your views on creationism please

[tyder001]

Hang on. As much as I hate to do it I'm gonna use my lunch break and go back and read the whole thread. Cause I must be missing something. Then at least when I comment I'll be sure of what I"m commenting on. :shy:

---------- Post added at 05:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 PM ----------

O.k got it now. Went back to the place I came in today. So, here goes:
He made an long opening statement. Lance latched on (not unfairly)to the Platypus statement. Then Openmindedman (opm) decided to continue. Lance gets angry and starts to curse at which point somebody else joins in and the fun begins. opm then asked for irrefutible evidence of evolution (knowing that was a red herring and wasn't gonna get answered.) But to the rescue comes (imo) the first "rational" response from CapnG. Then opm says something about Fratual math (which I know nothing about.) Then CapnG again has a good response. At which point opm finally does provide a link to a source. Then Lance decides to ask his question again after all the other yakk yakk from both parties and opm again does not provide lance with any answer.

So, in my humble opinion he did actually provide one link and did ignore the Platypus thing. Still, except for the extreme anger he appears to have generated I don't see a reason to "censor." But that is just my opinion and your welcome to disagree. I did google the term and found (as I suspected) a wide range of answers from creationist to materilsit to everyone in between. Looks to me like this dudes greatest sin is to challenge orthadoxy. Let me quickly say I am no scientist. I have a Degree but it is in the social or "soft" sciences and would not qualify me to talk much about the merits or weakness in evolutionary theory. I simply like a good honest conversation and feel much can be learned by sharing human experience. Again, if you want to turn it into a "Only science" skeptical inquirer site then I'm in the wrong place. I thought we "discussed" ideas here. By the way I don't bleive in flying disks and aliens seeding earth and men/women from outer space. But, I still enjoy the conversation and don't get all huffy just because none of you can show me the 'spaceship" I think this was overblown.

 

[tyder001]

I am incensed that you missed the high level of humor in virtually all my posts!

Sorry, I'll try to keep up.

 

[CapnG]

Wow this thread's still here? I would have thought so-openminded-my-brains-fell-out's continuous ramblings and repetitions would have at least gotten it locked by now.

Kudos Ron for your attempts to inject logic into this but your assessment of his argument seems to be accurate upon review: confirmation bias exists, therefore evolution is invalid. Still what can you expect from a person who's lead point is "the more we learn, the less we know"?

Also thanks Xylo for the tonsils info. Neat stuff.

Oh and tyder, I get what you're saying but I don't think you understand how free speech actually works, see Polly Parrot is free to come here and say whatever he wants, that's his right. But the rest of us have an equal right to call him on his BS, shout him down or just generally ignore him, so we have been. Ain't freedom grand?

 

[tyder001]

Sigh! Such condensation on this forum. Yeah I know how free speech works. That's why I'm anti censorship.

 

[CapnG]

Sigh! Such condensation on this forum. Yeah I know how free speech works. That's why I'm anti censorship.

Er, I think you mean either "condemnation" or "condesension". "Condensation" is beads of water.

Regardless, for the record I wasn't trying to be, it's just that your intial outburst of "OMG! Freedom of speech you guys!" seemed a little... overwrought.

 

[tyder001]

I saw I used the rong woid but to be honest at that point I was just tired and ready to give it up. Seems the choir has spoken and any other voice is shouted down. No it wasn't over wrought at all. Some folks started yelling "ban" and I felt the mob mentality had taken over at that point. I'm through with this topic (Didn't I say that b4?) Just got up with an upset stomach and thought reading some blogs and boards would get my mind off it. Anyway, it is what it is and I still feel the way I feel about it. I stated that I am not a young earth creationist and I'm not a reductionist either. I think there is enough evidence that something is going on beyond blind chance or I wouldn't waste my time on sites like this in the first place. I don't feel my time is wasted simply because I do feel there are truths to be learned by the "human" experience. I"ll hush now and let all of the little group here feel like they have vanquished the ignorent. Although whoever the guy is (and I"m not a big fan of him either) he's laughing it up with his buddies telling em how he kicked ass over on the fanatical forum. The winner writes the history and I guess all of you is writing his or their own.

