Creationist survey

[Stargazer]

1. You accept and then deny. Kind of sound like the same arguements I hear from those pesky Creationists..

I'm saying it's mysterious why it's volatile at all. It really shouldn't be.

 

2. Why I see the volatility arise is when one party attempt to convince the other party of his belief is fallacious and is without proof. As I said earlier Belief by definition is w/o proof ! This is one arena where both Atheist and Creationist are nearly alike. They both with enthusiasm and exuberiance attempt coerce and taunt their oppenent until the they acquiece or agree.

But if there are no proof, or even evidence, then what is wrong with me pointing this out? I mean, believers surely already know that what they believe is something made up?

 

3. If I said I believe in Santa, do we start a new thread ???

Santa is one of the gods. See, we can remain in this thread.

[Freethinker]

Seen as a series of stories, you can make the story fit the data.

Depends on which drugs you use. You've yet to show the connection you keep claiming. The BB Gen 1. Oh ya and the snake and apples in Gen 1.

[Freethinker]

Ah a true spin doctor, a silver tounged devil. After claiming the existence of the biblical Jesus the Christ, I asked maddog for ANY proof, ANY contepmorary eyewitness reports to confirm the bible stories, after his many attempts to ignore the request or change the subject, this next one is a masterpiece.

The question as to whether it is exist is like attempting figure out how big is infinity or the value 0/0 (indeterminate). I'm saying that such evidence could exist or not. I would though hypothesize that if it did you wouldn't find such (at least not w/o some kind of time loop).

 

Maddog

Truly a masterful effort to avoid having to deal with a simple request on an intellectuallty honest fashion. What wordsmithing! Such a definitive assertion

I'm saying that such evidence could exist or not.

 

WOW!

 

In all my years of asking this question, and all the slimy ways used to avoid facing reality, this is very possibly the most creative wording I have ever read. I bow to your skills.

[Freethinker]

Belief does not require evidence. Skepticism does.

 

However, to put any theory to task and corroborate as factual bears the brunt of all that

can shoot it down. It only takes evidence of one counterexample. This is why it is a lot

easier to disprove something than prove it.

 

I don't claim such in what I have posted this thread. Just a conjecture of a way one can

interpret various books from the bible as coinciding with know theories of science. I am

only thinking this may have where/how they originated.

 

You can disbelieve a hypothesis all you want. I haven't seen a valid counterexample has

been brought up, not to say that it doesn't exist - just haven't seen it.

 

Maddog

Another truly masterful avoidance speech! Applause! You must spend hours practicing getting out of answering questions. You have got to be a top member of the Bush administration! Your last name isn't Rove is it?

[maddog]

Another truly masterful avoidance speech! Applause! You must spend hours practicing getting out of answering questions.

 

My girlfriend says I am good also. What's your point. :hihi:

 

Maddog

[maddog]

Ah a true spin doctor, a silver tounged devil. After claiming the existence of the biblical Jesus the Christ, I asked maddog for ANY proof, ANY contepmorary eyewitness reports to confirm the bible stories, after his many attempts to ignore the request or change the subject, this next one is a masterpiece.

 

I guess you need proof that you get up in the morning ? I don't believe I ever said or

claimed existence to "biblical Jesus the Christ". Maybe you're confusing me with

prgmrdave or something. I do believe such a man named Jesus lived about that time and

said some wonderful things. How much else, one only speculate, unless you want to get

that time machine I was refering to earlier.

 

Truly a masterful effort to avoid having to deal with a simple request on an intellectuallty honest fashion. What wordsmithing! Such a definitive assertion

 

I'm saying that such evidence could exist or not.

 

WOW!

 

In all my years of asking this question, and all the slimy ways used to avoid facing reality, this is very possibly the most creative wording I have ever read. I bow to your skills.

 

I seem to have a bad habit of not putting "not" everywhere ... :rant: It's happened already

quite a few times today.

 

Correction: I'm not saying that such evidence could exist or not.

 

However, since you're in a contrary modd, I guess you would say "same difference". :hihi:

 

Maddog

[pgrmdave]

FT, I was just in a bit of a silly mood. I do recognize, however, that I am unable to find logical, empirical evidence for a god, and that my arguments were often flawed. I didn't quite mean that you won or I lost, but that my most of my arguments could not be considered logical, or scientific. I disagree that logic and science alone can bring one closer to reality, although I will not deny that they do.

