mudcat.org: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion

Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 11:49 AM
Richard Bridge 28 Aug 14 - 11:58 AM
olddude 28 Aug 14 - 12:04 PM
olddude 28 Aug 14 - 12:06 PM
Musket 28 Aug 14 - 12:26 PM
Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 12:31 PM
Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 12:35 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Aug 14 - 01:08 PM
GUEST 28 Aug 14 - 01:09 PM
Les in Chorlton 28 Aug 14 - 01:12 PM
Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 01:13 PM
Wesley S 28 Aug 14 - 01:13 PM
Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 01:35 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Aug 14 - 01:36 PM
BrendanB 28 Aug 14 - 01:38 PM
Les in Chorlton 28 Aug 14 - 02:07 PM
gnu 28 Aug 14 - 02:20 PM
Ed T 28 Aug 14 - 02:45 PM
GUEST,# 28 Aug 14 - 03:12 PM
Ed T 28 Aug 14 - 03:14 PM
Musket 28 Aug 14 - 03:16 PM
Ed T 28 Aug 14 - 03:26 PM
gnu 28 Aug 14 - 03:37 PM
Joe Offer 28 Aug 14 - 03:51 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Aug 14 - 03:51 PM
Ed T 28 Aug 14 - 03:54 PM
Bettynh 28 Aug 14 - 04:26 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 28 Aug 14 - 05:12 PM
Bill D 28 Aug 14 - 05:58 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 29 Aug 14 - 09:26 AM
Bill D 29 Aug 14 - 12:00 PM
Bettynh 29 Aug 14 - 12:23 PM
Bill D 29 Aug 14 - 12:23 PM
Ed T 29 Aug 14 - 01:02 PM
Musket 29 Aug 14 - 01:40 PM
Stu 29 Aug 14 - 02:42 PM
Ed T 29 Aug 14 - 02:59 PM
Bill D 29 Aug 14 - 03:12 PM
Bill D 29 Aug 14 - 03:18 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 29 Aug 14 - 04:35 PM
Bill D 29 Aug 14 - 06:21 PM
Ed T 29 Aug 14 - 06:25 PM
Ebbie 29 Aug 14 - 06:50 PM
Musket 30 Aug 14 - 02:53 AM
Musket 30 Aug 14 - 04:21 AM
dick greenhaus 30 Aug 14 - 01:08 PM
Bill D 30 Aug 14 - 01:53 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 30 Aug 14 - 02:02 PM
Musket 30 Aug 14 - 06:26 PM
Bill D 31 Aug 14 - 12:50 AM
Joe Offer 31 Aug 14 - 02:05 AM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 03:31 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 31 Aug 14 - 05:06 AM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 05:14 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Aug 14 - 05:31 AM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 07:34 AM
Jack Blandiver 31 Aug 14 - 07:54 AM
Greg F. 31 Aug 14 - 09:09 AM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 09:21 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 31 Aug 14 - 10:27 AM
Bill D 31 Aug 14 - 10:44 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 31 Aug 14 - 01:57 PM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 02:08 PM
MGM·Lion 31 Aug 14 - 02:10 PM
GUEST,Blandiver (Astray) 31 Aug 14 - 02:17 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 31 Aug 14 - 02:30 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 31 Aug 14 - 03:26 PM
Greg F. 31 Aug 14 - 03:42 PM
Bill D 31 Aug 14 - 04:06 PM
Musket 31 Aug 14 - 04:07 PM
Jack Blandiver 31 Aug 14 - 04:19 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 31 Aug 14 - 04:54 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 31 Aug 14 - 06:24 PM
Lighter 31 Aug 14 - 07:28 PM
Joe Offer 31 Aug 14 - 08:16 PM
Lighter 31 Aug 14 - 08:36 PM
Bill D 31 Aug 14 - 11:35 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 01 Sep 14 - 01:46 AM
Musket 01 Sep 14 - 01:52 AM
Joe Offer 01 Sep 14 - 04:46 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Sep 14 - 04:58 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Sep 14 - 05:03 AM
Stu 01 Sep 14 - 07:21 AM
Lighter 01 Sep 14 - 08:52 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 01 Sep 14 - 09:32 AM
Lighter 01 Sep 14 - 09:45 AM
Stu 01 Sep 14 - 09:47 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 01 Sep 14 - 09:50 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Sep 14 - 11:10 AM
Musket 01 Sep 14 - 11:40 AM
Greg F. 01 Sep 14 - 12:57 PM
Joe Offer 01 Sep 14 - 08:58 PM
Jack Blandiver 02 Sep 14 - 06:02 AM
Jack Blandiver 02 Sep 14 - 06:07 AM
Musket 02 Sep 14 - 09:37 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 02 Sep 14 - 05:52 PM
Musket 02 Sep 14 - 06:06 PM
Ed T 02 Sep 14 - 06:51 PM
Lighter 02 Sep 14 - 08:15 PM
Ed T 02 Sep 14 - 08:44 PM
Greg F. 02 Sep 14 - 10:00 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 03 Sep 14 - 02:19 AM
