Evolution vs. Creation

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

Birkenhead, UK

#73026 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
Examples of CULT( merriam-webster.com )
She has developed a cult following.
<long after it had gone off the air, the TV series continued to have a huge cult>
Okay, you're right, I admit it - I AM A MEMBER OF THE CULT OF GRAVITY!!!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73027 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"And thee are 1000s of Far East(Chinese) depictions of DRAGONS on lots of royal/civilain pieces"
Yes I know. And we have museum full of their bones.
"All new atheist population around the world!
"Atheism losing adherents in terms of the global population
The 2004 to 2007 publicity campaign for atheism in the Western World was not sustainable. The level of public interest in atheism is not coming back in the West and global atheism is shrinking.
See also: Global atheism and American atheism and Atheist Population and Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian
In 2012, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary reported that globally every day there are 800 less atheists per day, 1,100 less non-religious (agnostic) people per day and 83,000 more people professing to be Christians per day.
In 2011, the American Spectator citing research published in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research reported that atheism is on the decline as a whole in terms of adherents .
The American Spectator declared:
The report estimates about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the West, while religion is thriving in the Global South, where charismatic Christianity is exploding.
In 2009, the book A sceptics guide to atheism indicated: "A worldwide poll taken in 1991 put the global figure for atheists at just 4.4% of the population. By 2006 it was estimated that only 2% of the world population were atheists."
In 2012 an article entitled Atheism in decline by Nigel Tomes declared:
The IBMR publishes yearly figures for religions (and non religions) around the globe. Their latest numbers, hot off the press (Jan. 2012) show some interesting trends.
Atheism is in Decline
In 1970 atheists (those avowing there is no God) numbered 166 million worldwide; that was almost one-in-twenty 4.5% of the global population. By 2012 atheists number is estimated at 137 million. Thats a decline of almost 30 million. Since world population is growing, atheists share declined to less than one-in-fifty under 2% in 2012. Put differently, every 24 hours there are 800 fewer atheists in the world!
Atheism is in decline.
Agnosticism is in Decline
In 2000 agnostics (those who don't know if there is a God) numbered 666 million, 10.9% of the worlds people. By 2012 agnostic number is estimated at 661 million--a decline of 5 million. In relative terms by 2012 agnostics represent less than one tenth (9.4%) of world population. Every 24 hours there are 1,100 less agnostics in the world. Agnostics are also in decline.
Added together these two groups make up a declining share of global population. In 1970 atheists and agnostics accounted for one-in-five (19.2%) of the worlds people. Based on current trends by 2025 they will represent less than one-in-ten (9.7%). Their population share will fall by half in 50+ years."
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism
Wow.

You really did it.

You actually referenced Conservapedia.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73028 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
my·thol·o·gy
/m&#601;&#712;THäl &#601;j&#275;/
Noun
A collection of myths, esp. one belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition.
A set of stories or beliefs about a particular person, institution, or situation, esp. when exaggerated or fictitious.
covered by definition...did you miss it?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73029 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the evidence is overwhelming of Intelligence Design.
Why? because if scientists found an advanced alien computer on mars, they would take it apart to further advance their own technology.
So in the same way, scientists mimic processes that exist in the Universe to advance technology.
self-organization,
self-configuration (auto-configuration),
self-optimisation (automated optimization),
self-healing,
self-protection (automated computer security),
self-explaining,
and context-awareness.
Organic computing...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_computin...
Unfortunately it's just missing at least one thing: self-replication.

Again, if all plants in plant pots were planted by humans does that means all plants were planted by an intelligence?
xxxooxxx wrote:
So scientists copy the obvious advanced intelligent Design that exist in the Universe, the very same way as if they had found an advanced alien computer.
SO "obvious" in fact that all you can do is continue to reference human designs as an analogy, instead of provide objectively verifiable testable scientific evidence.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73030 Jan 29, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>Conservapedia? Really?

Gallup says you are incorrect:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19262884
Well let's look at the CIA's survey.

The CIA World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.35%(of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%, atheists 2.04%.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73031 Jan 29, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>Christianity.....2.1 billion followers
Islam.....1.9 billion followers
Non-believers.....1 billion followers
Hindu.....900,000 followers

We're number 3......YEAH!!
Wrong

The United States of America "Central Intelligent's Agency" survey.

The CIA World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.35%(of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%, atheists 2.04%.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Tempe, AZ.

