Creationism vs. Evolution

[patriots_1228 51]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: Cypherus21 The atheist dillemma always asserts that if God started everything, then who created God. This is a fallacy because it assumes for A = B, C = A. However, how can God be created? He wouldn't be God then. God always existed, he wouldn't come from anywhere. quote>

But see, that's the problem. You can't apply logic to god since a transcendent being would transcend logic. As such, god violates the laws of math and science. Which would prove he doesn't exist, but oops, he's immune to those too!

quote>

If god did exist, he would not be bound to the laws of math and science. Its kinda like how George Bush can torture people without getting in trouble, because he is the most powerful person on earth.

[belfastuniguy 18]

because he is the most powerful person on earth.quote>

Debatable....

[fukuda 351]

Looks like the tax of sophism in this topic increased lately...

I'll use the first quote in my signature for this topic

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: patriots_1228

If god did exist, he would not be bound to the laws of math and science. Its kinda like how George Bush can torture people without getting in trouble, because he is the most powerful person on earth.

quote>

A flawed analogy, but a hilarious one.

Originally posted by: fukuda Looks like the tax of sophism in this topic increased lately...quote>

Meh, sophism and organized religion kinda go hand in hand. Without it, Jesus would probably have been the only Christian in history.

I'll use the first quote in my signature for this topic

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.quote>

Pretty much standard policy for everyone, the trouble is that people's ideas of reason and common sense tend to be skewed.

[yoshikoroyimara 5]

Duke87...

Pretty much standard policy for everyone, the trouble is that people's ideas of reason and common sense tend to be skewed. quote>

so is it the standard policy for everyone, then?

fukuda...

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace.

Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.

Gautama Buddhaquote>

Namu amida butsu...Namu amida butsu...Namu amida butsu...

As a Buddhist, I can adopt traditions/beliefs of other religions...but in Buddhism, we don't have a Creation story , excluding those of individual cultures.  In fact, we don't really ever discuss about it.  Same as God.  Buddhism doesn't have gods...well...it gets confusing.  I guess essentially in Buddhism, there is a God, but its name is, well, Namelessness.  It is so remote from human conception, that, like the Creation story, Buddhism doesn't mention it, or at least doesn't expand on it.  Just wanted to share that...but it brings up something else:

Because the divine is too great (like death...just think about being dead...until you realize that you can't think when your dead, so therefore you really can't think about it) why should we discuss it when we know we will never really attain "Enlightenment" <-weird pun...don't laugh...

of it?  Discussing about the Evolution theory is fine (which I adopt in my life)...but not really the Creation story...(this does not mean I'm against it).

[autoVino 26]

Originally posted by: yoshikoroyimara Duke87...

Pretty much standard policy for everyone, the trouble is that people's ideas of reason and common sense tend to be skewed. quote>

so is it the standard policy for everyone, then?

fukuda...

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace.

Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.

Gautama Buddhaquote>

Namu amida butsu...Namu amida butsu...Namu amida butsu...

As a Buddhist, I can adopt traditions/beliefs of other religions...but in Buddhism, we don't have a Creation story , excluding those of individual cultures.  In fact, we don't really ever discuss about it.  Same as God.  Buddhism doesn't have gods...well...it gets confusing.  I guess essentially in Buddhism, there is a God, but its name is, well, Namelessness.  It is so remote from human conception, that, like the Creation story, Buddhism doesn't mention it, or at least doesn't expand on it.  Just wanted to share that...but it brings up something else:

Because the divine is too great (like death...just think about being dead...until you realize that you can't think when your dead, so therefore you really can't think about it) why should we discuss it when we know we will never really attain "Enlightenment" <-weird pun...don't laugh...

of it?  Discussing about the Evolution theory is fine (which I adopt in my life)...but not really the Creation story...(this does not mean I'm against it).

quote>

 

curiosity is why I like to discuss it... nothing more (and that it always makes an interesting discussion...)

[wir3d 2]

Still no religion or "science" as you guys say can be proven completely wrong.  Any one going to watch this

[Godzillaman 21]

Originally posted by: wir3d Any one going to watch this

quote>

Uh...no. It looks terrible actually...

