logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Gildermershina  
#41 Posted : 23 September 2009 22:26:49(UTC)
Gildermershina
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Moderators, Registered
Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,094
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Probably not here

Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:
Aj wrote:
Human's are so arrogant to think 'there must be a reason' to all life. Plus, life has the point of advancement of the race, basically, = not really any point at all. So in my opinion you should live life however the hell you want to and make as many people happy as you can and then your furfilling all that can be asked of you. No point devoting your life to worshiping a god and not enjoying the time you have here. You should live day's one at a time and make everyone one amazing, and you should do good things out of will rather than because of fear of being harmed by something.

:)

Oh, and yes science is :P
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start? and what made the thing start making the thing that started making life start? What makes a euglena cease to photosynthesize after a few days without light, what makes it become heterotrophic AND autotrophic? simple question, stupid answers.


The question isn't so much how did it happen, but why did it happen, and the answer is it happened because it happened. Why did the Earth just happen to be in the right place at the right time? Because it happened. Because of the size of the Universe, it was simply bound to happen somewhere. Difficult questions don't always have simple answers.

sharinganerror wrote:
Also on another note, creationism leads to huge leaps in academic progress for basic education here in the states. I'm currently acing honors biology with creationism in mind other than evolution, if I finish it in 9th grade(which I plan on considering I can go and take Phys Science now that I skipped it), I would already have enough credits to get me into college biology. I have yet to know of a curriculum in the american education system based on evolution that can get me into two years of college biology just from completing the book itself. Creationistic biology isn't as preachy as you think, it tells you basically everything a journal of medicine would, without you reading that "blah blah blah eventually evolved into yada yada" and still retaining all scientific fact.


Hang on a minute. Are you saying that Creationism is good because it's easy to learn? All creationism is is a blanket statement "A god, probably this God, probably created everything, somehow, probably the way it says in the Bible." What's to learn? True Creationism discounts the entire theory of species, as well as DNA, carbon dating, radiation dating, and anatomy in general - after all, unless the Creator was making a joke by including the vestigial appendix in order to cause life-threatening infections. Could you explain how Creationism is even biology? Seems like it's biology in the same way that Notepad is a word processor.
UserPostedImageUserPostedImageUserPostedImage
Offline forkboy  
#42 Posted : 23 September 2009 23:00:11(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
I can't believe any serious college would accept someone in to a serious Biology course if they have no knowledge of actual evolutionary theory. Yeah, maybe Liberty or some other evangelical college. But come off it, if you think "creation biology" retains all scientific fact you are talking utter shit. Unless you want to take the position of Karl Popper, that there IS no scientific fact, then evolution is accepted as scientific fact.
Offline forkboy  
#43 Posted : 23 September 2009 23:03:03(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start?

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?
Offline old.gregg  
#44 Posted : 24 September 2009 02:01:49(UTC)
old.gregg
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Moderators, Registered
Joined: 11/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,308
Man

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 14 time(s) in 6 post(s)
forkboy wrote:
I can't believe any serious college would accept someone in to a serious Biology course if they have no knowledge of actual evolutionary theory.


I agree, a big section of my GCSE Biology was on evolution and natural selection etc. I also believe if you cannot open your mind to new things then science, a constantly changing topic, is not the subject for you.
-
Offline sharinganerror  
#45 Posted : 24 September 2009 02:59:08(UTC)
sharinganerror
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 412
Location: Arizona, U.S.

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Gildermershina wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
Aj wrote:
Human's are so arrogant to think 'there must be a reason' to all life. Plus, life has the point of advancement of the race, basically, = not really any point at all. So in my opinion you should live life however the hell you want to and make as many people happy as you can and then your furfilling all that can be asked of you. No point devoting your life to worshiping a god and not enjoying the time you have here. You should live day's one at a time and make everyone one amazing, and you should do good things out of will rather than because of fear of being harmed by something.

:)

Oh, and yes science is :P
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start? and what made the thing start making the thing that started making life start? What makes a euglena cease to photosynthesize after a few days without light, what makes it become heterotrophic AND autotrophic? simple question, stupid answers.


The question isn't so much how did it happen, but why did it happen, and the answer is it happened because it happened. Why did the Earth just happen to be in the right place at the right time? Because it happened. Because of the size of the Universe, it was simply bound to happen somewhere. Difficult questions don't always have simple answers.

sharinganerror wrote:
Also on another note, creationism leads to huge leaps in academic progress for basic education here in the states. I'm currently acing honors biology with creationism in mind other than evolution, if I finish it in 9th grade(which I plan on considering I can go and take Phys Science now that I skipped it), I would already have enough credits to get me into college biology. I have yet to know of a curriculum in the american education system based on evolution that can get me into two years of college biology just from completing the book itself. Creationistic biology isn't as preachy as you think, it tells you basically everything a journal of medicine would, without you reading that "blah blah blah eventually evolved into yada yada" and still retaining all scientific fact.


