View Poll Results: Do You Belive In Creationsm?

Voters
73. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes I do - The Biblical version

    3 4.11%
  • Yes I do - "Intelligent Design" - God created everything

    9 12.33%
  • No - I believe in the Theory of Evolution (Darwinism)

    51 69.86%
  • None of the above - please explain

    10 13.70%
Page 33 of 34 FirstFirst ... 2331323334 LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 336

Thread: Do You Believe in Creationism?

  1. #321
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,788

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    And where exactly did I say all Christians and Muslims? Notice I said fundamental. That would imply people like Dobson, not someone like SouthernDemocrat.

    A fundamentalist does not represent all of one religion.
    It was a group of comments, not just that one.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Indeed. Christanity does not teach you to stop thinking, stop examining and stop trying to understand God's world. That however, IS intelligent design. Hence why I said it was a joke on Christanity. ID of Behe's model is nothing more then if something is too complex to explain now, it must be intelligently designed. That's effectively Animism which seeks to explain what cannot be explained currently with a God.
    This is a great misunderstanding on your part. No one is saying it is to complex to understand. They are saying the structures are to complex for evolution to be an explanation. We do not think nature has the tools to do such complex structures on its own. It may be God, it may be something else. We will not stop looking, but for now it is not explainable.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Incorrect. It's anti-stupid thinking. Just because you can't explain something doesn't mean you assume God.
    We thought it was God long before any other theory's came along. I do whole heartedly believe in God and think he created everything. He did not tell us the mechanics involved, but this we can discover through science.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    That's silly. Don;t know how a microwave works? God! Don't understand the water cycle? God. Don't understand anything? God. Way to shutdown one's brain rather quickly given how truly ignorant we are of most things. If we all thought the way that the ID model of Behe works, we wouldn't do anything, invent anything or learn anything new. What we don't know would be automatically attributed to God and we'd stop there. That's a surefire way to end up a very, very, poor nation.
    I have more than explained how this is not true above.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    There are much better reasons to believe then the God of the Gaps.
    If Behe were the final word you mite have a point, but he is not.

    You have been way off course from the beginning and I am done. I did not post an explanation to derail this thread.

    You have your self a good night and God bless.


    No Lives Matter

  2. #322
    Sage
    First Thought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Last Seen
    12-01-10 @ 02:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,218

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    "Behe says he once fully accepted the scientific theory of evolution, but that after reading Evolution: A Theory In Crisis, by Michael Denton, he came to question evolution. Later, Behe came to believe that there was evidence, at a biochemical level, that there were systems that were "irreducibly complex". These were systems that he thought could not, even in principle, have evolved by natural selection, and thus must have been created by an "intelligent designer," which he believed to be the only possible alternative explanation for such complex structures." - Michael Behe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Ugh, poor Behe. If only he understood evolution, he would not have made such a fool out of himself.

    Debunking Christianity: Notes on Draper's Article on Behe's Design Argument, Part 3: Are Behe's Examples Really Irreducibly Complex?
    "An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi

  3. #323
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,788

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    Ugh, poor Behe. If only he understood evolution, he would not have made such a fool out of himself.

    Debunking Christianity: Notes on Draper's Article on Behe's Design Argument, Part 3: Are Behe's Examples Really Irreducibly Complex?
    What does your comment have to do with my post?

    Even in your "blog" post it says he may not be correct, it says nothing about he is absolutely wrong.


    No Lives Matter

  4. #324
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    It was a group of comments, not just that one.
    Aka, you're grasping at straws.

    This is a great misunderstanding on your part. No one is saying it is to complex to understand. They are saying the structures are to complex for evolution to be an explanation. We do not think nature has the tools to do such complex structures on its own. It may be God, it may be something else. We will not stop looking, but for now it is not explainable.
    On the contrary, that is not even close to what ID argues. ID is in fact saying that it is too complex to explain and understand now. The whole eye senario is a perfect example of don't know = Goddidit. And as you say, IDers don't think nature has such tools, the problem is applying that historically, everything we couldn't explain is therefore credited to God.

    We thought it was God long before any other theory's came along. I do whole heartedly believe in God and think he created everything. He did not tell us the mechanics involved, but this we can discover through science.
    Which is contradictory to ID as ID is not science, cannot be tested and has no evidence.

