtroom were talking about ID in religious terms, and then inside the courtroom tried to pull an "aw shucks, religion has nothing to do with it Yer Honor" routine.

Judges don't like getting lied to.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

All kinds of books say all kinds of things, and yet for some reason people still debate them. How strange. So why should the Bible (whichever version you like) get special treatment? Because the Bible says you should believe the Bible?

If I believed everything that told me I should believe it, that would create some interesting problems.

Sigh. If only people had the willingness to critically examine their own beliefs. Critical thinking does not simply mean pointing out all the inconsistencies in other ideas, it also means critically examining your own.

After all, if your only reason for believing what you believe is that it is what you were told and what you have always believed, you have no more claim to it being "true" than anyone else. Especially since your ignorant opponents have exactly the same foundation for their position.

And please don't reply with "But the BIBLE backs me up." That's just circular. Pick any other religious text and you can say the same thing. You don't see me running around with some other 2,000 year old collection of folklore telling everyone to worship Ra the Sun God, just because these old stories (which have their value) seem to suggest that they should.

Well, I realize that instead of encouraging anyone to think (my intention), I have probably just offended them and they will just entrench more solidly in whatever form of ignorance is most comfortable for them, but oh well, what can you do. The capacity for critical thought either exists, or it doesn't.

It's also very frightening to hold your most cherished beliefs up to scrutiny, so I can understand that it's rarely done.

Believing in Creationism (i.e. that an omnipotent God created everything) is at least as retarded as believing in a God in the first place :rolleyes:
Ok, the evolution theory certainly has its flaws (which is why it's only a *theory*), but this is really totally ridiculous :rolleyes:
Now one could argue that creating a species like the current humans might not be that difficult if you have the required knowledge and means, and a omnipotent God would be easily able to do it, but that only shifts the problem, and at the same time, creates a *much* bigger problem: Who did create the omnipotent God!? :eek:
To create an omnipotent God, someone would have to be even *more* than omnipotent - which is utter nonsense, obviously. Thus, an omnipotent God can never have been created, and therefore it can't exist either. Simple logic :D
Intelligent Design isn't quite as stupid as Creationism as it at least doesn't require an omnipotent God to exist (which is utter nonsense, as we just have seen).

There is nothing, nothing in the Bible which even hints that you have to supress science in order for people to believe in God. The closest it gets is suggesting in Timothy that it is dangerous to put your faith in "that which is falsely called knowledge", presumably referring to magic. Of course, people will read stuff between the lines.

Has no one realised that the judge said "inanity", meaning pettiness, rather than "insanity"?

Hmmm.... not be petty here, but inanity means a little bit more 'reasonless' or 'senseless' then 'pettiness.' ;)

Elicere

'Cause parents have the right to control their kids educations, both secular and religiously.

Why should they? Why should parents have the right to mess up their kids just because they have particular religious beliefs?

We let parents opt their kids out of vaccinations for religious reasons

Which is incredibly wrong, as it means risking the health of an innocent child and the rest of the population (high rates of vaccination prevent the spread of disease, protecting everyone, not just the recipients of vaccines) on the whim of parents gripped by some insane belief that their God (who apparently doesn't want us to use the brains he gave us in order to reduce each others' suffering - despite the fact in the case of most religions, he urges us to care for one another) wants their child dead for no particular reason, and must be respected.

sex ed classes for religious reasons

Again, a bad thing. There's no sense in trying to hide the biological facts from your kids, and they deserve to know what they can do to avoid catching diseases or getting pregnant. It's not like if you stop them going to sex ed classes, they won't know how to have sex or won't want to.

If Sex Ed classes actually promoted promiscuity etc, then you might have a case, but you can't justify withholding from your kids basic facts about how their bodies work and how they can protect themselves from harm.

As far as I'm concerned, any parent who withdraws their child from sex ed, and that child subsequently wrecks his/her life via unsafe sex - that parent is morally responsible for their child's suffering and, if they're unlucky, their death.

health classes for religious reasons

Again, why would you want to enforce ignorance on your children about the facts of their own bodies?

and in some cases gym classes for religious reasons

This must be getting a little repetitive, but I'm going to ask again - how can you justify this. Does god really want your child not to exercise and to become unhealthy because of this?

why shouldn't we let them opt out of evo education as well?