---------- Post added at 07:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:32 AM ----------

One last thing and then I'll hush. Thanks for not entirely bashing me over the mess up with the "wrong word and spelling" mess. At least you didn't pull that out as a reason to dismiss my whole argument. Some people would have. I just type really fast (but not well) and don't go back and correct myself in the heat of the moment. 8)

 

[NTS]

The (say) death of a child strikes me as a far more powerful and devastating argument against a loving God than any scientific theory could possibly be, yet the deaths of children are taken for granted while believers and secularists argue about evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory. At present it is the best explanation we have for the observed facts of biology. It should be understood and discussed from that perspective. It is not a proxy for faith or its absence, and shouldn't be drafted into serving as such.

 

[CapnG]

Seems the choir has spoken and any other voice is shouted down. No it wasn't over wrought at all. Some folks started yelling "ban" and I felt the mob mentality had taken over at that point.

Now hang on a second. If free speech is free speech then "the choir" has every right to shout others down. Doesn't mean we know what we're talking about (although in this case I'd say we certainly supported our side more strongly) but by the rules of the forum nothing untoward has happened. Also one or two people requested bans. Two people hardly makes a mob.

Although whoever the guy is (and I"m not a big fan of him either) he's laughing it up with his buddies telling em how he kicked ass over on the fanatical forum.

If he is then he's got even bigger mental problems than I thought. Who brags to their friends about arguments they had on the internet?

Thanks for not entirely bashing me over the mess up with the "wrong word and spelling" mess.

I try not to harangue people about spelling/grammar mistakes too much because I make them all the time myself, I just point them out as I would expect others to point them out to me. Which reminds me: it's "ignorAnt"

 

[tyder001]

I try not to harangue people about spelling/grammar mistakes too much because I make them all the time myself, I just point them out as I would expect others to point them out to me. Which reminds me: it's "ignorAnt"

Doh! O.k. I get your point. Still not entirely agreeing but I do understand what you are saying. I gotta get some sleep now or I'll be doing more than spelling errors at work this AM. See ya next time.

 

[SoCalGNX]

After wading thru all the comments about things that do not have to do with creationism.....I think the concept has no place being taught as "science" as some would like to see. Creationism is a part of some religions belief system and needs to stay separated from anything else. I don't know that Darwin had all the answers either. But I favor Darwin over mythology.

 

[openmindedman]

This thread has been interesting reading since I left.

Thanks for the open minded people (oops, person) that injected some reasonableness into the discussion, going against a mob yelling "Hang Him!" is always hard to do.

Lets talk real quick about fact quoting, I have read many "facts" about evolution on this thread, but haven't read many sources for those quotes? I supposed that just means they are all liars right?

When you know your totally right, without any doubt, then it should be easy for you to just show the evidence proving yourself un-questionably right.

But again, I haven't seen that, I've seen insults, and statements about how "Science just has to be right", or the "Overwhelming evidence"... show me.

You act as if, "hey he doesn't believe, that must mean he's either an total idiot! or never read any of the scientific evidence."

I'd like to think that statement was wrong, at least on one count ;-)

I do look at so called evidence, and notice interesting patterns where evolutionists always interpret any evidence as something to support their theory.

"WHAT, but there is peer review!!!" yep, which I have (shocker) read about, and psychological studies (read previous posts of mine) have proved (interesting word, in this case proof means something that can be replicated and seen in action) that science is very susceptible to bias clouding their findings.

For some reason, peer review have become some kind of magical panacea that protects against any form of basic human psychology, and the need not only to be right, but this odd need to believe we know more than we do.

Evolution is the new religious myth that has interpreted a lot of data to create a intricately woven belief system... not fact.

Data like the fig wasp, which hasn't changed for over 34 million years, is still interpreted as data for the proof of evolution... why? because that's the bias. No peer review will change that, all the peers will agree that fig wasps are a product of evolution, even it it's a mystery how it stayed unaltered for so long. That is holding to a belief to answer all questions.... religion.

citation: Futurity.org 34-million-year-old fig wasp fossil found

“There were three very well-preserved specimens and we were able to use modern techniques to look at them in detail,” says Compton. “What makes this fossil fascinating is not just its age, but that it is so similar to the modern species. This means that the complex relationship that exists today between the fig wasps and their host trees developed more than 34 million years ago and has remained unchanged since then.”