    I have more than explained how this is not true above.
    No you didn't. You pretend you did.

    We should teach ID in the classroom. It would take all of 10 seconds.

    "If something cannot be explained currently, therefore God."
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  5. #325
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,788

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Aka, you're grasping at straws.
    You have got to be kidding.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    On the contrary, that is not even close to what ID argues.
    I and many others do support that argument. So tell me how you know the mind of everyone who supports ID?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    ID is in fact saying that it is too complex to explain and understand now.
    Wrong. One man is saying this and some others follow it. This is your limited perception of a broad subject with many views and theorys.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    The whole eye senario is a perfect example of don't know = Goddidit.
    On the contrary it is a perfect example of your complete and utter lack of understanding the fact that those who support ID have many different views and opinions. But please continue in your ignorance and continue to make blanket statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    And as you say, IDers don't think nature has such tools, the problem is applying that historically, everything we couldn't explain is therefore credited to God.
    So what? Evolution itself is accredited to God in other circles.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Which is contradictory to ID as ID is not science, cannot be tested and has no evidence.
    And who was arguing this point? I certainly would like to know. So again you try to change the subject and interject things that litterally have nothing to do with the thread or what I posted.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    No you didn't. You pretend you did.
    Than I can only assume you cannot read or are in denial.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    We should teach ID in the classroom. It would take all of 10 seconds.
    That is your opinion and nothing more. In the end it still has nothing to do with myself, this thread or to much of anything that was stated AGAIN.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    "If something cannot be explained currently, therefore God."
    Here is the part you seem to be missing...

    God did it whether we know how it happened or not. There is no "God of gaps" there is only God, period.


    No Lives Matter

  6. #326
    Sage
    First Thought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Last Seen
    12-01-10 @ 02:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,218

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    What does your comment have to do with my post?

    Even in your "blog" post it says he may not be correct, it says nothing about he is absolutely wrong.
    His argument from "irreducible complexity" has been utterly destroyed by tons of biologists. That was my point.
    "An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi

  7. #327
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    I and many others do support that argument. So tell me how you know the mind of everyone who supports ID?
    Not my fault if you wish to define ID as anything you want. I however, will use an actual model that isn't freely open to revision as one seeks dependent upon their losing position in a debate.

    Wrong. One man is saying this and some others follow it. This is your limited perception of a broad subject with many views and theorys.
    Ah, how nice. A belief without any real meaning. Free to change whenever, for whatever reason, any at time. Totally useful eh?

    On the contrary it is a perfect example of your complete and utter lack of understanding the fact that those who support ID have many different views and opinions. But please continue in your ignorance and continue to make blanket statements.
    See above.

    So what? Evolution itself is accredited to God in other circles.
    By whom? Creationists?

    And who was arguing this point? I certainly would like to know. So again you try to change the subject and interject things that litterally have nothing to do with the thread or what I posted.
    You said that Christanity taught people to seek to understand. You also argued that ID does this. This is factually wrong as ID is little more then God of the Gaps. Therefore, ID is an anti-thesis to Christanity's idea to seek knowledge.

    Watch:
    Than I can only assume you cannot read or are in denial.

    God did it whether we know how it happened or not. There is no "God of gaps" there is only God, period.
    I'm starting to agree with Scourge that some religious people cannot be reasoned with.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #328
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,788

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    His argument from "irreducible complexity" has been utterly destroyed by tons of biologists. That was my point.
    This has something to do with my post or this thread how? I notice you sort of ignored this the first time as well.

    As for your "tons of biologists" this is false as he has not been "destroyed" as it cannot be proved one way or the other yet. Neither side has enough evidence to do much of anything as your own article pointed out. It is an educated guess on both sides.

    Now if you had said which is most likely, I could then agree with your statement. But it is absolutely not a forgone conclusion by any means.


    No Lives Matter

  9. #329
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,788

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Not my fault if you wish to define ID as anything you want. I however, will use an actual model that isn't freely open to revision as one seeks dependent upon their losing position in a debate.
    The red highlights sum up your arguments quite well.