#73032 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the evidence is overwhelming of Intelligence Design.
Why? because if scientists found an advanced alien computer on mars, they would take it apart to further advance their own technology.
So in the same way, scientists mimic processes that exist in the Universe to advance technology.
self-organization,
self-configuration (auto-configuration),
self-optimisation (automated optimization),
self-healing,
self-protection (automated computer security),
self-explaining,
and context-awareness.
Organic computing...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_computin...
So scientists copy the obvious advanced intelligent Design that exist in the Universe, the very same way as if they had found an advanced alien computer.
Intelligent Design is nothing more than Christian religion wrapped in scientific sounding chatter.

The Federal Courts of the US has stated that Intelligent Design is just religious creationism with a new name.

Evangelical fundamentalists ding-bats have been promoting ID as real science so they can infiltrate Christian religion into High Schools and brain wash students.

Intelligent design has no science behind it....it is religion

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#73033 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Well let's look at the CIA's survey.
The CIA World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.35%(of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%, atheists 2.04%.
We were discussing increases and decreases - not static numbers. At any rate, this would *still* show an increase over Gallups initial 1% figure.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73034 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately it's just missing at least one thing: self-replication.
Again, if all plants in plant pots were planted by humans does that means all plants were planted by an intelligence?
<quoted text>
SO "obvious" in fact that all you can do is continue to reference human designs as an analogy, instead of provide objectively verifiable testable scientific evidence.
So science denies that the Universe is an intelligent process, to the point of coping the same precess to advance scientific technology.

Same thing happens all the time...for example one phone designer copies an advanced design of another phone designer and claims that it was an original design.

Science can't claim ownership to a Universe that's already owned.lol

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Tempe, AZ.

#73035 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Lack of evidence is not evidence.
TOTAL lack of evidence when hundreds of professional archaeologists have been looking for over a hundred years is a sure sign that the event NEVER happened.

We're not talking about just a small amount of evidence found, therefore there is small support for the assertion....we're talking NO evidence, Zilch, Nada, Nyet, Nothing. Archaeologists and many theologians have known this for decades
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#73036 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So science denies that the Universe is an intelligent process
No, the universe being an intelligent process is simply an undemonstrated claim.
xxxooxxx wrote:
to the point of coping the same precess to advance scientific technology.
How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?
xxxooxxx wrote:
Same thing happens all the time...for example one phone designer copies an advanced design of another phone designer and claims that it was an original design.
Sure. We know they are both designed. And who by. And how.
xxxooxxx wrote:
Science can't claim ownership to a Universe that's already owned.lol
They don't claim ownership. Only fundies like yourself claim ownership but are unable to show us the owner. Every time I ask you give me something made by humans instead. Which is a rather silly way to make a point.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Tempe, AZ.

#73037 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"And thee are 1000s of Far East(Chinese) depictions of DRAGONS on lots of royal/civilain pieces"
Yes I know. And we have museum full of their bones.
Funny thing; we have never found any 'Dragon' bones associated with human bones. No 'Dragon' bones in any strata that is newer than 65,000,000 years ago

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73038 Jan 29, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Intelligent Design is nothing more than Christian religion wrapped in scientific sounding chatter.
The Federal Courts of the US has stated that Intelligent Design is just religious creationism with a new name.
Evangelical fundamentalists ding-bats have been promoting ID as real science so they can infiltrate Christian religion into High Schools and brain wash students.
Intelligent design has no science behind it....it is religion
Actually the truth of the matter is, Science has to tie ID in with religious creationism to avoid the real issue...that of an obvious intelligent process behind the Universe.
The very same ploy is used to tie Christianity in with the barbaric practices of the historical hebrewic culture. The one's that the Christ abhored and spoke out against. There can be no real argument against the true teaching of Christ,so it's one of non existence...
That why on this thread there is very little mention about the Christ.

lol It's virtually the same ploy that they use when passing a bill...you have to accept this bill with these conditions....
But faith has no conditions...and that is why it is emphasized in many of his teachings.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73039 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the universe being an intelligent process is simply an undemonstrated claim.
<quoted text>
How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?
<quoted text>
Sure. We know they are both designed. And who by. And how.
<quoted text>
They don't claim ownership. Only fundies like yourself claim ownership but are unable to show us the owner. Every time I ask you give me something made by humans instead. Which is a rather silly way to make a point.
"the universe being an intelligent process is simply an undemonstrated claim."

So why does science copy "undemonstrated" intelligent?...lol

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Tempe, AZ.

