Majority of Republicans believe in literal creationism

Rana said:
You are a better educated conservatives than your fundamentalist counterparts.
I think you need to read a little more on this subject and attend school board meetings if your don't know of anyone who wants to do away with the teaching of evolution, there have been people do not want evolution taught to their children. You are right, they get evolution confused with the big bang and creation, but it also conflicts with their Biblical beliefs that all things were created by God at once and not over billions of years of time. They think it was done in the 7 days period as outlined in the Bible.

It creation stories don't belong in science, teach it, as Christie has suggested in a class that compares origin theories or religions. There are people who believe that evolution negates a high power's involvement, just because you aren't one of them, doesn't mean there aren't those types!

It is knowledge the same way that the story of Zeus and the gods and goddesses on Olympus is knowledge.
Click to expand...

Whereas, rather than merely attend the school board meetings, you would be better served to actually go back to school and get educated because what you produce here is an example of the failed educational system in the US.

You are a vastly under-educated progressives (sic) than your intelligent counterparts and you do little to advance the thoughts and ideals of this movement.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No it's not Dixie. All science is tentative in nature and their for nothing can be known with absolute certaintity. It is this fact and the falsification principle of science which makes it self correcting. It's equally true that science only attempts to explain natural causation. Any invocation of supernatural causation would be, by definition, something other than science. Does that discount "creation" as the possible origin of life? No it does not, it just means that "creation" can not be considered science but I think I've made that point to you a zillion times.
Click to expand...

I love when you talk, biology! Thanks, this is what I have been taught, religions says it "knows", science doesn't and wants to find the answers!
 
Damocles said:
Translation:

Well, I thought I had proof of something. Then I found out I that I had made a bad assumption, instead of just moving on I thought I might try to throw an insult to distract from my embarrassment.

Maybe, if god exists, he is a scientist. We're just an unfinished experiment, maybe even a failing one.
Click to expand...

The petri dish theory, I love that one!
 
Rana said:
this is where the fundamentalist are misguided, along with many other things.
I know this, you know this, but some people are very confused.
Click to expand...

since you just confused it can you explain why you think you know this?......You are the one who said we wanted to teach creation instead of science, then said we wanted to teach creation instead of evolution.......the fundamentalists actually had it right while you had it wrong....they wanted to teach creation as an alternate explanation of origin......
 
Damocles said:
Maybe, if god exists, he is a scientist. We're just an unfinished experiment, maybe even a failing one.
Click to expand...

I think it would be wrong to think of a deity as a scientist....a scientist explores the universe looking for answers, a deity would already have them......
 
Damocles said:
Translation:

Well, I thought I had proof of something. Then I found out I that I had made a bad assumption, instead of just moving on I thought I might try to throw an insult to distract from my embarrassment.

Maybe, if god exists, he is a scientist. We're just an unfinished experiment, maybe even a failing one.
Click to expand...

What are you blabbering about?

Anyhoo.

new world order spiritualists like dixie always say god is something weird, like energy, or the laws of physics, or everything... but we dont need god to explain those, we have the words "energy", "the laws of physics", and "everything" to deal with those concepts. Now we have god is a scientist. Thanks for the new loony tune.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No it's not Dixie. All science is tentative in nature and their for nothing can be known with absolute certaintity. It is this fact and the falsification principle of science which makes it self correcting. It's equally true that science only attempts to explain natural causation. Any invocation of supernatural causation would be, by definition, something other than science. Does that discount "creation" as the possible origin of life? No it does not, it just means that "creation" can not be considered science but I think I've made that point to you a zillion times.
Click to expand...

You have basically contradicted your own point here. If science is tentative and can't be absolutely certain, how can it be absolutely certain creation isn't science? Perhaps creation is a science we don't yet understand? Perhaps our science is inadequate to explain creation, just as it is inadequate to explain any number of other phenomenon we know about?

The point here, is not advocacy of teaching things that are only positive and certain. Science does not draw certainty, it proposes possibilities. Science does not conclude, it offers potential explanations. We can apply your same standards for creationism to science, and not teach our children about black holes and anti-matter, because science can't explain them... but is that teaching knowledge, or is that indoctrinating people based on what we THINK should be learned?

Millions of people believe the universe is the product of creation. Countless scholars have pondered the possibility without being able to dismiss it. The evidence all around us, is overwhelmingly supportive of the idea it could have been created, and there is NO EXPLANATION for origin found conclusively in science, there is not even a tangible theory on how life originated, that can be supported with tests or observation. It still remains a great big question mark! In light of this, we should EDUCATE our children on the possibilities. We shouldn't ever DISCARD possibilities because we don't believe them personally, or can't prove them conclusively, and that is exactly what you are proposing we do! It is the ANTITHESIS of Education AND SCIENCE!
 
Last edited:
Dixie said:
You have basically contradicted your own point here. If science is tentative and can't be absolutely certain, how can it be absolutely certain creation isn't science? Perhaps creation is a science we don't yet understand? Perhaps our science is inadequate to explain creation, just as it is inadequate to explain any number of other phenomenon we know about?

The point here, is not advocacy of teaching things that are only positive and certain. Science does not draw certainty, it proposes possibilities. Science does not conclude, it offers potential explanations. We can apply your same standards for creationism to science, and not teach our children about black holes and anti-matter, because science can't explain them... but is that teaching knowledge, or is that indoctrinating people based on what we THINK should be learned?

Millions of people believe the universe is the product of creation. Countless scholars have pondered the possibility without being able to dismiss it. The evidence all around us, is overwhelmingly supportive of the idea it could have been created, and there is NO EXPLANATION for origin found conclusively in science, there is not even a tangible theory on how life originated, that can be supported with tests or observation. It still remains a great big question mark! In light of this, we should EDUCATE our children on the possibilities. We shouldn't ever DISCARD possibilities because we don't believe them personally, or can't prove them conclusively, and that is exactly what you are proposing we do! It is the ANTITHESIS of Education!
Click to expand...


But even science demands a modicum of sensefulness. A hypothesis is still an educated guess, and as such, the delirious rantings of a wishful theocrat do not even rise to the standard of being a hypothesis.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But even science demands a modicum of sensefulness. A hypothesis is still an educated guess, and as such, the delirious rantings of a wishful theocrat do not even rise to the standard of being a hypothesis.
Click to expand...

Science demands no such thing! Science demands we keep an open mind and not dismiss any possibility or draw any definitive conclusion of certainty. The second you have drawn a definitive conclusion of certainty about anything, you have stopped practicing science and begun practicing FAITH.
 
Dixie said:
Science demands no such thing! Science demands we keep an open mind and not dismiss any possibility or draw any definitive conclusion of certainty. The second you have drawn a definitive conclusion of certainty about anything, you have stopped practicing science and begun practicing FAITH.
Click to expand...

But it doesnt demand we hallucinate bogus explanations that have no proof whatsoever of being causal.
 
AssHatZombie said:
This is the "there's so much complexity there HAS to be a god!" nonsense i was talking about?

Oh really? Why?


(crickets chirping)
Click to expand...

No crickets chirping except inside your vacant head! This has been explained about a million times to your stupid ass, which continues to simplify it and mock it as if there is no merit.

There are about two dozen things that had to happen in a certain order, within a certain time, to a certain degree, JUST for our planet to be conducive to life as we know life. From there, about two dozen other things had to happen in a certain order, to a certain degree, and within a certain time, for life to flourish and grow. From there... about another two dozen things had to happen, for life to evolve into the billions of life forms we know of. Each one of those billions of life forms, had to have thousands of things happen a certain way, in a certain order, to a certain degree, in order for the life to function and reproduce itself.

Now let me ask you this... If there was a gambler in Vegas, who had won thousands and thousands of times at the roulette wheel... he never lost... always won... over and over, for thirty, forty, fifty years... his streak continues... he's on the news, on the cover of magazines, everyone is talking about the Luckiest Man in the World... who can't seem to ever lose... Is there something "special" about him, or is he just extremely lucky? Is there a possibility something more is at play, than luck or chance? The Universe is this 'lucky man', except it has been on a roll for billions and billions of years.
 
AssHatZombie said:
This is the "there's so much complexity there HAS to be a god!" nonsense i was talking about?

Oh really? Why?


(crickets chirping)
Click to expand...

Why not? Is life not complex? No one asks you to believe ahz. That people wish to dismiss God as a relic of the needy or call him a Santa Clause of the imagination is a pretty weak argument against His existance as well.

I do believe in a personal creator. My belief is not dependent on your approval or anyones for that matter. I also appreciate the insight of a man who spent his entire career devoted to a science that is determined to provide proof; reason; and logic to evolutionary theory- only to be convinced of a creative God instead.
 
Dixie said:
No crickets chirping except inside your vacant head! This has been explained about a million times to your stupid ass, which continues to simplify it and mock it as if there is no merit.

There are about two dozen things that had to happen in a certain order, within a certain time, to a certain degree, JUST for our planet to be conducive to life as we know life. From there, about two dozen other things had to happen in a certain order, to a certain degree, and within a certain time, for life to flourish and grow. From there... about another two dozen things had to happen, for life to evolve into the billions of life forms we know of. Each one of those billions of life forms, had to have thousands of things happen a certain way, in a certain order, to a certain degree, in order for the life to function and reproduce itself.

Now let me ask you this... If there was a gambler in Vegas, who had won thousands and thousands of times at the roulette wheel... he never lost... always won... over and over, for thirty, forty, fifty years... his streak continues... he's on the news, on the cover of magazines, everyone is talking about the Luckiest Man in the World... who can't seem to ever lose... Is there something "special" about him, or is he just extremely lucky? Is there a possibility something more is at play, than luck or chance? The Universe is this 'lucky man', except it has been on a roll for billions and billions of years.
Click to expand...

thats actually a good analogy dixie
 
AssHatZombie said:
But it doesnt demand we hallucinate bogus explanations that have no proof whatsoever of being causal.
Click to expand...

No one is hallucinating. Do you have a scientific explanation for origin? Can you explain how billions of different interdependent life forms came to be? Evolution only explains a small sliver of this... it deals with how life has evolved, but there has never been a discovery of any cross-genus evolution. So how did we end up with billions of different life forms, all dependent on each other for existence? Science can not explain this, no matter how hard it tries, there is no reasonable explanation. It has been speculated, that "abiogenesis" took place, but this is tenuous at best, and can't be replicated in a lab to produce anything near a satisfactory result to confirm the theory. Even IF this theory were true, it doesn't account for the diversity of life around us. Things don't evolve from one genus to another, they can't... we can't even make that happen in the controlled environment of a lab, with all our brain power working on it 24/7!

So when it comes to "origin" of life, science has no explanation. Then, we can go all the way back to the theory of the Big Bang... what caused it? Spontaneity? We know that matter can't just create itself, so how did anti-matter become matter in a micro-second? And why did this matter just so happen to contain all the building blocks and pieces, to form life? Do you have an answer for that, Mr. Wizard? Didn't think so!
 
Ice Dancer said:
Why not? Is life not complex? No one asks you to believe ahz. That people wish to dismiss God as a relic of the needy or call him a Santa Clause of the imagination is a pretty weak argument against His existance as well.

I do believe in a personal creator. My belief is not dependent on your approval or anyones for that matter. I also appreciate the insight of a man who spent his entire career devoted to a science that is determined to provide proof; reason; and logic to evolutionary theory- only to be convinced of a creative God instead.
Click to expand...

Complexity does not godliness make. He's probably taken grant money from the military industrial complex to pimp out his reputation for this theocratic agenda.
 
Dixie said:
No one is hallucinating. Do you have a scientific explanation for origin? Can you explain how billions of different interdependent life forms came to be? Evolution only explains a small sliver of this... it deals with how life has evolved, but there has never been a discovery of any cross-genus evolution. So how did we end up with billions of different life forms, all dependent on each other for existence? Science can not explain this, no matter how hard it tries, there is no reasonable explanation. It has been speculated, that "abiogenesis" took place, but this is tenuous at best, and can't be replicated in a lab to produce anything near a satisfactory result to confirm the theory. Even IF this theory were true, it doesn't account for the diversity of life around us. Things don't evolve from one genus to another, they can't... we can't even make that happen in the controlled environment of a lab, with all our brain power working on it 24/7!

So when it comes to "origin" of life, science has no explanation. Then, we can go all the way back to the theory of the Big Bang... what caused it? Spontaneity? We know that matter can't just create itself, so how did anti-matter become matter in a micro-second? And why did this matter just so happen to contain all the building blocks and pieces, to form life? Do you have an answer for that, Mr. Wizard? Didn't think so!
Click to expand...


I dont have to have an explanation to know that yours is based in wishful thinking, and has zero proof.
 
Dixie said:
No crickets chirping except inside your vacant head! This has been explained about a million times to your stupid ass, which continues to simplify it and mock it as if there is no merit.

There are about two dozen things that had to happen in a certain order, within a certain time, to a certain degree, JUST for our planet to be conducive to life as we know life. From there, about two dozen other things had to happen in a certain order, to a certain degree, and within a certain time, for life to flourish and grow. From there... about another two dozen things had to happen, for life to evolve into the billions of life forms we know of. Each one of those billions of life forms, had to have thousands of things happen a certain way, in a certain order, to a certain degree, in order for the life to function and reproduce itself.

Now let me ask you this... If there was a gambler in Vegas, who had won thousands and thousands of times at the roulette wheel... he never lost... always won... over and over, for thirty, forty, fifty years... his streak continues... he's on the news, on the cover of magazines, everyone is talking about the Luckiest Man in the World... who can't seem to ever lose... Is there something "special" about him, or is he just extremely lucky? Is there a possibility something more is at play, than luck or chance? The Universe is this 'lucky man', except it has been on a roll for billions and billions of years.
Click to expand...

Everytime you go over it becomes wronger, more stupid, and more harmful to the discourse.

Rarity and unlikeliness also do not prove god.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top