NoGodBlog.com

I suspect that the totally blatant religious "colleges" and universities do accept ID, although that fact doesn't affect the point that you made. After all, by their own admission, they are not really on the planet.

can anyone dig out what the judge told Behe at the trial in Dover? I think it was really good

This being Florida, I would expect that the Scientologists might be offering their own theories of the origin of life on this planet to compete with the Christian version. I figure that they will take over Florida just about the time that most of the state is under water.

Discussing other STORIES about the origin of life in high school is fine: in social studies class (comparative world religions, world history), literature classes (to understand biblical allegory) - but these stories don't belong in SCIENCE class. Why do these American fundies (and it's nearly 100% an American issue, as far as the developed world is concerned) have keep trying to stick these unscientific stories into %$&@# science class?!??!?

cjn

Banning the mere mention of alternative origin concepts smacks of academic intolerance and plays into the hands of creationists; Ben Stein's movie is a classic example.

Keep in mind that creationists are as convinced as evolutionists.

Ahhh...I see the "thought police" are at it again...

Yes, let's keep radical ideas out of the educational system of America...

Let's prevent our teachers from thinking "outside of the box"...

Yes, let's teach our kids that certain types of thinking is not acceptable in America...

You're pathetic...you're so fearful of those who don't think exactly as you do...

Many people wrongly believe Galileo proved heliocentricity. He could not answer the strongest argument against it, which had been made nearly two thousand years earlier by Aristotle: If heliocentrism were true, then there would be observable parallax shifts in the stars’ positions as the earth moved in its orbit around the sun. However, given the technology of Galileo’s time, no such shifts in their positions could be observed. It would require more sensitive measuring equipment than was available in Galileo’s day to document the existence of these shifts, given the stars’ great distance. Until then, the available evidence suggested that the stars were fixed in their positions relative to the earth, and, thus, that the earth and the stars were not moving in space—only the sun, moon, and planets were.

You are no different then those who feared Galileo...

I personally believe the new movie "Expelled" will show the world how a minority is preventing the full flow of ideas in our educational system...

It will be a sleeper the same way Passion was....

Somebody on this site STILL fears Galileo.

So, phreaky, how would you feel if all of the sudden there was a law that stated every xian church must have a lecture by an evolutionary biologist every Sunday morning?

If you really give that thought, and you are honest about it, you might just understand why we (and anyone else who cherishes education) are so pissed off about this (and all the other attempts by the ignorant and uneducated).

Since I directed a question at you, I don't expect an answer.

I get really annoyed when they call ID a theory. A theory is a hypothesis supported by facts. There are no facts supporting ID. If this does go through I hope they do the same thing they try to do with evolution and insist they "show the weaknesses of the theory".


Think outside the box? In other words, change the definition of science/hypothesis/fact/observable.

Dave, got some good news. Monique Davis apologized to Rob Sherman.

http://www.wbbm780.com/
Lawmaker-Apologizes-For
-Comments-Against-Atheist/1980701

Yes, tell me all the theories and let me decide! Atlantis as roots of civilization, multiplication as one of many competing theories, a flat world as an alternative to our current view, Astral projections instead of maps, ect. Give everything a fair say, even if it doesn't have proof!

I want the Stork Theroy taught in school next to biological reproduction. :)

Comment from: phreedm

Ahhh...I see the "thought police" are at it again...

...and I see that the religiously insane have brought their soapbox back into the atheists backyard again...

Yes, let's keep radical ideas out of the educational system of America...

Only in america would a religiously insane hypocrite consider millennia-old occult fairy tales "radical ideas". Should we be teaching that the earth is flat as well?

Let's prevent our teachers from thinking "outside of the box"...

...by spewing their superstitious nonsense on those who do not believe any of it in classes devoted to scientific inquiry. Maybe they bring some alchemy, astrology, and numerology into the science classes too?

Yes, let's teach our kids that certain types of thinking is not acceptable in America...

“This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God,” Davis said. “Get out of that seat . . . You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying! You believe in destroying what this state was built upon.”

You're pathetic...you're so fearful of those who don't think exactly as you do...

...as opposed to the hypocritically brain dead ravings of certain religiously insane Republican't Putsch fellators when they run into opinions they don't agree with. On weblogs devoted to the pursuit of rational thought.

You are no different then those who feared Galileo...

...while you are no different than those who hung black people on a tree fifty years ago.

I personally believe the new movie "Expelled" will show the world how a minority is preventing the full flow of ideas in our educational system...

...and I personally believe that you are an abusively ignorant christian arsehole who pollutes children's minds with your occult nonsense.

I don't hold my beliefs to be the absolute and final truth on the subject just because a big book of religious fairy tales said they were, though...

It will be a sleeper the same way Passion was....

...flogged relentlessly in churches in order to make it look like people thought it was a good movie.

