Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 887 of 2073 (744770)
12-15-2014 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 884 by Colbard
12-15-2014 6:46 AM


Re: A Q of authority
Colbard writes:
Sorry, but you are so wrong and deceived, but then again how could you possibly know that.
Sorry but you are so wrong and deceived - but then again how could you possibly know that?
Colbard writes:
The same goes for the rest of you, sealing your own destinies by what you have sown.
Our destiny is dirt. Yours too. We're very egalitarian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 884 by Colbard, posted 12-15-2014 6:46 AM Colbard has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 900 of 2073 (745485)
12-23-2014 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 895 by Rodnas
12-22-2014 7:12 PM


Re: A Q of authority
Rodnas writes:
"The original life plasm of an evolutionary world must contain the full potential for all future developmental variations and for all subsequent evolutionary changes and modifications."
That seems like a tautology to me: "A box of Tinker Toys must contain the full potential for everything that can be built out of it."
Why wouldn't the box of chemicals contain the full potential for everything that can be made out of them without programming?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 895 by Rodnas, posted 12-22-2014 7:12 PM Rodnas has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 901 by Rodnas, posted 12-23-2014 7:59 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 907 of 2073 (745557)
12-24-2014 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 901 by Rodnas
12-23-2014 7:59 PM


Re: A Q of authority
Rodnas writes:
... the original genome had to contain all the components for it but it also had to have the program to make it happen.
The components are the "program".
Rodnas writes:
A bunch of parts in a toy box will not become a toy until someone, reading the instructions, assembles them.
But a box of chemicals will. Just try to stop a box of hydrogen and oxygen molecules from self-assembling into (more complex) water molecules.
Rodnas writes:
The program contained all the instructions....
How do you distinguish the instructions from the components? Are the instructions somehow "written" on the molecules? What is the ink?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 901 by Rodnas, posted 12-23-2014 7:59 PM Rodnas has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 909 by Rodnas, posted 12-25-2014 6:15 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 932 of 2073 (745771)
12-27-2014 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 909 by Rodnas
12-25-2014 6:15 AM


Re: A Q of authority
Rodnas writes:
Chemistry does nor require a code but biochemistry does, that's is the fundamental difference and a code requires a programmer.
But nobody has ever been able to demonstrate that that is true.
Rodnas writes:
I have no idea how anything was programmed;
Of course you don't. Nobody does.
But that's the whole point, isn't it? If you knew how it was programmed, it would be science and not religion. If you knew how it was programmed, it could be taught in school. But since neither you nor anybody else knows how it was programmed, it should only be taught in church.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 909 by Rodnas, posted 12-25-2014 6:15 AM Rodnas has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 941 of 2073 (759602)
06-13-2015 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 940 by ggirard
06-13-2015 12:17 PM


ggirard writes:
The theories of evolution and creationism aren’t mutually exclusive.
There is no theory of creationism. There isn't even a testable hypothesis.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 940 by ggirard, posted 06-13-2015 12:17 PM ggirard has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 975 of 2073 (808559)
05-11-2017 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 974 by Davidjay
05-11-2017 1:06 PM


Re: Got ya again .. Think bat think
Davidjay writes:
... no one gets away with anything with the Lord.
That includes you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 974 by Davidjay, posted 05-11-2017 1:06 PM Davidjay has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1067 of 2073 (840565)
10-02-2018 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1066 by creation
10-02-2018 12:28 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Only when filtered through your religion does evidence contradict creation. In reality it all agrees.
You seem to be suggesting that creationism is "real" science and that evolution is a religion. Is that right?

