Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#51049 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
"Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? Karl Popper, famous philosopher of science, said “Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical [religious] research programme ….”13 Michael Ruse, evolutionist science philosopher admitted,“Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”14 If “you can’t teach religion in science classes”, why is evolution taught? See: The religious nature of evolution,“It’s not science”.
Evolution is based on science and is taught in science classes.

Religion is based on just about anything and should never be taught in public schools by the establishment clause of the Constitution. Don't teach Evolution as a philosophy or ridicule religions and philosophies using Evolution as a yardstick and all is as it should be.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51050 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
"Proof positive?"
No!
More than mindless speculation and conjecture are required before any credence can be given to your religion/evolution.
Boy you have incredibly poor reading capability. The phrase was "proof of a positive". Go back and read the post again.

“Stuffs gettin better ”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#51051 Oct 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
I have serious doubts about your Michael Ruse quote too. From my Google search of him he does not seem to be the sort that would make those remarks. He believes there is no conflict between evolution and Christianity. So how he could believe that evolution is a religion seems contradictory.
Odds are you cannot properly quote Ruse. You probably got that quote from a creationist site and not the original article.
Here is a clue for you: Creationist sites lie all of the time. Don't trust them.
HERE!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ruse/is...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51052 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't say what you just inferred.
He said that evolution is a religion and should be treated the same as any other religion when it comes to education.
Find the source and link it. Why should I believe a lying creationist? Until you do so you have no quote.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51053 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like the sock drawer was flung open at warp speed.
Are you implying that Dogen is a sock puppet? You fool, he has almost 27,000 posts here compared to my 3,000.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#51054 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like the sock drawer was flung open at warp speed.
I'd prefer it if you didn't indulge in scientific abstractions. It's kind of like watching a chimp smoke a cigarette. They don't have a clue. It's harmful to them. They just see others doing it.

Then there's the irony factor.

“Stuffs gettin better ”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#51055 Oct 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL. Pull on the other one, it has bells on.
Surely you can do better than that. You obviously either do not understand the theory of evolution and the evidence that supports it or you do not understand the meaning of the words "speculative" and "substantive".
I understand the true definition.
Not the one you would apply.
Since evidence IS proof, yet you say your religion cannot be proved,you have no evidence.
You have bits and pieces and you have speculation as to what they are and what they mean, along with your over zealous need to attempt to disprove creation.
This is not only your religion, but a religion nearly as fanatical as the one which flew planes into buildings in NYC only a decade ago.

“Stuffs gettin better ”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#51056 Oct 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy you have incredibly poor reading capability. The phrase was "proof of a positive". Go back and read the post again.
Boy, your religion has blinded you from the truth.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51057 Oct 8, 2012
wolverine wrote:
<quoted text>
It Is Yet Another Failure By Science, To Ignore And Ridicule That Which I Have Seen Personally.
Do You Suppose Its The Shape Of Their Heads That Promotes Blindness ?
On the contrary, it's the failure of yourself for being incapable of backing yourself up.

“Stuffs gettin better ”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#51058 Oct 8, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Find the source and link it. Why should I believe a lying creationist? Until you do so you have no quote.
Awwwe
Poor little crybaby resorting to name calling again?
Waa,!

Your religion/evolution is blinding you.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51059 Oct 8, 2012
MazHere wrote:
So there is the difference.
I suggest that the empirical data supports Genesis, and therefore a creationist paradigm in general, better than it suppports TOE.
EXCELLENT! You may be my only hope for salvation in Christ! Okely dokely! SO! Evolution has been falsified and is no longer in the picture and now creationism is the only game in town! Please demonstrate how scientific evidence provides empirical testable support for Creationism, also known as GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC!

Thanks in advance.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51060 Oct 8, 2012
Johny wrote:
To say evolution is an established fact is pure dishonesty. It shows that evolution is even more "religion" than science. There are so many gaps in the evolutionary tree - nothing connects in a clear fashion. It is a lot of hand waving with little facts. Saying that we see micro changes in life does not support the larger evolutionary construct.
Actually Johnny since it has already been demonstrated for you the fact you still make this grandiose claim without backing yourself up shows you are nothing but pure dishonest.