Every single one of my religious siblings asked me to watch this movie, and some of them admitted that they had been tasked by their priest to 'get people to see this wonderful, historically accurate film'. I have heard some of them say the same sorts of things about Ben Stein's propaganda exercise, too. Funny how you don't seem to point that out in your (off-topic, unsourced, and unfounded) allegations. Yet again.

It's almost as though you can't help but lie in order to try and advance your occult fantasies...

Dave, got some good news. Monique Davis apologized to Rob Sherman.

Yes, as I mentioned in the other thread, she apologized yesterday. However, I've got to think that she wasn't really apologizing for WHAT she said, just the fact that she said it out loud. There was so much specific hatred and anger contained in her comments to Sherman - that much venom didn't come about just because she was having a "bad day." I'm sure she still hates atheists and fears atheism, but now realizes that, in her official capacity as an elected official, she should have kept her big mouth shut.

Nice that she apologized, but still a pathetic woman.

I've always been mystified by the concept of deciding scientific items by appealing to the "marketplace of ideas" as though the flat-earth theory is equal to the reality of the earth as something similar to a globe.

These xian preachers browbeat their parishoners with their wacky concepts, while scientiic evidence points to evolution, and we're supposed to vote on it or something? The scientific method will result in a better picture of reality than some sort of "American Idol" vote on theories (that most people will base on how closely it hews to their religious concepts, to hell with reality-after all, they'll follow the lead of their reality-denying government).

The religious concept blinds many people...

Didn't those people learn anything from Dover? I can't wait for the trial that will reverse this.

This is Florida. Don't you read Carl Hiasson? This state is full of whacky people. IF anything bizarre like the above happens in the US there is a high likelyhood it happens in my state, sigh.
All concepts are not equal; all philosophies are not equal anymore than we are all built equal (yes I mean that; we have equal opportunity here only). I apologize to the rest of the country for the blockheaded Bible thumpers here.

it is becoming more and more embarrassing to be a Florida resident. i am hoping to be out of there within a year.

ronda storms is one of the most self-righteous right-wing xtian nutjobs in politics. but her constituents LOVE her which is even scarier.

it would be priceless to have a time machine to bring the authors of the fairy-tale bible to the present day and see their reaction to what they created. even they would probably be amazed at the gullibility of the xtian masses.

i am hoping that storm's bill is just getting some lip service to help ronda save face with her constituents and will get killed on vote. but with all the republican nutjobs in the FL senate (and the state as a whole) there is no telling what could happen.

Do you suppose it would make any difference if we inundated the Florida newspapers with letters to the editors and the representatives with emails from out-of-state to show them what a laughingstock they are to the rest of the country?

good question karen. i really don't think so. there are too many religious and/or uneducated in the state to look at this rationally. they would be proud to be "setting such a worthy example" and look at you and me as the ones with the problem.

yea, florida is f***ed up in many ways.

Come on folks, don't be so down on poor Florida. They are not close to being alone. I ought to know. I was born in the number one worst state in the country for crazy over zealous nuts, Texas. And I now live in the number two state, Virginia. We can't all live in Oregon.

Peter

You really think VA outranks Kansas in crazy over-zealous nuts?

hey wait a minute you two. florida has it hands down, not even a contest. we are such a well-rounded, equal opportunity melting pot that every conceivable type kook is here.

texas probably has it for cults-only type stuff though. and let's not forget californicate. they have it for litigious kooks.

Do you suppose it would make any difference if we inundated the Florida newspapers with letters to the editors and the representatives with emails from out-of-state to show them what a laughingstock they are to the rest of the country?

Please do. A lot of the papers here, especially recently, have started running some more scathing editorials about this. It's hard to combat a situation where pig-ignorant people elect pig-ignorant Reps, and don't get it that science and the scientific method isn't determined by public opinion or votes.

True to form, these Republican reps. seem to think that being in gov't is like getting some kind of clown car to play with, constitution be damned. Frankly, they'd be more valuable if they took a tour of a chipper-spreader. While it was on.

Florida is in a major budget crisis (as I'm sure many other states are). State employees are THE lowest paid in the nation. They will recieve no pay raises this year, just like last year. Teachers are among the lowest paid in the nation. In the meantime, these ass-wipes are willing to play silly-ass games with state educational standards that will likely provoke a lawsuit along the Dover lines, costing the state more money. But hey, it's a clown-car and Jebuzz is a'comin.

(The term "Florida Cracker" takes on a whole new meaning after you've had to deal with them awhile.)