Hang on a minute. Are you saying that Creationism is good because it's easy to learn? All creationism is is a blanket statement "A god, probably this God, probably created everything, somehow, probably the way it says in the Bible." What's to learn? True Creationism discounts the entire theory of species, as well as DNA, carbon dating, radiation dating, and anatomy in general - after all, unless the Creator was making a joke by including the vestigial appendix in order to cause life-threatening infections. Could you explain how Creationism is even biology? Seems like it's biology in the same way that Notepad is a word processor.

Creationism doesn't promote the idea that whatever IS has evolved, it promotes whatever IS always has been. That idea leads us to plain look through a microscope and think,"WOW, I wonder what THAT evolved from!?" in creationism we just see it as it is and observe it,document it, and move on until further research is needed.

For crying out loud, I never it creationism was good because it's easier to learn, it's actually significantly harder when there's no made-up backstory like evolution. I'm just saying that creationistic curriculum is more advanced than evolutionary curriculum for many reasons, just not because it promotes creationism. 1. The public education system AND private education system use curriculum in high school that practically 7 years behind my current knowledge, 2. Most teachers use evolution as an excuse for something the book doesn't explain when asked a question on a test. Creationistic curriculum doesn't bother using itself as an excuse because the general idea is already there. 3. We don't bother trying to explain evolution or how life specifically began, we continue on with more important lessons that actually are worth a shit in today's world of people who don't give any. 3. There are too many theories within the idea of evolution itself that schools spend too much time indoctrinating their students to know when they could simply explain the general idea and actually educate these retards.
overall
Offline sharinganerror  
#46 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:00:47(UTC)
sharinganerror
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 412
Location: Arizona, U.S.

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
old.gregg wrote:
forkboy wrote:
I can't believe any serious college would accept someone in to a serious Biology course if they have no knowledge of actual evolutionary theory.


I agree, a big section of my GCSE Biology was on evolution and natural selection etc. I also believe if you cannot open your mind to new things then science, a constantly changing topic, is not the subject for you.

God, then you guys and your colleges are really ignorant, the theory of evolution is as much science as the Big Bang is to creationism. It all depends on what you think and believe is total bullshit, in this case, my previous sentence.
Offline sharinganerror  
#47 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:02:43(UTC)
sharinganerror
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 412
Location: Arizona, U.S.

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start?

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?

Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.
Offline forkboy  
#48 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:04:12(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
Genetics is a massive part of evolutionary theory. If you ignore the work of Mendel (perfectly proveable, the classic example being the colour of the eyes of flies) and his theory on genetics then I do not see how you can claim to have a proper grasp of biology.
Offline forkboy  
#49 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:05:15(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start?

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?

Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.

Science is meant to find answers. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Offline sharinganerror  
#50 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:08:59(UTC)
sharinganerror
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 412
Location: Arizona, U.S.

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
forkboy wrote:
Genetics is a massive part of evolutionary theory. If you ignore the work of Mendel (perfectly proveable, the classic example being the colour of the eyes of flies) and his theory on genetics then I do not see how you can claim to have a proper grasp of biology.

Because you believe that genetics is part of evolutionary theory, my belief is that it is part of creationism, that genetics has proven itself to exist because it doesn't cease to show up. Evolution is my eyes and the eyes of SANE people would know that if you don't see a single bit of visual proof, it ain't happening. Creationistic biology is nothing religious, in fact, the only difference is that it doesn't support evolutionary theory. Other than that, there is no difference, except for the fact that (like I previously said) it's 7 years ahead of the American public/private education system.
Offline sharinganerror  
#51 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:10:10(UTC)
sharinganerror
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 412
Location: Arizona, U.S.

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start?

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?

Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.

Science is meant to find answers. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But why answer a question if you have no absolute truth to the answer? Wouldn't that make it incorrect? If so, then every religion would also be wrong, which I have no problem with.
Offline forkboy  
#52 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:54:13(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
forkboy wrote:
sharinganerror wrote:
One question... how did life start, and how did what caused life to start, start?

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?

Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.

Science is meant to find answers. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But why answer a question if you have no absolute truth to the answer? Wouldn't that make it incorrect? If so, then every religion would also be wrong, which I have no problem with.

Are you aware of philosophy? We ask & then strive for answers to questions because that is human nature.

