God, Darwin, and Kansas

God, Darwin, and Kansas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Level -> God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 5:02:39 AM)
From the newsmax website: Faith Versus Science in Kansas 'Evolution Election' Kansas Board of Education members who approved new classroom standards that call evolution into question faced a counterattack at the polls Tuesday from Darwin's defenders. Five of the 10 seats on the board were up for election in the primary, the latest skirmish in a seesawing battle between faith and science that has opened Kansas up to international ridicule. http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/8/1/151000.shtml?s=ic

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 5:55:52 AM)
It is sad really. This battle has been going on for a long time. People are wound up tighter than a popcorn fart and can not admit anyone else is right. They have to have things their own way. Both the Creationists and the Evolutionists are at fault here. There is something to be learned from both sides, but neither one wants to give an inch. They are convinced they have discovered the one true answer and screw everyone else. The reality is that neither one of them are 100% right. Each side has merits. If they would just sit down and face each other and LISTEN, examine ancient writings and ancient history, examine current theories (such as the Chaos Theory) and fossil records and seriously analyze the data and commonalities, they would realize that the two theories can actually coexist in perfect harmony. No, God did not wave a magic wand 6,000 years ago and VOILA!!! Life. But no, it did not happen at random either. I just wish the two sides would stop being so bloody stubborn.

Lordandmaster -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 6:03:23 AM)
Uhh, Kenin, that means you believe in Intelligent Design. That's exactly what the whole issue is about. quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin No, God did not wave a magic wand 6,000 years ago and VOILA!!! Life. But no, it did not happen at random either.

meatcleaver -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 6:12:39 AM)
There is no evidence at all of divine intervention in the creation of life. This is an argument that is limited N. America in the western world and is mainly due to people who have a religious axe to grind. In the Canadian rockies there is plenty of fossil evidence that evolution throughs up hundreds, if not thousands of different life forms, many doomed to quickly perish because they are badly adapted to succeed, leaving those species well adapted to succeed. The very idea that humans are central to some great divine plan is simply human conceit. We will end up like the dodo or the dinosaurs if we don't take care or adapt to our environment or maybe we will nuke ourselves out of existence. Whichever, we are central to nothing but our own egos.

CrappyDom -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 7:18:11 AM)
Evolution is as much a fact as gravity but guess what, we don't know how either of them works. No legitimate scientists doubts gravity exists and neither do any doubt evolution it is just that nobody has come up with a theory that accounts for all the FACTS. It is only our poorly educated electorate too ignorant of how science works that allows this idiotic "debate" to go on. Intelligent design and creationism will end up in the same dump that a flat earth and phrenology ended up in. In fact, as someone already pointed out, America is the only country to not wake up to that fact.

IronBear -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 7:31:49 AM)
I can't underconstuble what all the shemozzel is about it is as simple as GDK in one alphabet yet to be written... GOD ~ The big bloke upstairs who was the first Shot Firer (Powder Monker for the uninformed) who set of the first and biggest bang. DARWIN ~ The bloke who originated and anually gives out the Darwin Awards for the dumn asses who are too dumb to remain alive.. KANSAS ~ Is as we all know the Land of Oz where the earthern end of the rainbow sits whern The lepricauns aren't playing with it.. Dangerous place with them thar Western Witches and thingies popping up..

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 7:34:51 AM)
You still have yet to get any facts straight CD. They were right about the pigs and whistle. I will try once more though. Creationism explains, if not taken to be a literal six days, the stages of evolution from the \Big Bang to the existence of Ubadian settlements. It was simplified to pass it down from generation to generation before the advent of writing in 3000 BC. The Chaos Theory explains that the world is not random at all. There is nothing random about it. It explains that everything, even though it appears to be random, such as the atmosphere, solar system, economics and population growth actually has order to it. An interesting example is any coastline along the ocean. View it from space. You will see bays. Continue to zoom in. You will continue to see them. Keep zooming in down to the particles of sand on the beach. You will continue to see them, and a mathematical formula will apply. Of course, if you still cannot get this through your head I will provide the equation and further explanation for you. It is our poorly educated masses that keep this debate going on. It is people like you that do not have the first clue about history, science, mathematics or society that makes these absurd claims and maintains a closed mind, keeping the world from exploring the possibilities and opening us up to new and fantastic discoveries. Of course the fundamentalist right is equally to blame. I know you are trying to excuse your actions by saying there is no God and thus eradicating any sense of accountability. You have already made that very clear. You are not alone. Millions of people do it. However, it is starting to appear that viewpoint makes about as much sense as the theory that we are just here at random. Bear in mind that the theory of Creation and it's many interpretations has been around for more than 6000 years. The theory of Evolution can not even hold a candle to that. The two can coexist, if people like you would stop being so narrow minded.

