• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Finger

Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

SouthernDemocrat said:
ID is basically creationism with modern marketing.
Click to expand...
Zyphlin said:
Eh, I disagree...specifically for the very reasons you laid out in your original post and then here as well....
Click to expand...

Yes SD: 'Intelligent Design' IS just respun creationism, and of course needs a DesignER/GOD. And is identically deservant of derision.

Several postings now of:
Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intelligent design is the assertion that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."[1][2]
It is a Modern Form of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, but one which avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer.[3]
The idea was developed by a group of American creationists who Reformulated their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to Circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science.[4][5][6] Intelligent design's leading proponents – all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank[7][8] – believe the designer to be the God of Christianity.[9][10]

Advocates of intelligent design seek to fundamentally Redefine Science to accept Supernatural explanations,[11] arguing that intelligent design is a scientific theory under this new definition of science.[12]
The Unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is NOT science.[13][14][15][16]
The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are NOT science because they are not testable by the methods of science."[17] The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it Pseudoscience.[18] Others in the scientific community have concurred, and some have called it Junk science.[19][20]
[........]
The term "intelligent design" came into use after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1987 case of Edwards v. Aguillard that to require the teaching of "creation science" alongside evolution was a violation of the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state endorsement of a religion. In the Edwards case, the Supreme Court had also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction".[24] In drafts of the creation science textbook 'Of Pandas and People', almost all derivatives of the word "Creation", such as "Creationism", were Replaced with the words "intelligent design".[21] The book was published in 1989, followed by a "grass-roots" campaign promoting the use of the book to teach intelligent design in high-school biology classes.[25]....."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
You get a like from me (cherish it) for not mincing or trying to spin away from what you've been saying or claiming to have the only possible definition of "creationism"
out there.
Click to expand...

It all comes down to supernatural events to prove their assertions. Supernatural events don't happen.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

beefheart said:
It all comes down to supernatural events to prove their assertions. Supernatural events don't happen.
Click to expand...

It would be better to say that until such time there is demonstrable evidence they exist, it is presumed that supernatural events don't happen. (Same principle as used in the justice system <-- hopefully this is self evident, right theists?)
Otherwise you are making a positive declaration that requires substantiation. Good luck proving a negative.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

mbig said:
Yes SD: 'Intelligent Design' IS just respun creationism, and of course needs a DesignER/GOD. And is identically deservant of derision.

Several postings now of:
Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I think it's fairly obvious that the proponents of ID are doing so out of their (typically) Judeo-Christian views, but the way they wedged it in there is to basically say "well, it's reasonable to conclude a creator designed it," which is rather tame when you think about it. It's essentially the old watchmaker metaphor deists with Enlightenment science inclinations used. That this comes into conflict with modern science is noteworthy (and also why I don't think it belongs in said classes), but it's very accommodating to early modern thought (which cannot be said of many protestant Christian sects).
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

RogueWarrior said:
It would be better to say that until such time there is demonstrable evidence they exist, it is presumed that supernatural events don't happen. (Same principle as used in the justice system <-- hopefully this is self evident, right theists?)
Otherwise you are making a positive declaration that requires substantiation. Good luck proving a negative.
Click to expand...

Ask James Randi....get a million bucks if you can produce supernatural anything.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

beefheart said:
Ask James Randi....get a million bucks if you can produce supernatural anything.
Click to expand...

Yes I know.
But by asking that, you are guilty of the same fallacy that theists use all the time: shifting the burden.

If you make the claim that the supernatural doesn't exist, you have to provide evidence that it doesn't.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

However, you can, indeed should, presume absence of existence if the supernatural has not been demonstrated.

The justice system uses the same methodology.
A person is presumed innocent until guilt is proven.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

RogueWarrior said:
Yes I know.
But by asking that, you are guilty of the same fallacy that theists use all the time: shifting the burden.

If you make the claim that the supernatural doesn't exist, you have to provide evidence that it doesn't.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

However, you can, indeed should, presume absence of existence if the supernatural has not been demonstrated.

The justice system uses the same methodology.
A person is presumed innocent until guilt is proven.
Click to expand...

It hasn't been demonstrated.

If someone claims they can do something supernatural, let them.