    "Some disagreements about design are unavoidable because people just disagree. But in debates about design some of the "more heat than light" is due to confusion about definitions of design. This is partly due to ignorance, when people don't think about what they're saying. But some confusion seems intentional, when debaters (on both sides) think distortion will help them appeal to listeners they want to impress. - Intelligent Design in Science & Society*(science, philosophy, theology)

    "four types of intelligent design
    The properties of nature are "just right" for a wide variety of life-allowing phenomena. For example, we have sunshine because natural processes produce a fine-tuned balance between opposing forces, in a tug-of-war lasting billions of years. Does this fine tuning of nature indicate a divine design of nature?
    Judeo-Christian theists believe that God responds to prayer, and He can change our situations and our thoughts & actions. Usually, all of this happens in a way that appears normal and natural, yet God is actively involved in a divine guiding of natural process in our daily lives. In a similar way, maybe God also guided the formative history of nature to produce desired natural-appearing results instead of other natural-appearing results.
    Judeo-Christian theists also believe that God can use miraculous-appearing action. And humans can produce objects and events that would not occur if we just let nature "do what it does" with undirected natural process. For example, if you receive a radio signal 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, ... and you think "this long string of prime numbers probably was not produced by undirected natural process," you are proposing a theory of Intelligent Design.

    The paragraphs above describe four types of design. When scientists study a feature of nature (a star, bacteria, whale, biochemical system, radio signal, car,...) they can ask about its origin. Was it produced by intelligent design, by:
    natural process because, before history began, the universe was designed so this would happen;
    natural process that was supernaturally guided in a natural-appearing way to produce a desired natural-appearing result, or
    detectable design-directed action by a supernatural agent () or natural agent (), which was necessary because undirected natural process would not produce the feature;
    or maybe there was no design, and the feature was produced by natural process that was not designed, not undetectably-guided, and not detectably-directed.
    - Intelligent Design in Science & Society (science, philosophy, theology)

    Looks like many people disagree with your narrow definition.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Ah, how nice. A belief without any real meaning. Free to change whenever, for whatever reason, any at time. Totally useful eh?

    See above.
    Nice dodge. Now respond to what I was actually talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    By whom? Creationists?
    No. By doctors who preform abortions.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    You said that Christanity taught people to seek to understand. You also argued that ID does this. This is factually wrong as ID is little more then God of the Gaps. Therefore, ID is an anti-thesis to Christanity's idea to seek knowledge.
    That statement is so moronic I don't even know where to begin.

    #1 This was not a debate Creation Vs Evolution thread.
    #2 Saying God did something does not cancel out the mechanics of said operation or the search for said natural mechanics.
    #3 The only thing I have seen so far that is "anti-thesis" is your argument to intelligence.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Watch:
    Than I can only assume you cannot read or are in denial.
    After your ridicules arguments, this does not mean much coming from you.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I'm starting to agree with Scourge that some religious people cannot be reasoned with.
    Last edited by Black Dog; 02-23-09 at 11:21 AM.


    No Lives Matter

  10. #330
    Sage
    First Thought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Last Seen
    12-01-10 @ 02:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,218

    Re: Do You Believe in Creationism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    This has something to do with my post or this thread how? I notice you sort of ignored this the first time as well.
    You posted about Behe, and so did I. That's really all that happened. Nothing too challenging there to grasp.

    As for your "tons of biologists" this is false as he has not been "destroyed" as it cannot be proved one way or the other yet. Neither side has enough evidence to do much of anything as your own article pointed out. It is an educated guess on both sides.

    Now if you had said which is most likely, I could then agree with your statement. But it is absolutely not a forgone conclusion by any means.
    His "theory" of irreducible complexity is a joke. Let me dismantle it for you.

    A lot of body parts that Behe or others claim are irreducibly complex are far from it. Example: The eye. The claim is made that the eye is perfectly designed for sight and is too complex to evolve. Behe has stated that half of an eye would do an earlier lifeform no good. This is false, becuase there are plenty of amphibians that have just enough visions to see shadows and changes in brightness. This allows them to see enough of an environment to escape a predator.

    Another one is wings. Behe has also stated that wings are irreducibly complex. Another false claim. Having an underveloped pair of wings would allow an animal to effectively hanglide(like a flying squirrell) or hover from treetops.
    "An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi

Page 33 of 34 FirstFirst ... 2331323334 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •