Evolution vs. Intelligent Design vs. Creationism

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Postby jokoboy » Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:57 pm

Thats a pretty insightful comment by Mohandas Gandhi, makes you think a little
"If you have to be crazy to be a duck hunter, I do not wish to be sane."
User avatar
jokoboy
hunter
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:35 pm


Postby goldhunter470 » Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:03 pm

grunt_doc wrote:I'm new to this forum, but here goes:

At home on my bookshelf, I have the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, and Darwin's Origin of Species all sitting next to eachother. Know why? It's because they are all the same. They each give you the same message from a different cultural perspective. They are different "paths" to the same destination. Science does not discredit creationism, it explains the steps. Science will tell you HOW a tree grows. Faith will tell you WHY a tree grows.

Note I didn't say "religion." It doesn't matter. Faith is the key.

Doc


I can't believe I missed this so long ago but this is probably the most insightful comment I've ever seen on this topic. I don't necessarily agree with following a certain faith but this is a GREAT post!! And the honest truth is that no one knows for sure WHY....
Input that enables becomes thoughts that smother.
User avatar
goldhunter470
hunter
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Fargo (like the movie!) ND

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:36 am

huntingdude16 wrote:Do you deny that there are many Christians that don't believe in evolution?


Speaking of Christians....

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

-Mohandas Gandhi
Of course there are and who do they hurt. Worst case they get evolution barred from the curriculum. So what? People say I'll never need geometry or a lot of other classes after they get out of high school. I can guarantee nobody will ever need to know about evolution unless they become an evolutionary biologist.

Hindus aren't all up for sainthood. They are non-violent, except when it comes to muslims. Then look out. Why do you think the Pakistanis and the Indians are always on the brink of war?

What really concerns me is that progressives like Obama may know all the ins and outs of evolution, but are so completely ignorant of the science of economics. This does real harm to real people, which is why I brought it up earlier. We argue about something that is both unknowable and completely irrelevant. Yet, we are accepting of truly foolish beliefs that do real harm to real people and we give those people a pass. Different religion and different part of science that they choose to ignore, but same nonsense.

Economics is a science. Like evolutionary biology, there are things that we know and things that we think we know and there is a whole lot of stuff we cannot ever know precisely. That does not give justification to disregard it completely because we have some higher purpose because the laws of economics cannot be violated just because we don't like them or choose not to believe them. That's why my comment about Obama's stated goal of reducing demand for foreign oil and reducing the competetiveness of American oil companies being a true contradiction and one of great iimportance for everyone American either directly or indirectly. It will do harm to every American with a pension, 401(k), or basically anyone that plans to retire as well as every American that works for an American oil company or that would benefit from a future job created by expanded American oil production.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby jokoboy » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:52 am

SpinnerMan wrote: I can guarantee nobody will ever need to know about evolution unless they become an evolutionary biologist.


So just keep people uneducated? How are they supposed to be evolutionary biologist without being introduced to evolution in the schooling system? That is the whole point of having a diverse curriculum in school, so as to introduce students to different ideas and different ways of thinking. So why have classes like American history and math in the curriculum? Those classes are just needed for people that are going into those fields so let them learn it on their own and take it out of the curriculum. To think like that is to totaly underestimate the need for education for our future generations.

Also, why bring so much unrelated politics into this discussion. This topic isn't about the demand on foreign oil or Obama’s ignorance of the science of economics. Its about Creation vs Evolution.
"If you have to be crazy to be a duck hunter, I do not wish to be sane."
User avatar
jokoboy
hunter
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:35 pm

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:16 am

With the phrase "worst case," I think it was safe to assume I didn't support it, but if that wasn't clear. I think they should teach the theory of evolution. I don't even think it would hurt to teach the less accepted theory of intelligent design, if you really want to teach independent thought. I do not think they should teach creationism because this is not a science-based theory.

