Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8965 total)
46 online now:
Meddle, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 43 visitors)
Newest Member: javier martinez
Post Volume: Total: 873,134 Year: 4,882/23,288 Month: 3/1,784 Week: 101/353 Day: 3/25 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My HUGE problem with creationist thinking (re: Which version of creationism)
Admin
Director
Posts: 12657
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 91 of 336 (619868)
06-12-2011 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 9:23 PM


Re: Call it what you will...
Why did you register a second account? This is from the Forum Guidelines:

  1. Do not participate as more than one ID. You may change your user ID by going to your Profile Page and creating a new alias.

I plan to merge your two accounts, but I'll hold off in case there's some reason to keep them separate, maybe family members posting from the same LAN or computer. Please let me know.

Edited by Admin, : Typo.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 9:23 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 10:57 PM Admin has responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 336 (619877)
06-12-2011 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Percy
06-11-2011 8:10 AM


Re: Who Observed What?
Percy writes:

Chuck77 writes:

Evolutionist definitions:

Science: Science acceptable to Evolutionists
Creationism: Science not acceptable to Evolutionists

Well, now you're just highlighting another problem with creationist thinking: illogic. The creationist confusion about fields of science is very real, we see it all the time. There is no equivalent evolutionist confusion, particularly since "creation science" has made no contributions for science to ignore.

I like how it's a state of "knowing". LOL. Really? How? By the Scientific method? Is the Scientific method used when determining what a "transitional" fossil is? How about Puncuated equllibrium? Nope, just assumptions. THAT's what science is when it comes to TOE and the "Big Bang". 100% assumptions. It must be nice to use Natural Seclection(which happens) and the force behind TOE and not have to prove that it actually leads to animals changing into completly different species of animals. Yes, a different KIND of animal. All we observe is the finch beaks as the best example. Different beaks not different kinds. THAT'S Natural Selection.

This is a hodgepodge of familiar examples of creationist confusion about evolution and science and is typical creationist thinking. Most of these fall into the category of fallacy of, "If I can disrespect it I've refuted it."

--Percy

Percy, it appears to me that your response to Chuck is somewhat of a hodgepodge of statements telling him of your opinion that he's wrong, rather than addressing reasons why you think he is wrong.

He highlighted some valid reasons why creationists reject the ToE.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Percy, posted 06-11-2011 8:10 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by RightHandMan, posted 06-12-2011 10:05 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

RightHandMan
Junior Member (Idle past 3125 days)
Posts: 7
Joined: 06-12-2011


Message 93 of 336 (619878)
06-12-2011 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Buzsaw
06-12-2011 10:03 PM


Take This To Heart!
John said EVEN GOD CAN MAKE CHILDREN FOR ABRAHAM

OUT OF THESE ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lord of Lords.... what does that tell you USELESS ATHEISTS!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Buzsaw, posted 06-12-2011 10:03 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 94 of 336 (619881)
06-12-2011 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 9:23 PM


Some people believe in a very overwieght prophet that abandoned his family in search of enlightenment ...

"Very overweight"? If you're talking about Gautama Buddha, you are making the common western mistake of confusing him with Budai, who has a similar name but is a completely different person.

Anyway, back to the topic.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 9:23 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3043 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(1)
Message 95 of 336 (619885)
06-12-2011 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Admin
06-12-2011 9:35 PM


Re: Call it what you will...
Admin writes:

Why did you register a second account? This is from the Forum Guidelines:

  1. Do not participate as more than one ID. You may change your user ID by going to your Profile Page and creating a new alias.

I plan to merge your two accounts, but I'll hold off in case there's some reason to keep them separate, maybe family members posting from the same LAN or computer. Please let me know.

I could not log into Mazzie123, could not change password, could not see some posts, I had huge probs with registration etc, so started a new registration in similar name, same avatar.

Obviously if I wanted a double ID I would have been more creative.

Please fix this, however you can, with new email addy. Thanks in advance for any assistance.

{2 ID's merged. E-mail was the most recent registration. - Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Admin, posted 06-12-2011 9:35 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Admin, posted 06-13-2011 7:10 AM Mazzy has not yet responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3043 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(1)
Message 96 of 336 (619889)
06-12-2011 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Dr Adequate
06-12-2011 10:13 PM


Dr Adequate writes:

Some people believe in a very overwieght prophet that abandoned his family in search of enlightenment ...

"Very overweight"? If you're talking about Gautama Buddha, you are making the common western mistake of confusing him with Budai, who has a similar name but is a completely different person.

Anyway, back to the topic.

just an example of whatever.....some faiths desert common sense altogether. TOE is one of them.

Some follow religious leaders that act like mad men, do not live what they preach and should be easily discerned as being bogus. This is a plea to common sense.

Many faiths/religions/cultures adhere to similar creation stories eg floods. Perhaps there is truth in many. However, when it comes to defending ones beliefs, one needs to be able to defend the basis behind it, why they feel their basis is stronger than any other faith, including TOE.

I feel creationists that base their beliefs on the biblical creation have an excellent basis from which to start, as outlined in previous post. I see TOE as a faith and should be taught as such, separating it out of biology in schools.

