has evolution become another blind be...

has evolution become another blind belief system ?

Created by aristotle on Oct 18, 2007

392 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

dont question 9/11 n evolution

questioning evolution is taboo

questioning 9/11 is a taboo

questioning religeon is taboo

evangeliis

Parramatta, Australia

#141 Nov 25, 2007
so then, evolution has no authority on any question regarding non-biological oriented questions? hoorah

Level 1

Since: Dec 06

Tampa, FL

#142 Nov 25, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
so then, evolution has no authority on any question regarding non-biological oriented questions? hoorah
Of course not. The fact that you didn't know that means you don't know anything about science at all. So why are you so adamantly opposed to evolution? Given that you've proven that you don't even know what it is, or what the theory of evolution states about how it works, how can you oppose it? Do you frequently show such hatred for something you don't even begin to understand?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#143 Nov 25, 2007
RMB Furion wrote:
I have to say, even if evolution can say that the planets were made this way and that, there is no way to explain how Uranus got to be turned on it's side, even with the assumption that an asteroid may have spanked it hard.
Once evolution can explain that planet and it's moons orbit then you may have a more adequate argument.
Hey ~ssh~le!

*taps on the glass booth RMB has enclosed himself in*

*taps again*

EVOLUTION says NOTHING WHATSOEVER ABOUT PLANETS.

That is _ASTRONOMY_, you ignorant fool.

Geeze, what a maroon. What an ignoranimous.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#144 Nov 25, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
<quoted text>
oh thats right, you don't actually answer any questions. evolution is the explanation of the universe without God. so it then must give an answer to any scientific question put forward. last time I checked astronomy was a scientific field.
*taps on the glass booth evangeliis has trapped herself in*

*taps again*

Hey,~ssh~le!

Evolution has NOTHING to say about ASTRONOMY!

Idiot.

Why don't you get a REAL education, before spouting off on things you don't understand.

Perhaps, you LIKE to remain ignorant?

You seem to wallow in it....

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#145 Nov 25, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
so then, evolution has no authority on any question regarding non-biological oriented questions? hoorah
Dennis2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not. The fact that you didn't know that means you don't know anything about science at all. So why are you so adamantly opposed to evolution? Given that you've proven that you don't even know what it is, or what the theory of evolution states about how it works, how can you oppose it? Do you frequently show such hatred for something you don't even begin to understand?
She is typical of religious zealots-- or more correctly, Religious Nazis.

They have zero information outside their own belief-sphere, or as I euphemistically said above, outside their little glass booths.

But, they see nothing wrong with making up sh~~ about anything and everything.

And that is fine-- except for the fact that they expect EVERYONE ELSE to believe their made-up sh~~ too.

And THAT is where they cross the line between what the US Constitution grants as rights and what it forbids.

It must be blissful inside their booths.....

I just wish they'd stay there, close the blinds and leave the REST of the world alone.

“Peace ”

Since: Jun 07

Brooklyn

#146 Nov 25, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
so then, evolution has no authority on any question regarding non-biological oriented questions? hoorah
I don't think anyone will mind me giving at least a partnership with chemistry and a good knowledge of math and an open mind to stay tuned to evolution.
evangeliis

Parramatta, Australia

#147 Nov 26, 2007
how dare you call me a nazi. it was the nazis that used evolution to justify killing millions of people yet here you are calling me a nazi, shame.

“Rattling for Chemistry”

Since: Dec 06

Deep Swamps of Georgia

#148 Nov 26, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
how dare you call me a nazi. it was the nazis that used evolution to justify killing millions of people yet here you are calling me a nazi, shame.
Wrong again! Hitler didn't even have an inkling what evolution was all about...he used the fundies Christians ideals for his own hate for his purpose..called blind faith. Hitler showed no knowledge of Darwinian evolution or natural selection. Nowhere in Mein Kampf does he mention Darwin, natural-selection or even the word "evolution" (in the context of natural selection).

Hitler had no scientific sophistication or an understanding of Darwin's theory of evolution and his "blood-line" explanation of human "progress" reveals a Biblical view, not a Darwinian view. He did, however, at times express ideas, not from Darwin, but rather from Herbert Spencer's concept of Social Darwinism, which has little to do with natural selection and served as an adjunct to his already established religious views. Darwin never expressed the idea that natural selection could extend from biological systems to social systems.

Hitler said in Mein Kampf: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."

Also Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933 said, "We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149 Nov 26, 2007
I've been long confused about how the creationists mis-use the term 'evolution'. In stead of simply using it for the description of how life changes over time, they tend to ignore this issue and focus either on abiogenesis or the Big Bang model of how the universe has changed, or, at times, how planets form. They siimply refuse to believe that none of these are directly related to 'evolution'as scientists use the term. Why?

After thinking about it for a while, it seems that the creationists are upset with the concept that things can change through ordinary physical processes and that these processes may be enough to explain how things came about. They are opposed to a materialist view of the universe and how it changes over time.

In other words, they are opposed to the very essence of how science works. Instead of trying to find out how the universe, they want to simply say 'god did it' and have that be a complete explanation. In doing so, they deny the right of even religious scientists who see this endeavor as 'seeing the mind of God' or 'understanding how God made the world'. If even a religious scientists comes up with a materialist explanation for something, they must have given up their belief in God. Or so the creationists seem to think.

So, the problem is the scientific method. Creationists do not want to subject their beliefs to tests. They prefer 'faith'. They do not want a materialist explanation for anything. THey want it all to reduce down to a deity. They do not want science. They want religion.

Level 1

Since: Dec 06

Saint Petersburg, FL

#150 Nov 26, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
how dare you call me a nazi. it was the nazis that used evolution to justify killing millions of people yet here you are calling me a nazi, shame.
No, it had nothing to do with evolution.

Still waiting for you to explain your pathetic behavior. All you've done thus far is prove that if you have a brain, you certainly don't use it. You adamantly oppose something because somewhere you heard someone say it is bad, even though you've clearly demonstrated that you know absolutely nothing about it. You are a mindless sheep.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#151 Nov 26, 2007
evangeliis wrote:
how dare you call me a nazi. it was the nazis that used evolution to justify killing millions of people yet here you are calling me a nazi, shame.
Silly fool.

Nazis were BELIEVERS in their own rhetoric.

They did NOT need PROOF.

They just BELIEVED.

(and Hitler claimed to be a Christian--- NOT an evolutionist. Hmmm. But that's a tangent.)

You _ARE_ a Religious Nazi-- you would FORCE your beliefs on others at gunpoint, if you could.

You just BELIEVE-- no need of actual proof for YOU.

So, yes, I DARE to call you out for what you REALLY are.
Ossuary

Waltham, MA

#152 Dec 11, 2007
RMB Furion wrote:
The Big Bang itself isn't in question, it is basically all the materials of the universe gathered in one spherical ball of matter and energy which was blown apart and spread out with the molecules and dust particles of everything that is now in existence as in rocks, water, air, and other aspects.
In the evolution of the universe, the only single possible part is the big bang itself, but the energy and matter for such would have to be created by something, because time has to have a beginning or we would not exist.
The only other even near plausible theory would be the steady state theory that the materials always existed and there was never a beginning. If that were true then there could not have been a possibility for the Lord, but because of the big bang theory, there is no question that something must have created the matter sphere for the blast to occur. If nothing had created it, then just as said, it would have been created by nothing, therefor it wouldn't have existed.
As the person from NASA did say though, every universe theory, such as the nebula and dynamo theory for instance, they have been proven false by the very existence of most of the planets in our solar system.
Well, let's draw a few more conclusions from this, shall we? You feel comfortable with the notion that all energy/matter was in one place at the beginning of time. You must, from empirical observation alone, also accept the findings "On the Colored Light of the Double Stars and Certain Other Stars of the Heavens", published by Christian Andreas Doppler in 1842. From these two knowledge points, you must be able to see that we can extrapolate the age of the universe, as a simple matter of time, distance and celerity. Sound scientific processes at work. Are you with me? Using similar principles and having previously determined through chemical analysis that moon rocks share a common heritage with earth, we can show when the moon was formed and hence the +minimum+ age of the earth. These facts alone show that the "young earth" coterie of the creationist movement is entirely wrong. Please trumpet the news, whenever you hear their misguided bleats.

“Peace ”

Since: Jun 07

Brooklyn

#153 Dec 12, 2007
Ossuary wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, let's draw a few more conclusions from this, shall we? You feel comfortable with the notion that all energy/matter was in one place at the beginning of time. You must, from empirical observation alone, also accept the findings "On the Colored Light of the Double Stars and Certain Other Stars of the Heavens", published by Christian Andreas Doppler in 1842. From these two knowledge points, you must be able to see that we can extrapolate the age of the universe, as a simple matter of time, distance and celerity. Sound scientific processes at work. Are you with me? Using similar principles and having previously determined through chemical analysis that moon rocks share a common heritage with earth, we can show when the moon was formed and hence the +minimum+ age of the earth. These facts alone show that the "young earth" coterie of the creationist movement is entirely wrong. Please trumpet the news, whenever you hear their misguided bleats.
I think you may enjoy this if not already familiar


NASA Science News for December 11, 2007

NASA's fleet of THEMIS satellites has made some surprising new discoveries about outbursts of Northern Lights and the source of their power. Findings include giant magnetic ropes that connect Earth to the Sun and explosions in the outskirts of Earth's magnetic field.

FULL STORY at

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007/11dec...
PredatorX

Pasco, WA

#154 Jan 31, 2013
How do you guys believe evolution occured?There,i picked up a 5 year old thread.
Graham

South Africa

#155 Jan 31, 2013
I believe evolution, but I don't believe we came from apes

“I am the great an powerful Ny!”

Since: Dec 06

Lebanon, PA

#156 Jan 31, 2013
PredatorX wrote:
How do you guys believe evolution occured?There,i picked up a 5 year old thread.
Sex.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#157 Jan 31, 2013
Graham wrote:
I believe evolution, but I don't believe we came from apes
This is a bizarre statement for a number of reasons.

The first and most obvious being that we DIDN'T come from apes. We ARE apes.

The second being, if you understand evolution, there's really no question about human lineage.

Change happens over time. It's as simple as that.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#158 Jan 31, 2013
PredatorX wrote:
How do you guys believe evolution occured?There,i picked up a 5 year old thread.
Genetic reproduction is not 100% perfect. You are not an exact copy of your mother.

Therefore change occurs.

That's evolution

“I am the great an powerful Ny!”

Since: Dec 06

Lebanon, PA

#159 Jan 31, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>The first and most obvious being that we DIDN'T come from apes.
Technically we all did. Your mom was an ape and you came from her.
Graham

South Africa

#160 Jan 31, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a bizarre statement for a number of reasons.
The first and most obvious being that we DIDN'T come from apes. We ARE apes.
The second being, if you understand evolution, there's really no question about human lineage.
Change happens over time. It's as simple as that.
Okay, you're a ape but I'm not

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 17 min Truth is might 174,093
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 4 hr Chimney1 143,951
News Intelligent design 6 hr Critical Eye 25
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 hr Critical Eye 20,904
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) Thu Igor Trip 178,702
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) Sep 2 macumazahn 1,248
News Pastafarians rejoice! Deep sea creature floatin... Sep 2 karl44 1
More from around the web