Doesn't your religion have a Commandment from God about that somewhere?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51061 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
Finally, it is like pulling teeth to get you to post a proper quote. And to show that even Michael Ruse does not really agree with the quote you posted, from the article you linked:
Is evolution, Darwinian evolution in particular, a religion? To sound like the philosopher that I am, it all depends on what you mean by "religion."
So, what about Darwinism? I don't think believing that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection (his version or today's version) commits you to religious belief.
So, if someone like Richard Dawkins indignantly protests that his passion about these sorts of things -- the passion that drives the "God Delusion" -- should not be taken as a religious passion, I am happy to accept that. I do nevertheless think that often Dawkins and company show the sociological characteristics of the religious.
And some very weak support for you:
Having conceded this, I do also think that there are and have been Darwinians who have made something of a religion -- call it a secular religion, if you like -- out of their science.
Yes, he did make that quote. Was he serious, not really. Some people make evolution their religion, but then some people make religion out of anything. I know that I would drop evolution if evidence was found that showed it to be wrong and so would every other poster here. I personally do not know of any atheists who take evolution as a religion.

What you did was quote mining. A form of lying. When you posted the complete article it bit you in the butt.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51062 Oct 8, 2012
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup that's why it called The fact of evolution and not the Theory of Evolution.
6 months later even after detailed explanations links to dictionary definitions and you STILL can't get it right.(shrug)

Bub, you have problems with English, you CERTAINLY ain't gonna be able to talk about science.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51063 Oct 8, 2012
Doctor Who Two wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes we can.
Plants do not evolve into animals.
At no time has one kind of animal ever given birth to a new kind of animal.
If this had happen in the past to create all life that ever lived on earth then it would still be happening. But it's not happening, not today not last year not last decade not the last millennium.
Billions and billions of life forms on earth and macro evolution isn't happening.
It's just doesn't happen.
In that case you got 2448 pages to debunk. And counting.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51064 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand the true definition.
Not the one you would apply.
Since evidence IS proof, yet you say your religion cannot be proved,you have no evidence.
You have bits and pieces and you have speculation as to what they are and what they mean, along with your over zealous need to attempt to disprove creation.
This is not only your religion, but a religion nearly as fanatical as the one which flew planes into buildings in NYC only a decade ago.
Wrong again. You are still misusing the word proof. We have much more than bits and pieces. We have a working scientific theory. You by the way are a hypocrite. You drive a car that relies on oil that is found using evolution as a tool. If you get sick you use medicine that used evolution as a tool. You still don't know what a religion is. My zealousness is against liars and their attempts to ruin the U.S. educational system. By the way, I have a huge problem with political correctness and what they have done to the educational system too.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#51065 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
Awwwe
Poor little crybaby resorting to name calling again?
Waa,!
Your religion/evolution is blinding you.
We cross posted fool. How was I being a crybaby? You finally did post the article I demanded and I found that you had quote mined. In other words, you lied.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51066 Oct 8, 2012
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Gillette, your base ignorance is staggering. If you're going to attempt to defend evolution, start sticking to facts rather than making an utter fool of yourself. You're parroting the same recycled BS that atheists have been peddling for decades... all of which has been soundly debunked over and over again. A word of advice... Bedtime stories do not constitute science. If you deflate all of the atheist meanderings from your post, you're left with an empty chair.
Atheism? BONG!!! Thanks once again HTS for telling everyone you reject science cuz you think GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC. "Gee, how shall we go about falsifying evolution today then? I KNOW! I'll keep whining about them mean old ATHEISTS! HAAHAHA!!!!"
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#51067 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
2012 has been a very BAD year for Darwinism and atheism:
http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/10...
"Presiden† S†arky says s†uff's ge††in be††er"
Ah. So your approach is also to claim science is wrong cuz Goddidit with magic.

6,000 years ago.

And for some reason you expect the scientific community to take you seriously.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#51068 Oct 8, 2012
President Starky wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand the true definition.
Not the one you would apply.
Since evidence IS proof, yet you say your religion cannot be proved,you have no evidence.
You have bits and pieces and you have speculation as to what they are and what they mean, along with your over zealous need to attempt to disprove creation.
This is not only your religion, but a religion nearly as fanatical as the one which flew planes into buildings in NYC only a decade ago.
YET ANOTHER Creationist who wants to trick someone into proving a negative!

It's not any scientists job to disprove your hokey-pokey wisdom.

Are you just out to get people kicked off of Topix with your cute little hat dance?

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
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 19 min MikeF 14,586
Why natural selection can't work 1 hr shaun2000 21
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 6 hr ChromiuMan 941
Why Are There No Transitional Animals Today? (Mar '09) 8 hr ChristineM 795
Darwin on the rocks Tue The Dude 832
Science News (Sep '13) Mon Ricky F 2,961
The conditions necessary for homo sapiens to sp... Sun NoahLovesU 5
More from around the web