If you broaden the topic to religious-based neglect of science. The rejection of economics is pertinent. It is the same thing for the same reason. It is outcome-based selectivity of the use or rejection of science. The creationists often are very science-based, but reject evolution. The anti-religious reject science and take the theory of evolution as the gospel that dispels the existance of any God or higher being. The leftists / progressives reject the science of economics to achieve their religious objectives of a powerful centralized government with them in charge.

Is a sound economic or a evolutionary biology education more important? Ideally both, but the focus should be on ensuring every child is well versed in the more important subject.

The leftist / progressive types have ensured that the average student doesn't know a damn thing about economics, but they fight with great passion to ensure that every child in America knows that we may have evolved from primates :huh: This is far worse than the creationist that fight with religious fervor to prevent children from learning that we might have evolved from primates. Besides, how well are they doing? Who hasn't heard about the theory of evolution and doesn't still believe in Santa Claus?
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby jokoboy » Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:46 am

SpinnerMan wrote:The leftist / progressive types have ensured that the average student doesn't know a damn thing about economics, but they fight with great passion to ensure that every child in America knows that we may have evolved from primates :huh: This is far worse than the creationist that fight with religious fervor to prevent children from learning that we might have evolved from primates. Besides, how well are they doing? Who hasn't heard about the theory of evolution and doesn't still believe in Santa Claus?


This is true since most of America cannot manage their own money and fall into debt hard and fast. There is a definite need in our schooling system for a more economic based curriculum so that our country doesn’t become so debt riddled that it collapses in upon itself.

SpinnerMan wrote:The leftists / progressives reject the science of economics to achieve their religious objectives of a powerful centralized government with them in charge.


This really doesn’t make any sense to me since I see leftists as very anti-religious. So they have a religious objective of a powerful central government? I know they want a powerful central government but I don't think its very religious based. More government is not the answer but yet we see more government involved with our daily life. Not only is it the leftist but the rightist also. The lines are very vague in times like these.

My basic proposal, then, is that most (but not all) Leftists/liberals are motivated by strong ego needs — needs for power, attention, praise and fame. And in the USA and other developed countries they satisfy this need by advocating large changes in the society around them — thus drawing attention to themselves and hopefully causing themselves to be seen as wise, innovative, caring etc. Rightists by contrast have no need either for change or its opposite and may oppose change if they see it as destructive or favour change if they see it as constructive. -David Horowitz
"If you have to be crazy to be a duck hunter, I do not wish to be sane."
User avatar
jokoboy
hunter
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:35 pm

Postby huntingdude16 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:49 am

With the phrase "worst case," I think it was safe to assume I didn't support it, but if that wasn't clear. I think they should teach the theory of evolution. I don't even think it would hurt to teach the less accepted theory of intelligent design, if you really want to teach independent thought. I do not think they should teach creationism because this is not a science-based theory.

And intelligent design IS? :huh:

The anti-religious reject science and take the theory of evolution as the gospel that dispels the existance of any God or higher being.

This, to me, simply shows me your ignorance of just what an Atheists point of view is and what they believe. If that is what you think then there is really no point in discussing this topic with you.

Good day, and good hunting.
huntingdude16
hunter
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: NoDak

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:16 pm

huntingdude16 wrote:And intelligent design IS? :huh:
It is. You should read about it. It's fairly interesting and definitely thought provoking, which is why adding it to the curriculum would be a good thing.