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1066 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 12:28 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1068 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 12:55 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1069 of 2073 (840573)
10-02-2018 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1068 by creation
10-02-2018 12:55 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Bingo, Ringo.
So you're saying that religion is a bad thing and should be avoided.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1068 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 12:55 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1070 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 3:36 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1071 of 2073 (840589)
10-02-2018 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1070 by creation
10-02-2018 3:36 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
When science pawns it's God awful silly made up fables on us as if it was actual knowledge or science, that is deceptive and vile and bad.
If you can show that that is being done, by all means do so. No creationist has ever succeeded in doing it before, so you have your work cut out for you.
But if you're just going to make empty accusations, all you're doing is being deceptive and vile and bad.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1070 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 3:36 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1074 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 7:05 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1077 of 2073 (840697)
10-03-2018 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1074 by creation
10-02-2018 7:05 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Unless you show some basis other than belief you must wear it.
You're the one who's playing catch-up here. You're the one who has to show that hundreds of years of work by thousands of scientists is wrong.
Or are you just working on a schoolboy homework assignment where you have to make a certain number of inane posts to get your gold star?

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1074 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 7:05 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1079 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 12:19 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1080 of 2073 (840713)
10-03-2018 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1079 by creation
10-03-2018 12:19 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Here is an example in news of science being wrong
Nobody ever said that science could never be wrong. The beauty of science is that it's self-correcting. Scientists are continuously looking for errors and fixing them.
Creationists, on the other hand, are still clinging to the same mistakes they made fifty years ago. That's dishonest.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1079 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 12:19 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1085 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 10:50 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1090 of 2073 (840790)
10-04-2018 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1085 by creation
10-03-2018 10:50 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Being unable to deny getting busted is not honesty.
Creationism has been busted. Didn't you get the memo? It's just dishonest to pretend that it has anything to offer.
creation writes:
Patching up areas in a faulty model that are shown to be wrong is not self correcting.
Science corrects itself. Creationism has never succeeded in showing any flaws. All creationists ever show is that they don't understand the model.
If you think the model is flawed, pick a topic and discuss it in depth. You might learn something. So far, all you've done is parrot creationist rhetoric that has been refuted a thousand times.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1085 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 10:50 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1091 by creation, posted 10-04-2018 3:18 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1096 of 2073 (840834)
10-04-2018 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1091 by creation
10-04-2018 3:18 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Creationism is the belief in God creating everything. You should not confuse some historical attempts at explaining how the evidences fit with a creation, with creation itself.
No, creationISM is a contempt for science - which you have admitted to having - and the attempt to prove that science is wrong. It has always failed to do so.
The belief in a creator is not creationISM unless it sets itself in opposition to science.
creation writes:
My approach has been more one of looking at the real premises and fundamental core beliefs that are used in origin sciences.
Your approach on this forum has been to parrot Points Refuted A Thousand Times. You have never made an attempt to seriously discuss how stupid those points are. I have suggested to you several times that you should pick one topic and discuss it. This running around from topic to topic and blathering nonsense isn't impressing amybody - except maybe your teachers.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1091 by creation, posted 10-04-2018 3:18 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1098 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-04-2018 7:11 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1102 by creation, posted 10-05-2018 12:04 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 1103 of 2073 (840912)
10-05-2018 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1102 by creation
10-05-2018 12:04 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
You have not even really addressed the issues let alone offered anything to refute.
That's what I'm telling you. Pick an issue. Address that issue. Read the responses. Reply to the responses.
creation writes:
Creation believers have the right and duty to question whacked out worldly wise men making weird and baseless anti creation claims.
But they don't have the ability. You can't question something intelligently if you don't understand it - and you clearly don't understand page one of your elementary school science book.
Your complaints are very shallow. Dig deeper.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1102 by creation, posted 10-05-2018 12:04 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1106 by creation, posted 10-05-2018 11:22 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 1107 of 2073 (840990)
10-06-2018 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1106 by creation
10-05-2018 11:22 PM


Re: nature of time
creation writes:
Empty blather aside, feel free to post some point that you can actually support and discuss.
You're the one who claims that science is wrong. You pick a topic and refute it.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1106 by creation, posted 10-05-2018 11:22 PM creation has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024