For those that do not believe in Evolution.

[nikki2200 4]

Thank god you guys are here. I don't have the energy for this again.

 

Of course, I think we pointed out 480 times in the other thread about the "find and replace" thing. Didn't seem to stop the arguments though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[edjr 6,898]

Thank god you guys are here. I don't have the energy for this again.

 

Of course, I think we pointed out 480 times in the other thread about the "find and replace" thing. Didn't seem to stop the arguments though.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure I remember or posted in that thread

[nikki2200 4]

I'm not sure I remember or posted in that thread

 

I don't think you did. And it went on for a month. In the end, the truth won.

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=382074&hl=creationism&st=0

[DankNuggs 305]

Intelligent design is just another term for creationism. It was given a new name so it could be disguised as science and taught in public schools. I agree with you that in no shape or form does it resemble science and it should never be taught as such.

My (liberal) science class taught me the beginning of the world began at the big bang... This is pure and utter BS as well... While its certainly plausible (and likely) that the universe goes through cycles of expansion, then contraction, then big bang, it still doesn't address the unmoved mover aspect... Science really has no purview into this anymore than religious theory....

 

Its funny that for all the religious nutjobs and the scientific athiests, the whole lot of them are full of ######...

[DankNuggs 305]

Go watch the video I posted a link to in the Mensa evolution thread. It was PROVEN that the ID movement is simply creationism rebranded. They literally did a search and replace in books on creationism and replaced the word creationism with Intelligent Design. This was PROVEN. You may personally think differently but the whole ID movement is simply creationism renamed. That's not debatable.

Im not too interested in that discussion other than religions of the world should be studied in social studies and science in science class... Seems pretty obvious... Don't need a long thread or anything..

[KSB2424 3,174]

Then we agree.

Hold on one damn minute. I agree with that statement too. Are you playing tricks?

[Little Rusty 19]

I disagree with this statement. ID is a notion of unmoved mover... It doesn't necessarily have to encompass any or all of traditional religious belief... Simply an understanding that if time/space/earth exists there must have been a beginning of that existance. Something was set in motion at some point.

 

 

Thats basic logic and occams razor.

 

 

The conversation gets returted when people say ID = redneckhillbillybiblebelterholyrolleretcetcetc...

 

[nikki2200 4]

My (liberal) science class taught me the beginning of the world began at the big bang... This is pure and utter BS as well... While its certainly plausible (and likely) that the universe goes through cycles of expansion, then contraction, then big bang, it still doesn't address the unmoved mover aspect... Science really has no purview into this anymore than religious theory....

 

Its funny that for all the religious nutjobs and the scientific athiests, the whole lot of them are full of ######...

 

What would a "conservative" science class looked like?

 

And when you keep talking about "unmoved mover" are you referring to Aristotle's philosophy on how the universe worked? And if that's what you are referring to can you please explain the relevance?

[nikki2200 4]

Hold on one damn minute. I agree with that statement too. Are you playing tricks?

 

[KSB2424 3,174]

What would a "conservative" science class looked like?

They would have taught the Big Bang as a scientific theory about changes in the Universe; opposed to implying through lecture that it is proof of how life started.

[nikki2200 4]

They would have taught the Big Bang as a scientific theory about changes in the Universe; opposed to implying through lecture that it is proof of how life was started.

 

That's how it was taught to me and I would venture to guess I lived in a much more liberal area than you guys did.

 

We were taught several theories of how the universe came to be. Big Bang was one and was taught as probably the most likely one. Can't remember some of the others, they may even be discounted now. The Big Bounce was another I think.

[BudBro 183]

got here late.

 

so, two types of the same shark mated and evolved into another version of the same shark? that's the story? the black finned one couldn't even find a white finned or mexican finned shark to mate with? he had to pick the same type of finned shark? seems kinda racist doesn't it?

 

how is that evolution? that's like a dude from jersey mating with a chick from los angeles. that's not evolution. that would just make a kid with a terrible accent that says "like" all the time. that's not a new species.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

got here late.

 

so, two types of the same shark mated and evolved into another version of the same shark? that's the story? the black finned one couldn't even find a white finned or mexican finned shark to mate with? he had to pick the same type of finned shark? seems kinda racist doesn't it?

 

how is that evolution? that's like a dude from jersey mating with a chick from los angeles. that's not evolution. that would just make a kid with a terrible accent that says "like" all the time. that's not a new species.

 

How would 'Global Warming' cause a greaseball from Jersey to pork an airhead from LA?

[DankNuggs 305]

What would a "conservative" science class looked like?

 

And when you keep talking about "unmoved mover" are you referring to Aristotle's philosophy on how the universe worked? And if that's what you are referring to can you please explain the relevance?

