Political Crossfire Forums

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

The American wrote: Vulcidian wrote: Here is the link:

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061122/sc_nm/religion_turkey_evolution_dc

So, basically, in Turkey they are continuing the push to uproot evolution from schools. They are using propaganda created by Intelligent Design and Creationism advocates to further there cause.

I feel it is a sad day when the pseudo-intellectual arguments in America are beginning to be used to justify the destruction of science throughout the world. Especially among nations with fundamentalist Islamists, where it is needed the most.

It's time for the United States government to make a stand. Despite the feelings of the country overall, our government rallied to strike a huge blow to prejudice and racism in the 1960's.

I feel it's time the government laid down the law in the intelligent design and creationist debate.

Unless it infringes upon the rights of others, one cannot force another human being to believe something that is a matter of opinion. But evolution is not a matter of opinion. The exact mechanics of evolution are up for debate, but the theory itself is beyond contestation of any manner that current science can offer.

Intelligent Design and Creationism are fake sciences with little use to humanity at all. Their arguments are so vague, and the predictive qualities so useless that any truth in them is completely useless for applications.

If I were to say, the sun will come up tomorrow, and it does, that is somewhat of a theory. But if a scientist tells me the sun will come up because of the rotation of the earth about its axis which completes a revolution approximately every 24hrs...now that is something useful.

Intelligent design and creationism are insults to the nation's intelligence. Every minute our society allows another child to be corrupted by this nonsense and put on the path of being useless as a thinking individual is a tragedy.

In my opinion, allowing someone to discriminate against someone because their race might be inferior, is the same thing as allowing creationism and intelligent design the same status as Evolution.

Evolution is a theory just like Atomic theory. But we can make atomic bombs, and we can breed animals based upon desired qualities.

I think this nonsense must stop immediately.

How do the readers feel?

1. Do you feel Intelligent design is a theory with as much support and power of prediction as evolution?

2. Do you think it's a good thing that Christian fundamentalist propaganda is being used to tighten fundamental Islam's hold on the middle east?

3. Do you think Creationism is preying on the uneducated, and deserves the same fate as Jim Crow laws?

....I think you know how I feel...

You are asking our government to take a stand on a baseless theory against another baseless theory? Theory of creation is based more or less on faith. Theory of evolution, if true could go either way. One thing not explained of it, if it is possible to move forward, then it is possible to move backward. In which case, you may be reduced eventually to the size of a worm.

To categorize people as being uneducated in believing one or the other is opinionated and baseless. Both are just theories, so those believing in one or the other, one has better intelligence? I think not. That my friend, would be a not so quite intelligent position to take.

Trig.

Come on. If you knew anything about this debate you'd know that Evolution is infinitly more of a credible theory then ID is. Evolution is actually a scientific theory with insane amounts of empirical evidence supporting it, whereas ID is a theory of the colloquial variety where the evidence is not even there. The only people who back it do so politically, not scientifically.

And the only way you'd devolve into a worm is if it allowed you to survive better then not being a worm would. Some intestinal parasites benefit from only having what's essential, so such organsims devolve to become less complex and, thus, more efficient.

Vulcidian · Joined: 05 Nov 2006 Posts: 892

Charlie Man wrote: I don't personally think we should intervene in other countries in this way, whether they're wrong or not, it's also wrong to impose upon them. I think it's called "high-handedness without representation."

As for education being better before public education, gavnook, just look at the illiteracy rate before and after, and take a look at germany's reformation from tribes into a nation and how universal education impacted that. Pretty effective counterexamples, them.

And lastly, upon the question of ID (the idea that's so unscientific it's not even wrong) or evolution (the theory we've been using for quite a time now and has yet to run into a counterexample [that means something in the fossil record that doesn't fit at all, or modern observation of evolution happening, but in a very wierd fashion]) I think it's obvious.

They closed down forum number 6, creationism vs evolution, becasue the scientists won.

Yes, in rational arguments the scientists will always win against creationist and advocates of intelligent design.

The problem is that most people in the nation don't and shouldn't have to spend the time sending these quacks packing.

More and more people are falling prey to this falsehood because they are not evolutionary biologists, but a 12 year old with no background in biology can explain creationism to you. This is because it doesn't require any real evidence or experimentation. It's not science, and people need to stop treating it as such. It's just like the trinity, it's useless and baseless.

There needs to be a nation-wide and world wide movement stopping the corruption of the children of the world by this vile lie. There's a word for creationism and intelligent design in a world of free speech...

It is called SLANDER

Slander is illegal. Everyone who wants human beings to have a chance at understanding the world should write their congressman in support of evolution. They should also never fail to combat creationism and Intelligent design wherever it appears.

THe problem is that they've been the only ones doing the talking for too long. We've assumed Evolution is safe, the article shows it is very much in danger.

lovebush · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 1147

bob.appleyard wrote: The American wrote: You are asking our government to take a stand on a baseless theory against another baseless theory? Theory of creation is based more or less on faith. Theory of evolution, if true could go either way. One thing not explained of it, if it is possible to move forward, then it is possible to move backward. In which case, you may be reduced eventually to the size of a worm.

To categorize people as being uneducated in believing one or the other is opinionated and baseless. Both are just theories, so those believing in one or the other, one has better intelligence? I think not. That my friend, would be a not so quite intelligent position to take.

Trig.

1. "baseless theory" -- this could mean one of two things:

a) you've tested the theory against evidence, and found its explicative powers wanting.

b) you don't know what a theory is

Okay, after reading "Theory of creation is based more or less on faith", I'm going to go with ... b.

2. "if it is possible to move forward, then it is possible to move backward" -- this can mean only one thing: that you're ignorant of neo-Darwinist evolution by natural selection's import. There is no forwards or backwards under neo-Darwinism, only adaption to the environment.

3. ID/creationism isn't a theory (note the use of a singular), as it does not make any testable predictions, merely asserts "god of the gaps." That is, if a phenomenon cannot currently be explained naturally, then God did it. It's intellectually lazy and doomed to failure, if it were a serious attempt to explain an aspect of the natural world, which of course it isn't.

ID doesn't attempt to prove what the source of intelligence is, only that there must be a source. Crick believed the intelligent designer was an ET. I guess he wasnt a real scientist.

http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1107&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

Crick was full of sh*t, and so was Behe (or Hovind, if anyone is idiotic enough to bring him up)

lovebush · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 1147

mr.snruB wrote: Crick was full of sh*t, and so was Behe (or Hovind, if anyone is idiotic enough to bring him up)

Well, I wont attempt to debate such a well thought out and logical presentation of your opinion.

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

Good. Don't make me lay down some knowledge on your ass

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10788

Hmmm.....

So...just out of curiosity....what is your theory on where the material that makes up the universe/universes and everything in it/them came from?

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10788

Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

There are tons of mathmatical theories that can't be proven....should they not be taught in school?

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

Ameriman wrote: Hmmm.....

So...just out of curiosity....what is your theory on where the material that makes up the universe/universes and everything in it/them came from?

I don't know.....and I don't attempt to know. That's more of a physics thing. Not even related to evolution.

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

Ameriman wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

There are tons of mathmatical theories that can't be proven....should they not be taught in school?

Meh, good point.

However, special relativity, etc etc, are thought to someday be proven. Even followers of God devoutly claim that God can't be proven. You can't claim the two to be the same.

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

Ameriman wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

There are tons of mathmatical theories that can't be proven....should they not be taught in school?

If there were theories that attempted to solve the same question, but could be proven, and the people wanting to teach the unproven math theory on a level field as the proven one also wanted to tell children "there is a debate as to which one is correct"....then no, it shouldn't

You don't see many people clamouring to get a "flat-earth" theory into classes, do you?

