BlogCatalog

If you are going to study biology, it makes no sense unless viewed in the context of evolution.

All other approaches are false.

[reply]

4/12/09

timethief

Theory of Evolution: Fact or Idiotic?
Theory of Creationism - factual or idiotic?

[reply]

4/12/09

cookingasshole

good timing on the edit
4/12/09

timethief

Edit - smedit! Maybe I'll start a thread Theory of Creationism - factual or idiotic? and then we can all witness censorship in action. ... lol
4/12/09

lettershome

Creationism: wishful thinking.
4/12/09

gramoftruth

Absolutely, do it!

4/12/09

cookingasshole

Evolution is a theory...like gravity. We can't fully prove it but we know it exists. You just have to have a little faith.

[reply]

4/12/09

mylotnovice

Evolution Theory can be proved in Genetics, that is Micro-Evolution. Look how fast Virus mutates. As for Macro-Evolution, it has been proved by Fossiles. But it is like proving that Electricity exists that is how we have Computers today but it doesn't prove that the Computer built by itself

4/12/09

Go to the Darwin exhibit at the Museum of Natural History in London.

[reply]

4/12/09

cookingasshole

It is probably filled with leftist propaganda designed to bring down the church.

4/12/09

Yeah, that's the kind of open-mindedness we're used to hearing from the pulpit. Keep it up.

[reply]

4/12/09

cookingasshole

I was joking dude

4/12/09

Use a smiley next time, mkay? :-)

[reply]

4/12/09

greencurmudgeon

Evolution is not the total explanation, but it is the most scientifically proven explanation of how life on Earth began and formed. I would have thought the discovery of the Archaeopteryx fossil would have put paid to the thought that life doesn't change over time.

This does not mean there is no God. Evolution is the how, not necessarily the why. That said, evolution will never be proven to the satisfaction of the creationists, and the existence of God will never be proven to the satisfaction of evolutionists. Tension between the two extremes is likely to be permanent.

[reply]

4/12/09

gramoftruth

Very well said! There could be another thread . . . theory of duality
4/12/09

timethief

Good idea.

4/12/09

Stillthinking

Hahahaha! Creationism is just flat out stupid.

If you don't believe in evolution, there is a huge variety of activities that morally you should not be engaging in. Including but not limited to:

1. Doctors visits. Modern medicine is based entirely on the theory of evolution, the cornerstone of modern biology. If you insist upon creationism, you should be seeing your priest or pastor every time you get sick, not your doctor. Forget hospitals, vaccines, antibiotics. All of it. BIG FAT NO or else you are a hypocrite.

2. Buying and eating food from the grocery store because most of the food in the grocery store has been modified by scientists who used chemical and genetic engineering to create a huge variety of foods including most commercial brands of bread, cereal, non-organic fruits and vegetables, non-organic meat. Forget toothpaste, mouthwash, deodorant, soap, shampoo as well.

3. If you wear contacts or glasses, you should be ashamed of yourself. Because if you believe in creationism, you should also know that the science that produced corrective lenses was derived from the biological sciences which are based on evolution.

4. You have to give up your pets. Immediately, because modern domestic dogs and cats are a result of humans manipulating their natural evolution. You can add all livestock to that list as well.

5. You have to start telling your kids that dinosaurs did not exist, which means no more visits to any museums to perpetuate the notion of evolution. It also means no more trips to theme parks that have dinosaur themed attractions. No more movies or TV shows with dinosaurs in them. No more BARNEY.

6. You have to withdraw your children from public schools and enroll them in Christian academies or homeschool them. Schools teach accepted facts not fanciful notions of creation based on religious mythology.

In fact, I am pretty sure that as far as practice, the only Christians who are not hypocrites in their belief in creationism are the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints and the Christian Scientists.

[reply]

4/12/09

timethief

@stillthinking

Hahahaha! Creationism is just flat out stupid.

Woot! ROTFLMAO!

4/12/09

NathanLee

Oh dear, another ignorant person claiming their simplistic logic means that evolution can't happen.

Firstly: evolution is not about the origins of life. Sure they're related fields, but evolution is about how we changed from the earlier life forms NOT how life got from nothing to something. Recently those early stages have been replicated in the lab. Observations of evolution through natural selection have been part of science for a long time. So although you can keep finding creationist rubbish claiming various things: they're decades if not centuries out of date.

