evolution

Started by powerfulone1987156 pages
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Well, it was kind or irrelevant in context with what school is for - It has nothing to do with school.

In my statement, in which was referred to as irrelevent, no where did I mention anything about relgion and school.

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
In my statement, in which was referred to as irrelevent, no where did I mention anything about relgion and school.

is it comprehensible.....

religion can be good for number things. Not just for being a priest.
People find comfort in it.
People look toward faith to guide them.
And who's to say it's not real.
So religion is useful.

You responded to the post where I said religion has little use in school unless your thinking of being a priest. I was saying the theory of evolution has a more practical reason to be in schools then creationism (if it came down to one over the other) - ergo by process you were giving reasons you thought it had value. I wasn't talking about religion in general, I was talking about it in schools. If you responded to what I was saying, as you did, then it would be assumed you were talking about it in schools as well.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
You responded to the post where I said religion has little use in school unless your thinking of being a priest. I was saying the theory of evolution has a more practical reason to be in schools then creationism (if it came down to one over the other) - ergo by process you were giving reasons you thought it had value. I wasn't talking about religion in general, I was talking about it in schools. If you responded to what I was saying, as you did, then it would be assumed you were talking about it in schools as well.
My mistake then. I was responded about religion over all, not specifically religion in school.

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Evolution is theory and has plausible evidence.

It's a theory, just as is Creation.

It just sounds more plausible to folks who don't want to think there is a God.

(so they wont have to obey Him, I guess... I don't really know.)

But they are both only theory's,... for now. 🙂

Where is this evidence for creationism?

Faith in god and the bible don't count.

Oh wait, other than that, there is none.

Creationism is NOT a scientific theory.

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
I'm not "God", I haven't the answers to everything.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
or 'ANYTHING' for that matter.
Originally posted by powerfulone1987
why do you keep responding with these little comments. Please shut up.

Anyone else see the irony there?

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
And as many people who have responded to me in an offensive way because of my opinions on this topic

One may ask oneself if people are responding negatively to the argument, or to how the argument is presented. Is that comprehensible enough for you?

Originally posted by Lana
Where is this evidence for creationism?

Faith in god and the bible don't count.

Oh wait, other than that, there is none.

Creationism is NOT a scientific theory.

Yes, I would agree to a degree. I feel there is a fundamental difference between them (obvious I know.) I mean first you have a scientific theory supported by a large amount of scientifically verifiable evidence that is both consistent and in line with the theory, a theory which has holes yes, but holes which don't actually disprove it and are gradually being dealt with over time.

Then you have creationism which has a profound lack of scientifically verifiable evidence, other then "have faith" and "God works in mysterious ways", and doesn't actually have any evidence to disprove evolution, just harps on and on about the holes in the evolutionary theory (which once again don't actually disprove it) while ignoring the huge holes within itself, holes which are far more condemning then anything in evolution.

Now some people consider both theories, and while that might be true I don't think it should mean both are to be seen equal or or equally viable or deserve equal attention by the school board - especially when one is more practical, and religion is available in other places.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Now some people consider both theories, and while that might be true I don't think it should mean both are to be seen equal or or equally viable or deserve equal attention by the school board - especially when one is more practical, and religion is available in other places.

"I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms." - Stephen Gould

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
"I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms." - Stephen Gould

Exactly.

Kharmadog, once again, you're stuck to my @$$. Did I say something to you to give you the wrong idea, b/c I don't like you.

So please stick to the topic and not to me.

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
Kharmadog, once again, you're stuck to my @$$. Did I say something to you to give you the wrong idea, b/c I don't like you.

Wow, enough with the hostility and latent homosexual inuendo. I was just pointing out the irony of your statement (which continues) and the fact that people are probably taking exception more to how you are making your point as opposed to the point you are making.

By rectifying that communication hurdle the topiccould proceed without hostitlity.

That sounds comprehensible. 🤨

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Wow, enough with the hostility and latent homosexual inuendo. I was just pointing out the irony of your statement (which continues) and the fact that people are probably taking exception more to how you are making your point as opposed to the point you are making.

By rectifying that communication hurdle the topiccould proceed without hostitlity.


again, it's all about me and not about the topic. You seem to be making a habit out of this.

Now. Evolution anyone................?

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
again, it's all about me and not about the topic. You seem to be making a habit out of this.

Now. Evolution anyone................?

is it comprehensible.....

Maybe we should evolve out of this bickering.

If you are looking for proof of evolution, read this article.

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060222_chicken_teeth.html

I'm not sure I would call that proof of evolution. Proof is apparently subjective.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I'm not sure I would call that proof of evolution. Proof is apparently subjective.

You read it, didn't you?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You read it, didn't you?

Oh yeah. I read it.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Oh yeah. I read it.

I just wanted people to read it.

If there is no evolution, were did the teeth come from?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Maybe we should evolve out of this bickering.

maybe you shouldn't have brought it up as I was trying to end it myself, don't be a hypocrite. Evolve yourself first.

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
maybe you shouldn't have brought it up as I was trying to end it myself, don't be a hypocrite. Evolve yourself first.

is it comprehensible.....

holy crap, you just love to stir it up don't you?