Fig wasps and fig trees are mutually dependent, with each of the 800 or so modern species of tree pollinated by just one or two species of fig wasp that ignore other fig trees. The wasps—which measure just 1.5 mm in length—have developed a particular body shape and features to enable them to crawl into figs to reach the flowers there.

This, could also be interpreted to be data for creation, and like so much other evolutionary data, it's the loudest voice that winds the interpretation debate... because the peers agree! that doesn't make it true!

I think the only way we will ever find truth is to look at the data objectively and understand that as humans we have limited faculties to understand the universe around us, and to believe we have figured it all out, is not just hubris, but the height of ignorance.

 

[justcurious]

This thread has been interesting reading since I left.

We agree right there...

I do look at so called evidence, and notice interesting patterns where evolutionists always interpret any evidence as something to support their theory.

Since you are back I might reiterate my unanswered question, it is personal in nature so you don't have to answer but I feel it would help us understand each other : Do you agree with the creationist view as stated by the Holy Bible ?

 

[CapnG]

You know you're right lance, this guy's HYSTERICAL! I can't remember the last time I saw such unadulterated bullshit presented in a serious manner.

 

[openmindedman]

Since you are back I might reiterate my unanswered question, it is personal in nature so you don't have to answer but I feel it would help us understand each other : Do you agree with the creationist view as stated by the Holy Bible ?

If you mean that I believe the bible in the sense that the earth must be only 6000 years old and dinosaurs were created by the devil to corrupt mankind.

No I do not... as I'm sure most people that believe in God, don't limit him to such a tiny scope.

Do I believe God could have used Evolution as a tool of creation, yes, I don't see why not....... if evolution could be proven.

I guess the basic answer is, the God I believe in is big enough to use any tools to create the universe He saw fit. But He's also big enough to have used tools to create us all that we, as creation, may never be able to fully understand or have the capacity to truly comprehend.

There is still mystery in the world, and it's there even if we want to believe we have already stamped it all out.

---------- Post added at 12:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 AM ----------

You know you're right lance, this guy's HYSTERICAL! I can't remember the last time I saw such unadulterated bullshit presented in a serious manner.

really... just read any post you have ever made.

 

[CapnG]

really... just read any post you have ever made.

HAHAHA! More comedy gold! I assure you I read every post I make, I kinda have to as I'm typing them. Pity you don't seem to though, you might have actually learned something by now. Oh well...

I've read every post you've made too. It amuses me that you can't see te inherent irony of decrying evolution while simultaneously trumpeting psychological research as the absolute be-all and end-all excuse (sorry reason) why it can't possibly be correct, psychology being such an exact and perfect science and all.

The fig wasp example YOU provided proves unequivically that despite your claims you simply don't understand evolution. At all. Not that that matters of course, so long as you've made up your mind and cling to your own "belief system" (the mighty PYSCHOLOGY!) we're clearly all fools.

BTW, I'm still waiting on your thesis dimissing gravity since it too is just theory (no doubt it's caused by mass psychosis as proven through PSYCHOLOGY!).

 

[openmindedman]

BTW, I'm still waiting on your thesis dimissing gravity since it too is just theory (no doubt it's caused by mass psychosis as proven through PSYCHOLOGY!).

You can't grasp the "theory" about my argument.

You act as if basic human psychology is a fantasy! (even if it can be tested) but digging up a bone and yelling, I know exactly how this evolved! is a perfect science.

That is just plain ignorant... but you, don't strike me as a very intelligent person so I will just let it pass.

You act as if gravity (drop something, ooh, I can see it in action) is the same as "see this fish, over millions of years it eventually became a human" is the same thing.... lame.

You may not be able to get an education, as you may not be smart enough to grasp various teaching.... but that's no excuse to interfere in grown up conversations.

Not that we are having any on this forum...

IGNORANT MOBS UNITE!!!

 

[justcurious]

If you mean that I believe the bible in the sense that the earth must be only 6000 years old and dinosaurs were created by the devil to corrupt mankind.

No I do not... as I'm sure most people that believe in God, don't limit him to such a tiny scope.

Do I believe God could have used Evolution as a tool of creation, yes, I don't see why not....... if evolution could be proven.

I guess the basic answer is, the God I believe in is big enough to use any tools to create the universe He saw fit. But He's also big enough to have used tools to create us all that we, as creation, may never be able to fully understand or have the capacity to truly comprehend.

There is still mystery in the world, and it's there even if we want to believe we have already stamped it all out.

Thank you,

When you put it like that I think I can consider what you are saying. You might even agree that evolution is the best (if not only) theory we have at the moment to address the issue of biodiversity and of appearance and extinction of species ? That would not threaten your views as you have stated them in your last post.

Also according to your last post, it occurs to me that it is not evolution as a theory that you are attacking, but the materialistic/reductionist/mechanistic view that has totally deprived the universe of SPIRIT. In that case, we have some overlapping understanding. You might have had a better response on this forum with this approach.

What do you say ? :

 

[openmindedman]

Thank you,

When you put it like that I think I can consider what you are saying. You might even agree that evolution is the best (if not only) theory we have at the moment to address the issue of biodiversity and of appearance and extinction of species ? That would not threaten your views as you have stated them in your last post.

Also according to your last post, it occurs to me that it is not evolution as a theory that you are attacking, but the materialistic/reductionist/mechanistic view that has totally deprived the universe of SPIRIT. In that case, we have some overlapping understanding. You might have had a better response on this forum with this approach.

What do you say ? :

I AGREE!!!

I guess after I read about Russel Wallace co-creator of evolutionary theory, and also some of the other scientists of the time that could see merit in the theory without dismissing the role of a creator. I totally agreed with them.

For some reason evolutionists believe you have to be an atheist... I don't know why.

My whole point is boiled down to, they can't know everything, so how can they know that a creator couldn't exist.

Which means that creationism isn't for idiots, just for people that can accept that the universe isn't all wrapped up in a explanation already.

 

[CapnG]

You can't grasp the "theory" about my argument.

We know your theory (if it can be jokingly called that): "Confirmation bias is possible, therefore it is guaranteed- but only in evolutionary science and nowhere else.. like say psychology, which is flawless". Holds about as much water as a swiss cheese life-raft.

You act as if ... digging up a bone and yelling, I know exactly how this evolved! is a perfect science.

No, that's simply how you characterize me so you can feel self-assured. Poor, poor egotist... Feel free to quote me where I said "Evolution is absolutely proven fact!". Oh wait, I never did. Not once. Ever. But keep brushing away with that tar, perhaps some feathers will stick...

That is just plain ignorant... but you, don't strike me as a very intelligent person so I will just let it pass.

That's cute, trying to insult me like that... wait, weren't you the one whining about insults earlier? "Fine for me but not for thee", eh? Curiously like your other so-called arguments...

You act as if gravity (drop something, ooh, I can see it in action) is the same as "see this fish, over millions of years it eventually became a human" is the same thing.... lame.

Theory is theory, I don't define the terms. So gravity exists because if you drop something you can see it? CONFIRMATION BIAS! No wait, that's your weak-ass line for whatever you don't personally agree with because... whatever.

You may not be able to get an education, as you may not be smart enough to grasp various teaching.... but that's no excuse to interfere in grown up conversations.

Again with sad attempt to insult and belittle. Tch tch tch. You're running out of legs to stand on; your "theory" is invalid, your counter-arguments hopelessly ineffective, your evidence actually defeats your own case and now you've abandoned the high ground to say "Oh yeah well... you're STUPID!" like a six-year old. That's just sad.

Not that we are having any on this forum...

Not with you around, no.

IGNORANT MOBS UNITE!!!

Cries their leader...

 

[openmindedman]

Theory is theory, I don't define the terms. So gravity exists because if you drop something you can see it? CONFIRMATION BIAS! No wait, that's your weak-ass line for whatever you don't personally agree with because... whatever..

Poof you don't understand bias, the example is ignorant and miss categorizes what bias does.

sorry about calling you ignorant, but reference your own statement above and if the shoe fits...

;-)