Anyhow, creationism is just made up stuff. Certain aspects of the biblical creation stories simply did not happen (e.g. great flood categorically did not happen).

[reply]

4/12/09

mylotnovice

Creationism is most probably silly but Evolution Theory doesn't explain the origin of life, it does only explain one of the mechanics by which micro-transformation could be made. I've been in scientific engineering school with Biology and Statistics specialisation and I know that Geneticians according to this Evolution Theory cannot even explain the existence of the simplest life being which is a virus because the age of Universe would not be even enough for the probability to occur.

So there is something missing for sure in Evolution Theory but the mass people are so willing to use it to justify Anti-God theory that this has nothing to do with Science.

You can pretend that Creationism (at least with somebody called "God") is silly but you cannot justify it with Evolution Theory, but because it is arbitrary like a sect belief. That is this is Logical not Scientific reason (that's why I use the term "silly", it's only in that sense not in the sense to be offending believers).

[reply]

4/12/09

Stillthinking

The OP is using this forum to proselytize. They have done variations on this thread multiple times.

Shouldn't you be in church? It's Easter Sunday.

[reply]

4/12/09

timethief

The OP is using this forum to proselytize. They have done variations on this thread multiple times.

Day in and day out the worst salesmen in the world pour out their ineffectual message on this forum with impunity. They are allowed to do so because they claim to love unbelievers -- don't you know?

4/12/09

Actually, the Great Flood is a myth in several cultures. It may not have happened as a flooding of the entire world, but in a world x-thousand years ago where most people lived out their entire lives within a small area, if your town was suddenly under water, that's what you'd think: the whole world flooded.

Example: The entire Black Sea coast used to be several metres below its present level. They have found ancient settlement remnants under water ringing the entire Black Sea. At some point the water broke through or over the Bosphorus land bridge keeping the ocean from the Mediterranean back, flooding these settlements.

The ocean has also flooded the Mediterranean several times through the Strait of Gibraltar as the seas have risen and fallen over. This has been shown through deep core samples taken at the mouth of the Nile.

[reply]

4/12/09

timethief

You summarized that very well. The oldest record of the great flood story from which the Old testament Noah's arc myth was derived is found in the Epic of Gilgamesh, a Sumerian legend.

4/12/09

Stillthinking

I don't think that belief in Evolution is an affront to anyone's belief in God. You can believe there is a God and you can also believe in evolution. The two are not mutually exclusive.

My issue with this entire thread is that it is insulting to believers who take a more humanist view of Christian belief. I consider myself a Christian, but take a step back when I read the Bible. I consider the Bible a collection of morality tales leading to the creation of the Christian church, not a history of the natural world to be taken literally.

And if you read the New Testament, you would know that there are no provisions that in order to be saved, you have to believe every word of the Bible literally. If you believe in your salvation in Christ, that should be enough.

Also, being a witness to Christ, doesn't mean you insult, berate, and alienate non-believers.

I think posting religious threads is one of the least effect methods of being a witness for Christ. You're not going to change anyone's minds and you're just going to piss people off.

Including me.

[reply]

4/12/09

annz

Here, here! (er, Hear, hear?) Anyway, you said what I wanted to say, much more eloquently than I would have. Thank you, Stillthinking!

4/12/09

I think the same goes in the real world. I'm willing to bet that most Muslims, for example, just want to live a normal life in peace, and hate the radical fundamentalists who give them all a bad name.

[reply]

4/12/09

mylotnovice

I'm not a believer but I'm not annoyed that some people believe in God because as French Famous Philosopher said it's a winning bet: if you believe in God what happens in the two cases:

- If God does really exist, you win
- If God doesn't really exist, you lose nothing

so it's a win-noloss situation when you believe in God

As for me, I rather prefer not to believe in him for

- If God does really exist, he will forgive me as long as I do follow moral principals
- If God doesn't really exist, I have nothing to lose either.

[reply]

4/13/09

nicebargain

I think I agree with you.

4/12/09

timethief

I could care less what others believe in, provided they keep their beliefs to themselves in shared spaces like this one, and do not attempt to convert me.

[reply]

4/12/09

mylotnovice

Christianism has something called "proselytism" in their duty which doesn't exist in some other religions like Buddhim that is why they may be a bit irritating :). Now it's human, if you have conviction or like something you want to share it with others even if it is only a cooking recipe

4/12/09

Recipe for religion:

1. Take one myth

2. Stir in fear and manipulation

3. Build monuments

4. Demand money

(repeat step 4 as long as you can.)

[reply]

4/13/09

thingys

can I get a Amen? Preach on Brother!

4/12/09

countsneaky

I agree with you, my dear Time Thief. The Count made a wrong turn somewhere here looking for the Gentlemen's room. Count Sneaky

[reply]

4/12/09

wagerwitch

DID HE SAY --- MICRO-ORGASM?

Yeah - Satan did it - I'm proud to say!

[reply]

4/12/09

dosox

Evolution is a development & it does not consists of facts & idiots.

[reply]

4/12/09

busylizzy

I thought "evolution" was about creatures adapting and changing over time. I do not think it has has anything to do with the origins of life or creation.

[reply]

4/13/09

flamingpoodle

Exactly. Abiogenesis is a collection of several plausible accounts for the origins of life. Evolution explains the diversity of life. Those are two different theories.

Anyway, this topic has been beaten to death and revived more times than Sylvester Stallone's career.

4/13/09

thingys

Works for me

Image Hosted by <a href="http://ImageShack.us" title="http://ImageShack.us" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">ImageShack.us</a>

By thingys

[reply]

4/13/09

flamingpoodle

Here is a great, free book for those who are struggling to understand evilution:
www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876

[reply]

4/13/09

I do not believe in Evolution or Creationism. I have looked at them both and they both demand for considerable leaps of faith.

Please consider that maybe there’s another option that we haven’t discovered yet.

After all we don’t know everything about everything.

You may find that you exist more peacefully with the understanding that we are not capable of knowing.

Peace Xanthe

[reply]

4/13/09

kzemek

Idiotic!

[reply]

4/13/09

Spiritoftruth

YES, Theory of “Evolution” Idiotic
4/13/09

Stillthinking

Do you two of you see doctors? Do you eat food that has been cultivated? Do you own pets? Do you eat meat? Have you ever seen a nature show in your life or attended a single biology lecture?

Evolution is the cornerstone of modern biological sciences. Evolution is what made domestication of animals, cultivation of crops, and modern medicine possible.

This is only a debate in the US. The rest of world accepts evolution and laughs at us for being so backwards.

4/13/09

garret35

Something created us, as to what who knows.

Call it a higher power, call it anything you want.

Bottom line something had to create the universe....but who or what created that which created us?

It's a never ending debate.

Just be happy we get a chance to be here at all.

[reply]

4/13/09

NewBlogger2008

Evolution works up until a certain point. Certainly micro evolution is valid because species do adapt to their environments and have done so for millions of years. However, evolution begins to lose traction as you move backwards towards simpler and simpler life forms. Until you eventually have reached some single celled organism from which all life has evolved. The question remains however, "Where did that original single cell life form come from?" Life (as far as I am aware at least) cannot form from no where.

[reply]

4/13/09

flamingpoodle

In science, explanations must be based on naturally occurring phenomena. Natural causes are, in principle, reproducible and therefore can be checked independently by others. If explanations are based on purported forces that are outside of nature, scientists have no way of either confirming or disproving those explanations.

Any scientific explanation has to be testable — there must be possible observational consequences that could support the idea but also ones that could refute it. Unless a proposed explanation is framed in a way that some observational evidence could potentially count against it, that explanation cannot be subjected to scientific testing.

books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11876&page=10

[reply]

4/13/09

Jaybetee

Deep stuff here; my brain hurts...I think I'm evolving.

[reply]

4/13/09

legbamel

4/13/09

1brncowco

Has nobody ever seen Darwin's Timeline? The truth of the matter is all right there. They have fossilized cells dating back 3.2 billion years ago. As they say, "The truth is in the pudding."

[reply]

4/13/09

legbamel

No, no, god just planted all of that handy, radio-datable carbon in the dinosaur bones and other fossils to mess with people. He's got a wicked sense of humor, you know.

4/13/09

Do you two of you see doctors? Do you eat food that has been cultivated? Do you own pets? Do you eat meat? Have you ever seen a nature show in your life or attended a single biology lecture?

Evolution is the cornerstone of modern biological sciences. Evolution is what made domestication of animals, cultivation of crops, and modern medicine possible.

Yes I do see a doctor but can he bring me back to life after I die? Yes I do eat food that has been cultivated. Evolutionary science did not invent food cultivation we have been cultivating crops and domesticating animals throughout human history they may have “observed” and created new techniques but it was in existence long before Evolutionary science. Evolutionary scientists did not make modern medicines possible. Most medicines come from nature, whose compounds are replicated by chemists, into chemical formulas. This is chemistry not evolutionary science.
Evolutionary science maybe able to play around with what we already have, but cannot explain or create the energy of life itself. It cannot create life out of inanimate objects and cannot create hybrids from DNA that are not already compatible. Lastly and most importantly it observes a change it’s an observation it can’t explain why and is unable to pin point when a particular strain of bacteria will make an evolutionary development. It just knows it does, and that’s about it.

[reply]

4/13/09

legbamel

"Evolutionary science did not invent food cultivation we have been cultivating crops and domesticating animals throughout human history they may have “observed” and created new techniques but it was in existence long before Evolutionary science."

Just because it wasn't named as such doesn't mean that people were not practicing evolutionary science in crop cultivation and livestock breeding. The whole point of breeding members of a species for the desirable traits, be they size, strength, disease resistance, or what-have-you, is directly influencing the evolution of that species. The fact that it has been done for thousands of years only points to the fact that people recognize its benefit, not that evolution doesn't exist. Whether you call it selective breeding or simply farming, it's still people influencing natural evolution.
4/13/09

flamingpoodle

*sigh
Read the friggin book. Please. Actually, read any friggin book for starters. One without pictures.
4/13/09

legbamel

"Yes I do see a doctor but can he bring me back to life after I die?"
Maybe, depending why your heart stopped.

"[Evolutionary science] cannot create hybrids from DNA that are not already compatible."
Not true. Scientists often insert genes from reproductively-incompatible species in order to test various theories, chemicals, and medicines without using human beings.

"Lastly and most importantly it observes a change it’s an observation it can’t explain why and is unable to pin point when a particular strain of bacteria will make an evolutionary development. It just knows it does, and that’s about it."
So you're rejecting a viable theory because it can't predict a random mutation? Do you doubt that the lottery exists because no once can predict what numbers will pop out of the little hoppers?
4/13/09

timethief

"Yes I do see a doctor but can he bring me back to life after I die?"

Maybe, depending why your heart stopped.

Actually that happened to me twice. I was amazed when I later joined a group for survivors of back-to-life AKA near death experiences and found that 1/3 of the members attributed their survival to "God working through the doctor's to save them."

4/13/09

Evolutionary science did not invent food cultivation we have been cultivating crops and domesticating animals throughout human history they may have “observed” and created new techniques but it was in existence long before Evolutionary science."
*Sigh, So the history of evolutionary science has no beginning..Typical.

[reply]

4/13/09

legbamel

Typical of what or whom?
4/13/09

Stillthinking

The fact that evolution exists allowed human being to manipulate crops and animals into domestication. Animal husbandry is in itself, an experiment in evolution. We didn't call it evolution, but that's exactly what it was.

4/13/09

timethief

I'd like to add something factual to the discussion.

During his five-year trip aboard the H.M.S. Beagle, Charles Darwin discovered that birds called finches were found on all of the Galapagos Islands. He arrived in the Galapagos in 1835 and found 13 species of finch living on different islands. The finches were similar in size and coloration, but had very differently sized and shaped beaks. The beaks of these finches were adapted to the island where they lived and the food that they ate.

Darwin believed that the process of evolution took too long for us to observe it happening, but the finches of the Galapagos were an example of evolution taking place, and he wrote about them in his book called “The Voyage of the Beagle”. Darwin decided that these finches all used to have bills like other finches, but when they came to live on the Galapagos and started eating different things, their beaks changed over thousands of years. This is called divergent evolution. Since he described the finches, a number of researchers, including Peter and Rosemary Grant (who wrote “The Beak of the Finch”) have traveled to the Galapagos Islands to conduct more detailed research.

Each finch species has evolved according to its particular food source. For instance:
* Long beaks are for probing trees and cacti. Cactus finches have long beaks adapted for reaching into cactus flowers and eating the nectar. Warbler and woodpecker finches have long beaks for probing into trees to find insects and other small animals to eat.
* Thick, wide beaks are for crushing hard seeds. Ground finches have beaks adapted for crushing seeds. Medium finches are better adapted at eating small seeds than large ones, so they are not likely to be found on islands with variation in seed size and large ground finches who are able to eat larger seeds. Wide beaks also allow them to take in more food.

Many of the finches in the Galapagos are not yet distinct species because they are separated onto different islands, and physical barriers prevent groups from reproducing. Different species may develop when a population is divided and then the groups evolve in separate ways. This is called allopatric speciation. If the two parts of the population evolve in different ways and then are able to come pack together (if the geographic barrier is removed), the two populations may compete with each other. Or, they may have developed specializations that allow them to no longer need the same food type or nesting space, so they may be able to live in the same space without competition.

Today the leading experts on the finches are Peter and Rosemary Grant of Princeton University. They and their colleagues have shown that the birds originate from a few settlers who arrived on the islands two to three million years ago. These founders gave rise to different lineages, each of which adapted to the islands with a special beak shape of its own. This evolutionary change is remarkably fast compared to most other animals, and it continues today. As droughts and heavy rains hit the islands every few years, natural selection favors different beak sizes. Meanwhile, populations of the finches become separated from one another as they develop unique mating songs. Sometimes this divergence produces a new species. In other cases, closely related species may interbreed and fuse back together.
www.corante.com/loom/archives/006146.html

[reply]

4/13/09

vijayanths

idiotic fact?

[reply]

4/13/09

yourfindit

I have never agreed with the Theory of Evolution. It is said that humans once had the form of apes. Does that mean that our buddies in the zoo will "evolve" sometime in the near future? I think not.

[reply]

4/13/09

timethief

I think it behooves us to actually read and study what's being discussed before we share opinions, lest we end up sounding silly.

"The potentially confusing statement that "evolution is both a theory and a fact" is often seen in biological literature.[1][2][3][4][5][4][6][7] This statement arises because evolution is used in two ways. First, the "fact of evolution" refers to the changes in populations of biological organisms over time, which are known to have occurred through scientific observations and experimentations. Second, the "theory of evolution" refers to the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the current scientific explanation of how these changes occur. Misuse and misunderstanding of how these terms are applied to evolution have been used to construct arguments disputing the validity of evolution."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
4/13/09

legbamel

yourfindit, that's not what the theory means at all. Those animals are specialized for their original habitat. They've already evolved to live in it, although their species and ours will change over time. But the process isn't a set course, whereby one species magically transforms into another as it "grows up".

It's tiny increments over generations, also known as survival of the fittest. The babies that are best at surviving in a given environment are the ones who live long enough to have babies of their own. If some oddity has made that survival more likely, it's more likely to be passed on to more babies. Eventually, the creatures that have thus developed may have abilities or features that their great-great-great-great-great-grandparents did not. Apes will evolve into apes better-suited for their habitat, and as that changes so will their species, assuming that it doesn't change so fast that the existing apes die before they can have babies of their own, which is by no means assured.
4/14/09

flamingpoodle

Our buddies in the zoo have already evolved. They evolved from our same common ancestors in different ways. We evolved as humans, they evolved as zoo buddies.

Congratulations! You just figured out that evolution is not directed and dealt a lethal blow to intelligent design.

4/13/09

@Legbamel
Comparing evolutionary science to the lottery just goes to prove that these changes cannot be pin pointed. If the fact that mutations happen as randomly as lottery wins, prove categorically to you that this theory is 100% correct,then you it appears are satisfied very easily. As I stated in my opening comment and I will say again, I do not believe that we have the capacity as of yet to prove that this theory is cataegorically correct.
@timetheif
Thankyou for sharing your experience with me, now I will share one with you.
My daughter died of a condition called cardiac tamponade. She was a perfectly healthy baby born a little to early.Her doctor believed this advancement in science was the way forward in feeding her. So he fed her through a tube that went into her heart. The tube moved pierced partially her heart but didn’t go all the way through. The feed collected in the pericardial sac. Her heart became to heavy to beat and she died within hours.This procedure 10 years later is now banned in nearly all countries all over the world.
I am however pleased that you are ok.
@flammingpoodle
Isnt the bible a book am I supposed to believe everything that says just because its a BOOK.

[reply]

4/13/09

legbamel

I don't think that the theory is 100% correct. That's why it's a theory and not a fact. New information is discovered all of the timeabout the history and current working of this planet.

I'm very sorry about your daughter and your experiences, but I don't see how a medical accident or badly performed procedure relates to evolution in general. In truth, I'd have died as a baby if medical science hadn't been able to understand what was wrong with me and treat it until I was strong enough to live with the condition. But that was scientific advancement, not natural evolution. If left to nature, I wouldn't be here to write that because I am not one of "the fittest".

I think flamingpoodle was trying to say that you sound unfamiliar with the actual theory, not that you should simply accept something because it's in a book. Indeed, I'd recommend reading books and articles on all sides of a complicated issue before forming a strong opinion. That doesn't usually happen, though, with me as much as with many people.
4/13/09

timethief

@xanthepat
I'm so sorry about what happened to your daughter. I was fortunate because the physicians and technology of the day were sufficient to revive me.
4/14/09

flamingpoodle

No Xanthepat. Reading any book without pictures enhances your reading comprehension skills. Even the Bible or the Quran. Once you get used to reading books without pictures, you can move on to thicker books about topics like, say, evolution, and then give informed opinions on those topics. Of course you shouldn't believe everything that you read just because it's in a book, but you should also take it one step further and second guess your reasons for dismissing what you read.

Evolution does occur randomly at genetic level. However, it does not occur entirely random on further levels because the organism engages with its environment. This means that the fit genes survive while the less fit genes don't, even if the genes do pop up randomly. By means of analogy, it means that you can predict the lottery numbers. Evolution does predict the lottery numbers accurately and it is therefore a repeatable, observable, irrefutable fact. It's like gravity, but we also have the theory of gravity which may or may not be 100% accurate when describing gravity. Similarly, the theory of evolution does its best to describe evolution, but it may not be 100% accurate yet.

However, what we currently have is part of the body of science. Science does modify itself and check itself thanks to peer review and the scientific method (its a way to second guess the reasons for believing something.. ). Since evolution is an observable phenomenon, the scientific method is ideally suited to modify our theory of evolution and to ensure we keep on predicting the lottery numbers better and better.

I did a few posts on evolution. If you don't like my posts, try to follow the links in the text to my sources for more clarity.

necrofiles.blogspot.com/2008/12/how-random-is-random-mutation-on-dna.html

4/13/09

busylizzy

Wow - one heck of an arguement going on here!!!!!!

[reply]

4/13/09

Stillthinking

It's actually making me mad. I need to not follow this argument anymore.

Let people believe what they want to believe.

I really feel these religious threads are pointless. The more I try to argue my point of view, they more entrenched and insistent they become in their belief.

What is the point? In the end, everyone ends up angry and riled up. No one has learned anything. The world goes on.
4/13/09

busylizzy

ST - no one is going to change anyone else's mind when it comes to religion, faith and ideology. Arguements are "exercizes in futility" for everyone concerned. It's been that way since the beginning of humanity! (plz, folks- no discussions on when that started!)

LOL!

Say hi to the calico for me!
4/13/09

Stillthinking

She says "meow" back.
4/13/09

timethief

@busylizzy
no one is going to change anyone else's mind when it comes to religion, faith and ideology

That holds true for me. No amount of arguing will ever convince me that the construct of the creator God that others believe in exists. My experience of god is quite different from theirs. However, my mind is open and ready to examine any empirical and irrefutable evidence demonstrating the existence of such a creator God, if and when it's available.
4/13/09

busylizzy

We are all pretty darn stubborn when it comes to his subject, especially me since I am a Taurus. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
4/13/09

timethief

lol ... Technically, I'm a Leo.
Hear me ROAR ...
But after you get to know me you find out that I'm a pussycat.

4/14/09

hdobhal

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Let me think something..................

yes. now I KNOWWWWWWWWWWW............

GOD created earth, then water, then trees, then viruses etc etc...

Then, HE created humans, Adam and Eve (right?)

Then He created others.