There is no need to choose a particular version of creation to be taught in schools. Rather all that needs to be done is the truth, warts and all, of the current contradictions and debate within evolutionary theory to be taught and how this relates to the outdatedness of Darwins simplistic ideas.

It is about providing balanced information so that the community can be well informed and able to make an informed decision to accept TOE or any creationist model.

This is much more preferable to bullying students into only online of thought and being taught only the glossy side of TOE in public schools, most of which has changed or been refuted by the time text books go to print.

For me it does not matter which creation model is correct, as long as none of my ancestors were apes. The evidence, research, contradictions etc show me evolution is an unlikely event. I am not an IDer, yet abiogenesis is unlikely to have occured on this planet or any other.

For me, it is NOT about tuning the population into YECS, old earth creationists, IDers, or otherwise, I don't think. It IS about offering a basis for informed choice to the community and the future adults of the world. This may be accomplished by instigating a curriculum of TOE that includes the debates and contradictions within itself, considers all creationist refutes seriously, and teaches TOE as theory, not a fact. That may be a good start.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-12-2011 10:13 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-13-2011 3:01 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 98 by AZPaul3, posted 06-13-2011 6:02 AM Mazzy has responded
 Message 100 by Percy, posted 06-13-2011 7:53 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 101 by Theodoric, posted 06-13-2011 8:22 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 102 by Coyote, posted 06-13-2011 10:14 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 104 by bluescat48, posted 06-13-2011 1:04 PM Mazzy has responded
 Message 118 by ZenMonkey, posted 06-18-2011 1:40 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 97 of 336 (619893)
06-13-2011 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


just an example of whatever.....some faiths desert common sense altogether. TOE is one of them.

Would that be the same "common sense" that tells people that the Earth is flat and that heavier objects fall faster than light ones and that the Sun orbits the Earth?

Practically nothing in science is "common sense", that's why it's necessary to teach science.

I see TOE as a faith and should be taught as such, separating it out of biology in schools.

Ooh, yes! And we could separate the periodic table from chemistry and Maxwell's equations from electricity!

The evidence, research, contradictions etc show me evolution is an unlikely event.

Whereas scientists, the people who are familiar with the evidence and the research, regard evolution as a done deal. Maybe they know something you don't, such as science.

For me it does not matter which creation model is correct ...

Your indifference is singular. I would have thought that that would be rather important, but apparently all that matters to you is denying the findings of scientists.

This may be accomplished by instigating a curriculum of TOE that includes the debates and contradictions within itself, considers all creationist refutes seriously, and teaches TOE as theory, not a fact. That may be a good start.

Taking creationist arguments seriously would involve teaching why they're all crap. Personally, I'm in favor of this.

What you mean by "taught as a theory" you do not say, and possibly you do not know. The theory of evolution is taught in the same way as the germ theory of disease, the theory of gravity, Maxwell's theory, and other things known to be true to a high degree of accuracy.

You have repeatedly blathered about imaginary "contradictions" in evolution; though without, of course, offering anything in support of this nonsense. If you ever wish to even attempt to back up your windy rhetoric with anything of substance, perhaps you could start a thread on this subject.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 98 of 336 (619902)
06-13-2011 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


Evolved Warts
There is no need to choose a particular version of creation to be taught in schools. Rather all that needs to be done is the truth, warts and all, of the current contradictions and debate within evolutionary theory to be taught and how this relates to the outdatedness of Darwins simplistic ideas.

An interesting insight into your creationist thinking might be for you to give us some details of what "warts" you think you see in Evolution.

You might also like to give us some idea why you think 150 years of refined detail all the while strengthening Darwin's basic premise is somehow a weakness of the theory.

Finally, what makes you think the present controversies in Evolution, like diversity in clades, the pace of evolution and evo-devo, are not being taught? Are you enrolled in such a course of study?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Mazzy, posted 06-13-2011 11:54 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12657
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


(1)
Message 99 of 336 (619906)
06-13-2011 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 10:57 PM


Re: Call it what you will...
Mazzy writes:

I could not log into Mazzie123, could not change password, could not see some posts, I had huge probs with registration etc, so started a new registration in similar name, same avatar.

It would help me investigate the problem if you could provide some information:

  1. What browser and OS were you using?

  2. Had you logged out, or were you trying to log in from a different computer?

  3. Did you forget your password, or did your password stop working?

  4. If you tried the Request New Password link on the login page, what happened that it didn't work for you?

  5. The posts that you couldn't see, can you describe what it was you could see surrounding these posts?

Thanks for your help!


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 10:57 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 19637
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


(1)
Message 100 of 336 (619910)
06-13-2011 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


Mazzy writes:

just an example of whatever.....some faiths desert common sense altogether. TOE is one of them.

This is an example of capitulationist creationist thinking: "Okay, I give up, creation science *is* really religion, but evolution is religion, too."

I feel creationists that base their beliefs on the biblical creation have an excellent basis from which to start...

This is an example of the creationist belief that Biblical revelation is the equal of or is even superior to evidence from the real world.

There is no need to choose a particular version of creation to be taught in schools...It is about providing balanced information so that the community can be well informed and able to make an informed decision to accept TOE or any creationist model.

This is an example of the creationist tactic of claiming openmindedness: "We're only being fair and open-minded. Let's teach the Biblical creation myth, plus all the other creation myths that also have no evidence."

For me it does not matter which creation model is correct, as long as none of my ancestors were apes.

This is an example of creationist determination to ignore any evidence that contradicts their beliefs. By the way, Mazzy, not only were your ancestors apes, earlier ancestors were rodent-like mammals, before that were reptiles, and before that were fish. So there's no reason to let your prejudices stop at apes.

The evidence, research, contradictions etc show me evolution is an unlikely event.

Finally, a mention of evidence, but only to provide a hint of the ignorance lying behind creationist rejection of many of the findings of modern science.

I am not an IDer, yet abiogenesis is unlikely to have occured on this planet or any other.

This is another example of creationist ignorance. Whether abiogenesis happened on the fifth day through a miracle of God, or by slow accumulating change over time on the primitive Earth or some other planet billions of years ago, abiogenesis (life from non-life) still happened. Unless life has always existed it had to have a beginning, and whatever that process was by which life first began, whether by miracle or nature, it is called abiogenesis.

This may be accomplished by instigating a curriculum of TOE that includes the debates and contradictions within itself, considers all creationist refutes seriously, and teaches TOE as theory, not a fact.

This is a reference to the creationist fallacy that there is some kind of legitimate debate within science about evolution. The creation/evolution debate is a contentious social/religious/political issue, but there is no debate within science about whether evolution really happened.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7051
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 101 of 336 (619914)
06-13-2011 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


and teaches TOE as theory, not a fact

I see you are ignorant of what a scientific theory truly is. Or maybe you are being dishonest. You are equivocating the word theory.
Here is what a Scientific Theory is.

quote:
A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

A Scientific Theory is not a guess.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

Coyote
Member (Idle past 558 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 102 of 336 (619925)
06-13-2011 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


There is no need to choose a particular version of creation to be taught in schools. Rather all that needs to be done is the truth, warts and all, of the current contradictions and debate within evolutionary theory to be taught and how this relates to the outdatedness of Darwins simplistic ideas.

And you will provide this TRVTH from ancient tribal myths and superstitions?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 336 (619931)
06-13-2011 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Acalepha
06-09-2011 2:16 PM


Re: Your solution is not practical
Acalepha writes:


You cannot teach about Genesis without imparting some of the Christian values to the student. This is the same about every other ethnic group that has a creation mythos.

So who decides the values we teach and do not teach?

The answer is that school boards would do it, and the result would disregard the rights of other ethnic groups and would be unconstitutional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Acalepha, posted 06-09-2011 2:16 PM Acalepha has not yet responded

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2642 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 104 of 336 (619951)
06-13-2011 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Mazzy
06-12-2011 11:52 PM


For me it does not matter which creation model is correct, as long as none of my ancestors were apes.

Very interesting, considering humans are apes. So what are your ancestors, rocks?


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Mazzy, posted 06-12-2011 11:52 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Mazzy, posted 06-13-2011 11:14 PM bluescat48 has responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3043 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 105 of 336 (620051)
06-13-2011 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by bluescat48
06-13-2011 1:04 PM


Only evolutionists think of themselves as apes. I can clearly see that mankind has advanced reasoning and perceptual ability that clearly distinguishes us from apes and any animal. It is evolutionists that ask common sense to leave the room, while trying to convince the community we are apes with all sorts of reasonings. Thankfully, your ancestors were never knuckle walkers though!!!!

Biblical creationists know mankind never were apes. The first man was created in the image of God by just as magical process as your natural abiogenesis. That is where I came from. You'll be happy to know that you have no ape ancestors either. Debating fossils is for another thread. I'll breifly say this. Homo erectus is a mix of apes and humans. I do not think your researchers can tell the difference, I am afraid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_Erectus
http://planet.uwc.ac.za/.../attachments/Bahn_Turkana_Boy.pdf

Turkana boy is quite different to some other homo erectus examples according to new finds. So the human line is a bigger mess than the others, which I know is hard to believe.

It does not matter if ID or any other creationist models is offered alongside TOE. All creationist thinking exposes the flaws, contradictions and delusions of evidence past (eg LUCA, knuckle walking ancestry), so any would be beneficial to what is generally taught these days. The more important thing is that any creation model be taught with sincerity and not tokenism.

All need to engage the reasoning ability God (or evolution to some) gave them, that separates humans from animals and make an informed choice based on knowledge. This is preferable to having believe what some one tells you. The bible supports this action.

So really, there is no problem for me here. Where I have a problem is theory being taught as fact, which I believe is a misleading representation of the status quo.

Edited by Mazzy, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by bluescat48, posted 06-13-2011 1:04 PM bluescat48 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by bluescat48, posted 06-14-2011 12:16 AM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 111 by Pressie, posted 06-14-2011 6:51 AM Mazzy has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020