#73041 Jan 29, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Total tosh,
The babble says gods intention to kill was deliberate and planned and based on nothing more than intolerant greed, i.e. MURDER for profit so why does the babble NOT agree with you?
If it were accidental then the book would not have the readership it has, a bit of blood, guts and mayhem does wonders for a books popularity, hey, you are hooked on it.
Genesis 6:11-17 and 7:11-24 – God planned and carried out the first recorded mass murderer in history for no other reason than intolerance that his own creation were not being good little subjects.
Exodus 12:29 – God planned and carried out the killing innocent children for no other reason than egotistical spite that there parents (his creation) were not being good little subjects
Deuteronomy 21:10-13 – God allows and condones the rape, slavery and subjugation of women for no other reason than he gets off and rape, slavery and subjugation of those who ere not being good little subjects
Or do you have some christian cop out for those atrocities, no not one of the worthless excuses written by apologists thousands of years later when people began questioning but a contemporary and valid reason that would be accepted in a court of law for such abhorrent behaviour written in the babble? No? wow I am surprised…
<quoted text>
Summarily speaking who cares about a dying faith built on genocide, child murder and rape, deception and LIES?
<quoted text>
That’s what was though of the Roman Empire and I believe Hitler thought the same about the Reich, as did Genghis Khan. History is littered with such claims.
Genesis 6:11-17 and 7:11-24
Exodus 12:29
Deuteronomy 21:10-13
Are you saying that the babble does not agree with you? Because it’s printed in the babble in the verses I cite and you are denying them and calling me a liar?
Or is it that you have no excuse so simply IGNORE the parts of the babble that disagree with you and call the person who cites those verses you IGNORE a liar.
You pathetic moron, I have given you every chance to justify your cause and all you can do is try and change the subject and call me a liar. Pathetic…
Honey, just because you build you life around lies does not mean that everyone lies, It simply means you have no understanding of truth. I have no god to lie for so I see no need to lie. Christianity is declining, you cannot call that a lies because it is a FACT
God was the first recorded mass murderer in history - FACT
God killed children - FACT
God condoned rape - FACT
No lies, that is WRITTEN, accept it and become a better christian
And of course God condoned slavery too. In America in the mid 19th century church pastors were using the Bible as justification for slavery. Rednecks Southerners believed it all.
Elohim

Branford, CT

#73042 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the truth of the matter is, Science has to tie ID in with religious creationism to avoid the real issue...that of an obvious intelligent process behind the Universe.
The very same ploy is used to tie Christianity in with the barbaric practices of the historical hebrewic culture. The one's that the Christ abhored and spoke out against. There can be no real argument against the true teaching of Christ,so it's one of non existence...
That why on this thread there is very little mention about the Christ.
lol It's virtually the same ploy that they use when passing a bill...you have to accept this bill with these conditions....
But faith has no conditions...and that is why it is emphasized in many of his teachings.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73043 Jan 29, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the universe being an intelligent process is simply an undemonstrated claim.
<quoted text>
How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?
<quoted text>
Sure. We know they are both designed. And who by. And how.
<quoted text>
They don't claim ownership. Only fundies like yourself claim ownership but are unable to show us the owner. Every time I ask you give me something made by humans instead. Which is a rather silly way to make a point.
"How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?"

Most, if not all of Science is based on the intelligent processes of the Universe...fact.

“All things considered”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73044 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
"How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?"
Most, if not all of Science is based on the intelligent processes of the Universe...fact.
How about nuclear fusion...

would you say that a human built nuclear reactor was of intelligent design?...of course, anyone would.

But to claim that a star, doing the exact same process is undemonstrated as an intelligent process, is ludicrous.

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#73045 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
How about nuclear fusion...
would you say that a human built nuclear reactor was of intelligent design?...of course, anyone would.
But to claim that a star, doing the exact same process is undemonstrated as an intelligent process, is ludicrous.
You're comparing a reactor to a reaction. Do you understand that those are different things?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#73046 Jan 29, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So science denies that the Universe is an intelligent process, to the point of coping the same precess to advance scientific technology.
If you have some evidence that the universe is intelligent, I'd love to see it.
xxxooxxx wrote:
Same thing happens all the time...for example one phone designer copies an advanced design of another phone designer and claims that it was an original design.
Science can't claim ownership to a Universe that's already owned.lol
You're starting to sound like Chuckles.

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 8 min Grace Nerissa 37,726
~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12) 16 min Grace Nerissa 1,759
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 19 min Roy 152,505
The BIZARRE reasons why men rape in India 32 min Yupp111 1,084
Tell Us Who or What You Really Are,...? (Apr '13) 58 min wichita-rick 1,644
Federal Disability Insurance Program 1 hr Roy 12
tellmealie (Dec '12) 1 hr Independent1 335
Let's Play Song Titles With One Word? 1 hr wichita-rick 318
Is it possible to....... 1 hr CJ Rocker 578
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 2 hr Mega Monster 7,582
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 2 hr Sarah 25,711
More from around the web