Can you handle the Truth?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
[b]OMFG you responded to one of my posts Am I off your ignore list? 😱

I asked for you thoughts on the video that was posted, what does this have to do with the video? All this time of waiting around and you can't even reply to the video that was posted, you have to post another video that doesn't even deal with the video that I was talking about. I expect better from you JIA. What does that have to do with anything?
Last time I check the Theory of Evolution is a "Theory" and not the "Fact of Evolution" so I don't know what school that you went to. It is not a religion by any means, please do explain. Even with your second definition of science is the exact explanation of the Theory of Evolution through observation.

You were doing OK until this statement, evolution is happening every day. 😆 Last time I check there wasn't even any life on this planet "Billions of years ago". 😆 [/B]

No disrespect but I intended to respond to AngryManatee but inadvertently selected your post.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No disrespect but I intended to respond to AngryManatee but inadvertently selected your post.

😆

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
that's why i'm here 😉 i got a few days left of vacation to spend typing up thesis's before college starts. Wait a minute...
I do belive that is religion because it is a unprovable theory about how the world came to be. Since it "happens' over a span of millions of years, you can't easily experiment on it. Those experiments that have been done are invalid/unsupported.
indeed. As such, it is not what should be pounded into children's head's since birth as scientific fact. For instance, while talking to some weak-minded high schoolers, I was given the retort that "It was made up by scientists who went to college, so it must be fact". Obviously it should be kept out of schools.

see below.
This really applies to both evolution and the bible. :/ for instance, darwin writes that all animals have a common ancestor. Every secular scientist since has tried to find "facts" that support it. If you looked at a world view that fits the fact, it would be "we know what we know, and what we don't know, we don't know". Evolution is nothing but educated guessing at something that nobody witnessed.
you have things like sunspots and the fact that the earth is moving in relation to the sun. think about it.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Milankovitch/milankovitch_2.php this disproves the age of the earth being over 100000 years old, and shows that the earth's revolutions are not constant.

at 80 billion years ago or whenever you say life began, the earth would have been spinning way too fast to sustain life and the days would have been incredibly short.

I dodn't ask you to take it as fact, but it is my theory as to why A, carbon dating says the earth is so old, and b, so many extroardinary things were happening in genesis, such as a life span of millenia.
they don't really describe the sun at all. and your hypothesis interesting but unfounded. http://creationsciencemessages.org/worldbeforenoah.htm

I'm not proving it its just the "christian scholar's" theory as to why dinosaurs went extinct, people had so long a lifespan, and things along that line that would otherwise be unbelieveable in genesis.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4254news3-24-2000.asp

radiometric dating is not absolute but i'll give you that one.

Fine. First of all this 'firmament' could be vapor or ice. I am not going to be specific. Secondly, it could be why mosquitos in amber are so big. You wanna know what comets are made out of? water. The bible says that god blew the water off of the face of the earth.
the flood happened. this much is true. how we don't know, the most logical next step is the theory of the "firmament". Chinese and incas have legends of a flood that encompased the earth as well as us. Furthermore, the petrified remains of the ark have been believed to be found.
i didn't say science was. Just evolution, and I believe so because it is based on things that cannot be proven or can be easily disproven, and requires faith to believe.

Creationism and other religious based concepts of the origin or development of life on Earth are not taught as a scientific course because there are no testable theories in them; they do not and can not follow any of the scientific method. How can you test “God did it”?

So by saying that just because something happened millions of years ago that we can never understand how it happened, evolution happens slowly and fast. While we may never see an ape turn into a human we can look at the genetic markers between the different species and trace them back. While this may not be exact enough for you what kind of proof do you have that Adam was created by God? What tests can you run that show any kind of scientific method that even shows that he existed?

You seem to like to knock what science is trying to explain but what do you have to show that your belief is more valid? What evidence do you have to support that we didn’t come from apes without trying to validate your point by disproving others? Disproving something doesn’t make the opposite true, just because it is not black doesn’t mean that it is not white.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
[B]I’m still waiting to find out what school that you went to that is teaching the Theory of Evolution as fact? This is the most widely accepted theory of the development of life on Earth which has been tested and retested every day and being that there are some missing pieces and theories that have not been “proven” it has still stood the test of time.

Also notice how you are all so eager to defend evolution? if you acknowledged it as a theory with an ambiguous nature of truth then you would not be trying to debate it so fervently.

Creationism and other religious based concepts of the origin or development of life on Earth are not taught as a scientific course because there are no testable theories in them; they do not and can not follow any of the scientific method. How can you test “God did it”?

I'm saying that NEITHER should be taught in schools. What we don't know we shouldn't teach, and if we do teach evolution why not say "some believe that a deity is the origin of life" and "some believe that evolution is the origin of life" instead of vigorously arguing one without representation of the other in the classroom. My preferred policy, however would be to take both out and let the kids/parents figure it out for themselves.

So by saying that just because something happened millions of years ago that we can never understand how it happened, evolution happens slowly and fast. While we may never see an ape turn into a human we can look at the genetic markers between the different species and trace them back. While this may not be exact enough for you what kind of proof do you have that Adam was created by God? What tests can you run that show any kind of scientific method that even shows that he existed?

You seem to like to knock what science is trying to explain but what do you have to show that your belief is more valid?

What evidence do you have to support that we didn’t come from apes without trying to validate your point by disproving others?

Disproving something doesn’t make the opposite true, just because it is not black doesn’t mean that it is not white.

I don't think that the government or the schools or the media should adopt a stand on evolution or chreationism unless they are non-profit due to the fact that neither has been proven.

I'd be a fool to attempt to prove creation scientifically, as the best i can come up with is how complex everything is and analogies consisting of monkeys on type writers and dropping a watch 3 trillion times, and i'm sure nobody wants to hear those again.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
they might not use the word "fact" but they do really pass it off with (dareIsay) brainwashing. Little things like using "billions of years ago" in a discovery channel show or something like that, and how they speak the whole evolution theory with no ambiguity as if it really happened. Sure, you can believe it happened, but i want my kids to be taught that which is established not that which is yet to be established.

Also notice how you are all so eager to defend evolution? if you acknowledged it as a theory with an ambiguous nature of truth then you would not be trying to debate it so fervently.
Is it hard for you to comprehend what i'm saying? I believe in creationism, I believe in jesus, I believe in god, I study science. I'm not saying i'm going to prove that god exists. I'm not going to be able to prove any such thing. You don't want to believe it? that's fine with me.

I'm saying that NEITHER should be taught in schools. What we don't know we shouldn't teach, and if we do teach evolution why not say "some believe that a deity is the origin of life" and "some believe that evolution is the origin of life" instead of vigorously arguing one without representation of the other in the classroom. My preferred policy, however would be to take both out and let the kids/parents figure it out for themselves.
Like I said i'm not arguing that Christianity is scientifically based or proven enough for the classroom, i'm just arguing that evolution should not be taught either, as it is not scientifically based or proven.
i'm not offering an alternative my solution is just to delete, not to change or add. 1. that your scientists either jump the gun or hoax to get their missing links, i mean seriously, how am i supposed to believe a religion presented to me by the same people who said that a pig's tooth belonged to an ape/man and reconstructed an entire skeleton out of it? Or decided that the grave of a man with arthritis contained the fossil of an ancient primate. The opposite is my truth, in my opinion it is the ultimate truth, and there is none to undo it. They are both pretty dodgy scientifically, but thats why there is faith. It all comes down to "what would you prefer to believe?" and the choice is: Are you the master work of a mastermind or are you an accident of gas?

I don't think that the government or the schools or the media should adopt a stand on evolution or chreationism unless they are non-profit due to the fact that neither has been proven.

I'd be a fool to attempt to prove creation scientifically, as the best i can come up with is how complex everything is and analogies consisting of monkeys on type writers and dropping a watch 3 trillion times, and i'm sure nobody wants to hear those again.

So lets us take a look at things that can’t be proven.
1. Pretty much all of astronomy, black hose, other galaxies and etc…
2. A lot of the medical sciences
3. Theoretical math and physics
4. All most all of geology
5. All most all of ancient history
I could keep going on..

These things are taught in schools of things that are not “proven”.

The Theory of Evolution is a science and not a religion so get over that, the theory can follow the scientific method which is…

1. Ask a Question
2. Do Background Research
3. Construct a Hypothesis
4. Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
5. Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
6. Communicate Your Results

Just because you think they mean “fact” is pointless, you are using so many double standards that it is getting tiresome to talk to you. Are there missing holes in the theory, yes but it is a theory. This is the most accepted theory for the development of life and no one has come up with one better, should we only teach something that we have only witness for ourselves?

You should stop watching the Discovery channel, them dinosaurs show are lying to you.

Just one other thing, if this is so flawed how is it even being taught in our schools? Since us Atheist are outnumbered by like 6 to 1 by followers of religion how is it that it has stood as a viable science in schools? Now I know you are going to say the government, but who makes up the government, people and they bring their religion in so do all people in the government all of a sudden become Atheist when passing laws. 😱

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Do you really understand what you are saying, so unless something can be proven it shouldn’t be taught in schools?

So lets us take a look at things that can’t be proven.
1. Pretty much all of astronomy, black hose, other galaxies and etc…
2. A lot of the medical sciences
3. Theoretical math and physics
4. All most all of geology
5. All most all of ancient history
I could keep going on..

You should stop watching the Discovery channel, them dinosaurs show are lying to you.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Just one other thing, if this is so flawed how is it even being taught in our schools? Since us Atheist are outnumbered by like 6 to 1 by followers of religion how is it that it has stood as a viable science in schools?

Now I know you are going to say the government, but who makes up the government, people and they bring their religion in so do all people in the government all of a sudden become Atheist when passing laws. 😱

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
obviously because not all "religious people" are scientists or even skilled with logic, whereas the supporters of evolution are either educated in the ways of the tongue or unable to think for themselves...

This makes no sense. What does "the ways of the tongue" mean? And it is more likely that fundamentalists cannot think for themselves then others.

logic/debate/advanced political matters, etc.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
logic/debate/advanced political matters, etc.

"One of these things is not like the other"

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
But these are actually important. knowing the origin of the universe is not. Explain what you mean by "all most all" Also, that list is not easily disproven by basic logic.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
I am very knowledgeable of the scientific method. I beg you not to treat me like an idiot.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
Now you are taking the dogmatic view that "everyone accepts it" so it must be right.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
obviously because not all "religious people" are scientists or even skilled with logic, whereas the supporters of evolution are either educated in the ways of the tongue or unable to think for themselves.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
they might not use the word "fact" but they do really pass it off with (dareIsay) brainwashing. Little things like using "billions of years ago" in a discovery channel show or something like that, and how they speak the whole evolution theory with no ambiguity as if it really happened. Sure, you can believe it happened, but i want my kids to be taught that which is established not that which is yet to be established.

Well, the phrase 'billions of years ago' isn't postulated by evolutionary biology. Saying 'billions of years' indicates an acceptance of the facts of physics and geology, not biology. Evolution is an established scientific theory. As such, it is about as close to fact as science gets. Evolution is supported by a large body of facts and makes testable, accurate predictions. There simply isn't uncertainty in the scientific community about whether or not evolution is valid.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

Also notice how you are all so eager to defend evolution? if you acknowledged it as a theory with an ambiguous nature of truth then you would not be trying to debate it so fervently.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

Is it hard for you to comprehend what i'm saying? I believe in creationism, I believe in jesus, I believe in god, I study science. I'm not saying i'm going to prove that god exists. I'm not going to be able to prove any such thing. You don't want to believe it? that's fine with me.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

I'm saying that NEITHER should be taught in schools. What we don't know we shouldn't teach, and if we do teach evolution why not say "some believe that a deity is the origin of life" and "some believe that evolution is the origin of life" instead of vigorously arguing one without representation of the other in the classroom. My preferred policy, however would be to take both out and let the kids/parents figure it out for themselves.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

Like I said i'm not arguing that Christianity is scientifically based or proven enough for the classroom, i'm just arguing that evolution should not be taught either, as it is not scientifically based or proven.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

i'm not offering an alternative my solution is just to delete, not to change or add.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

1. that your scientists either jump the gun

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

or hoax to get their missing links,

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

i mean seriously, how am i supposed to believe a religion

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

presented to me by the same people who said that a pig's tooth belonged to an ape/man and reconstructed an entire skeleton out of it? Or decided that the grave of a man with arthritis contained the fossil of an ancient primate.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

The opposite is my truth, in my opinion it is the ultimate truth, and there is none to undo it. They are both pretty dodgy scientifically, but thats why there is faith. It all comes down to "what would you prefer to believe?" and the choice is: Are you the master work of a mastermind or are you an accident of gas?

Besides- evolution is not 'dodgy' at all.

"Accident of gas" made me roll on the floor whilst laughing. At best it shows a propensity towards fart jokes or at worst that you don't know what you're talking about (despite pages upon pages of my attempts to hammer the mechanics of abiogenesis into your skull- which actually led to me learning more...).

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

I don't think that the government or the schools or the media should adopt a stand on evolution or chreationism unless they are non-profit due to the fact that neither has been proven.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11

I'd be a fool to attempt to prove creation scientifically, as the best i can come up with is how complex everything is and analogies consisting of monkeys on type writers and dropping a watch 3 trillion times, and i'm sure nobody wants to hear those again.

Yes, you would be a fool to take a stance in opposition to the facts. I'm glad that we're settled (since I presume that you don't want to be a fool). You will henceforth cease and desist your erroneous assertions about evolution's lack of scientific credibility and your factually false insistence upon the unscientific nature of the theory itself. You may, of course, continue to believe in fairies and unicorns and giant planet covering shells of ice. I wouldn't presume to tell you what to think- only what is correct. You can be wrong all you'd like.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
logic/debate/advanced political matters, etc.

Those irrational scientists and their skill in logic and critical thinking.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
they might not use the word "fact" but they do really pass it off with (dareIsay) brainwashing. Little things like using "billions of years ago" in a discovery channel show or something like that, and how they speak the whole evolution theory with no ambiguity as if it really happened. Sure, you can believe it happened, but i want my kids to be taught that which is established not that which is yet to be established.

Also notice how you are all so eager to defend evolution? if you acknowledged it as a theory with an ambiguous nature of truth then you would not be trying to debate it so fervently.
Is it hard for you to comprehend what i'm saying? I believe in creationism, I believe in jesus, I believe in god, I study science. I'm not saying i'm going to prove that god exists. I'm not going to be able to prove any such thing. You don't want to believe it? that's fine with me.

I'm saying that NEITHER should be taught in schools. What we don't know we shouldn't teach, and if we do teach evolution why not say "some believe that a deity is the origin of life" and "some believe that evolution is the origin of life" instead of vigorously arguing one without representation of the other in the classroom. My preferred policy, however would be to take both out and let the kids/parents figure it out for themselves.
Like I said i'm not arguing that Christianity is scientifically based or proven enough for the classroom, i'm just arguing that evolution should not be taught either, as it is not scientifically based or proven.
i'm not offering an alternative my solution is just to delete, not to change or add. 1. that your scientists either jump the gun or hoax to get their missing links, i mean seriously, how am i supposed to believe a religion presented to me by the same people who said that a pig's tooth belonged to an ape/man and reconstructed an entire skeleton out of it? Or decided that the grave of a man with arthritis contained the fossil of an ancient primate. The opposite is my truth, in my opinion it is the ultimate truth, and there is none to undo it. They are both pretty dodgy scientifically, but thats why there is faith. It all comes down to "what would you prefer to believe?" and the choice is: Are you the master work of a mastermind or are you an accident of gas?

I don't think that the government or the schools or the media should adopt a stand on evolution or chreationism unless they are non-profit due to the fact that neither has been proven.

I'd be a fool to attempt to prove creation scientifically, as the best i can come up with is how complex everything is and analogies consisting of monkeys on type writers and dropping a watch 3 trillion times, and i'm sure nobody wants to hear those again.

This was a very well-written post. I agree with your points completely Lord Knightfa11.

😄

Ohh.....I should not come back here. It is bad for my health.

Originally posted by Ordo
Ohh.....I should not come back here. It is bad for my health.

Don't worry; JIA never says anything anymore. He just agrees with his socks. 😂

it is not scientifically based or proven.

*shudders*

Re-reads...

*Shudders*

Just no. 😐

Shaky- Knightfa11 is not a sock. He may be a liar, an idot, a communist, a porn star, and a sock but he is not a communist.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
*shudders*

Re-reads...

*Shudders*

Just no. 😐

Shaky- Knightfa11 is not a sock. He may be a liar, an idot, a communist, a porn star, and a sock but he is not a communist.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

Well, the phrase 'billions of years ago' isn't postulated by evolutionary biology. Saying 'billions of years' indicates an acceptance of the facts of physics and geology, not biology. Evolution is an established scientific theory. As such, it is about as close to fact as science gets. Evolution is supported by a large body of facts and makes testable, accurate predictions. There simply isn't uncertainty in the scientific community about whether or not evolution is valid.

It has the same amount of ambiguity as any other established scientific truth. I would argue just as "fervently" if you wanted to claim that the Sun orbits the Earth, or that the Earth is flat. If you brought up old superstitious nonsense like that there would be just as much wrong with it as there is with this.

I really don't understand you. Why do you follow Creationism in the absence of facts? What is the basis for your decision?

http://www.halos.com/ <--These are polonium halos found in granite, a fascinating argument for creationism.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com/ifyoucanreadthis.htm <--Once again fascinating.

There is a difference between Creationism and Evolution. Evolution is supported by mounds of scientific evidence, and Creationism is not. Evolution is an empirical concept, Creationism is not.

I hope you mean defenition #2, right?

Evolution accurately describes the universe and predicts future occurrences and Creationism does not.

22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,

Last of all, you come to how you want your worldview to be. Would you rather look at yourself as the masterpiece of a mastermind, or would you rather be the accident of hydrogen gas.

As a great philosopher said, I would rather be an Optimist and wrong than a pessimist and right.

Evolution is pertinent to our day to day life in a way that Creationism never could be; Evolution explains domestication of animals, improvement of crop/lifestock yields and the development of drug resistant bacteria while Creationism is utterly worthless when dealing with the real world.

Oh and the bible tells you to "love your enemies" "bless those that curse you", etc. It offers great advice that is relevant on the real life.

What I am arguing about is the fact that evolution into something new will not happen. A dog will not create many different kinds of ancestors. a dog is a dog and a cat is a cat. Feline and Canine. They aren't going to turn into a different species. I understand that if you are going to breed a labrador with a chiuaua you are going to get some kind of mutt with traits from both species, and also that survival of the fittest within kinds is plausible and practical.

And take a gorilla on before you say that humans are more "fit" than their ape predecessors. (oh, i understand that we didn't come from gorillas, but the same basic principal still applies.)