"Everyone who believes in telekinesis, raise my hand"
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

beefheart said:
It all comes down to supernatural events to prove their assertions. Supernatural events don't happen.
Click to expand...

Work with me here.

su·per·nat·u·ral
ˌso͞opərˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

Now, let's pretend, in the time of our ancients, that a great chariot from the sky ascended from the heavens, with great fire. And from this chariot came two angels of God. They impregnated virgins and they gave births to the sons and daughters of God.

That's kind of hard to wrap one's head around, no? They had no scientific understanding to speak of. In fact, through the ages such knowledge of science, or the search thereof, would get you burnt at the stake. These, "chariots," these, "angels," were beyond the understanding of any known natural order. Therefore, GOD!

Now, flash forward. Year 2014. Nightly news reports, "Alien spacecraft makes contact with NASA and reveals human breeding experiment dating back to ancient ages."

People could understand that. We do breeding experiments as well. We manipulate genetics all the time. We too, have flying spacecrafts and are capable of visiting other worlds.

The "supernatural," is no longer "supernatural." As we can understand it in scientific terms and nothing is really unnatural about any of it, when you think about it.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
You've already said, repeatedly that you anyone who consider themselves a creationist is an idiot, doesn't matter what "type". That's grand. I'm not trying to dissuade you at all. I'm telling you that most Christians consider themselves creationists.
Click to expand...

Specifically literal readings of Genesis: Young Earth Creationism. This has been explained to you already.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
You get a like from me (cherish it) for not mincing or trying to spin away from what you've been saying or claiming to have the only possible definition of "creationism"
out there.
Click to expand...

It's not the "only possible" definition. It's just the one people are using here. People use the term "creationist" in a context like this to refer to Young Earth Creationism, not any and all forms of religion.

I hope this clears it up for you. I'm sure you now understand when somebody says creationism is wrong, they don't mean any version of it you can conceive of, but rather a specific version of it.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
Anyone who believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He died for our sins and that we are saved through our faith/belief in Him is a Christian.
Click to expand...

Do you actually believe that when your interpretation causes Jesus Christ to become the Greatest Liar of All Time? How can we believe anything about Christianity when an interpretation of Genesis dictates that God is a liar and has been a liar from day one? The notion of acceptance of Christ as our Savior relies on a level of trust in Christ. YEC eliminates that trust by dictating that God is not trustworthy and has lied from the very beginning in the very first Book of the Bible. How can someone be a a Christian on your criteria when the very requirement for faith, trust, no longer exists? I don't think you will even try to answer this.

It's funny how the people most hostile and enraged by religion seem to think they're the authority on what someone's "true beliefs" should be.
Click to expand...

Since when did my rejection of an interpretation = enraged by religion?

I noticed you are refusing to name a single piece of non-propaganda commercial product that Creationism helps make. Why is that? You know full well that I will keep bringing up challenges that get ignored as form of open mockery about my opponent's inability to produce an argument. Why would you actively bring that upon yourself?
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

beefheart said:
ID is creationism.
Click to expand...

It's simpler than that. Intelligent Design is Animism. The only thing that got changed is replacing Animism's spirits with an unnamed Creator. Basically, both ID and Animism is "I don't know, therefore Magic."

Most people have long given up that the rains are caused by the rain gods, that lightning is caused by Zeus and that the praying to a fertility God will bring you children, but there's really no difference between Animism and Intelligent Design. It's exceptionally hypocritical for someone to believe in ID at the same time accepting the science behind why we're going to have rainstorms in a few days.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

Hatuey said:
Watching X-Factor slink away from his first post in this thread is slightly satisfying. He lied about Dr. Edwin Conklin's position as an 'evolutionist'. He tried really hard to attribute the statements of others to my posts. Then he couldn't answer what his quote had to do with the issue. Then he got school on just which Christians accepted evolution. Then mbig called him out for engaging in further dishonest and trying to get people to insult his view. You gotta love just how his arguments have been bludgeoned to death but I'm not one to really enjoy jumping on people who don't know their stuff. So I'll bid you all adieu and observe as some of you demolishing X's uninformed statements.

:peace
Click to expand...

I haven't got a reply as to a single piece of non-media propaganda that creationism helps produce. I asked him to provide one. I haven't gotten a reply yet.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop" (Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University).[/QUOTE

I suspect that many of us were results of "accidents".
Click to expand...
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
Actually no. I don't think someone is a moron or unintelligent for their religious beliefs. Obviously I understand taking things on faith.
Click to expand...