Yes, let's keep radical ideas out of the educational system of America...

phreedum,
I'm asking this in all seriousness and would appreciate an honest answer from you: If we teach the totally unsubstantiated hypothesis of intelligent design in public schools then where does it end? would you also throw your full support behind teaching that aliens created life on our planet? astrology as a balance to astronomy? alchemy as a balance to chemistry? what about the stork theory as a balance to sex education? why or why not? all of the ideas I cited have the same amount of evidence in support of them which is to say absolutely none. Please answer my question because I'm genuinley curious why you would support one faith based idea and not others.

If I were a tenured science teacher, I'd mention every possible origin theory other than creationism and ID. If the students and parents complain, so what? Point to this law as your justification.

alex,

do you really expect phreedm to answer that question (or any question)? it may force him to think rationally which may short-circuit his fragile brain waves. let's see how he handles it (as if we don't already know).

I'm laying odds he answers it with a question.

I'll double down on Karen's bet.

In case any Floridian teachers need an example of a transitional fossil:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7339508.stm

At least the florida govenor doesn't "rain dance" like georgia. Perdue is way nuttier than any other governor (except Huckabee). In science, ID would have to prove itself and have points to teach. But besides debunked anti-evolution propaganda, what real unique points can they have without promoting a religous doctrine, as they claim not to?

no phreedm public school teachers should not be thinking outside the box.since not 1954 we have had outside the box thinking one fad after another in public education.we need to teach the core subjects and civics.time to stop with this nonsense that all the little darlings can be doctors.if you want people to learn about ID teach it in church.

should read since 1954.

Dave, I think you're blowing this out of proportion.

There's no harm in mentioning that not everyone believes in evolution. It's the simple truth and kids are going to figure it out anyway. As long as it's mentioned in an honest way (meaning that they don't present it as an alternate scientific theory), it certainly won't bother me. If they do present ID as a realistic alternative then they've stepped way over the line and should be reprimanded. There should already be laws about preaching in schools on the books, but there's a difference between preaching and accepting that the world is the way that it is.

The most important thing in that post is that they're teaching the evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology. As long as they're teaching science in science class they can't just pretend that religion doesn't exist, especially in other classes. I would love it if they would start teaching about some of the various religions (and non-religions) and they treated them all equally. I'd like to see how long religions lasts once it becomes obvious that none of the major religions can prove they have their roots in reality. It won't happen in present day Jesumerica since the Christians currently have a near monopoly on religious foolishness, but I can dream, can't I?

This runs right up to the edge of what I find acceptable in schools. But it doesn't cross the line yet.

AOL,

Thank you for the info about the snake with two legs. It is truly awe inspiring. I think you just made my weekend.

And they say we don't have any evidence for evolution...

Comment from: Boise Jim

So, phreaky, how would you feel if all of the sudden there was a law that stated every xian church must have a lecture by an evolutionary biologist every Sunday morning?

Hey BJ...

Not exactly comparing apples to apples...but thanks for proving my point...

The FEAR of discussing new ideas outside of the accepted scientific theories of the day is exactly what the Catholic church did 600 years ago...which is exactly what AA is doing today...

What are you so fearful of? If the proof is so overwhelming then why not allow it to be discussed...?

Why should a professor be denied tenure because of his beliefs?

Should a private citizen be sued because of their religious convictions? Why should a Christian photography business be sued and fined because they declined a job at a gay wedding? Is that the type of country you want to live in?

You claim to be for freedom and yet in everything you (and AA) do your actions prove you're for a more totalitarian form of government...muzzle those who don't think as you do...

Alex...

Yes...absolutely. For so many of the ideas you've mentioned are already discussed in schools. Alchemy is discussed and then shown to be wrong. The stork? We have enough sex ed classes to prove that point...

Aliens from other worlds? It's already discussed.

The point is why suppress the free flow of ideas? Why should any subject be off limits in a country founded on freedom?

Why do you support the idea of having "thought police"...?

You make the claim that there is not proof of ID...so? Should we deny the discussion of all theories simply because we don't have proof?
Of course not...

Being such a well educated man I'm really surprised you don't see the danger of implementing a Stalinist type approach to education...

alatham,

Evolution is a fact. Anyone who believes otherwise is uneducated or in denial.

Expanding on your idea completely, would be absurd. For example, we should then be stating that some don't believe that the earth is roundish or, how about some don't believe that humans have been to the moon. The absurd beliefs are, for all practical purposes, endless in number.

The only reason that evolution is still a theory is because it isn't reasonably predictable but, unpredictability is, part of what evolution is. That does not change the fact that evolution is.

No goddoneit.

phreedum,
How do we find the time during the school day to present every crackpot alternate theory out there? American kids are already near the bottom in performance among the developed nations of the world. Why not stick to the facts and let kids learn about all of these unsubstantiated ideas outside of school? I'm all for freedom of enquiry but teaching kids that intelligent design is as valid as evolution is just wishful thinking and a great disservice to the kids and our future as a scientific power.

well some with sense have managed to at least include this definition in the bill:

"the term “scientific information” means germane current facts, data, and peer-reviewed research specific to the topic of chemical and biological evolution"

so as far as i know there are no scientifically peer-reviewed studies on ID since it is not science. that should help some, but there is no doubt that there will be a lawsuit filed sooner or later after some flaming xtian teacher tests the limits of what can be said.

comparing an atheist's stand on this to Galileo and the catholic church is laughable. we don't care if it's taught as part of a 'religions of the world' or 'mythology' or 'comic book superheroes' class. just keep it out of science which has a prescribed set of criteria to follow.

Intelligent Deception is still deception even if you stick the word intelligent in front of it. and even if it were true it is still not science as defined by man's standards. it would fall under supernatural mythical phenomenon kind of like superman, spiderman, etc.

Comment from: alexatheist

American kids are already near the bottom in performance among the developed nations of the world.

Why not stick to the facts

I think you just answered your question...

You're not answering the point. It's not a question of allowing "crackpot" ideas, (although many of the past great scientists were considered crackpots in their day) it's the question of allowing the free flow of thought...

Who would decide what's a crackpot idea or ins't?

You're describing exactly what we have. A Stalinist approach to education. The powers at be limit what can be discussed...

Just like the Roman Catholic church did 600 years ago...which lead Western Europe into the Dark Ages..

There are many who believe we're heading into a new Dark Ages BECAUSE of the limitations placed on education...

And you wonder why we're falling behind the rest of the world...

Who would decide what's a crackpot idea or ins't?

If it can't stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny then it is a crackpot idea. Scientific truth isn't something which one can have an opinion about.
Phreedum I'm not going to say this to come across as eltist but rather just to state a fact: I studied biology and the scientific method at the university level and I have a thorough understanding of scientific concepts which it is obvious that you don't. If you understood how science worked you would see just how laughable ID is and that it just is not science. Until there is at least one study in support of ID which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method it will always remain a crackpot theory.

And you wonder why we're falling behind the rest of the world...

I never said that I wonder why American school kids finish near the bottom in education, I know why. It is because we elevate emotions and feelings and standardised test scores above actual learning. The fact that our schools are overrrun by non English speaking children of illeagle immigrants also cheats students out of an education. American kids just won;t be able to compete with Asian and European kids in the future.

There are many who believe we're heading into a new Dark Ages BECAUSE of the limitations placed on education...

So phreedum since you support teaching all points of view in public schools I assume that you would throw your full support behind the neighbourhood witch's coven doing a module on spell casting as a balance to chemistry, right? Maybe we need to bring in the Flat Earth Society too balance the lessons taught in geography. If you wouldn't support this then please tell me why since this is no more ridiculous a proposal than teaching kids that god magically created the universe as a balance to the science of physics or astronomy.
Where does it end?

D'oh!
illeagle=illegal
too=to
What can I say? I'm a product of the VA public school system. :-)

phreedm said:
"There are many who believe we're heading into a new Dark Ages BECAUSE of the limitations placed on education...

And you wonder why we're falling behind the rest of the world..."

congrats, you're finally right about something but for the wrong reasons. one of the primary reasons is because of nutjobs like ronda storms and you who think that introducing fairy tales into science will help things out. there are others of course, with political correctness being a big part as well.

alexatheist,

illeagle=illegal

Damn, you completely had me christianed (fooled) on that one. All this time I thought you were doing it on purpose.

David Silverman,

can anyone dig out what the judge told Behe at the trial in Dover? I think it was really good

Went looking but found that I am unsure regarding your reference, so instead here are some good links, Judge Jones did a good job.

This is the Decision. If you search for "behe" and read the surrounding text, there is some good stuff there:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/
dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html

This one has audio of Judge Jones reading some of his key findings:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/judge.html

This is Nova's PBS Judgment Day program:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html

And Wikipedia has a page titled
"Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial documents" with lots of links.

Alex...you are an elitist...but be that as it may...

So you do support the idea of "thought police"...

So here...prove the following using your argument...

Until there is at least one study in support of a person being born gay which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method it will always remain a crackpot theory.

OK...show me. For if you can't...then we should not allow the discussion of homosexuality in the public schools...

The 500+ other animals that get down homoerotically don't count or what? Or did they make a choice also?

phreedm wrote: "If it can't stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny then it is a crackpot idea."

Precisely, which is why there's no ID taught in science class.

Your analogy to Galileo is off base. Galileo HAD science on his side. The IDiots do not.

The whole schtick of accusing scientists of being SCARED is mere projection on the part of religionists.

What's happening here is that religious evolution deniers are attempting to get pseudoscience taught in classrooms because they fear the way evolution threatens belief in the Genesis creation myth. What's NOT happening here is a situation where "dogmatic" scientific "thought police" are trying to keep some brave, innovative idea out of classrooms because they somehow fear for THEIR "scientific orthodoxy".