Perhaps the knowedge I HAD failed me, but it is now replaced with the new and improved version and I am better off because of it

I have done this quite often. A few years ago, I realized that my ideas/philosophies were changing, even though each one seemed true at the time, so I adopted one of my few core ideas - that, at any given time, my ideas are most likely incorrect, as I will correct them in the future, but that it is necessary to use them and attempt to argue for them and against them in order to discover flaws in them. Often I will most aggressivly defend my views when I am closest to losing them, because I know that if I cannot defend them to myself, then they are most likely not true, and I need to find another way of looking at it. As for god, I feel it so strongly on an emotional level, that I cannot release the idea of his existance. I see no reason for there not to be a god, and I feel it so strongly, that it makes more logical sense for me to believe than not to. I understand that simply saying that there is no proof against it doesn't mean that it is true, but it is a matter of faith.

[Turtle]

Creative evolution is without question a possibility; the real issue is people blindly following written matter thousands of years old. If we raise our son's to be better men than us, then how many times better are we today to ascertain what is real?

[jp3089]

You know Freethinker,

 

I've heard a lot of tongue lashing of creation and God, but no real evidence for evolution.... Where's the hard evidence? I've never seen a half-man/half-ape skeleton before... Have YOU? Show me some evidence. Fed-ex me a real evidential piece of fossil that backs up evolution. Give me a good explanation of the catalyst that sparked the BB. And not just Darwinian worldview cloaked as science. I want evidence and facts.

 

In reply to your evidences that back up Jesus... Have you ever read Josephus or Tacitus? They are other 1st and 2nd century authors that speak of Jesus of Nazareth the miracle worker. What about all of the ossuaries that began showing soon after the Biblical date when Jesus ascended to heaven? These ossuaries mention Jesus of Nazareth and say such things as "Jesus save me". There is much historical evidence besides the Bible for Jesus. You obviously have many pithy and rude replies, but have not studied the subject for yourself. Even the Bible itself is much more reliable than many of the ancient philosophers that we take for granted. Know your stuff before you start mouthing off.

 

Give me hard, tangible proof for evolution... if you can.

 

-JP

 

p.s. I do apologize for the way this is written. I love debating and automatically jump into attack mode. Any heat is not directed at you as a person, but merely my zest for a great discussion. Blessings.

[IrishEyes]

You know Freethinker,

 

I've heard a lot of tongue lashing of creation and God, but no real evidence for evolution.... Where's the hard evidence? I've never seen a half-man/half-ape skeleton before... Have YOU? Show me some evidence. Fed-ex me a real evidential piece of fossil that backs up evolution. Give me a good explanation of the catalyst that sparked the BB. And not just Darwinian worldview cloaked as science. I want evidence and facts.

 

In reply to your evidences that back up Jesus... Have you ever read Josephus or Tacitus? They are other 1st and 2nd century authors that speak of Jesus of Nazareth the miracle worker. What about all of the ossuaries that began showing soon after the Biblical date when Jesus ascended to heaven? These ossuaries mention Jesus of Nazareth and say such things as "Jesus save me". There is much historical evidence besides the Bible for Jesus. You obviously have many pithy and rude replies, but have not studied the subject for yourself. Even the Bible itself is much more reliable than many of the ancient philosophers that we take for granted. Know your stuff before you start mouthing off.

 

Give me hard, tangible proof for evolution... if you can.

 

-JP

 

p.s. I do apologize for the way this is written. I love debating and automatically jump into attack mode. Any heat is not directed at you as a person, but merely my zest for a great discussion. Blessings.

 

Oh boy... this should be FUN!! :hihi:

Welcome to the discussion, JP, and to our Forums. It's not hard to tell which side of the debate you are on! And while we all surely appreciate your zeal, I will caution you to please watch your tone. While you may be a very staunch creationist, and you may fervently believe everything written in the Bible (as I do), it in no way makes you an expert on the depth of Freethinker's knowledge. While I do not agree with all of Freethinker's views, and I very often strongly disagree with his interpretations of the Bible and his personal feelings regarding Christianity, I have come to respect the time and energy he actually puts into his posts. Quite frankly, Freethinker knows the Bible better than most people that call themselves Christians. And quite honestly, I have read and studied more because of him and his skepticism than most any other thing has challenged me to do in a very long while.

Again, WELCOME, and I hope you enjoy debate as much as you say. You could be in for a very wild ride. Please remember to adhere to our FAQ and keep the posts respectful, ok?