Then He created rulers and masses

Then He created sense in rulers - to use religion as weapon of mass control.

Then, when He created scientists, who actually proved WRONG well known theories like earth is flat, sun revolves around earth etc. OOOOOps. SOMETHING STARTED GETTING WRONG HERE!

Then He created OTHER Scientists. But, the more He created them, the more they countered past absurd (err) beliefs !!! LIKE DARWIN WHO PROPOSED EVOLUTION THEORY!!!!!!!!!!!

Then He created EVEN MORE SCIENTISTS - who discovered and invented things ranging from cars, telephones, electricity, machines, medical equipments to COMPUTERS!!!

Then He created INTERNET!

THEN HE CREATED THESE FELLAS (like thefiveelements) WHO USE ALL THOSE CARS, TELEPHONES, ELECTRICITY, MACHINES, MODERN MEDICAL EQUIPMENT AND THEN USED COMPUTER AND INTERNET TO SHOUT HERE THAT EVOLUTION IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh God, you are so great!!!

[reply]

4/14/09

thefiveelements

[reply]

4/14/09

flamingpoodle

No falsifiable claims? No thanks.

4/14/09

Spiritoftruth

[reply]

4/14/09

flamingpoodle

In that case your standard for truth is lower than mine.

Oh wait, my bad. It does contain falsifiable claims.

But arrogant as humans are, they can’t create one drop of water, which is the most valuable resource for any life to survive on this planet.

Actually, we can create water.
4/14/09

flamingpoodle

Continue The Journey With
The Five Elements:
all truths revealed

Contrast this claim with:

How can anyone in their right mind even consider these idiotic Theories of a “Big Bang” or “Evolution?” that are simply based on the darkness of Ignorance. These Satanist Philosophers make it seem like things can appear into existence by themselves.

I love collecting logical fallacies. I think one look at the periodic table would leave you counting more than 5 elements. Although you might have to take off your shoes.
4/14/09

legbamel

Y'know, name calling, accusations of evil, and obscure threats don't really make your argument any stronger. In fact, at this level they make people back away slowly while reaching for a phone to call the men in white coats to take you away. Are you seriously suggesting that flamingpoodle is a demon who escaped from hell to blog about science?

4/14/09

Spiritoftruth

[reply]

4/14/09

voodooKobra

[So “Evolution” can simply be an idiotic Theory based on the darkness of Ignorance?]
No, it cannot.

Learn what a scientific theory means. The origin of the first single-celled organisms is the study of scientific study. Look up "abiogenesis." We don't have definite answers yet, but we're making progress.

Have some damn patience. Science approaches 100% certainty as time goes on. If there were a problem with evolution, it would be the scientists who would discover it, not the preachers or theologians.

[reply]

4/14/09

Jaybetee

We're getting a number of comments here reported on. Let's start playing a little nicer, or this one's outta here.

[reply]

4/14/09

Jaybetee

We won't remove threads that aren't offensive or that violate site rules. Just because someone posts the fact that they think evolution is idiotic is not in itself offensive; it is an opinion. Let's keep the reports to threads that are truly offensive or break a rule.
4/14/09

Stillthinking

I find the SHEER number of religious threads on the main discussion boards to be extremely offensive.

So, I am going to keep hitting that report button.
4/14/09

crpitt

I only reported one that I felt was link dropping and the sole motivation for this post.
4/14/09

Jaybetee

We have no problem with reported threads. Just please don't report a thread because it contradicts your opinions. Make sure it is an offensive statement or it violates a discussions rule.
4/14/09

Epicharis

yeah...like that's going to happen...
4/14/09

Stillthinking

Why can't religion have it's own forum like politics????
4/14/09

Epicharis

because the admins don't want it to
4/14/09

Stillthinking

I don't understand why. I think religious topics are even more toxic than political ones.

The believers get all riled up that we can't be converted to their system of beliefs. The non-believers get angry over being preached to.

Just get rid of these threads.
4/14/09

Epicharis

ask them...but I imagine it's got something to do with them being religious themselves...you'll notice that the godsquad never complain about how many religion discussions there are...
4/14/09

Jaybetee

you'd be imagining wrong. don't make assumpitions.

4/14/09

Epicharis

*sigh*

[reply]

4/14/09

thefiveelements