SpinnerMan wrote:The anti-religious reject science and take the theory of evolution as the gospel that dispels the existance of any God or higher being.

huntingdude16 wrote:This, to me, simply shows me your ignorance of just what an Atheists point of view is and what they believe. If that is what you think then there is really no point in discussing this topic with you.
I did not say atheists. Maybe your just a little too sensitive. Just like there are some Christians that believe the universe is only thousands of years old. There are atheists, but not all atheists, that believe things about evolution that have no basis in the science and are simply not true. A subset of these are so anti-religious that are blinded by their zeal to prove that God does not exist that they treat evolution as a religious tenet and not a scientific theory and project far more upon it than is rational. Not all atheists feel this way, which is why I did not use the word atheist.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby huntingdude16 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:05 pm

It is. You should read about it. It's fairly interesting and definitely thought provoking, which is why adding it to the curriculum would be a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

"It is a modern form of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, modified to avoid specifying the nature or identity of the designer.The idea was developed by certain United States creationists who reformulated their argument in the creation-evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science. Advocates of intelligent design argue that it is a scientific theory, and seek to fundamentally redefine science to accept supernatural explanations"

"The unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is pseudoscience. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science." The American Association for the Advancement of Science says "intelligent design has not been demonstrated to be a scientific theory." The US National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience. Others have concurred, and some have called it junk science."

Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience is defined as a body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the scientific method,lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status.

As far as i'm concerned, it deals with a supernatural creater that might as well be God, and really I don't see how this can be claimed to be a Science.

I don't see a middle ground with using both God AND science to explain origin. Theirs a reason they call it faith.

I did not say atheists. Maybe your just a little too sensitive. Just like there are some Christians that believe the universe is only thousands of years old. There are atheists, but not all atheists, that believe things about evolution that have no basis in the science and are simply not true. A subset of these are so anti-religious that are blinded by their zeal to prove that God does not exist that they treat evolution as a religious tenet and not a scientific theory and project far more upon it than is rational. Not all atheists feel this way, which is why I did not use the word atheist.

Like?
huntingdude16
hunter
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: NoDak

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:47 pm

You got a long way to go their dude.

Evolution is NOT testable either. There is not a repeatable experiment that can be performed. What experiment could be devised that would disprove the theory? It will always be a theory that ebbs and flows as different fossils are discovered and somebody comes up with a better story that fits them all together. I believe it is how we came to be, but you cannot prove it in a scientifically rigorous manner. There will always be alternative explanations that cannot be disproved. I can't remember are we looking for one missing link or are there several species that link primates and humans?

Be careful on your references. Wikipedia - good for basic information, but not 100% reliable.

The two organization referred to sound suspicious to me. There are profession societies for most organizations. These sound like political organizations.

US National Science Teachers Association - lots of stuff about going green, etc. on their website.

American Association for the Advancement of Science - Sounds like a political group to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Association_for_the_Advancement_of_Science
AAAS used satellite images in February 2007 to document human rights abuses in Burma.

So how does this advances science? It's quite a stretch to see how this would be the highest priority activity to advance science.

huntingdude16 wrote:Like?
Your right. All atheists are intelligent well-adjusted, well-educated people that have a perfect grasp of science and are not rebelling against their parents, religion, or society. It the first large group that has all perfect members and no whack-jobs in the entire lot :rofl:
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby TEAM WEBFOOTPOSSE » Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:05 pm

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
waterfowler20 wrote:
getemducks wrote:I am new to this but I think what you have there is a duck. :huh:

Are you crazy! That ain't no duck, thats one of'dem cackler gooses! :hi:
User avatar
TEAM WEBFOOTPOSSE
hunter
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:39 am
Location: Nebraska

Postby huntingdude16 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:14 pm

How about the fact that certain bacteria have become more and more resisitant to drugs suppose to kill them?
Some will call it 'adapting'. Well guess what, that's what evolution is all about!
All you have to do is look around the world to see why saying 'evolution can't be proved' is a bunch of bologna. There are so many examples, I could go on and on and on and on of adaptations that have been made. Yeah, it's 'just a theory'. But....

"Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena."

-United States Academy of Sciences

So how does this advances science? It's quite a stretch to see how this would be the highest priority activity to advance science.

This would have to do more with the advancement of technology, but the advancement of technology often would not happen without advances in science.

Your right. All atheists are intelligent well-adjusted, well-educated people that have a perfect grasp of science and are not rebelling against their parents, religion, or society. It the first large group that has all perfect members and no whack-jobs in the entire lot :rofl:

You didnt answer my question.
huntingdude16
hunter
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: NoDak

Postby J Loves Huntin » Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:17 pm

I will ask the question, when someone beats you up consistently, what do you do. If you are like me you find a way to get ready the next time. Working out, martial arts and wrestling are all way of "adapting to fix the sittuatio." Is it possible that these bacteria are becoming stronger because just like we as humans become irratated when someone want to hurt or kill us they try to find a way to stop it. And explain to me how a paramecium which is one of the most simple life forms can swim amazingly fast; so fast to put it in human terms it would be the equivilant of a human swimming 60mph through peanut butter. Sound like we are getting worse not better. :oops:
And lets be honest both sides are based on faith. I as a Christian believe that mine is far more scientific and go ahead ask me why I will tell you. Not to mention the guy who came up with it Darwin was not even highly educated in science. HE WAS a former BIBLE college student. :rolleyes:
And no the Koran, Darwin's bood, the Bible and all other religious doctrine are not the same "paths" to godhood, heaven or any other form of righteousness. Jesus said it really clearly, " I am the Way the Truth and the Light, no man comes to the Father but through ME!" And yes I can stand on a soapbox all Day! :rofl:
Jesus Saves!!!
Season 2010-2011
2 Specks
1 Dove
User avatar
J Loves Huntin
hunter
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Dallas

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:29 pm

Still bacteria.

If you define evolution as simply adaptation, then it's indisputable. We can even test and prove that. There is no argument here.

If you include creation of life from nothing but a soup of chemicals and the creation of new species, then this has NEVER been observed despite a 100% guarantee of a Nobel Prize for the first scientists to do it. Nobody can think of any other plausible explanation and I agree.

Scientific theories are disproved from time to time. This is one that will never be proven or disproven because it can't be. Many details have and will change over time and ironically the theory of evolution will continue to evolve or maybe just adapt.

If you don't know that there are anti-religious zealots, I'm not going to do that much homework for you.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby huntingdude16 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:04 am

I will ask the question, when someone beats you up consistently, what do you do. If you are like me you find a way to get ready the next time. Working out, martial arts and wrestling are all way of "adapting to fix the sittuatio." Is it possible that these bacteria are becoming stronger because just like we as humans become irratated when someone want to hurt or kill us they try to find a way to stop it.



And lets be honest both sides are based on faith. I as a Christian believe that mine is far more scientific and go ahead ask me why I will tell you. Not to mention the guy who came up with it Darwin was not even highly educated in science. HE WAS a former BIBLE college student. :rolleyes:

Theres that term 'educated' again. Do you really want to talk about education?
Yes, he had studied to enter the clergy. But he then had his doubts and ultimatly decided against it, and through his findings on his voyage on the H.M.S. Beagle, and other sources, he came up with the theory of evolution. Darwin had always had a great interest in nature, and like you and me was a hunter and fisherman. No, he wasnt highly educated in science. But neither am I, and I consider myself to know a lot more about how nature works than the general public!

If you define evolution as simply adaptation, then it's indisputable. We can even test and prove that. There is no argument here.

...and those adaptations can eventually change the animal enough to become a completly different looking animal.


If you include creation of life from nothing but a soup of chemicals and the creation of new species, then this has NEVER been observed despite a 100% guarantee of a Nobel Prize for the first scientists to do it. Nobody can think of any other plausible explanation and I agree.

Remember the Miller experiments? It obviously didnt create life, but it certainly is intriguing!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment

Yes I know this is Wiki, but it is a widely known experiment.

If you don't know that there are anti-religious zealots, I'm not going to do that much homework for you.

The vast majority of the anti-religious(Atheists) are not radical. The simple fact that you can't even name one is evidence of this. Look at Richard Dawkins, he is probably one of the most widely known Atheists, but would you consider him a radical? I sure wouldnt!
And if there are, how often do you hear about them? I sure havnt...

Theres probably about the same %age in proportion, as there are supporters for Ralph Nader in the upcoming election. In other words, not even worth bringing up.
huntingdude16
hunter
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: NoDak

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:40 am

There is always one of the most famous atheist.

“ Religious suffering is, at the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. ”
— Karl Marx

That puts you in good company. An atheist that spawned a philosophy that is responsible for more suffering and death than all the Christian fanatics that have ever existed. Mr. Marx is even more well known than Richard Dawkins.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Preacher1011 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:01 am

jokoboy wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote: I can guarantee nobody will ever need to know about evolution unless they become an evolutionary biologist.


So just keep people uneducated? How are they supposed to be evolutionary biologist without being introduced to evolution in the schooling system? That is the whole point of having a diverse curriculum in school, so as to introduce students to different ideas and different ways of thinking. So why have classes like American history and math in the curriculum? Those classes are just needed for people that are going into those fields so let them learn it on their own and take it out of the curriculum. To think like that is to totaly underestimate the need for education for our future generations.

Also, why bring so much unrelated politics into this discussion. This topic isn't about the demand on foreign oil or Obama’s ignorance of the science of economics. Its about Creation vs Evolution.


Well I'll bring up the education thing again. I don't agree with introducing more and more crap that kids in high school won't need. They need to have it more like college to get the kids ready for it. Have majors and minors, just like college, and have them take courses pertaining to their major. Have wildlife people have a heavy science load, and artists a heavy art load. Don't make them take non-needed courses. If a student doesn't know what they'll be doing after high school, then have a general education major just like in college. High school needs to be prep for college, not learn about everything and hope it helps you later on. Anywho, that's my .02 and my :hijacked:
Locked&Loaded wrote: I got out shot by a 13 yeard old girl.


jrockncash wrote:Is that mask only for ghosts or can fat guys with little weiners use it too?


Image
User avatar
Preacher1011
Forum & State Moderator
 
Posts: 8456
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:14 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN

Postby rmh » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:40 pm

The problem with having "majors" in high school is that most high school kids have no idea what they want to do. The majority (something like 70%) of college kids change their majors 3 times. Not just concentration (from accounting to marketing, say) but a total change of majors. And, if high school is all "college prep" what do you do with the 50% or so (avg.) that don't go to college? We're going through that now where I teach, trying to tell folks that all our kids are college bound.
2013 Totals
1 2003 Ford Focus (harvested by a 6 point whitetail)
1 1991 Chevy Lumina (harvested by a PT Cruiser)
rmh
hunter
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: On the Chesapeake

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:48 pm

I agree with rmh on this one.

I went to a high school that did an exceptionally good job at preparing the kids that were going to college for college. It completely failed on preparing the kids that were not going to college. All of my close friends did not go to college. It was depressing to come home from college and here about how they lost their job at the chicken factory, etc., and I eventually lost touch with most of them because they ended up with very depressing lives. The sad thing is they had access to a very good tech school that they could have went to in high school and the kids that did go there were doing fine.

Anyone that is truly qualified to go to college will probably do just fine. It's the kids that are not qualified to go to college that we really need to make certain they can read, write, and solve problems at a high school level and we need to push them to get a skill and/or join the military. If we don't, they end up have unnecessarily difficult lives.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Preacher1011 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:46 pm

At my high school we had a technical, university, or dual paths. I don't know, I just took so much crap that I never will use again. I don't have to have spainish in my major, but I got to take two years of it in high school.
Locked&Loaded wrote: I got out shot by a 13 yeard old girl.


jrockncash wrote:Is that mask only for ghosts or can fat guys with little weiners use it too?


Image
User avatar
Preacher1011
Forum & State Moderator
 
Posts: 8456
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:14 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN

Postby jehler » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:06 pm

I have used every single thing I learned in highschool. everyone that says they have taken so much blah blah that they will never use again, like what? go to mexico preach (or texas, florida or california) and see if those two years of spanish don't come in handy. I still remember how many units in a mole, pi to 4 or 5 places. I know that to get the air bubbles out of a block of clay you have to bang it on the bench for a friggin hour or it will explode in the kiln, etc. etc. Using what you learn in highschool everday isn't the important thing, knowing it is and a bare minuimum of knowledge it be.

Just thought of one thing. I have never diagramed a sentence in post highschool life. :rofl: they still teach that randy?
Buy it, use it, break it, fix it,
Trash it, change it, mail - upgrade it,
Charge it, point it, zoom it, press it,
Snap it, work it, quick - erase it,
Write it, cut it, paste it, save it,
Load it, check it, quick - rewrite it,
Plug it, play it, burn it
User avatar
jehler
thread hi-jacking expert and a great guy
 
Posts: 17516
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:52 pm
Location: Traverse City, MI

Postby rmh » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Sentence diagramming? I don't know about elementary or middle school but not high school so much. Maybe a couple but it's a dying art (torture?) that has died out pretty much. Personally I never got much past subject and verb.



As an aside, I've always wished I knew more math (pretty much goop to me), it would have helped me in things I've done in which I've struggled.
2013 Totals
1 2003 Ford Focus (harvested by a 6 point whitetail)
1 1991 Chevy Lumina (harvested by a PT Cruiser)
rmh
hunter
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: On the Chesapeake

Postby jehler » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:59 pm

math stuck with me and i use it daily, calculus, not so much but algebra and geometry yes.
Buy it, use it, break it, fix it,
Trash it, change it, mail - upgrade it,
Charge it, point it, zoom it, press it,
Snap it, work it, quick - erase it,
Write it, cut it, paste it, save it,
Load it, check it, quick - rewrite it,
Plug it, play it, burn it
User avatar
jehler
thread hi-jacking expert and a great guy
 
Posts: 17516
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:52 pm
Location: Traverse City, MI

Postby huntingdude16 » Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:33 am

There is always one of the most famous atheist.

“ Religious suffering is, at the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. ”
— Karl Marx

That puts you in good company. An atheist that spawned a philosophy that is responsible for more suffering and death than all the Christian fanatics that have ever existed. Mr. Marx is even more well known than Richard Dawkins.

Do you know what Marx's view on evolution was, and how valiently he supported it?

Because, relating back to the original refuted statement...
"There are atheists, but not all atheists, that believe things about evolution that have no basis in the science and are simply not true."
Unless you do know, Marx is a moot point!
huntingdude16
hunter
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: NoDak

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:48 am

huntingdude16 wrote:Unless you do know, Marx is a moot point!
He was a big fan.

huntingdude16 wrote:All that seems complicated. I spose I could just believe in God and not have to try to comprehend all of it. Ignorance is bliss.
You don't believe in God, yet you seem to go the ignorance is bliss route.

This seems to be a fair synopsis of Marx's thoughts. It's written by a religious group of some sorts, but it seems to have a lot of the basic stuff in one place.
http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC4W0999.pdf
Marx sent Darwin a copy of Das Kapital. He did not want to dedicate it to him.

You need to read the opposing side. Try to understand where they are coming from. Nobody is 100% right or wrong. Until you can fully explain and understand the counter argument you are simply accepting your side out of ignorance. Although that may seem like bliss, it's how you end up with a Presidential candidate that is "intelligent" and doesn't know anything. There is a reason I read Obama's 2nd book. I was going to read his 1st, but the 2nd one scared me so badly, I'm not sure if it's worth my time. Obama clearly has no understanding of the opposing view, which is why he does not know how to argue against it. He doesn't really know what it is, but only what like minded people have told him it is and they are wrong.

I know it's a shock, but most Christians believe in basic concepts of the theory of evolution. They just don't think it means much in the grand scheme of things.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16195
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

PreviousNext

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AWall3322 and 4 guests