[pgrmdave]

JP, I can say from experiance, that Freethinker is a very intelligent, very logical debator, and probably has the information you want at his fingertips, but be prepared to take an objective view of his evidence, as he will take objective views of yours.

[pgrmdave]

And have fun - don't become angry. So long as it is all in good spirit, you will learn, and grow as a person.

[Stargazer]

I've heard a lot of tongue lashing of creation and God, but no real evidence for evolution.... Where's the hard evidence? I've never seen a half-man/half-ape skeleton before... Have YOU?

Humans and other apes have a common ancestor, says the current evolutionary theory.

 

Show me some evidence. Fed-ex me a real evidential piece of fossil that backs up evolution. Give me a good explanation of the catalyst that sparked the BB. And not just Darwinian worldview cloaked as science. I want evidence and facts.

I want you to explain what the big bang has to do with Darwin's theories. This should be fun - but it wont. :-( The reason? I'm getting myself tangled up in a "debate" with a creationist. I never learn. I'm already kneedeep in a smelly swamp of a "debate" with a creationist on another board. He refuse to understand what science is, and insist that science is a religion. They're bizarre, aren't they?

 

Even the Bible itself is much more reliable than many of the ancient philosophers that we take for granted. Know your stuff before you start mouthing off.

 

Give me hard, tangible proof for evolution... if you can.

I always find it funny in a bizarre way that a religious creationist would demand evidence.

[IrishEyes]

ok, stargazer, instead of the intellectually superior attitude, #1) explain to JP why his questions are invalid, or #2)show him the 'evidence' he asks for, or #3) refrain from commenting any further.

 

I already warned JP, now it's going to the rest of you as well:

Keep it respectful or don't participate.

[Stargazer]

#1) explain to JP why his questions are invalid

What questions? The one about connecting big bang with Darwin's theories?

 

#2)show him the 'evidence' he asks for

Nice how the word evidence is in quotation marks. Surely you're not suggesting that there's no evidence? :-)

There are plenty of websites that are devoted to this particular field of science, such as http://www.talkorigins.org and http://evolution.berkeley.edu

Halfman/halfape skeleton? I think it would be hard to draw an exact line between Homo Sapiens and the recent ancestors. There are many fossils and remains that seems to fit into the tree of human evolution. Obviously it's not complete, but as far as I understand it, the ancestors of us and the ancestors of chimpanzees split up some 6 million years ago or so. The fossils and remains could be put together and a tree would form where we see the different hominids including Homo Sapiens, Homo Floresiensis and others. Of course, it is perfectly possible that a god killed off and created several different but still similar species, thereby creating the illusion of macroevolution - but why would it be necessary? I mean, isn't macroevolution just microevolution over a really long period of time?

 

Keep it respectful or don't participate.

Webster.com:

 

Respect[...]

2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION

3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>[...]

 

I do not, can not and will not hold creationism or religious fundamentalism in high regard. I do respect you all as fellow human beings though. I do realise that lots of people don't know everything about science, and I'm certainly not an exception in any way. I do have an idea of what science is, how it works and why it's superior to other methods of describing the observed reality. If I have come off as brusque or rude I must apologise, but it does get annoying after hearing the same arguments over and over and over again. In the cases where people actually learn from each other, it's fun, but from the numerous occasions that I have seen how people desperately cling to their personal favourite faith or religion, ignoring evidence and lying about what science really is, then it gets really, really irritating. And since plenty of people in past discussions (on other boards at least) simply refuse to listen, learn and to actually read about what they claim to be "against" it's possible that I simply assume that all creationists are the same, that is they believe and refuse to accept scientific evidence. They do seem to accept all the scientific knowledge that made it possible to construct computers, cars and telephones, though. Curious, that. They also seem to accept the theories regarding gravity and atoms.

[jp3089]

My apologies to everyone. You are completely right, and I was disrespectful as a first-time poster.

 

I hope we can still have some great discussions, however.

[jp3089]

Stargazer -

 

Thanks for your reply. I have a couple of my own. My apologies again for my first posting.

 

Humans and other apes have a common ancestor, says the current evolutionary theory.

 

 

 

 

I always find it funny in a bizarre way that a religious creationist would demand evidence.

 

Yes, yes! There's my point. The current evolutionary theory says that they do... But what about hard evidence? That's what I'm after.

 

Why is that funny? I'm merely searching for the truth. Why should it be bizarre that ANYONE would demand evidence?