should "Evolution" be considered a sign of Ignorance ?

Or just a sign of no guidance nor vision ?

There are two points to this thread..one is obvious, the other you will have to speculate on.

Here is the question...should "evolution" be considered a sign of ignorance ? un-guided ignorance ? Should teaching children in a scholastic environment be considered willfully be teaching a known falsehood...

Get off your high horse and disprove it.

You were looking for this reaction- now you have it.

Neither creationism or evolution has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Or maybe they both have. The big bang created something, and apparently the chicken came from something prehistoric. There is a missing link though, no one knows anything for sure........

Maybe both strict evolutionists and creationists have a deficiency of vision.......
and sadly, a lack of awe and wonder and curiousity

Originally posted by Planet teleX
Get off your high horse and disprove it.

You were looking for this reaction- now you have it.

I don't have to disprove anything, the task is on you guys to show proof !

so lets no try to turn this around shall we ?

I want solid proof that any layman can understand in a youtube video or something, anything.

Religion is unfalsifiable period...

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


LOL how many posts are you going to create regarding the same BS?
I've counted 3 so far.

Originally posted by thirdeyeaware
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

 

LOL how many posts are you going to create regarding the same BS?
I've counted 3 so far.

edit on 14-12-2010 by thirdeyeaware because: Typo

I am simply opposing similar threads and I am addressing "Groups"

very much so inline with the T&C.

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by Planet teleX
Get off your high horse and disprove it.

You were looking for this reaction- now you have it.

I don't have to disprove anything, the task is on you guys to show proof !

What? No man... just no.

Go read a science book or two.

I want solid proof that any layman can understand in a youtube video or something, anything.

Nobody can prove this to you, because you're obviously blinded by an archaic belief system.

Religion is unfalsifiable period...

Which one are you referring to?

reply to post by thirdeyeaware


Yeah ATS shouldn't allow this kind of behavior.

This is your third thread about this topic in 20 minutes, wth are you doing?

You talk about the insanity....seems your the one looking through the looking glass alice.

reply to post by unityemissions


I am referring to Philosophy

no specifics... oops !

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


I can't tell if you are serious or not? I mean, I lack the ability to sense sarcasm (this is true, not just an exaggeration), so if this is sarcasm, then take my post accordingly.

Just wanted to comment that believing in evolution in no way means you are ignorant, misguided, and most of all, it certainly does not mean you have no vision. I personally believe in evolution and my vision of the grandeur of things is part of what keeps me going in life. Religion never gave me that vision I feel from nature and science alone. And I have tried, I have an open mind and I've attended many different religious services with friends in the past. It never worked for me, but to each their own.

And of course it should be taught in schools, until proven otherwise or viable proof arises that evolution is not the correct train of thought, then why wouldn't it be taught? The fact here is that whether or not evolution is the truth, it still has more tangible proof than creation has. Religion was taught to everyone before evolution was known, and then evolution became the "better" explanation for things, thus replacing religious teachings.

We need to teach evolution because it's the only thing that can accurately unite everyone's thinking. Even if religion was the only thing taught, or taught in place of evolution, it wouldn't help anything in the world or society. Everyone has too varying of beliefs in religion to ever concretely teach one religious view in a school setting, it's just impractical. If we taught religion in school, it should be taught as world theology and we should learn the viewpoint of all religions around the world, that might help to promote tolerance.

Teaching religion is way more of teaching a falsehood than teaching evolution could EVER be considered. Even if something crazy happened to disprove evolution, religion would still be full of much more trickery, corruption, and falsehoods, in comparison.

I believe the true word to be taught through religion was lost long ago, corrupted by man for ages and altered to serve personal interests and purposes. I don't disagree with religion, but I do agree with separation of church and state, and I don't favor organized religion in any way. The ratio of the positive things that organized religion has done compared to the negatives of it should say all that is needed.

Spirituality I believe should be sought on your own, as a personal journey, not something dictated by persons of power in a church, or school.

reply to post by _Highlander_


there is no time limit to posting as I recall, take a look at the thread topics... My intent is to gain an opposing discussion to the three other posts which they contradict.

Why is it bothering you ?

Is this in retaliation of the other thread that sparked major debate?...

Evolution happens, Micro-evolution.

Scientists cannot create life in labs even today...
Even if THEY DID, wouldn't that prove it takes intelligent life to create life??

=)

Oh, the wit...

And yes, I really do mean that, and no, I'm not trolling you.

The thing about the "Should creationism be considered a sign of insanity" is that people are trying to teach creation as science. It's not. It's a philosphical/religious issue. So teach it in a theology/philosophy lesson, keeping it in context.

The thing about evolution is that it has no place in a philosophy or theology lesson (although my supervisor thinks that society would benefit greatly from a "hardline darwinian approach"), it has as much place in a biology lesson as gravity does in a physics lesson, or covalent bonding in a chemistry lesson.

If you read SaturnFX' opening post for the (confrontationally titled) thread that this is undoubtedly inspired by, I think that this gist is put across. As you keep saying, evolution does not answer why, but science only concerns itself with "how" - that is to say, mechanism and cause. Creation, as a philosophy, has no business with mechanism and cause, but every business with underlying reason.

From the nature of your posts, I would say that underlying reason is more important to you than mechanism and cause. So stick with philosophy.

For me, and those like me (if such a thing can be said to exist outside of Kim jong il's role in Team America - or was that directed elsewhere?), mechanism and cause are more important than underlying reason.

Sorry if I may have offended you elsewhere.

Originally posted by unityemissions
Nobody can prove this to you, because you're obviously blinded by an archaic belief system.

oh I believe in evolution, you must not have been following the thread I have today ? I do not disagree with evolution in any way except that it is not the answer to everything as the pushers of this new religion claim.

Evolution has been gobbled up by people who believe, it does not change anything, and I support their on-going efforts.

I just want to see this theory proven in a very simple manner that all mankind can understand, from a rocket scientist to a ditch-digger.

is that so hard to do ?

both castes I mentioned seem to understand the "truth" all on their own without even scientific intervention or experiment.

reply to post by Planet teleX


Well lets see for evolution to have had happen you need long periods of time to have past. We have no proof of long ages. Radio carbon dating is flawed and uses assumption to work,

Solar decay would have the earth to hot only millions of years ago

magnetic decay would have the earth a magnetic star only 20,000 years ago,

deserts grow at a know rate and the Sahara is only about 4000 years old which fits to the flood,

tree ring is a flaw science as it is know that some years produce several ring yet the oldest tree is about 4,400 years old.

fossils do not prove old age as it has been proved that a fossil can be produced in years,

fossils do not prove evolution as dead bones can not tell you what they came from and what they reproduced,

the moon is receding at a know rate and only millions of years ago the moon would have been so close that the tidal wave would have washed the land free of any life forms,

the Top of Grand canyon is over 7000 feet above sea level and the area where the river enters is only 2800 feet so water did not flow up hill for million of years to create the canyon, but a lake was behind the ridge and broke over like a dam breaking and created the canyon probably in less than 100 years. Also where is the delta?

The land is eroding at a know rate yet the mud in the bottom of the ocean is not deep enough for this long period.

There has never been an account of a farmer planting corn and peas grew out, or his cow and bull mating in a sheep is born.

Evolution is a faith based science that is false you are a trained person as the indoctrination centers would have you,

Know matter how much evidence against or proof that the so called evidence for is show to be false you will not except is for you have been train not taught in this area.

Religion on its own doesn't make one insane, but complete and utter denial of the possibility of evolution, and those people who take their kids to the museum and then instruct them why everything they see at the museum is incorrect or untrue...those people...definitely insane!

Always liked this quote, it's very sensible in relation to this topic...

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” - Galileo Galilei

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


Why polarize it? What if evolution is the method of creation? What if your god chose a less "hands on" method? Evolution does create new life forms does it not.

Just throwin a thought out there.

Originally posted by SpaceJ
Religion on its own doesn't make one insane, but complete and utter denial of the possibility of evolution, and those people who take their kids to the museum and then instruct them why everything they see at the museum is incorrect or untrue...those people...definitely insane!

Always liked this quote, it's very sensible in relation to this topic...

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

who is denying evolution here ? no one is denying evolution but it would seem the group stuck on evolution (as an answer to everything) can not think beyond that old road, and stop attacking other people armed with the power of evolution.

gosh man give someone a little knowledge and it equates to power over their subjects... very similar to dictatorship.

These groups are worse ten-fold than any religious people I know.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


This is like your fourth thread on it today? Dont worry then, it seems you have an agenda and your mind is already made up.