[fukuda 351]

q]Originally posted by: wir3d Still no religion or "science" as you guys say can be proven completely wrong.  Any one going to watch this movie.quote>

[JanYpe 17]

Hmm, are we interested in a pathetic, misguided, idiotic propaganda piece? Sure! Let's get the popcorn.

[wir3d 2]

Wow I would expect more from a moderator. You do not have to critizise me. And fukuda, I could be exactly like you. You guys are completely wrong. Maybe next time you can give me some proof and back up your comment.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Wow I would expect more from a moderator.quote>

I think they are still entitled to their personal views.

[wir3d 2]

I just think that is a little rude. I mean I could have a lot of "personal views" but I choose not to. I have a personal view of you. Would you like to here it?  

So in the end:  If you have nothing good to say, don't say it at all. (or sarcrastic)

[coolotter88 2]

http://thegiraffelies.ytmnd.com/

oh and that ben stein movie is not worth going to, I know because I didn't go to watch it. I don't understand why there is such a film and why people will watch it. It really hurts me to see people even consider creationism as a valid scientific theory.

I agree with John Oliver who said something to the extent of "well why don't we stick stickers on all the scientific theories, gravity is just a theory, maybe I CAN fly!"

[belfastuniguy 18]

I have a personal view of you. Would you like to here it? quote>

Oh I think I can hazard a guess at what that is given your previous comments toward me in this thread.

[Micah 16]

No. Don't post your personal view of anyone. If you do, I'm deleting it immediately. Talk about the topic, not each other.

Coolotter88, I believe he's advocating Intelligent Design, not Creationism. Although they come from the same roots, they are different trees.

[patriots_1228 51]

wir3d: The first time you get owned by JanYpe, you might be pissed off, but then you realize its pretty damn funny. Besides, what you'd expect, you linked us to the crappiest movie trailer ever. Besides, personal views are allowed. Personal views of other people, however, are not. ;D

[Godzillaman 21]

Originally posted by: wir3d I just think that is a little rude. I mean I could have a lot of "personal views" but I choose not to. I have a personal view of you. Would you like to here it?quote>

Big whoop. The world won't care if you think it's rude. <<There's a cheap life lesson for you...

You do not have to criticize me.quote>

Where did JanYpe criticize you? Look at the post and you can see he criticized the trailer you showed us, but he didn't criticize you.

[krbe 193]

Originally posted by: wir3d I just think that is a little rude. I mean I could have a lot of "personal views" but I choose not to. I have a personal view of you. Would you like to here it? quote>

If it was he we discussed, but it is a) not what we're discussing or presenting, or b) allowed.

And if that is rude, I wonder how you would have felt after an hour with my lecturer. To differentiate between case and person is the key.

So in the end:  If you have nothing good to say, don't say it at all. (or sarcrastic)quote>

Yes, because every opinion is worth the same! Equal air time FTW! Jesus, my high school teacher got flamed when he dared to disagree with such an opinion. Still, he is not wrong.

I'd like to bring up one of the very first posts:

Originally posted by: Frankie_Grove Wonderful! Someone created yet another thread that puts member against member in a heated, endless debate! quote>

There is nothing wrong with a heated, endless debate for every person that are capable of looking past the opinions of others, wether real or just perceived.After all, we're here for SC4, not because we think every religious person is an idiot, or because we believe that everyone that's not believing in some old books are condemned.

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: wir3d Wow I would expect more from a moderator. You do not have to critizise me. And fukuda, I could be exactly like you. You guys are completely wrong. Maybe next time you can give me some proof and back up your comment.quote>

Come again? I didn't post anything about you.

The trailer itself already shows this movie is based on a stupid premise (FIGHTING BIG EVIL SCIENCE RAWR). From the parts I have seen and what I have read about it, I can tell that it entirely misrepresents science, doesn't shed any factual light at all on either side of the issue and is no more than a vile mudslinging exercise. ( atheïst  darwinists say holocaust is a-okay!)

I attach about the same value to this rubbish as I do to a Micheal Moore film: very little.

Originally posted by: patriots_1228 wir3d: The first time you get owned by JanYpe, you might be pissed off, but then you realize its pretty damn funny. Besides, what you'd expect, you linked us to the crappiest movie trailer ever. Besides, personal views are allowed. Personal views of other people, however, are not. ;D

quote>

Feeling the love.