Its just background that my early education was from an institution at the forefront of liberal progressive acadamia... This isn't curriculum that is getting influenced from the type of sources that you people argue about...

 

 

Its relevant because its the point of the argument. You are defining ID as some cult like group creationist group, which they seem to be... The argument is whether spirituality is a worthy placeholder in the void of science...

 

Science sees spirituality as nothing more than a degen squatter, biding time until they get kicked out... Trouble being there is a logical void where science can't go... Unmoved mover/spirituality/xenu may be the answer...

[Strike 6,023]

Its just background that my early education was from an institution at the forefront of liberal progressive acadamia... This isn't curriculum that is getting influenced from the type of sources that you people argue about...

 

 

Its relevant because its the point of the argument. You are defining ID as some cult like group creationist group, which they seem to be... The argument is whether spirituality is a worthy placeholder in the void of science...

 

Science sees spirituality as nothing more than a degen squatter, biding time until they get kicked out... Trouble being there is a logical void where science can't go... Unmoved mover/spirituality/xenu may be the answer...

 

This is untrue. Science, by definition, is open to all viewpoints. However, there is a method to science. Science will have no problem accepting spirituality/religion when/if it can be proven via the scientific method.

[nikki2200 4]

Its just background that my early education was from an institution at the forefront of liberal progressive acadamia... This isn't curriculum that is getting influenced from the type of sources that you people argue about...

 

 

Its relevant because its the point of the argument. You are defining ID as some cult like group creationist group, which they seem to be... The argument is whether spirituality is a worthy placeholder in the void of science...

 

Science sees spirituality as nothing more than a degen squatter, biding time until they get kicked out... Trouble being there is a logical void where science can't go... Unmoved mover/spirituality/xenu may be the answer...

 

There is obviously a hole. And if you want to insert god into yours, that's your prerogative.

 

However, this concept that the goal of science is to crush the idea of god is just propaganda by the religious wingnuts that are afraid of what may happen to their archaic notions as we learn more about the world. If scientists thought they had it all figured out, they would have quit already. But they are seeking the truth. And I would bet money on the fact that the majority of scientists actually DO BELIEVE IN GOD. The picture that is painted by Christian and right wing propaganda is not accurate. And most scientists just care about their work and I can't see why they would give a fock if anyone else wanted to philisophically insert god into their hole. There's no conspiracy. Take off the tinfoil hat.

 

If a conspiracy does exist, it is to squash scientific evidence that can be PROVEN because it doesn't agree so much with what the bible says. Just the poll numbers that show how many people don't "believe in" evolution, like it's some kind of notion that hasn't been backed by 150 years of scientific evidence, makes me embarrassed to live in this country.

[DankNuggs 305]

This is untrue. Science, by definition, is open to all viewpoints. However, there is a method to science. Science will have no problem accepting spirituality/religion when/if it can be proven via the scientific method.

the scientific method could never 'prove' religion. Scientific method is based on metrics observed by the physics of the known world... You would have to assume these same metrics/process would work outside of that box. Questionable assumption...

[Strike 6,023]

the scientific method could never 'prove' religion. Scientific method is based on metrics observed by the physics of the known world... You would have to assume these same metrics/process would work outside of that box. Questionable assumption...

 

Yeah, god forbid we use repeatable metrics and observations as opposed to blind faith to guide us. What the fock are we thinking?

 

[BudBro 183]

How would 'Global Warming' cause a greaseball from Jersey to pork an airhead from LA?

it's colder in jersey than l.a., right? so the guy from the colder place goes to the warmer place and mates with a member of the same species. so the kid can now tolerate wyoming weather. evolution.

[jerryskids 7,088]

interesting, always presumed it was more generational, mating type activities that produce offspring with diversive traits, the successful onces allow for more breeding and the cycle continues...

 

 

You think an elephant grew its trunk like bamboo?

I don't disagree with you per se, but they seemed most surprised that the two sharks did the nasty in the first place. If this were typical for evolution, it wouldn't be so surprising.

[jerryskids 7,088]

While KSB, philly, phurfur, jk, and Dank are doing a fine job at proving the point that evolution apparently doesn't touch everybody equally, what this thread really needs is a big ol' dose of stupid from Mensa to really get kicked into high gear.

 

 

Also, I was merely questioning the relevance of "evolution" to this specific situation. The only comment I made about evolution in general was a tacit acknowledgment of the belief that man and ape evolved from the same primitive creature.

[Voice_Of_Reason 0]

it's colder in jersey than l.a., right? so the guy from the colder place goes to the warmer place and mates with a member of the same species. so the kid can now tolerate wyoming weather. evolution.

Yeah, I call BS on this being evolution. I always thought evolution was a change that allowed for serious adaptation. Like a black tip shark developing thumbs so he can email his momma.

 

Moving to a colder climate isn't a big enough adaptation to call it evolution. I moved to a colder climate. I adapted. What used to feel cold to me now feels like a perfect day.

[remote controller 143]

I wonder if we have the missing link on site. Do we have a blonde dark ape?

[Savage Beast 1]

Bwahahahahahaha............................... Did anybody read the article? 2 black tip sharks mated and it's called evolution? Really? One is an Australian black tip, and the other is a common black tip. But both are black tip sharks. How is this evolution in action? It's the same as an Australian horse mating with an American horse. This is hardly evolution of any kind. It's like kinds mating. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Bwahahahahahaha............................... Did anybody read the article? 2 black tip sharks mated and it's called evolution? Really? One is an Australian black tip, and the other is a common black tip. But both are black tip sharks. How is this evolution in action? It's the same as an Australian horse mating with an American horse. This is hardly evolution of any kind. It's like kinds mating. Nothing more, nothing less.

The best part is that it's all because of 'Global Warming'.

[DankNuggs 305]

I don't disagree with you per se, but they seemed most surprised that the two sharks did the nasty in the first place. If this were typical for evolution, it wouldn't be so surprising.

The evolution part if i read it correctly was finding atypical sharks in colder waters and learning they were actually a different species.

[NewbieJr 541]

I wonder if we have the missing link on site. Do we have a blonde dark ape?

You rang?

[drobeski 3,061]

Maybe it is its own species yet to be discovered ? Have they discovered every species of everything in the sea already ? Proven scientifically ofcourse ? I heard that ocean/sea things is sorta big with lots of living stuff in it.

[redtodd 7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHex9GDQ2S0

 

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Maybe it is its own species yet to be discovered ? Have they discovered every species of everything in the sea already ? Proven scientifically ofcourse ? I heard that ocean/sea things is sorta big with lots of living stuff in it.

Shhhh..............they never discover "new species", this is a result of 'Global Warming'.....

 

 

Oops!

 

 

12/13/2011

Media Outlet: Discovery

Abstract Field:

Each year, scientists discover an average of 15,000 new species, usually ones that are highly endangered. But can this trend of discovery continue, and are we reaching a limit on how many species actually exist in the world?

 

 

http://www.conservation.org/newsroom/CI_in_the_news/Pages/Number-of-New-Species-Dropped.aspx

[Little Rusty 19]

You rang?

 

 

 

[Little Rusty 19]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHex9GDQ2S0

 

 

that's just dumb

[BudBro 183]

Bwahahahahahaha............................... Did anybody read the article? 2 black tip sharks mated and it's called evolution? Really? One is an Australian black tip, and the other is a common black tip. But both are black tip sharks. How is this evolution in action? It's the same as an Australian horse mating with an American horse. This is hardly evolution of any kind. It's like kinds mating. Nothing more, nothing less.

[JT 137]

In Phillybears own little way he nails it again.

 

I haven't ruled anything out. Evolution, Religion, Science, Voodoo. Our small time as a people, on this planet, that is ecompassed in a Universe of which there might be other Universes. I mean, our (human race) little pee brains probably can't even comprehend what all has been and will be entailed in so called "Life". Maybe evolution is the byproduct or happenstance of some divine being (a God) that we as humans can't even begin to understand. A million years might be a minute drop in the bucket of the overall time clock. What is time really btw? Maybe it's all happenstance of some cosmic big bang. Science changes course within our own lifetimes, imagine how it may backtrack over a hundred generations. Or maybe it's all something that we haven't thought about or discovered yet (or never will as we don't have the capacity too). I haven't ruled anything out.

 

So since I don't have a focking clue, I don't sit back and tell others what are the correct answers. I'm simply not that conceited.

 

Nah-ah. You thought Tebow should get to play, so you take each step of each day in the path of Jesus! You have to!!!

[edjr 6,898]

They would have taught the Big Bang as a scientific theory about changes in the Universe; opposed to implying through lecture that it is proof of how life started.

Doesn't get more liberal than Massachusetts. I was taught bbt too.

[edjr 6,898]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHex9GDQ2S0

 

I'm. A believer

[remote controller 143]

You rang?

[Gepetto 1,454]

Good one. I bang more chicks every month than you have in your lifetime, but I'm gay. CLASSIC!!

 

Admitting is the first step. Is this the first time you've come out of the closet? j/k. Anyway, back to man came from apes, or God, or something like that.

[Gepetto 1,454]

The best part is that it's all because of 'Global Warming'.

 

I know. Some people are really trying hard to push their agendas in this article.

[DankNuggs 305]

Yeah, god forbid we use repeatable metrics and observations as opposed to blind faith to guide us. What the fock are we thinking?

 

Strawman. We are talking theoretically about what started the big bang cycle and whats reasonable to assume about it