Originally posted by Agent Elrond
u have yet to prve that Darwin was responsible for social darwinismIf I came up with an idea and some bozo warped it and many ppl died, it's not my fault, it's the bozo's fault.
Mmm...Lets say I created a missle but I didn't intend to use it or even forsee it's destructive pontential. I'd feel pretty proud of myself but if some moron came along and used it to vaporize a hundred people, I would still be indirectly responsible for creating it. Or take for instance if I leave a loaded gun in an open area and a child takes it and mistakingly kills itself or another I am once again responsible for it even though I did not intend for the child to get their hands on it.
Originally posted by sonofasaiyan
But that makes him and his theory no less accountable. Intent is not a factor here, whether his were good or bad.
The answer can't get more clear: NO
his intentions were good and he can NOT be held accountable for what OTHER people do!
are you responsible for what your neighbour does? are you responsible for what happens in your street? You're responsible for yourself and for your kids up till a certain age, from there on it's pretty straightforward: everyone controls his own destiny.
and about your "sites"
"One Nation Under God"???? 😂 please give a link to a USEFUL site that makes this claims? we already established around a thousand times that such sites don't know what they're talking about.
or this:
"[Evolution is] really a belief system ... They're just clinging to any evidence they can to try to prove that there's no God." - Ken Ham, Executive Director of Answers in Genesis
he got his position by getting a major in stupidity? every single person knows that you can NOT prove a negative! TO has wrote it so many times that I just hope she can simply copy-paste it when yet another person comes in to claim we have to proof there is no god!
“When students of other sciences ask us what is now currently believed about the origin of species, we have no clear answer to give. Faith has given place to agnosticism. Meanwhile, though our faith in evolution stands unshaken, we have no acceptable account of the origin of species.” - William Bateson, famous geneticist of Cambridge
And this is a NORMAL explanation, the thing is ... religion doesn't change, they still believe the books still say the earth is a square and that it is the center of the universe. Science on the other hand has the inteligence to change with it's age, when new discoveries are made, the theories change and become more accure, something you can not say about the bible
“Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation – which is unthinkable.” - Sir Authur Keith, famous British evolutionist
I whole heartly disagree with this fellow... it's not because evolution doesn't exist that the only alternative is creatism! One does not exclude the other
(english is not my first language and I have no idea what Sir Julian Huxley wants to say in that quote)
and that last quote... what's the point of that?
“In accepting evolution as fact, how many biologists pause to reflect that science is built upon theories that have been proved by experiment to be correct, or remember that the theory of animal evolution has never been thus proved?"
one word.... Fruitflies...according to TO a scientists favorite for this
so...that's only the mainpage and already it's full of faults... so why would someone waist their time on the other subjects if they clearly can't understand what they're talking about?
Okay, I think we came up with a list of qualifications for sources a while back. One of which went as follows:
Any information that is not widely known and accepted by the scientific community must be given with AT LEAST two sources. Two separate articles from the same site do not count as two sources.
And any information from answersingenesis.com is bull, that site is a load of crap. I wrote some emails to them once, and they never answered my question. They only picked out the minor errors in my letter and acted as if I knew nothing because of these errors.
I was talk'n to some creationist a second ago and they gave that old argument: If we come from monkeys, why are there still monkeys running around? I usually say that evolution is like a family tree. Some branches reach higher than others, but they still come from the same trunk. This makes sense to me, but I don't know. I could be full of sh*t. Does anyone else have a better way to explain it or am I dead wrong?
hahahahaha, I saw the name Ken Ham in there!
I read a couple of his books for an English project I had to do(in a Lutheran school), and he is the stupidest man to ever write a book. Ever. He once said that the farther away an object is from earth in distance, the closer it is to us in time....or some such shit, and that the speed of light got slower as it got closer to earth. (Im paraphrasing, what I read was such bullshit that I refused to waste braincells by remembering it).
Ok check this out.
sonofasaiyan, you clearly missing the point. Darwin had a theory he published a thing called the "The Origin of Species" it was more of a theory of how life evolved.
Others used it, took it out of its context to express their view on life and the origin of it, wich often were a a racial one.
To blame Darwin for their way of thinking would be the same as saying Jesus is the reason why people kill and butchered cultures in the name of god.
Sonofasaiyan> So because some lunatics abused Darwin's theory it is DARWIN's fault???
😆
Okay, I then blame God for all the evil done in the name of Christianity.
I'm still waiting, you know? You haven't proven that Darwin supported social Darwinism. Come on, otherwise you'll be marked as a lying fool...
Before you do ANYTHINg else... Takes this test: http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/cre-test.htm
AE> Was it you who wanted flying reindeer? They're in this thread... countless times.
DD> Nope, you're right. The monkeys we descended from no longer exists. Look at the feline tree - you have tigers, lions, pumas, leopards etc. etc. etc. They're related, but not the same. And hey, anyone seen a saber-tooth tiger recently? No, they EVOLVED into something else.
The same with the homo-line of monkeys.
Here, knock yourself - and your Creationist friends - out! 😄
Originally posted by The Omega
Sonofasaiyan> So because some lunatics abused Darwin's theory it is DARWIN's fault???
😆
Okay, I then blame God for all the evil done in the name of Christianity.I'm still waiting, you know? You haven't proven that Darwin supported social Darwinism. Come on, otherwise you'll be marked as a lying fool...
Before you do ANYTHINg else... Takes this test: http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/cre-test.htmAE> Was it you who wanted flying reindeer? They're in this thread... countless times.
DD> Nope, you're right. The monkeys we descended from no longer exists. Look at the feline tree - you have tigers, lions, pumas, leopards etc. etc. etc. They're related, but not the same. And hey, anyone seen a saber-tooth tiger recently? No, they EVOLVED into something else.
The same with the homo-line of monkeys.
Here, knock yourself - and your Creationist friends - out! 😄
Got me there but check this out my fanatic friend.
http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro10.html
And we would not have called them lunatics if they existed in contemporary society. It's funny how some people take religion and God with grain of salt but rarely ever question science that may be proven in many instances but is far too dynamic. In a thousand years evolution may be discredited like so many other scientific theories.
Finti> Did dinosaurs become utterly extinct? Yes and no. Some species of dinosaurs evolved into birds, others died out, leaving no descendants. So it's wrong to say dinosaurs are extinct. Just the kind of dinos we usually know are.
The same with sabre-tooth tigers. They evolved into something else, and the SPECIES itself, with its specific traits died out.
See?
Arachnoidfreak> Bah, do you think I can remember where it is? 😉
Here it is, proof you can't prove a negative.
ME: Flying reindeers exist!
You: No, they don't.
Me: Prove it!
You then have to find every single reindeer on Earth and toss them from Big Ben, to prove they can't fly. I can claim you didn't find ALL reindeer, or that it was a SPECIEL reindeer not born yet, or a reindeer from Sirius! Eventually you'll have to search through the entire Universe, through all ages, and toss ALL reindeer from Big ben to show that reindeer cannot fly. I can claim they can only fly on Sundays or during a Full Moon or... When asked by special healers or druids or...
Now, if instead you asked ME to prove my positive assertion I would have to find the ONE reindeer that could fly.
Sonofasayian> Before you do ANYTHINg else... Takes this test: http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/cre-test.htm
just a delusional christian with a phd, trying to be complexly smart.
They manage to clone a sheep, so out of one of natures creation man was able to duplicate it. If man can duplicate such complex being as an animal life form dont you think nature is a step ahead of man as of yet.
We are on the brink of cloning humans how does this phd dude explain that