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: wir3d ...Any one going to watch this

quote>

I was wondering how long it would be before someone brought up that one.

I doubt it will even be screened here, and even if it was I might watch it if it was a free screening or a free dvd handout but not otherwise. I've seen extended trailers involving actual content and read quite a few reviews with detailed accounts and it doesn't look or sound like the kind of quality I'd buy a cinema ticket to see. The material I've seen from the clips seems poorly done.

Originally posted by: Micah ...

Coolotter88, I believe he's advocating Intelligent Design, not Creationism. Although they come from the same roots, they are different trees.quote>

In what way?

[Micah 16]

In what way is he advocating Intelligent Design or in what way do they come from the same roots but are different?

[Sam 163]

Both really although mainly the second part is what I was originally referring to. As to the first, I suspect the movie didn't mention much about the actual evidence in favour of intelligent design (the only reason I would watch it would be any hope that it did) and I've never heard any really concise statement of what it is as opposed to what it thinks is wrong with evolution (two very different things).

But I was mainly asking about the second part, since as far as I can tell they are very similar and in many cases use the same points as each other. If I was looking at it from a cladistic/evolution perspective I would say they are from the same clade and one is clearly the common ancestor of the other (or at least a form very closely related to the common ancestor) which is I assume similar to your tree analogy.

However since posting that and while following up from Wir3d's post, I found this rather nice video on youtube from the American Association for the Advancement of Science responding to the movie:

It has Francis Collins (Director, National Human Genome Research Institute, US National Institute of Health) who has been mentioned in several previous posts in this thread, in which he speaks very clearly on Intelligent Design (he is speaking against it). His explanation is pretty much what I understood intelligent design to be. (Edit: the relevant part starts at about 3:00 minutes in)

I actually like his points that he made in this clip, in fact I think the whole video is well worth watching. It also has much nicer music than the xpelled clip.

However, I'm still interested in hearing what anyone else sees as the main proposition of intelligent design, especially in light of the film under discussion and its representation of the issue, and since we are discussing alternative views.

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: wir3d  And fukuda, I could be exactly like you. quote>

Which means?

Originally posted by: wir3d You guys are completely wrong.quote>

Can you give more arguments, please?

[Micah 16]

ID is the belief that God, whether he used "creation" or evolution, made the Earth from what it was until what it is today. Creationism and evolution are simply tools that God used, according to ID.

As for the movie, I've simply heard reviews and it's mainly about ID versus evolution. Personally, I don't plan to see.

[patriots_1228 51]

Originally posted by: fukuda

Originally posted by: wir3d  And fukuda, I could be exactly like you. quote>

Which means?

quote>

 

Perhaps, for the sake of this thread, we should say "exactly like you" refers to being a great industrial BATter

Back on subject, Im wondering what you would classify my beleifs as? I beleive god made the event that caused the creation of this world, but that he hasn't really meddled with it much, aside from giding his creatures. 

and feel free to classify my beleif as bullcrap.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[jjune4991 1]

i saw that new movie "expelled", a documentary on evolution vs. creationism, and i thought it was good! now, i did think it did have some mistakes made, but overall, it was a good argumentative movie. and for me, i am a creationist. i just dont think that we were brought up by some inorganic molecules coming together and somehow working correctly in the perfect way to get living beings. and just like mr. garrison said, "and that fish had butt sex with another fish...and that one had butt sex with a squirrel and made more retard babies. and then the frog-fish-squirrel had but sex with a monkey. and now, you are the retarded baby of a frog-fish-squirrel who had butt sex with 5 monkeys." yea...sure...

[coolotter88 2]

Mr. Garrison wasn't making fun of Evolution, he was making fun of Creationists, because they are ignorant people.

[jjune4991 1]

how was he making fun of creationist when he destroyed evolution? saying what the b.s. it is. and how can you say we creationist are ignorant? some of the most respected...well, after seeing that movie that i just said, banished...scientists believe that darwin's theory cannot hold up to scrutiny. there are so many flaws, that it is illogical in itself.