So you'd think that regardless of what actual beliefs they had?

Something (beyond the fact that you've been wildly dishonest this entire thread) tells me you're not being honest here.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

SouthernDemocrat said:
You know what is really insulting? How every time creationists get challenged and ridiculed for their beliefs they respond by claiming atheists and liberals are attacking Christians…… As if all Christians are as stupid as they are. By making such assertions creationists are saying the world's 2 billion Christians are all as ignorant of science and modernity in general as they are. That is about as insulting to Christianity as it gets, particularly when you consider that literal creationism is a minority view in Christianity.
Click to expand...

X Factor said:
It's funny how the people most hostile and enraged by religion seem to think they're the authority on what someone's "true beliefs" should be.
Click to expand...

Or posts that argue that if you reject an interpretation of one part of a Religion, that makes you "hostile and enraged by religion."

I point out how YEC creates a theological problem resulting from a literal interpretation of creation so large with the trustworthiness of God that it renders all beliefs about him suspect and somehow I now an hostile to all religion? I explicitly called YEC believers not Christian BECAUSE of that problem as it invalidates the very foundation of Christianity: trust in Christ.

Seriously, could X Factor be more dishonest?
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

imagep said:
X Factor said:
The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop" (Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University).
Click to expand...

I suspect that many of us were results of "accidents".
Click to expand...

Beyond the fact that the quote was modified by dishonest creationists, it's a gross failure to understand chemical reactions, complexity and time.

Dishonest Creationists like to argue that rolling a single die to get a series of numbers is incredibly hard. What they fail to realize is that if you roll a billion dice a second for a million years, you are virtually guaranteed to get that sequence. In a single cubic foot of soil, trillions of chemical reactions are happening. That quote only works on idiots who don't understand the basics of science.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

Deuce said:
It's not the "only possible" definition. It's just the one people are using here. People use the term "creationist" in a context like this to refer to Young Earth Creationism, not any and all forms of religion.

I hope this clears it up for you. I'm sure you now understand when somebody says creationism is wrong, they don't mean any version of it you can conceive of, but rather a specific version of it.
Click to expand...

Right, the biblical version.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

flu.jpg
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

X Factor said:
Right, the biblical version.
Click to expand...

The literal biblical version, which not many actually subscribe to. Particularly the literal biblical version which interprets the earth as being 6000 years old. The bible does not actually say the earth is 6000 years old. Some human being decided that, and some people decided that was gospel.

The trouble is a bit of a logical short-circuit:

God is infallble -> bible is the word of God -> the bible is infallible

But it's missing a step. It's missing the part where human beings are interpreting, reinterpreting, translating, and retranslating the bible. God may be infallible, but a human's interpretation of the bible is not.

We have straight-up proof that the earth is more than 6000 years old. Period. End of story. The only way for the earth to be 6000 years old is if God deliberately altered the laws of physics to deceive us to this end. If that's what you believe, fine, but don't expect me to agree to your interpretation without evidence.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

beefheart said:
That isn't what evolution is.

But to your point, it happened, get over it.

Believe whatever you want, just don't teach religious dogma to kids in public school.

Want to make crap up and teach it to kids? Do it in your private school.
Click to expand...

exactly please don't teach your dogma in public school. you want to make crap up that life formed from a single cell organism? do it in your private school.
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

ludin said:
exactly please don't teach your dogma in public school. you want to make crap up that life formed from a single cell organism? do it in your private school.
Click to expand...

If your version of creationism is allowed, I'm sure you won't mind the Muslims teaching theirs as well (though it's nearly the same). Or how about the Buddhists?
 
Re: Reporter Suspended For Defending Evolution Comes Back, Gives Immediate Middle Fin

ludin said:
exactly please don't teach your dogma in public school. you want to make crap up that life formed from a single cell organism? do it in your private school.
Click to expand...

Scientific evidence exists to support this idea, therefore discussing this in a science classroom is appropriate.

Discussing your holy book in a science classroom does not fit this requirement. Philosophy or religion classroom? Sure. Just keep in mind that yours is not the only religious idea that will appear here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom