The Gullibility of Evolutionists

reply to post by AshleyD



It's not like you called the thread "The Gullibility of Evolutionists Religion"
it's just that evolutionists treat it like their religion. How can Intelligent design violate anyones freedom of religion. ID is not religious. The notion of a creator is in line with all belief systems except maybe the atheists. So is atheism a religion? or a lack of one?

reply to post by goblue


HERE are some very basic definitions for creationism for you.

1. the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the doctrine that the true story of the creation of the universe is as it is recounted in the Bible, esp. in the first chapter of Genesis.
3. the doctrine that God immediately creates out of nothing a new human soul for each individual born.

n. Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible.

A literal belief in the biblical account of Creation as it appears in the Book of Genesis. Creationists believe that the creation of the world and all its creatures took place in six calendar days; they therefore deny the theory of evolution.

Wow. I just realized I'm not necessarily a creationist. Theologically, yes. Literally, no. At least not according to the stringent definitions listed above. Poop on dictionary.com!

reply to post by AshleyD


I think certain intelligent forces know that if they stir the pot to a boiling point nothing will be resolved and no intelligent conversation will happen.
And they do it with the precision of a master of goading.
Turning this thread into just another of many passionate arguments.
Thusly they can keep the feeling that what they obviously feel is a tool for furthering their goals (atheism). But as a matter of course refuse to admit it even when called on their constant allusions to such.

Science is neither theistic or atheistic. But atheists LOVE to assume that it is because of their opinions and need to shove their beliefs down everyone else's throats, because in the words of one "Religion is D A N G E R O U S". Call them on that and they will call you a liar of course.

[edit on 3-3-2008 by WraothAscendant]

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
ID is not religious.

Oh? Then who's directing the design intelligently?

Okay lets get back to the topic at hand, and no more tit for tat crap.


The Gullibility of Evolutionists

Originally posted by AshleyD
This thread isn't intended to engage in yet another creation vs. evolution debate inasmuch as it is to discuss the gullibility and hypocrisy of those who adhere to the theory of evolution and accept supporting evidence with virtually wholesale approval.

reply to post by Beachcoma



Wouldn't current scientific theories that state we are some sort of massive computer simulation fit as an IDish view?
Yet obviously NOT a theological theory. Or maybe psuedo-theology of sorts.

Random thought.


[edit on 3-3-2008 by WraothAscendant]

(Rewritten to ensure it is more on topic.)

Riley, can your atheistic/evolutionary beliefs stand up to the test of criticism, doubts, questions, conspiracies, and controversies? If so, then why the fuss? Why start throwing around terms like 'propaganda' and 'slander?'

There are many, many threads that attempt to poke holes at Christianity. So, this thread is not 'propaganda' or 'slander.' It is also raising concerns as to whether nor not evolutionists are gullible by totally tuning out anything that contradicts what has already been declared 'canon' in terms of evolution.

There have been dozens of comments saying 'creationism has no evidence' or there is 'nothing to back up creationism.' This tells me they have not reviewed both sides of the argument and are in fact acting in a gullible manner by believing what confirms their current beliefs and automatically dismissing anything that conflicts.

[edit on 3/3/2008 by AshleyD]

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by riley

No. It is a science. ID [creationism] was a way to introduce the concept of god into public schools by putting it into science class.

Aye, lets give ID a wedgie again...

The wedge strategy is a political and social action plan authored by the Discovery Institute, the hub of the intelligent design movement. The strategy was put forth in a Discovery Institute manifesto known as the Wedge Document,[1] which describes a broad social, political, and academic agenda whose ultimate goal is to "defeat [scientific] materialism" represented by evolution, "reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions"[2] and to "affirm the reality of God."[3] Its goal is to "renew" American culture by shaping public policy to reflect conservative Christian, namely evangelical Protestant, values.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...

You'd have to be gullible to think this was anything to do with science.

True.. and this is why evidence like this will be ignored by creationists. You don't want to admit the existence of the thing that proves there is a conpiracy against ToE when you are blatently attacking ToE. I sincerely believe this place is riddled with ID agents now.

reply to post by Beachcoma



an intelligent source

ID doesn't specify

reply to post by Bigwhammy


So what does ID specify then? Serious question. I'm from a country where they don't teach this stuff.

Thank you for the reply AshleyD. The idea of ceationism was from the bible like I thought. I have always had a theory about the bible. Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 when they thought the world was flat still. If 1,492 years after the bible was written they still thought the world was flat how smart or informed do you think the people where that wrote it or interpreted the writings that went into it. How easy would it have been to fool the un informed people that put it together.

Originally posted by Osiris1953
reply to post by AshleyD

 

See it's that type of attitude that has gotten people angry in the first place. That's what you are ignoring. There are people that would be willing to discuss this is a calm, cool, manner, but it your personality and methodology that is turning people off and irritating them. Since the point seems to be to aggravate as many people as possible, I'm not feeding in to it any more. Have fun with this. I'll have nothing to do with this thread any longer.

On the contrary,, this thread proved to be a bigger success at proving a point. Yeah it was hot in there but ,,

but it your personality and methodology that is turning people off and irritating them

Damn I KNEW IT!

BAD PERSONALITY! ,, BAD PERSONALITY! BAD! BAD! BAD!

Their,, that should teach that darn bad personality a thing or two.

Since the point seems to be to aggravate as many people as possible, I'm not feeding in to it any more.

No,, umm just a slight correction their,,,

"it is aggravate as many "Atheists" as possible =)

Ya know how we did it?


by insulting something totally unrelated to them in any "personal" way,,

we called a secular science gullible and WOW ! You would swear we just made a voodoo doll out of the god of Allah. But actually,, it was Atheisms religion of evolution in Science disguise.

They get worse then we do when ya attack their religion HA HA

- Con

Originally posted by Beachcoma
reply to post by Bigwhammy

 

So what does ID specify then? Serious question. I'm from a country where they don't teach this stuff.

The flying spaghetti monster!

Or the raelian movent maybe? They believe aliens designed all life on earth. That would be ironic as they are big believers in ID but a very atheistic and despise religion.

[edit on 3-3-2008 by riley]

Originally posted by AshleyD
To compare, let's use my opinion of flood geology as an example of how to weigh evidence without being gullible enough to believe something just because it conforms to one's beliefs.

Jesus says I'm better than you, my milkshake is better than yours, my doubt, is better than your faith, my milkshake (it really is good) is better than yours!

Revelations 3:16

So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Either believe IT like a nut, or not. Don't market your triangulation crazy to me in a "convincing" way lukewarm girl that Jesus would puke from His mouth. You make baby Jesus sad. I make Him happy.

I mean He said it!

You disappoint Jesus. I make Him happy.

Let's say it again.

YOU DISAPPOINT JESUS. I MAKE HIM HAPPY!

hi!

I mean He said it!

reply to post by goblue



I have a book called Genesis Unbound. It is by one of the most honored Hebrew Scholars in the world Dr John Salihimer.

He says from the original language the genesis account is not about the creation of the universe at all.

For instance the phrase "In the Beginning" the first words of the Bible. It is a Hebrew word that means a period in time NOT a point in time.
In the beginning could've been 20 billion years

It is about the preparation of the garden for man. If you recall the whole of the old testament can broken down into the jews are good they get the land == they are bad they get kicked out.

Its the major theme of history -- even today.

So isn't it fitting that the Genesis account is the preparation of the garden? Then man disobeys gets kicked out....

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by AshleyD

 

here's the difference between evolution and creationism...the scientific study of evolution is under constant peer review, and thus, it IS subject to change as more knowledge is gathered and a consensus is reached. and that lasts, until further peer review reveals new or more in-depth knowledge of what is being studied.

creationism is absolute, and there is no study by peers that might point out a difference in previous knowledge still accepted today. what was written in one book (the bible or talmud or quran) thousands of years ago, is the last and only accepted "truth". and anyone that points out a difference, is never accepted, nor is their particular "study". nothing that remotely conflicts with the original writing is ever taking seriously and is quickly dismissed.

I have to whole heartedly Disagree with Jimmy's statements.
First off, Many in the scientific community are saying the peer review system is broken. See this article: www.freerepublic.com... At the least, most publishers of peer reviewed articles
will only publish articles that fit in with the current accepted theories.
Some theories, like Evolution, are sacred; any research that challenges
the basic tenets of Evolution, need not apply. See site here, www.expelledthemovie.com... that exposes some of what I have said.
That means articles that mention ID, aren't chosen to be published.
Scientist are starting to publish their work on blogs. By-passing this politically controlled system.
Creationism, is not an absolute. Some peoples personal idea of how Creation happened may be dogmatic. But basically Creationism, just means created by a creator. Like Evolution basically just means, change
over time. You can see a site here; www.evolutionnews.org... where scientist; discuss ID and review and discuss scientific articles.

[edit on 3-3-2008 by Howie47]

reply to post by RANT


WOW that was REALLY harsh. I haven't heard that much venom come out of someone's mouth since the last time I visited the psyche ward to see someone I knew.

reply to post by Beachcoma


Just an intelligent cause or agent. That's it.

However in some states if you are an atheist they take your child aside and teach him about a flying spaghetti monster. Special needs children, we call them.

Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature
that are best explained as the result of intelligence.

-- William A. Dembski

Originally posted by idle_rocker
[WOW that was REALLY harsh. I haven't heard that much venom come out of someone's mouth since the last time I visited the psyche ward to see someone I knew.

Not so much harsh. Just incredibly stupid and ignorant. Not to mention an astonishing testament to his lack of reading comprehension.

[edit on 3/3/2008 by AshleyD]