Your other post just: *groan*
Offline Gildermershina  
#53 Posted : 24 September 2009 03:56:08(UTC)
Gildermershina
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Moderators, Registered
Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,094
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Probably not here

Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:
forkboy wrote:
Genetics is a massive part of evolutionary theory. If you ignore the work of Mendel (perfectly proveable, the classic example being the colour of the eyes of flies) and his theory on genetics then I do not see how you can claim to have a proper grasp of biology.

Because you believe that genetics is part of evolutionary theory, my belief is that it is part of creationism, that genetics has proven itself to exist because it doesn't cease to show up. Evolution is my eyes and the eyes of SANE people would know that if you don't see a single bit of visual proof, it ain't happening. Creationistic biology is nothing religious, in fact, the only difference is that it doesn't support evolutionary theory. Other than that, there is no difference, except for the fact that (like I previously said) it's 7 years ahead of the American public/private education system.


That's absurd. Every bit of visual proof? You mean, if one human cannot, in their head, know the entirety of every tiny facet of the progress of all life on the entire planet, then it must be bunk?

Evolution is a) self-evident b) scientifically proven in the same way that anything is scientifically proven - it is the best and most complete EXISTING model. Creationism is not even a model, it's simply choosing to ignore an absolutely vital part of science. If you remove evolution from the equation, all biology is simply documentation. There's no such thing as hereditary traits. There's no

As for the "Creationist science is not religious at all" argument, only religious people could ever make such an obvious contradiction. What Creationist science isn't is science. If not for the religious element Creationism would simply be arbitrarily declaring all science beyond a certain point as being unprovable. All science is partially based on good estimates, that's how progress is made. You make an assumption which allows you to proceed to a new area of study, and work in that area then in reverse proves or disproves the leap you made. Creationism is a like a foreign land on a map marked "Here be dragons".

And could you please explain the great leaps forward in education this adds up to? Sounds like a pamphlet for a Christian college "Here's what scientists DON'T want you to know..." It boggles the mind.
UserPostedImageUserPostedImageUserPostedImage
Offline ALX  
#54 Posted : 04 October 2009 11:15:54(UTC)
ALX
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 19/07/2009(UTC)
Posts: 753
Man
Location: STALKER!

stephaniewazhere wrote:
++__++ wrote:
stephaniewazhere wrote:
++__++ wrote:
stephaniewazhere wrote:
++__++ wrote:
stephaniewazhere wrote:
++__++ wrote:
So if there was a big raping spaghetti monster, you'd think it was real without any evidence because you "believe"?


No because I didn't see it.
But that's the thing, when it comes to Christianity you must believe in order to know what I am saying. I say this from experience, the thing is that I am 2 face to the lord and I am not setting a good example, but I am going to tell you what I experienced it is up to you to believe me or not. We are all individual souls.


So you saw god?


NO!

I felt the holy spirit.


But how you do know it was the "holy spirit" as you say?


Because the feeling was unexplainable and I felt it in church as the pastor was praying on me and I accepting Jesus as my savior.


Doesn't necessarily have to be the "holy spirit". You see, the modern day religions are all extremely primitive. They are full of flaws, because the religion was created by people who thought that dragons exist and that rabbits lay eggs from a dead man. These thoughts were created in order to explain things that people back then could not, since they had limited science. They (christians) speak with very enticing and intriguing words, but that is it. If you actually believe all they say is the supreme society and lifestyle, then I pity you Steph.



It was the holy spirit. Because it says it on the bible.

The religion was not created by people who believed in Dragons and whatever you are talking about, if you are talking about Revelations, that is something completely different. No one is claiming my thoughts, what I felt was what I felt. My pastor speaks like any other human being (only with respect and all that good stuff), he doesn't see himself any different in the human side just because he is a pastor. He just speaks the word and what god speaks within him. There are many things you are ignorant about chirstinanity that you just won't understand unless you go to church. But you don't just go to church, you must put believe in it to understand it.
God will give you the knowledge to understand if you put believe in it, trust me.

If you pity me thats your problem because my job is to speak the truth as a Christian and if you don't believe that is your problem my friend. Like said before we all have individual souls.



I think this guy sums it up pretty well
RP Only Since July 2010

The Owner Of:

Long Nights- [alt-rock/post-grunge- think Foo Fighters meets Creature with the Atom Brain] MTN Climber
-Ryan Page: Vocals/Guitar/Keys
-Warren Mcgriff- Guitar
-Christopher I. Myers- Bass
-Blake Renwick- Drums

The World According To St. Jimmy- [Pop-punk/punk- Think Green Day meets Social Distortion]
-Michael "Dog" Bryant: Vocals
-Shawn "Shady" Harris: Guitar
-Jeff Zamora: Bass
-Karl Hine: Drums

forkboy wrote:
STOP MISSING THE FUCKING POINT YOU INTENTIONALLY OBTUSE BUFFOON


Paradox wrote:
*Shotgun clicks*

Dont mess with prog

The Skulls wrote:
Why thank you. Wait, if I'm alive then -- oh lawdy BRRRAAAAIIINZZZ