You haven't presented any reason why evolution should be treated separately to other areas of science. Can I stop my child learning about gravity, or is evolution special, and if the latter, why?

I'd much rather address the religious concerns of parents by letting them remove their kids from school situations they find religiously objectionable -- which affects only their kids -- then by constantly fighting over attempts to inject religious doctrines into the school system - which affects all the kids in the system, and often the community at large.

So we're just going to give up on the children of these people? Leave them to rot in ignorance, or possibly ill-health, because their parents' religion said that science, or sex education, or vaccination, is wrong? This will only perpetuate the issue, because these kids will then grow up, have their own children, and make the same problems as their parents did.

I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O


You do realise that saying that tells the science types you really don't understand it; right?

oh Gahd - how can anyone in their right mind think that creationism is anywhere close to be science? And you are right, it isn't Christianity because I don't believe I;ve ever heard Jesus tell he story of creation.

There's a lot of muslim, jewish and atheist creationists then, I take it?

I skimmed it, read around the bolded areas, but I didnt read the ENTIRE thing :P
For shame! Tsk! :D

no, they want their theocracy, if all of the sudden the US was a Muslim state, I doubt they would be happy.


*not that there is anything wrong with Muslims, just that I have a feeling that if we ended up with "God in America again" and it wasn't their specific version of God then they would be really really mad.

Excellent post. Dead on.

I've studied evolution, been told why it is not true, or why it is religion just like Creationism. I've studied Intelligent Design, watched debates about it..old ones and new.

And ultimately what gets me is that the Intelligent Design model and the Evolution model both make some sense.

Heck I have hung around here long enough for everyone(yes everyone, so no need to speek up) to explain to me why ID is not science, and how it is completely wrong.

Yes, both models of how our would works make sense to me. If an intelligent man said he believed Intelligent Design, I would test him, and if he answered legitly than I would leave him alone. Which do I choose to believe? I do not give a rat's ass.

Because simply, I have not seen I.D. try to detract to this big over all cause that everyone talks about known as "SCIENCE". All ID books I have read proclaim the Scientific theory, just like the Evolutionist ones. Because simply, as long as progress is on the move, why give a crap about ID or Evolution? History? Important. Comprehension of the human genome as well as nature? Important. Evolution and ID? They can sit in the Janitorial closet with a measely Federal grant while causes that are imporant, and bring about positive life change are funded.


P.S. Sure, evolution (I should just refer to science, since it seems evolution= science in the very basic understanding that there is no distinction between evolution and science) can help those "positive life changing causes", I have no problem with that.

I've studied evolution, been told why it is not true, or why it is religion just like Creationism. I've studied Intelligent Design, watched debates about it..old ones and new.

And ultimately what gets me is that the Intelligent Design model and the Evolution model both make some sense.

Heck I have hung around here long enough for everyone(yes everyone, so no need to speek up) to explain to me why ID is not science, and how it is completely wrong.

Yes, both models of how our would works make sense to me. If an intelligent man said he believed Intelligent Design, I would test him, and if he answered legitly than I would leave him alone. Which do I choose to believe? I do not give a rat's ass.

Because simply, I have not seen I.D. try to detract to this big over all cause that everyone talks about known as "SCIENCE". All ID books I have read proclaim the Scientific theory, just like the Evolutionist ones. Because simply, as long as progress is on the move, why give a crap about ID or Evolution? History? Important. Comprehension of the human genome as well as nature? Important. Evolution and ID? They can sit in the Janitorial closet with a measely Federal grant while causes that are imporant, and bring about positive life change are funded.


P.S. Sure, evolution (I should just refer to science, since it seems evolution= science in the very basic understanding that there is no distinction between evolution and science) can help those "positive life changing causes", I have no problem with that.

I assume you will NOT be trying to obtain preventative medication, in the event of a pandemic variant of 'flu, then?

What I meant to say was that "The Christian religious right wing in the United States of America (which is situated on Earth) wants to establish a Christian theocracy in place of the current government of the United States of America"


I guess, there should be:
"The Christian religious right wing in the United States of America (which is situated on Earth) wants to establish a Christian religious right wing in the United States of America (which is situated on Earth) theocracy in place of the current government of the United States of America"

See the difference?

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

Wow. Do you believe that the earth is flat too? Or that you use leeches to "bleed" people in order to cure diseases?

the da vinci code is just a story mate, dont believe everything it says.;)

Wow. He was talking about Galileo, you know, the historical figure. Not a conspiracy theory novel. I am dumbfounded as to how you can even get from Galileo to Da Vinci.

Galileo...you know, the scientist who was tried and placed on house arrest for life by the Church for saying that the earth revolves around the sun. Since, according to your all holy book, the earth is the center if the universe, the sun revolves around it, and god made the sun stop so some guy could win some OT battle. Look it up.

They can sit in the Janitorial closet with a measely Federal grant while causes that are imporant, and bring about positive life change are funded.

The way people are taught to think *is* important. ID teaches people it is a good thing[tm] to assume something and then find evidence to *support* your assumption. That vision is dangerous - because the simple fact is that if you *want* to find evidence that supports your beliefs, you almost certainly will. But that doesn't mean you are right...

Now imagine people starting to apply this way of thought to other issues besides ID vs evolution. Hint: that already happened numerous times in the past. Often the results were not pretty.

P.S. Sure, evolution (I should just refer to science, since it seems evolution= science in the very basic understanding that there is no distinction between evolution and science)

Nonsense. Evolution is science, but science is not evolution. Even aside from all the other areas science covers, it is perfectly possible that evolution will one day be disproven and replaced by another scientific theory.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.
That kind of talk in an embarrasment to Christianity. I'm a Christian, but I'm not part of the group who says "If your not Christian, you can go to hell." You can't take the Bible literally all the time. And think of this: God din't write the Bible. Men did. They might have been told what to right, but that doesn't make them infallible. And on topic:
I believe God did create the universe, but I don't believe that everything apeared as it is now. I think evolution could be a God given function of humanity and everything else.

i couldnt be bothered to read all that. why dont you just let them think what they want instead of moaning about it? :confused:
They have every right to believe as they choose to believe. Where I draw the line is when they start telling me that children, or in my case, grandchildren, have to believe that ID is science. Utter and complete nonsense! :(

I'd like to see how one of these ID classes go..
"God made it all, class dismissed"

but seriously, anyone that believes that evolution did not take place either doesn't know the facts or is just ignoring them. How do you explain that 99.9%
of species that once existed no longer exist? Or how through faunal succession you can see an animal clearly change from one species to another. Or even using an animal with a short life cycle like fruit flies you can see evolution happen in a matter of months.

ID supporters love to say evolution is only a "theory" well so is electromagnetic theory which is letting you read this right now, so is gravity which is also letting you read this right now, though somewhat more indirectly, so is atomic theory, continental drift, the list goes on.. but people who subscibe to ID probably don't know what i'm talking about anyway about so i'll just stop

I'd like to see how one of these ID classes go..
"God made it all, class dismissed"

Oh no, they can contain much more. Quite a few research methods exist to examine exactly how things were created by their designer. Some of these "reverse engineering" methods are even sound; and are for instance also used in archeology.

Problem is that the mere fact that the method is sound in certain situations doesn't mean it is sound to be used here or yields any meaningful result. But I expect that part would be left out.

It says a lot about the religious nature of American society that this is even an issue in the USA.

Here, there is no debate about which should be in school science lessons. Anyone who suggested that it should be the creationism would be laughted out of the room.

I have an idea.

Let's forget Evo and I.D. Let's go back to the greek myths that say Prometheus created humans. Twice. :D

I always liked Greek myths anyways.

This post brought to you by the SSS

The Sarcastic Society of Sarcasm.

COMMENTARY: Why oh why do some people who call themselves "christians" advocate teaching "intelligent design" as science? It most obviously is nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to teach religion as "science," something I find totally incredible. There is nothing, nothing in the Bible which even hints that you have to supress science in order for people to believe in God. So why do it? I'm serious ... why???

As the Scriptures say,

"I will destroy human wisdom
and discard their most brilliant ideas."

So where does this leave the philosophers, the scholars, and the world's brilliant debaters? God has made them all look foolish and has shown their wisdom to be useless nonsense.
God deliberately chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise.


The bible is in direct opposition to worldly learning. The theocrats' opposition to scientific cosmology and evolution is not because they think that the Bible is more correct, but they believe that the wielders of the bible ought to be more powerful and the objects of greater credulity. They oppose not the lack of openmindedness on the part of secular scholars, but the rise of knowledge itself.

The Sarcastic Society of Sarcasm.

So does that mean that they believe deeply in sincerity, but have chosen a sarcastic name? "Yeah buddy, we're all about the sarcasm. Uh huh. :rolleyes: "

There's a lot of muslim, jewish and atheist creationists then, I take it?
alot of Religions has their own stories on the creation of the world. if one is taught, they should all be taught.

All that over a two line disclaimer stating a fact?
Sheesh, I beleive in evolution, and I wouldnt care because, and get this, evolution is still a theory O_O
'Sides, all of my science teachers have givin some sort of disclaimer at the beggining of the year about this since I was in 8th grade, I think. Usualy its something along the lines of, 'Evolution is still a theory, it hasnt been proven, but its the best weve got so its what were teaching.'
Is that an 'endorsement of religion'?
Methinks this judge was just a LITTLE bit biased, judging by the language he uses throughout the article.

Ok. So then should we start putting the disclaimer "George Bush is not God," on our social studies textbooks? How about "there is no evidence that Pat Robertson's protien shakes prolong life."

Evolution is a theory, it isn't just a theory, it's a theory. There's a big difference. Unless of course the science teacher then uses that disclaimer as the basis for an entire lesson dedicated to explaining exactly what a theory is. Perhaps the disclaimer should read "Evolution is just a theory, Intelligent Design isn't even a theory."

Because simply, I have not seen I.D. try to detract to this big over all cause that everyone talks about known as "SCIENCE".

Go read the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Doctrine" sometime, then, where they compare science and the scientific mindset to a great tree, and ID as the "wedge" they'll use to bring the tree down....

All ID books I have read proclaim the Scientific theory, just like the Evolutionist ones.

And they're lying. Through their teeth. Anyone who has even a fraction of a right to call themselves scientifically literate knows that ID isn't science, is in fact just religion dressed up as science using pretty words they think sound smart, and the people who are scientists, or claim to be, and still support it are putting religion first and being dishonest for it. Simple as that.

Because simply, as long as progress is on the move, why give a crap about ID or Evolution? History? Important. Comprehension of the human genome as well as nature? Important. Evolution and ID? They can sit in the Janitorial closet with a measely Federal grant while causes that are imporant, and bring about positive life change are funded.

So knowledge for knowledge's sake is unimportant and not worth pursuing? You don't care where we came from or how the world works?

Perhaps the disclaimer should read "Evolution is just a theory, Intelligent Design isn't even a theory."

[hunts for clapping smiley and doesn't find it]

The sentiment is there, though,

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.

alot of Religions has their own stories on the creation of the world. if one is taught, they should all be taught.

Ya, but even if they agreed to that, they'd still complain that the Ouroboros myth resembles Big Bang cosmology too much because the idea of everything congealing out of chaos sounds too much like what happened with a universe full of radioactive plasma in the millions of years after the big bang.

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.

Cop-out. Post and run.

I suggest you educate yourself (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution) before posting "OMG I DON'T GET IT WE'RE TOO COMPLEX GOD DID IT."

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.
No one is claiming ( at least not anyone with any degree of intellectual capacity ) that human beings are "an accident." There are such things as probability and uncertainty and other scientific principles which determine which options are selected, but I know of no one who is familiar with science who would ever say that "humanity is an accident."

As to some "accident explosion that wasn't caused by anything," that's another discussion. This discussion is about evolution and "intelligent design," both of which address biology, not cosmology.

One thing you need to get your mind around is the incredible amount of time we are dealing with in any discussion of evolution. If you can actually force yourself to read something not related to your preconcieved notions about things, I highly recommend the book "In Search of Deep Time," by Henry Gee. In this little book, Dr. Gee not only explains how the ponderous fact of geologic time impacts biological development, he also explains some of the ways we know ( fact, not theory ) how many billions of years old the earth is.

I strongly urge you to make an effort to overcome your prejudices and actually study this subject.

I strongly urge you to make an effort to overcome your prejudices and actually study this subject.

Make an effort ? Doesn't that require an attention span of over 5 minutes and a willingness to actually do something yourself ?

Look, people, can we just agree on something here before we argue?:
There is absolutly no way to prove or disprove any relgious claims. I can neither prove nor disprove that God created the Earth is 7 days, or if God actually talked to Mohammed. You may believe one way, but you can't prove that, and neither can you disprove it.

Look, people, can we just agree on something here before we argue?:
There is absolutly no way to prove or disprove any relgious claims. I can neither prove nor disprove that God created the Earth is 7 days, or if God actually talked to Mohammed. You may believe one way, but you can't prove that, and neither can you disprove it.

Which is *exactly* why creationism and ID can not be called science and therefor do not belong in a science classroom. Tales of how the earth was created by God/Allah/Sapghetti monsterisms are more than welcome in religion 101 on the other hand. ID belongs in neither; since it pretends to be something it is not.

Science, Faith and Lies. Lets keep the categories seperated for the childrens sake.

Make an effort ? Doesn't that require an attention span of over 5 minutes and a willingness to actually do something yourself ?
Uh ... yes. And your point??? :confused:

Uh ... yes. And your point??? :confused:

For some reason I doubt that someone who makes a post filled with ignorance on this forum and then runs off is capable of performing those functions.
Call it "the MTV generation syndrome"; though I suppose that makes me sound like a grumpy old rat.

I'm in the "the teachers should just say that random evolution is just one of many explanations, but is basicly the only one of those you'll be required to know by heart." group. I don't want people in science class to discuss Jesus or adam and eve, but I don't want the students to be shocked when they hear about other ideas on how we came to be. After all, why should the students be ignorant of ideas that aren't in mainstream science? If they hear more creation stories, they might get confused if they were taught that there is only one creation story.
*runs away from those who want to establish an atheist theocrasy where religion is oppressed and Crhistians are burned at the stake by hypocritical atheists*

For some reason I doubt that someone who makes a post filled with ignorance on this forum and then runs off is capable of performing those functions.
Call it "the MTV generation syndrome"; though I suppose that makes me sound like a grumpy old rat.
Probably more of a "grumpy old rat" than I am. Heh!

I'm in the "the teachers should just say that random evolution is just one of many explanations, but is basicly the only one of those you'll be required to know by heart." group. I don't want people in science class to discuss Jesus or adam and eve, but I don't want the students to be shocked when they hear about other ideas on how we came to be. After all, why should the students be ignorant of ideas that aren't in mainstream science? If they hear more creation stories, they might get confused if they were taught that there is only one creation story.
*runs away from those who want to establish an atheist theocrasy where religion is oppressed and Crhistians are burned at the stake by hypocritical atheists*

Evolution isn't random. Nor is it one of many scientific theories. Teach science in science classes, religions in religious ed. classes.

Elgesh']Evolution isn't random. Nor is it one of many scientific theories. Teach science in science classes, religions in religious ed. classes.
Perxactly.

I'm in the "the teachers should just say that random evolution is just one of many explanations, but is basicly the only one of those you'll be required to know by heart." group. I don't want people in science class to discuss Jesus or adam and eve, but I don't want the students to be shocked when they hear about other ideas on how we came to be. After all, why should the students be ignorant of ideas that aren't in mainstream science? If they hear more creation stories, they might get confused if they were taught that there is only one creation story.
*runs away from those who want to establish an atheist theocrasy where religion is oppressed and Crhistians are burned at the stake by hypocritical atheists*

Man, what? I'd like to know what an atheist theocracy would be like. Presumably you think we'd all worship Dawkins or Darwin or something. Anyway a lot of people who think evolution is true are christians, which in case you hadnt noticed is the entire point of this thread.

Man, what? I'd like to know what an atheist theocracy would be like. Presumably you think we'd all worship Dawkins or Darwin or something. Anyway a lot of people who think evolution is true are christians, which in case you hadnt noticed is the entire point of this thread.uh oh... waiting the expected response....

and counting...

Elgesh']Evolution isn't random. Nor is it one of many scientific theories. Teach science in science classes, religions in religious ed. classes.
unfortunatly, there is no Religous Ed classes before college and definitely not in public schools.

However making reigious studies and keeping it an elective course should be done.

I belive in the Philosophy of Satanism but i wont go into that again.. already been flamed about it by morons

Yes, far too many ignorant people believe it's devil worship.

It's sad that people still do not understand the diff between the "street" use of the word theory, and its scientific application. If this is no biggie, should we require or encourage teachers to explain that gravity is just a theory? That the earth goin' around the sun is just a theory?

Fucktards of age, and kiddies who didn't do their homework in elementary school, look up the scientific definition of a "theory". I'm embarrased for you.

Surely this doesn't surprise you. Far too many Americans believed that Iraq was involved with the terrorist attacks on 9/11. People like being ignorant. They fear to learn as they don't wish to be wrong.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

The bible is riddled with contradictions and has humans being created twice. Try reading the bible. It's amazing how messed up it is.

the da vinci code is just a story mate, dont believe everything it says.;)

Not everything in fiction has to be fake.

How long were those first days? There was no sun. Without a sun can there be a day?

Technically, a day are defined as the time it takes a planet to make one rotation on its axis. If you were referring to a solar day, I'd give you that.

"Evolution is just a theory, Intelligent Design isn't even a theory."

That has to be one of the greatest things I have read.

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.

I think it's kind of sad that reading comprehension seems to be a lost skill. If you actually bothered to read the bible, you would see that there are numerous contradictions. I noticed them when I was a kid. When the clergy tried to give me a bad excuse, I left the catholic church.

If humans were as smart as you want to believe, why are we destroying the planet?

Personally, I think you were an accident. But hey, that's just my two cents.

Look, people, can we just agree on something here before we argue?:
There is absolutly no way to prove or disprove any relgious claims. I can neither prove nor disprove that God created the Earth is 7 days, or if God actually talked to Mohammed. You may believe one way, but you can't prove that, and neither can you disprove it.

In honor of Bill Hicks, I have a one word question for you: "Dinosaurs?". If the earth was created in 7 days and the Earth is only a few thousand years old, why weren't dinosaurs talked about?

*runs away from those who want to establish an atheist theocrasy where religion is oppressed and Crhistians are burned at the stake by hypocritical atheists*

Why shouldn't we burn them at the stake? It was christians that did it to others in Salem. It was christians behind the inquisition. I say it's time for history to come full circle. (I'm joking, for the most part.)

Look, people, can we just agree on something here before we argue?:
There is absolutly no way to prove or disprove any relgious claims. I can neither prove nor disprove that God created the Earth is 7 days, or if God actually talked to Mohammed. You may believe one way, but you can't prove that, and neither can you disprove it.

Hell no, because you are wrong. If you had ever opened a book of geology, you wouldn't say things like that. It's like saying that Moon doesn't exist, because it's a sunny day and you cannot see it.

Barely ANYTHING is easier to prove than the fact Earth is older than few thousand years. Fossiles. Oil. Carbon timing measures (I do not know the english equivalent for the Finnish word hiilimittaus, sorry). The Dover cliffs. Volcanos. All these are filled with evidence.

A different question is, do you decide ignore all these? See, here comes the thing that makes the main difference between science and faith-based religion. Science takes a look at what we got, and tries to come up with a conclusion that fits in it.

Religion is that conclusion, and tries to come up with evidence to fit in it.

I assume you will NOT be trying to obtain preventative medication, in the event of a pandemic variant of 'flu, then?
No, I think that purchasing preventative medication like that goes in the "positive life change" box.

So knowledge for knowledge's sake is unimportant and not worth pursuing? You don't care where we came from or how the world works?

Me? The Doors Corporation. 61% YES! I do not care about where we came from, I think that mankind has progressed and prevailed quite well without knowing its (it's for it is, its for possessive?) past, and I think it can keep doing that. Knowing how the world works, now that is a toughy, it would take science/tists to find out, but I am against funding that. So I would...I would say yes I do care about how our world works, but am not interested in pursuing it myself. Nor interested in being around anyone who is pursuing it.

In conclusion, I will post more if this thread stays alive.

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.

What possible motive would I have to contact someone so obviously irrational, ignorant, and manifestly not worth even my admittedly abundant time....

God/Allah/Sapghetti monsterisms

Yay the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

i think its kinda sad how people can overlook soooooooooo many things that the Bible says that can be proven scientifically or at least makes so much sense when you think about it. And evolution... what the crap is that? If we were all single-celled organizisms, why is there only one species (humans) with an sort of real intellegence and also... why are there male and female. How would single-celled organizisms that reproduce asexually suddenly change over to heteralsexual beings that are PERFECTLY compatible... thats kinda convienient. HUMANITY IS NOT AN ACCIDENT!!! HOW CAN ANYONE THINK THAT?!?! WE ARE WAY TO COMPLEX TO BE CREATED FROM SOME ACCIDENT EXPLOSION THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY ANYTHING. THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD BE AN ACCIDENT! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! GOD DOES MAKE SENSE! IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE, COMMENT, OR ANYTHING WITH ME, PLEASE CONTACT ME.

Anyone else find if funny someone suporting cretionism calls themselves ChaosGenisis?

Anyone else find if funny someone suporting cretionism calls themselves ChaosGenisis?

Yeah, I did notice that - very, and probably unintentionally (I doubt intelligent humor is within this person's capabilities) ironic.

Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony.

Just because I love that quote and it's vaguely related.

I've studied evolution, been told why it is not true, or why it is religion just like Creationism. I've studied Intelligent Design, watched debates about it..old ones and new.

And ultimately what gets me is that the Intelligent Design model and the Evolution model both make some sense.

Heck I have hung around here long enough for everyone(yes everyone, so no need to speek up) to explain to me why ID is not science, and how it is completely wrong.

Yes, both models of how our would works make sense to me. If an intelligent man said he believed Intelligent Design, I would test him, and if he answered legitly than I would leave him alone. Which do I choose to believe? I do not give a rat's ass.

Because simply, I have not seen I.D. try to detract to this big over all cause that everyone talks about known as "SCIENCE". All ID books I have read proclaim the Scientific theory, just like the Evolutionist ones. Because simply, as long as progress is on the move, why give a crap about ID or Evolution? History? Important. Comprehension of the human genome as well as nature? Important. Evolution and ID? They can sit in the Janitorial closet with a measely Federal grant while causes that are imporant, and bring about positive life change are funded.


P.S. Sure, evolution (I should just refer to science, since it seems evolution= science in the very basic understanding that there is no distinction between evolution and science) can help those "positive life changing causes", I have no problem with that.
The first question which gave voice to reason was, "Why?" Why am I here, where did I come from. Everything else stemmed from this and gives importance to the myth of Genesis and other Creationist Myths. These myths are not unimportant and should not be on anyone's back burner just like they should not be in anyone's science class. But I take issue with you saying that there is no importance in this question and that it should not be funded. If this question were not asked and if there not hypotheses and theories which came forth to explain it, we wouldn't have had much reason to leave our caves and your history would be little more than what was killed for breakfast.

Look, The Bible couldn't spell it out more clearly, God created the world in 6 days.

People can believe in any Satan inspired scientific theory, or heretical "Intelligent Design" twaddle, or any heathen religion they want to, God gave them the free-will.
But they're all going to hell.
The Bible says what happened and what is going to happen, so debating the issue is a wee bit redundant.

Your particular misinterpretation....

I'd also be, if I were you, more concerned with your own eternal state...

No, I think that purchasing preventative medication like that goes in the "positive life change" box.


Puchasing preventative medication that will/does ONLY exist because of our knowledge of the mechanisms of evolution.

Can't have it both ways.

If you are going to rubbish evolution as a subject, and wish it away... you are being a hypocrite if you are still luxuriating in the fruits of it's knowledge.