The reason ID isn't able to be taught in biology class is the same reason that flat-earth belief isn't taught in geology class, or that Holocaust Denial isn't taught in history. It's just plain WRONG.

Going all Monty Python and crying "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" won't make ID right.

Those are just the facts. I know that embracing some kooky conspiracy theory probably flatters the innate need of religionists to feel like victims all the time, but like most everything else that lurks in the murky minds of believers, it's simply imaginary.

The solution is simple: Produce some scientific research that actually backs up a valid Theory of Intelligent Design, and have it withstand peer review...and voila, it will enter the mainstream of scientific ideas!

Otherwise, all the whining and projecting in the world won't change facts. Sorry. Right now, the weight of scientific evidence continues to support evolutionary biology, and continue to leave ID out on the sidewalk with a tin cup.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7339508.stm

My mistake in the previous post. I attributed a quote to phreedm when it was really from alexatheist responding to phreedm. Still, my points stand. Consider my comment in support of alex's response.

Or better yet...

Until there is at least one study in support of a person being born an atheist which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method it will always remain a crackpot theory.

Someone show me evidence of the above...

Creation is an origin myth. Already noted are the gaps

• The sun was created on the fourth 4th day. No sun; no solar system.

How can there have been three 24-hour solar days (including morning and evening) without a solar system?

• The geographical name places mentioned in Genesis 2 (Tigris and Euphrates) would have been erased by the flood.

There's more...

• Note also that the earth produced vegetation without the sun; without photosynthesis. Scientific?

• Genesis contains two creation accounts; Genesis 2:4b to 2:25 is thought to have been written first. Genesis 1:1 through 2:4a, second.

• As the result of Adam's sin, death entered into the world; a part of the curse. Yet Adam ate prior to the fall. What did he eat? Vegetation that would have died upon consumption.

• Pain and suffering also existed prior to the fall. Note that Eve's pain in child bearing was "multiplied" from the Hebrew רבה which means "greatly increase." To increase something must exist.

• Layers of ice in the polar regions reveal age, must like the rings of a tree. The prove an old earth far exceeding Ussher's 4004 BC creation date.

And on it goes...

Comment from: mw66

It's just plain WRONG.

Ok...prove that it's wrong. Scientifically...not emotionally...

Ok...prove that it's wrong. Scientifically...not emotionally...

See above post.

phreedm
what version of creation would you teach, each religion has its own.these subjects are best left for college level studies when minds are more mature and a person is more likely to be well grounded in their own faith tradition.pastors jumping in on scientific subjects is no better than untrained persons preaching from the pulpit.
the question we should ask ourselves is why is it important to us the individual personally how life was created.will the answer affect our moral interaction with others.

OK...show me. For if you can't...then we should not allow the discussion of homosexuality in the public schools...

Actually phreedum your analogy is flawed since the fact is that gay people are real as evidenced by people like myself whereas ID is not real as evidenced by the total lack of evidence. However to indulge you I will say that there are many studies linking sexual orientation, both homosexual and heterosexual, to genetics and these can be easily accessed by Googling some key terms. The most famous of these studies involve fruit flies, twins, handedness, and hair whorls. The available data indicates a very strong genetic component to sexual orientation but genetics is a relativley new science so there is still a lot more work to be done. In any case, phreedum, comparing sexual orientation's genetic basis to imtelligent design is just another example of your utter lack of an understanding of science.

ID is an untestable assertion and is therefore of less value than a testable assertion that is tested and found to be invalid. Somehow this little FACT continues to escape xian idiots and their NoGodBlog representative Phreeky. Seriously, what is wrong with their brains?

I think most everyone here would agree creationists are uneducated hicks. For your entertainment I wanted to stop by to give you all an example of a 100% pure creationist hick. This is a comment about an article in the Miami Herald about Sen. Ronda Storms and her religious attack against science education in Florida:

http://tinyurl.com/539fez

Here's a sample and there's a lot more stupidity where this came from:

"There for they have taught these lies to our kids with ONE purpose, and that was to take GOD OUT of the schools. So who actully had and still has an AGENDA. Not those who are afraid of teaching real Science or letting our KIDS think for themselfs ,and letting them decide if they were created by a creator ."

If I lived in FL, I would send my son/daughter to school highly coached to assert that the earth was created by millworms. The teacher had better create a module and spend at least several classes on the subject, and there better be a quiz!

If not, I would cry "Oppression!" and would take it to the legal level.

Millworm creationism would be taught or else!!!

Alex...

No...your answer is flawed. Simply because you exist, and because your gay does not answer the question...

Are individuals born gay...?

You point to fruit fly studies as proof? This from an elitist who brags about college level biology studies?

The truth is you can't point to one study...

Therefore according to your own criteria the idea that someone being born gay should not be discussed within our educational system...if and until there's one study which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method...

Your words...not mine...

But of course since you're an elitist you only apply your words to others...not yourself...

Seeker...

You're a fraud just like Augustine...

From you emotional responses to questions prove you were never trained at a seminary...yet you claim to be a former pastor...

Tell me...what drives an individual to pretend there something they're not on an atheist blog...?

reason...

My discussion with Alex is taking us off topic...

Let's make it simple...

Do you believe in the following statement...

freedom of thought is fundamental to the scientific process

From you= Your
there=they're

phreedm asked?

'Do you believe in the following statement...

"freedom of thought is fundamental to the scientific process"

freedom of thought is fundamental to many processes. however thought isn't required for ID because no matter what question is asked, the answer is the same.... "god did it". maybe that is a thought process to a brainwashed xtian but it sure as hell isn't to a "free-thinking" rational mind. of course you can't understand that because you apparently don't have one.

sorry phreedm you lose again.

And he/she/it loses again.

Phreaky:

Or better yet...

Until there is at least one study in support of a person being born an atheist which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method it will always remain a crackpot theory.


Someone show me evidence of the above...

Every single baby born in this world is an atheist.

Atheist- no belief in a god or gods.
That's it. Are you trying to tell me that an infant has an understanding of gods? So, when you were 3 months old, you knew about and understood who Jesus and Yahweh were? Yeah, right!
What you are mistaking is that a baby may be born into a religious family, i.e. xian, but that doesn't make it a xian. What it makes it is a baby of xian parents.

But I don't expect you to understand...

wow phreedm, I haven't been around that much, but your name calling has hit new heights. I never really understood why evolution is so threatening to belief. Is it so hard to believe that people were writing a story handed down by oral tradition and shouldn't be the basis of scientific learning? I went to 12 years of christian school and we talked about evolution without it being threatening. They were pretty even handed explaining that some people think it's a literal story and some people think it's allegory... and that was at a christian school. One of my teachers said it well: it's not about how it was done, but about who did it. I think that evolution is the most likely way we got to where we are and it doesn't threaten my beliefs.

I did a quick search for one of my favorite Family Guy references to this:
http://religiousfreaks.com/2006/07/09/evolution-vs-creationism-family-guy-style/

Fantastic.

Spanders

One of my teachers said it well: it's not about how it was done, but about who did it.

How ridiculous! Who? The entire scientific world stopped anthropomorphizing nature a long time ago.

Whoops

One of my teachers said it well: it's not about how it was done, but about who did it.

How ridiculous! Who? The entire scientific world stopped anthropomorphizing nature a long time ago.

Comment from: spanders

wow phreedm, I haven't been around that much, but your name calling has hit new heights.

Of course you'd have to say that Spanders...you'd never see the other side of the issue. Actually I've grown fond of the wide variety of names everyone has come up with for me...I let all of the teens know each Friday night. It's a great lesson in pointing out the weaker hand in a debate...

Only Liberals water down a message to compromise and make everyone feel all warm and fuzzy...

The truth hurts. Had you been around you'd understand exactly what I'm taking about...why would someone find the need to pretend they're someone they aren't?

Comment from: Boise Jim

Every single baby born in this world is an atheist.

Here we have another emotional response...not very scientific BJ

Comment from: sayonara

freedom of thought is fundamental to many processes. however(but) thought isn't required for ID because no matter what question is asked, the answer is the same.... "god did it".

And one peron sho not only doesn't understand ID but also believes in limiting the free flow of ideas because of a preconceived opinion...

Wow...this thread is very eye opening...

In response to: Sun Fries Brain cells in Florida -- origin "alternatives" OK'd?
spanders [Member]
I went to 12 years of christian school and we talked about evolution without it being threatening...and that was at a christian school.

*******

Are you sure you went to Christian school? and sure also that your teacher is a Christian? Really? You mean to say your teacher is also a monkey just like you and as you believed?

Man was created by God in His own image and breath man to live with soul, unlike pigs, dogs, Urangutan, Gorilla, chimpanzee or monkey from Darwin's fantasies?

Please don't include your sister/brother/parents/ancestors to your foolishness.

Man have souls but animals/monkeys doesn't have. Thats why if anyone never hit your body but say something that hurts your feelings, you have emotions, conscience and that is your soul and you will decide while on earth where do you want your soul will go...to heaven or hell....Remember...John 3:16 for salvation. God bless.

What, I realize that argument isn't one that you would relate to, but it was intended for phreedm. In other words, it is a debate that exists within the christian community and addresses issues of errancy vs. inerrancy. While the scientific community relies on testing and evidence, it does not mean that scientists cannot be religious. Religion can inspire religious scientists to understand how god created the world. The inspiration for being a scientist varies from person to person. I suspect you will argue that being religious takes away from being a good scientist. I don't see where there would be trouble if dogma doesn't replace study and testing. OK, back to work for me... another drive by on my part.

So in arithmetic and math classes we check with the students to see what they think the answers to the questions are and then we declare them all to be right?

This can be used in language classes as well. Spelling, grammar, punctuation - there are lots of alternative ways of doing things. Why should only one of them be right?

Some spell it freedm and claim the children should not be restricted in their exposure to reality claims. The children need to see there is a controversy over all the permutations of 1+1=3 and 2*2= 5, etc. They need to learn all the right and wrong ways a thing can be done.

Some Christians accept evolution and some don't. Rare, I suspect is the pulpit used to preach creation as fact as well as the reasons that other Christians accept evolution.

Preach the controversy! Open the eyes of those in the pews who will not see.

Everybody go click on that Scientology link. Costs them money that goes to the blog, for a double win.

Just don't be taken in by their equal and balanced arguments for taking all your money and isolating you from your family and friends.

The Christ idiot said "Man was created by God in His own image"

You got any evidence for your wild claim?

Have you ever seen the Sky Fairy? How do you know what it looks like? How do you even know it exists?

Are you stupid or something?

What a moron. The god nuts have all these childish ideas and they think they are proven facts. There is nobody more insane, more stupid, and more gullible than the Christians.

The worst of these idiots are the Baptists. It's no coincidence that Florida Senator Ronda Storms, the airhead who is attacking science education, is a Baptist.

Christ idiot, just keep your breathtaking stupidity out of our schools.

More hopeless stupidity from the Christ idiot: "Man have souls but animals/monkeys doesn't have."

This is what Einstein called the "ridiculous egotisms" of Christians. The Christians have an inflated sense of their own importance. They think humans are God's chosen species, magically created to be separate from nature and the only species allowed to fly up to heaven. What a childish cowardly belief.

Here's the rest of Einstein's quote:

"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."

Christ idiot, if people are not animals, what are they, plants?

Christ idiot, why are so hopelessly gullible, insane, and stupid? I'm serious. What does it take to make a person like you a total moron? Do you have an unusually small brain?

CITW,
While I appreciate the thorough response, I don't have time go through it point by point. As a summary, I think you are saying that since there are inconsistencies in the theory of evolution and that the Bible clearly lays out an inerrant explanation, we should present both equally. However, your argument makes A LOT of assumptions that are highly questionable.

I suspect our scientist friends here can do a better job of explaining evolution and geological time and the processes involved. Your examples of the differences between humans and other animals are not 100% accurate. Other animals have been studied to gossip, joke and show empathy. We may not be as special as you might think. Who knows, god could look like an ape!

The biblical account of creation has conflicting information within itself:

In the first account, God created fruit trees before Adam and Eve; in the second account, God created Adam, then the fruit trees, then Eve.

In the first account, God created animals before Adam and Eve; in the second account, God created Adam. then the animals, then Eve.

Genesis 1:20 describes how God had "the waters bring forth ...fowl" ; in Genesis 2:19, God formed them "out of the ground".

In the first account, God created the fish on the 5th day; in the second account, the fish of the sea were not created at all.

I think Tom Harpur puts it well:
"Looking in the Bible for a scientific account of origins is like looking in the phone directory for a recipe for angel cake."

We can also look at the comparison between the biblical creation story and the Babylonian creation story which are almost identical in order. Should we give equal time to the theory of evolution, Genesis and the Babylonian creation story in science class? I will continue to argue that we should teach prevailing scientific method and its results. The bible is not a science text book. We should not treat equally modern science for the stories of a nomadic tribe's creation story.

What did Christ is on the way to the Funny Farm do-copy and paste Answers in Genesis onto our little blogsweetblog? Or is it from the Discotute?


DAVE!!!!!!

Dissenting posts are welcomed, but preachy, vulgar, or hateful posts are deleted without apology.

Do we need to present our case to Mrs. Dave again?

Comment from: BobC

"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."

BC...I'll bet you can't provide the full article that this quote is from...?

Wow Spanders...

I guess that liberal christian church of yours doesn't dive too deeply into Scripture...

Spanders

What, I realize that argument isn't one that you would relate to, but it was intended for phreedm. In other words, it is a debate that exists within the christian community and addresses issues of errancy vs. inerrancy.

Life is too short to waste arguing about how many fairies you can put on the tip of a needle. What do you expect to gain by arguing about Phreeky's fairies rather than simply demanding evidence for their existence?

Christ is in the way

Give us an operational definition of the terms "god" and "exist". If you can't do that then admit it.

Nobody here is going to bother responding to your psychotically long post above. This is especially the case when you fail to answer the most fundamental questions about the terms you use.

Christ is the Way,

Phreedm was unable to provide cohesive answers to these critical problems in Genesis. He/she retreated, instead, to ad hominem attacks.

The conclusion is: The Genesis account is indefensible.

Can you do better? Can you explain to an atheist audience to these glaring inaccuracies in the Genesis account? And without plagiarisg (copying/pasting) someone else's rambings?

• The sun was created on the fourth 4th day. No sun; no solar system.

How can there have been three 24-hour solar days (including morning and evening) without a solar system?

• The geographical name places mentioned in Genesis 2 (Tigris and Euphrates) would have been erased by the flood.

There's more...

• Note also that the earth produced vegetation without the sun; without photosynthesis. Scientific?

• Genesis contains two creation accounts; Genesis 2:4b to 2:25 is thought to have been written first. Genesis 1:1 through 2:4a, second.

• As the result of Adam's sin, death entered into the world; a part of the curse. Yet Adam ate prior to the fall. What did he eat? Vegetation that would have died upon consumption.

• Pain and suffering also existed prior to the fall. Note that Eve's pain in child bearing was "multiplied" from the Hebrew רבה which means "greatly increase." To increase something must exist.

• Layers of ice in the polar regions reveal age, must like the rings of a tree. The prove an old earth far exceeding Ussher's 4004 BC creation date.

And on it goes...

Phreedm,

Please refrain from ad hominem attacks. If you can't defend your position, at least have the courage and character not to personally attack those who expose biblical errors.

If one strips away your presonal insults and reads only the rational arguments you propose, what is left to read? Perhaps you should invest your time studying to "show yourself approved."

I realize you are frustrated being confronted with uncontestable truth regarding your faith, but replying with personal insults only weakens your position in the minds of thinking, reasonable people.

Let's take the high road and keep our discussion within the range of propriety and decorum, shall we?

I sent Dave an email imploring him to invoke the delete w/o apology rule on CITW. Don't know if it will help.

Christ is in the way

Your posts used to be entertaining but they no longer are. You have made them way too long and you have peppered them liberally with bible passages. Nobody likes to have to scroll by such content-sparse posts and surely only the masochistic would bother reading them in their entirety. If the content of your posts are representations of the clutter and disorganization of your mind you truly have my sympathy.

CSTW...

Don't waste your time on Seeker...

He's a fraud...

CITW...

Don't waste your time on Seeker...

He's a fraud...

phreedm said:
"I let all of the teens know each Friday night. It's a great lesson in pointing out the weaker hand in a debate..."

if you were a real man and wanted to open these teens up to the free thought you claim to covet, you would let them come to the blog themselves and read what is posted so they could decide who has the weak hand. unless you have brainwashed all of them as well some may have the mental capacity to realize what you are doing to them, and what you are all about.

so tell us phreedm, do you let them come and read the blog or do you act like the thought police and restrict what they have access to? i won't hold my breath for an answer.

but from where i sit, you are not only a hateful and pitiful old man but a phoney as well.

Sayonara

Phreeky has absolutely no interest in free thought. It would be loads of fun to have one of his "teens" here to observe him make a fool of himself daily.

CITW...

Don't waste your time on Seeker...

He's a fraud...

Phreedm,

Why the continued personal attacks?

Why are you unwilling to discuss the issues at hand rather than attack me personally?

Why are you discouraging other Christians from confronting the truth regarding biblical errors?

Is it an admission that you are wrong?

What,

I assume CITW's post is a copy/paste; probably not original thought.

CITW,
Your argument went from defending ID to an ad hominem argument. Interestingly, the word "satan" originally came from a stumbling block. It didn't describe an entity. In the Jewish version of the creation account was simply a serpent, not satan.

This, of course, gets into deeper theological discussion. God gives us free will, but I'm not sure I believe, or want to believe, in a god that gives us free will, but then literally punishes the hell out of us for exercising that free will by choosing any other option than a literal interpretation and asking us to believe in things that are beyond our understanding. Here again I stand with people like Tom Harpur. I believe that there is a god, but don't think god determines what route I drive, what I invest money in or what I have for breakfast. I don't believe in a god who would give us brains that can process data and then tell us if we don't ignore it we're going to burn in hell.

Spanders,

then literally punishes the hell out of us

This is key argument against fundamentalist Christianity.

Entire civilizations -- perhaps hundreds of millions of humans -- lived and died wholly unaware of the existence of the Judeo-Christian religion.

Did all these people go to hell? Are they still there right his moment? Will they remain in hell's torments for countless billions of years?

Doesn't make sense, does it?

(btw - ad hominem attacks are admissions to defeat.)

(btw - ad hominem attacks are admissions to defeat.)

Why do you think phreedum played the gay card on me? He is cornered and desperate. "I'll give it to that elitist faggot for challenging my feel good beliefs-take that, Alex". Bwahahaha!