Offline TheCDs  
#55 Posted : 02 November 2009 15:40:12(UTC)
TheCDs
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2009(UTC)
Posts: 729

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
forkboy wrote:
I can't believe any serious college would accept someone in to a serious Biology course if they have no knowledge of actual evolutionary theory. Yeah, maybe Liberty or some other evangelical college. But come off it, if you think "creation biology" retains all scientific fact you are talking utter shit. Unless you want to take the position of Karl Popper, that there IS no scientific fact, then evolution is accepted as scientific fact.


I go to a major research university (Indiana University, Bloomington, member of the Big Ten, and one of 60 members of the Association of American Universities a group made up of America's leading research universities) and I can tell you that you would be laughed out of the class if you mentioned creationism. Our intro biology courses have large sections covering basic evolutionary theory, and we also have advanced classes looking only at evolutionary theory.

sharinganerror wrote:
Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.


What do you mean by that. Evolution has a lot more evidence on the table than creationism (the fossil record alone since there really isn't any tangible proof that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being or beings exist at all let alone that he/she/they created everything) and since evolution is a process it is probably occurring in some species in some facet right now, so saying that evolution isn't nor will it ever be isn't really true.

I am curious how you can explain the existence of things like carbon dating, I mean did God just throw in these really old dates to keep us off his trail like he's freaking Carmen Sandiego.
UserPostedImage
Axiom is
Mike Peck- Production/Guitars/Piano/Keyboards/Hammond Organ/Vocals
Tim Dunn- Production/Guitars/Bass/Drums/Saxophone/Vocals
Offline forkboy  
#56 Posted : 30 March 2010 02:54:39(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
sharinganerror wrote:

But why answer a question if you have no absolute truth to the answer?

I was going back through this forum to see if a question I was contemplating posting had already been asked and came across this.

Man, that's just wonderful. Shame I got no reply to my question about having heard about philosophy.
Offline Mt. Epic  
#57 Posted : 31 March 2010 13:45:58(UTC)
Mt. Epic
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/09/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,749
Man
Location: Somewhere in the universe

Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 28 post(s)
I believe that science isn't the reason as to why but the reason as to how. Whichever religion reigns as accurate if we ever find out that answer, would be supported by science, rather than itself being science. BUt then again, everything is a result of science, so I suppose technically religion is science. But what I"m trying to say is that science is more of evidence to a philosophy than the philosophy itself.
UserPostedImage

Fuck yo punk ass! Da BBC Kingz gon' getchu!
Offline Gildermershina  
#58 Posted : 31 March 2010 15:05:38(UTC)
Gildermershina
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Moderators, Registered
Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,094
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Probably not here

Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
Yes, but the entire point of philosophy is defining things that are in essence, impossible to define. There's no evidence to a philosophy, it's just a way of looking at things as they are. Religion kind of functions differently, having elements of a philosophy, certain social and cultural norms, as well as a hodge-podge mythology which aims to explain in rational terms, irrational unfathomable concepts, i.e. what happens before, and what happens after. For all the rational values such as teaching the value of life, there is just as much that is about any of these other things, about what clothes to wear on a Tuesday when you go to the shed, light a candle, and then dance round a statue of a frog with a top hat and a monocle. The actual "science" of a religion is some variation or other on a creation myth, usually contrary to subsequently discovered evidence, and usually also a blanket statement that things are the way they are just because God/Gods wanted it to be that way. That is not science, because science is a process applied to an ongoing quest for knowledge. Religion has all the answers it needs already. It's done. No need to change, to grow.
UserPostedImageUserPostedImageUserPostedImage
Offline Rodney81  
#59 Posted : 20 July 2010 13:40:06(UTC)
Rodney81
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 20/07/2010(UTC)
Posts: 14
Location: Mequon, WI

Science isn't a religion, it's THE religion. Science is the reason to how, and not why, and without it, there wouldn't be religion. And I'm agnostic btw, if ppl want to know where i come from.
Offline forkboy  
#60 Posted : 25 July 2010 12:05:09(UTC)
forkboy
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow

Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
Rodney81 wrote:
Science isn't a religion, it's THE religion. Science is the reason to how, and not why, and without it, there wouldn't be religion. And I'm agnostic btw, if ppl want to know where i come from.

OK, you can't just say this and it be ignored. I demand explanation and clarification. How exactly do you come to the conclusion that religion wouldn't be possible without science? Because I mean that just does not make sense to me so what am I missing here?
Users browsing this topic
Guest (5)
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.360 seconds.