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

mr.snruB wrote: Ameriman wrote: Hmmm.....

So...just out of curiosity....what is your theory on where the material that makes up the universe/universes and everything in it/them came from?

I don't know.....and I don't attempt to know. That's more of a physics thing. Not even related to evolution.

Exactly! A majority of my friends are Christian, and many, close to all infact, believe in evolution. I have even heard the argument of evolution only being possible through God. While I don't really like that argument, because I don't like the idea of a personal God, as if you have a personal God it is impossible for God not to exist... that argument still exists.

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

mr.snruB wrote: Ameriman wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

There are tons of mathmatical theories that can't be proven....should they not be taught in school?

If there were theories that attempted to solve the same question, but could be proven, and the people wanting to teach the unproven math theory on a level field as the proven one also wanted to tell children "there is a debate as to which one is correct"....then no, it shouldn't

You don't see many people clamouring to get a "flat-earth" theory into classes, do you?

You can't claim that the science of evolution and the science of God are the same. You just can't.

lovebush · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 1147

Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

Afraid your beliefs wont hold up in comparison, hmm how little faith you have in your religion. :roll: Would you mind telling me who you heard the ID argument from. by your statements you seem to be rather ignorant of the theory.

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

Ek0nomik wrote: mr.snruB wrote: Ameriman wrote: Hmmm.....

So...just out of curiosity....what is your theory on where the material that makes up the universe/universes and everything in it/them came from?

I don't know.....and I don't attempt to know. That's more of a physics thing. Not even related to evolution.

Exactly! A majority of my friends are Christian, and many, close to all infact, believe in evolution. I have even heard the argument of evolution only being possible through God. While I don't really like that argument, because I don't like the idea of a personal God, as if you have a personal God it is impossible for God not to exist... that argument still exists.

Yup. I hardly agree with that theory myself (I'm more of the Richard Dawkins style of evolutionist 8:) ), but some do. Type in "Ken Miller on Intelligent Design" for a lengthy lecture type thing (that I found extremely interesting) for a take from a guy who believes in that, but is really goddamn smart

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10788

mr.snruB wrote: Ameriman wrote: Hmmm.....

So...just out of curiosity....what is your theory on where the material that makes up the universe/universes and everything in it/them came from?

I don't know.....and I don't attempt to know. That's more of a physics thing. Not even related to evolution.

So the idea of creationism...being that the origin of the material that makes up the universe is completely unknown...isn't necessarily that far out there of a theory now is it? Shouldn't we at least tell our children that there are alternative beliefs out there? Isn't that what education is?

By the way...the science of physics doesn't discuss the origins of things...it discusses how things react to each other.

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10788

Ek0nomik wrote: Ameriman wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

There are tons of mathmatical theories that can't be proven....should they not be taught in school?

Meh, good point.

However, special relativity, etc etc, are thought to someday be proven. Even followers of God devoutly claim that God can't be proven. You can't claim the two to be the same.

I'm not saying they are the same. Those same followers also say that when you die God will be proven...isn't that "thought to someday be proven"?

All I'm saying is that denying our children knowledge of anything is a crime.

lovebush · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 1147

mr.snruB wrote: Good. Don't make me lay down some knowledge on your ass

Not at all Snub, I always enjoy a little debate with you, but in the arena of your opinion, you win hands down!

mr.snruB · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 7136 Location: Ontario, Canada

lovebush wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: ID is creationism on crack. It can't be scientifically proven, therefore it shouldn't be taught in school. Evolution can be scientifically proven, and therefore should be taught.

Afraid your beliefs wont hold up in comparison, hmm how little faith you have in your religion. :roll: Would you mind telling me who you heard the ID argument from. by your statements you seem to be rather ignorant of the theory.

The most convincing arguements I've heard were from Michael Behe (whom I've mentioned before) and William Demski with their Irreducible Complexity thing, but that's been debunked