Lordandmaster -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 8:56:28 AM)
Yeah, and the theory that the sun revolved around the earth existed for about 100,000 years. So what? quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin Bear in mind that the theory of Creation and it's many interpretations has been around for more than 6000 years. The theory of Evolution can not even hold a candle to that.

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 9:03:22 AM)
Yes, but science has yet to disprove the theory of divine intervention. In fact it has created more questions than answers.

Lordandmaster -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 9:06:15 AM)
Science doesn't have to "disprove" anything. That's not how science works--you can't just come up with whatever unverifiable theory you want and pretend that it might be "true" just because it can't be disproven. The "theory" of divine intervention has never been proven, can't be proven, and doesn't disprove anything else. Really, we're the only country in the world where a fundamentally unscientific "theory" is taken seriously in the public-school science curriculum. If you want to teach religion, teach it in religion class. Not in science class. No wonder the rest of the world thinks we've lost our marbles.

gooddogbenji -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 9:34:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin Yes, but science has yet to disprove the theory of divine intervention. In fact it has created more questions than answers. Isn't it one of the basic laws of science that you can't prove a negative? Granted, I can prove(in theory), based on theology, that divine intervention did not happen, but not based on science, as the rules there forbid it. That would be like checkmate in poker. Yours, benji

twicehappy -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 9:59:30 AM)
Ok, here is my opinion. We need to teach our children about all religions and also about science and scientific theory and let them decide for themselves as they mature. I believe in both higher powers and evolution but for all i know life on this planet started when Alpha Centaurians on vacation dumped their port a potty into Earth's oceans because it was stinking up their inter galactic camper.

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 10:23:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: twicehappy I believe in both higher powers and evolution but for all i know life on this planet started when Alpha Centaurians on vacation dumped their port a potty into Earth's oceans because it was stinking up their inter galactic camper. lol [:D] Nice.

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 10:34:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gooddogbenji quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin Yes, but science has yet to disprove the theory of divine intervention. In fact it has created more questions than answers. Isn't it one of the basic laws of science that you can't prove a negative? Granted, I can prove(in theory), based on theology, that divine intervention did not happen, but not based on science, as the rules there forbid it. That would be like checkmate in poker. Yours, benji True. However that is not the way it has worked out. Scienctists have set out to prove MANY times that a deity does not exist. MANY times. They thought they had it when they came up with evolution. Until all the holes became evident. Until the Chaos Theory was discovered, which blew the theory that there absolutely, for certain, was NO God (or other deity) out of the water.

gooddogbenji -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 10:46:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: twicehappy Ok, here is my opinion. We need to teach our children about all religions and also about science and scientific theory and let them decide for themselves as they mature. All religions: Christianity (Catholics, Anglicans, Evangelical, Jehovah's Witness, Latter Day Saints, Orthodox, Pentecostal) Islam (Sunni and Shiite), Judaism (Conservative, Reform, Orthodox, Reconstructionist), Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Baha'i, Zoroastrianism, Wicca, Druidism, Atheism, Unitarianism, Church of the flying spaghetti monster, Tibetan Monkism, All Hail Benji, and many more. I'm sure I messed a good 20 or 30 which could well make the list, but you get my point. If we teach what is essentially Christian theories, then we have to, in order to keep Church and State separate, teach several. I agree with you there. However, where do we draw the line? I would hazard to guess that once 3 religions are taught, a whole slew of lawsuits would ensue to get almost every religion on that list, and rightfully so. There is a reason Church and State got separated. Do we want the government in charge of teaching our children what to believe? Besides, do I trust most of my teachers in school to be able to teach their own religion, let alone several, objectively? No. While I am the first to admit that science has a LOT of loopholes in it, it is the best theory we have. I think they have the basics down well enough that we can teach it, and let people learn about God creating the earth in Church, whichever one they may attend. Yours, benji

gooddogbenji -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 11:02:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin True. However that is not the way it has worked out. Scienctists have set out to prove MANY times that a deity does not exist. MANY times. They thought they had it when they came up with evolution. Until all the holes became evident. Until the Chaos Theory was discovered, which blew the theory that there absolutely, for certain, was NO God (or other deity) out of the water. I'm not sure if I agree with your point of science having thought it proven. Granted, many scientists do not believe in God, but I highly doubt that any reputable scientific organisation would state, "We have proven that there is no God." Some individuals may say this, but that does not mean that science a whole believes it, in the same way some Christians say the Bible is to be taken literally. That doesn't make it true, nor does it mean all Christians believe this. Your point of science having to disprove anything is false. The basis of science is in building up on previous ideas, working around and with them to see if they are likely, or if, based on newer theories, another scenario is more likely. Ultimately, like in law, there comes the point where it is possible that flying monkeys killed the lady and hypnotized all the witnesses, but more likely that the guy whom everyone saw do it, did it. Scientists originally worked within Christian ideas, but as it became apparent that certain ideas of the Church's were false(see sun revolves around earth), but the Church refused to see it, a rift developed. This has continued until today - despite very reasonable evidence that evolution, at least to some degree, has been going on and will continue, many Christians simply do not believe in it, and believe that it should not be taught in schools. If one side refuses to see the obvious for too long, obviously they will be ridiculed. I think it is time for religions around the world to get their heads out of their collective asses and to actually look at the world around them, not at a book that was written thousands of years ago, encoded, in a different culture, in a different language. I'm not saying they're wrong, but they need to reanalyze their arguments for today's world. Yours, benji

SirKenin -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 11:55:51 AM)
I agree that many fundies need to reanalyze their strategies. I have a strong dislike for organized religion of ANY description, because more often than not they have their heads up their asses like you say. Then again, to be fair, so do most atheists. There is a center point, and if one does their homework they will find it.

amastermind -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 11:56:08 AM)
I don't know the details of the debate in Kansas but I do know this: Evolution is just a theory, and not a very good one at that. On the other hand, Creationism isn't a theory at all. I am sure anyone who has followed the debate has heard all the arguments but what bring it home to me are the following obervations: The differences between breeds of dogs that have been bred for hundreds of years, disappear with a very small number of generations when the dogs are allowed to breed freely. Thus, nature seems to work against forming new species. There is no fossil evidence of transitory animals in between two different species that supposedly originated from the same one. Random mutation, the proposed mechanism for creating species, doesn't seem very likely. For one thing, there really isn't enough time for the process to work. Even a few billion years is not enough time for enough favorabe mutations to have occured. Furthermore, most mutations are harmful, not beneficial. When babies in Iraq were born with 6 fingers and enlarged heads due to their exposure to radiation from the war, how many parent said "Great news! We have now helped the evolutionary process.?" Creationism, the "theory" that God created the world in six days isn't a theory at all. No more than a theory that the earth circles the sun because God willed that. So in fact there are things that we just don't understand very well and maybe can never understand. I hope the Kansas School Board as well as all those involved in the debate recognize this. Finally, there is no conflict between science and religion. They answer two different questions. Religion answers the question "Who?" whereas science answers the question "How?"

SusanofO -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 12:18:33 PM)
God may think it' all pretty amusing. [:)] - Susan

amastermind -> RE: God, Darwin, and Kansas (8/2/2006 12:29:00 PM)
SusanofO, your response reminds me of a T-shirt I saw once. On the front was written "God is dead - Nietzsche" On the back was written "Nietzsche is dead - God"

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.0625