Musket 03 Sep 14 - 04:25 AM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 06:07 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 03 Sep 14 - 08:25 AM
Lighter 03 Sep 14 - 08:33 AM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 09:00 AM
Jack Blandiver 03 Sep 14 - 09:22 AM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 09:29 AM
Lighter 03 Sep 14 - 09:36 AM
Stu 03 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM
Musket 03 Sep 14 - 10:56 AM
Lighter 03 Sep 14 - 11:20 AM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 12:25 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 03 Sep 14 - 12:40 PM
Lighter 03 Sep 14 - 12:44 PM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 12:51 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 03 Sep 14 - 01:02 PM
Ed T 03 Sep 14 - 01:07 PM
Bill D 03 Sep 14 - 01:09 PM
Musket 03 Sep 14 - 01:23 PM
Bill D 03 Sep 14 - 01:30 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 03 Sep 14 - 01:45 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 03 Sep 14 - 02:29 PM
Uncle_DaveO 03 Sep 14 - 02:37 PM
Bill D 03 Sep 14 - 02:56 PM
Lighter 03 Sep 14 - 05:53 PM
Greg F. 03 Sep 14 - 06:22 PM
Bill D 03 Sep 14 - 08:23 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Sep 14 - 02:54 AM
Joe Offer 04 Sep 14 - 03:45 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Sep 14 - 04:06 AM
Musket 04 Sep 14 - 04:18 AM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 04:35 AM
Stu 04 Sep 14 - 05:56 AM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 05:57 AM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 06:34 AM
Musket 04 Sep 14 - 06:38 AM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 06:53 AM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 07:26 AM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 07:54 AM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 08:08 AM
Lighter 04 Sep 14 - 08:49 AM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 09:37 AM
Lighter 04 Sep 14 - 09:48 AM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 10:07 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Sep 14 - 10:11 AM
Mrrzy 04 Sep 14 - 10:29 AM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 10:55 AM
Bill D 04 Sep 14 - 11:29 AM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 11:34 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Sep 14 - 12:02 PM
Bill D 04 Sep 14 - 12:02 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 12:11 PM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 12:23 PM
Stu 04 Sep 14 - 12:23 PM
Bill D 04 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Sep 14 - 01:08 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 01:22 PM
Musket 04 Sep 14 - 01:24 PM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 02:16 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Sep 14 - 02:22 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 02:28 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Sep 14 - 03:24 PM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 03:39 PM
Jack Blandiver 04 Sep 14 - 04:08 PM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 04:13 PM
Musket 04 Sep 14 - 04:53 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 05:29 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 05:31 PM
Joe Offer 04 Sep 14 - 05:45 PM
Mrrzy 04 Sep 14 - 06:08 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Sep 14 - 06:26 PM
Greg F. 04 Sep 14 - 06:35 PM
Joe Offer 04 Sep 14 - 07:45 PM
Ed T 04 Sep 14 - 08:06 PM
Bill D 04 Sep 14 - 08:09 PM
Joe Offer 05 Sep 14 - 01:29 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Sep 14 - 03:12 AM
Stu 05 Sep 14 - 04:11 AM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 04:50 AM
Jack Blandiver 05 Sep 14 - 06:30 AM
Joe Offer 05 Sep 14 - 06:47 AM
Stu 05 Sep 14 - 06:49 AM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 07:01 AM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 07:21 AM
Lighter 05 Sep 14 - 07:28 AM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 07:34 AM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 07:47 AM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 07:58 AM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 09:47 AM
Jack Blandiver 05 Sep 14 - 10:16 AM
Stu 05 Sep 14 - 10:17 AM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 10:37 AM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 10:47 AM
Jack Blandiver 05 Sep 14 - 10:54 AM
Bill D 05 Sep 14 - 11:47 AM
Mrrzy 05 Sep 14 - 12:19 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 12:24 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 12:28 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM
Bill D 05 Sep 14 - 12:41 PM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 12:42 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 01:02 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 01:15 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 01:29 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
Lighter 05 Sep 14 - 01:41 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 02:52 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 02:59 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Sep 14 - 03:07 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 03:18 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 03:44 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Sep 14 - 03:45 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Sep 14 - 03:53 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 04:14 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 04:27 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Sep 14 - 04:38 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 05:02 PM
Bill D 05 Sep 14 - 05:03 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 05:09 PM
Jack Blandiver 05 Sep 14 - 05:21 PM
Joe Offer 05 Sep 14 - 05:22 PM
Bill D 05 Sep 14 - 05:24 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 05:30 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Sep 14 - 05:38 PM
Lighter 05 Sep 14 - 05:41 PM
Musket 05 Sep 14 - 06:30 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Sep 14 - 06:31 PM
Joe Offer 05 Sep 14 - 07:48 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 07:58 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 08:07 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 08:40 PM
bobad 05 Sep 14 - 08:55 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 09:12 PM
Greg F. 05 Sep 14 - 09:15 PM
bobad 05 Sep 14 - 09:28 PM
Jeri 05 Sep 14 - 09:30 PM
Ed T 05 Sep 14 - 09:33 PM
bobad 05 Sep 14 - 09:38 PM
Bill D 05 Sep 14 - 10:10 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 06 Sep 14 - 02:39 AM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 03:22 AM
Joe Offer 06 Sep 14 - 06:09 AM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 06:19 AM
Stu 06 Sep 14 - 06:38 AM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 07:38 AM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 08:19 AM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 09:09 AM
Bill D 06 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 10:40 AM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 11:04 AM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 11:20 AM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 12:34 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 01:01 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 01:04 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 06 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 02:36 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 05:30 PM
Musket 06 Sep 14 - 05:43 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 06:36 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 07:00 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 07:38 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 08:24 PM
Bill D 06 Sep 14 - 08:27 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 08:38 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 08:47 PM
Lighter 06 Sep 14 - 09:08 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 14 - 09:25 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 09:34 PM
Joe Offer 06 Sep 14 - 09:38 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 10:00 PM
Ed T 06 Sep 14 - 10:17 PM
Bill D 06 Sep 14 - 10:41 PM
Lighter 07 Sep 14 - 07:12 AM
Stu 07 Sep 14 - 07:47 AM
Lighter 07 Sep 14 - 08:17 AM
Greg F. 07 Sep 14 - 08:52 AM
Musket 07 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM
Ed T 07 Sep 14 - 09:18 AM
Ed T 07 Sep 14 - 09:26 AM
Musket 07 Sep 14 - 04:49 PM
Ed T 07 Sep 14 - 05:12 PM
Musket 07 Sep 14 - 05:38 PM
Ed T 07 Sep 14 - 06:09 PM
Mrrzy 07 Sep 14 - 07:56 PM
Bill D 07 Sep 14 - 08:02 PM
Ed T 07 Sep 14 - 08:20 PM
Amos 07 Sep 14 - 10:28 PM
Mrrzy 07 Sep 14 - 10:43 PM
Bill D 07 Sep 14 - 11:04 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 08 Sep 14 - 02:19 AM
Musket 08 Sep 14 - 03:15 AM
Joe Offer 08 Sep 14 - 03:49 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 08 Sep 14 - 05:32 AM
Lighter 08 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM
Ed T 08 Sep 14 - 09:26 AM
GUEST 08 Sep 14 - 09:56 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM
Musket 08 Sep 14 - 01:35 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Sep 14 - 02:34 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Sep 14 - 03:08 PM
Ed T 08 Sep 14 - 03:10 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 08 Sep 14 - 03:14 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 08 Sep 14 - 03:30 PM
Mrrzy 08 Sep 14 - 04:12 PM
Musket 08 Sep 14 - 04:27 PM
Ed T 08 Sep 14 - 04:38 PM
Lighter 08 Sep 14 - 04:43 PM
Ed T 08 Sep 14 - 05:23 PM
Ed T 08 Sep 14 - 05:34 PM
Ebbie 09 Sep 14 - 02:22 AM
Musket 09 Sep 14 - 05:26 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Sep 14 - 11:25 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 09 Sep 14 - 11:41 AM
Lighter 09 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM
Mrrzy 09 Sep 14 - 12:11 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Sep 14 - 12:33 PM
Bill D 09 Sep 14 - 01:04 PM
Ed T 09 Sep 14 - 01:31 PM
Mrrzy 09 Sep 14 - 01:32 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Sep 14 - 02:44 PM
Ed T 09 Sep 14 - 02:58 PM
Ed T 09 Sep 14 - 03:23 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 09 Sep 14 - 04:17 PM
Bill D 09 Sep 14 - 04:23 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 09 Sep 14 - 04:28 PM
Bill D 09 Sep 14 - 04:47 PM
Mrrzy 09 Sep 14 - 05:22 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 09 Sep 14 - 05:46 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 09 Sep 14 - 06:10 PM
Mrrzy 09 Sep 14 - 06:12 PM
Bill D 09 Sep 14 - 08:43 PM
Ed T 09 Sep 14 - 09:59 PM
Joe Offer 10 Sep 14 - 04:43 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 10 Sep 14 - 01:28 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 10 Sep 14 - 01:39 PM
Musket 10 Sep 14 - 01:46 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 10 Sep 14 - 01:56 PM
Bill D 10 Sep 14 - 02:01 PM
Ed T 10 Sep 14 - 02:07 PM
Lighter 10 Sep 14 - 02:15 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 10 Sep 14 - 02:45 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 10 Sep 14 - 03:21 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 10 Sep 14 - 03:46 PM
Bill D 10 Sep 14 - 05:18 PM
Bill D 10 Sep 14 - 05:27 PM
Bill D 10 Sep 14 - 05:34 PM
Mrrzy 10 Sep 14 - 05:48 PM
Lighter 10 Sep 14 - 05:52 PM
Bill D 10 Sep 14 - 07:37 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 11 Sep 14 - 02:28 AM
Musket 11 Sep 14 - 04:44 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 08:30 AM
Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 09:01 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 09:02 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 09:06 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 11 Sep 14 - 09:58 AM
Doug Chadwick 11 Sep 14 - 10:19 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 10:27 AM
Musket 11 Sep 14 - 10:31 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM
Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 10:37 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Sep 14 - 10:40 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Sep 14 - 10:43 AM
Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 11:07 AM
Bill D 11 Sep 14 - 11:28 AM
Musket 11 Sep 14 - 12:13 PM
Mrrzy 11 Sep 14 - 12:15 PM
Mrrzy 11 Sep 14 - 12:25 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 12:52 PM
MGM·Lion 11 Sep 14 - 01:43 PM
GUEST,Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 02:14 PM
Bill D 11 Sep 14 - 02:30 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 02:59 PM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 03:12 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 03:14 PM
GUEST,Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 03:50 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 11 Sep 14 - 03:57 PM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 03:58 PM
Musket 11 Sep 14 - 04:55 PM
GUEST,Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 05:02 PM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 05:06 PM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 05:11 PM
GUEST,Lighter 11 Sep 14 - 07:42 PM
Ed T 11 Sep 14 - 07:48 PM
Bill D 11 Sep 14 - 08:46 PM
Mrrzy 11 Sep 14 - 09:30 PM
Mrrzy 11 Sep 14 - 09:31 PM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Sep 14 - 06:03 AM
Stu 12 Sep 14 - 06:49 AM
GUEST,Lighter 12 Sep 14 - 08:18 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 08:46 AM
Bill D 12 Sep 14 - 09:45 AM
Ed T 12 Sep 14 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 10:39 AM
Joe Offer 12 Sep 14 - 10:48 AM
Jeri 12 Sep 14 - 10:57 AM
Lighter 12 Sep 14 - 11:02 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 11:49 AM
Musket 12 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM
Stu 12 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM
Bill D 12 Sep 14 - 12:03 PM
Lighter 12 Sep 14 - 12:45 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 01:10 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 12 Sep 14 - 01:21 PM
Steve Shaw 12 Sep 14 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 12 Sep 14 - 01:56 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 02:14 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 12 Sep 14 - 02:56 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 12 Sep 14 - 03:48 PM
Ed T 12 Sep 14 - 04:46 PM
Ed T 12 Sep 14 - 04:49 PM
Musket 13 Sep 14 - 02:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Sep 14 - 04:58 AM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Sep 14 - 05:07 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 13 Sep 14 - 05:31 AM
Stu 13 Sep 14 - 09:44 AM
Musket 13 Sep 14 - 12:49 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 13 Sep 14 - 01:03 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 13 Sep 14 - 04:35 PM
Musket 13 Sep 14 - 05:42 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 14 Sep 14 - 02:56 AM
Jack Blandiver 14 Sep 14 - 03:32 AM
bobad 14 Sep 14 - 08:36 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 14 Sep 14 - 10:48 AM
Lighter 14 Sep 14 - 11:29 AM
Bill D 14 Sep 14 - 11:59 AM
Ed T 14 Sep 14 - 12:15 PM
Musket 14 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 14 Sep 14 - 03:50 PM
Greg F. 14 Sep 14 - 04:01 PM
Musket 14 Sep 14 - 04:20 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 14 Sep 14 - 04:28 PM
Stu 14 Sep 14 - 04:47 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 14 Sep 14 - 05:15 PM
Greg F. 14 Sep 14 - 06:20 PM
Bill D 14 Sep 14 - 06:42 PM
Jack Blandiver 15 Sep 14 - 04:19 AM
Joe Offer 15 Sep 14 - 04:56 AM
Musket 15 Sep 14 - 06:40 AM
Jack Blandiver 15 Sep 14 - 06:40 AM
Lighter 15 Sep 14 - 09:38 AM
Stu 15 Sep 14 - 11:38 AM
Bill D 15 Sep 14 - 12:56 PM
Jack Blandiver 15 Sep 14 - 01:00 PM
Musket 15 Sep 14 - 02:31 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 15 Sep 14 - 02:51 PM
Mrrzy 15 Sep 14 - 06:13 PM
Bill D 15 Sep 14 - 10:24 PM
Joe Offer 16 Sep 14 - 01:04 AM
Stilly River Sage 16 Sep 14 - 01:44 AM
Musket 16 Sep 14 - 05:23 AM
Ed T 16 Sep 14 - 05:54 AM
Jack Blandiver 16 Sep 14 - 07:26 AM
Lighter 16 Sep 14 - 08:40 AM
Musket 16 Sep 14 - 08:50 AM
Jack Blandiver 16 Sep 14 - 09:06 AM
Stu 16 Sep 14 - 09:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Sep 14 - 09:53 AM
Lighter 16 Sep 14 - 10:07 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 16 Sep 14 - 10:43 AM
Mrrzy 16 Sep 14 - 11:38 AM
Jack Blandiver 16 Sep 14 - 12:29 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 16 Sep 14 - 01:22 PM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Sep 14 - 02:05 PM
Musket 16 Sep 14 - 02:07 PM
Greg F. 16 Sep 14 - 02:24 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 16 Sep 14 - 02:25 PM
Bill D 16 Sep 14 - 02:27 PM
Stu 16 Sep 14 - 03:07 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 16 Sep 14 - 04:00 PM
Jack Blandiver 16 Sep 14 - 04:37 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 16 Sep 14 - 04:58 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Sep 14 - 05:24 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 16 Sep 14 - 05:26 PM
Ed T 16 Sep 14 - 05:33 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 16 Sep 14 - 05:55 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 16 Sep 14 - 06:15 PM
Greg F. 16 Sep 14 - 06:20 PM
Jack Blandiver 16 Sep 14 - 06:53 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Sep 14 - 07:40 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Sep 14 - 07:43 PM
Lighter 16 Sep 14 - 07:53 PM
Mrrzy 16 Sep 14 - 10:09 PM
Joe Offer 17 Sep 14 - 12:33 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 17 Sep 14 - 04:04 AM
Musket 17 Sep 14 - 04:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Sep 14 - 04:52 AM
Jack Blandiver 17 Sep 14 - 05:56 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 17 Sep 14 - 06:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Sep 14 - 07:48 AM
Jack Blandiver 17 Sep 14 - 08:35 AM
Musket 17 Sep 14 - 08:45 AM
MGM·Lion 17 Sep 14 - 09:19 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Sep 14 - 09:56 AM
Joe Offer 17 Sep 14 - 10:34 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 17 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM
MGM·Lion 17 Sep 14 - 10:53 AM
Stu 17 Sep 14 - 11:03 AM
MGM·Lion 17 Sep 14 - 11:08 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Sep 14 - 11:28 AM
Stu 17 Sep 14 - 11:45 AM
Musket 17 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 17 Sep 14 - 12:07 PM
Jack Blandiver 17 Sep 14 - 12:10 PM
Lighter 17 Sep 14 - 12:26 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 17 Sep 14 - 12:51 PM
Stu 17 Sep 14 - 12:59 PM
Steve Shaw 17 Sep 14 - 02:44 PM
Steve Shaw 17 Sep 14 - 02:51 PM
Jack Blandiver 17 Sep 14 - 04:04 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 17 Sep 14 - 05:29 PM
Steve Shaw 17 Sep 14 - 05:58 PM
Steve Shaw 17 Sep 14 - 05:59 PM
Jack Blandiver 17 Sep 14 - 06:33 PM
Steve Shaw 17 Sep 14 - 07:08 PM
MGM·Lion 17 Sep 14 - 11:39 PM
Mrrzy 18 Sep 14 - 12:27 AM
Musket 18 Sep 14 - 03:28 AM
Stu 18 Sep 14 - 04:05 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Sep 14 - 04:54 AM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 05:21 AM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 05:30 AM
Lighter 18 Sep 14 - 09:20 AM
Jack the Sailor 18 Sep 14 - 11:15 AM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 12:12 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 18 Sep 14 - 01:10 PM
Musket 18 Sep 14 - 01:25 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 18 Sep 14 - 01:46 PM
Greg F. 18 Sep 14 - 01:59 PM
Greg F. 18 Sep 14 - 02:03 PM
Mrrzy 18 Sep 14 - 02:07 PM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 02:35 PM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 03:52 PM
Lighter 18 Sep 14 - 03:53 PM
Steve Shaw 18 Sep 14 - 04:05 PM
Lighter 18 Sep 14 - 04:27 PM
Jack Blandiver 18 Sep 14 - 06:10 PM
Steve Shaw 18 Sep 14 - 08:13 PM
Stu 19 Sep 14 - 04:40 AM
Jack Blandiver 19 Sep 14 - 05:06 AM
Greg F. 19 Sep 14 - 09:19 AM
Stu 19 Sep 14 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 19 Sep 14 - 10:26 AM
Lighter 19 Sep 14 - 11:00 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 19 Sep 14 - 12:42 PM
Greg F. 19 Sep 14 - 12:45 PM
Bill D 19 Sep 14 - 01:03 PM
Bill D 19 Sep 14 - 01:07 PM
Steve Shaw 19 Sep 14 - 01:32 PM
Steve Shaw 19 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
Musket 19 Sep 14 - 03:12 PM
Greg F. 19 Sep 14 - 04:01 PM
Jack Blandiver 19 Sep 14 - 04:18 PM
Lighter 19 Sep 14 - 04:22 PM
Bill D 19 Sep 14 - 08:05 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 20 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM
Greg F. 20 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM
Jack the Sailor 20 Sep 14 - 12:02 PM
Bill D 20 Sep 14 - 12:20 PM
Mrrzy 20 Sep 14 - 12:58 PM
Greg F. 20 Sep 14 - 01:19 PM
Bill D 20 Sep 14 - 01:26 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars 20 Sep 14 - 03:50 PM
Jack Blandiver 20 Sep 14 - 05:19 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 20 Sep 14 - 06:47 PM
Bill D 20 Sep 14 - 07:17 PM
Steve Shaw 20 Sep 14 - 07:30 PM
Musket 20 Sep 14 - 07:35 PM
Lighter 20 Sep 14 - 08:04 PM
DMcG 21 Sep 14 - 02:48 AM
Stu 21 Sep 14 - 07:19 AM
Lighter 21 Sep 14 - 07:32 AM
Jack the Sailor 21 Sep 14 - 12:10 PM
Bill D 21 Sep 14 - 12:27 PM
Greg F. 21 Sep 14 - 03:48 PM
GUEST,This is Pete on the I pad 21 Sep 14 - 05:20 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 21 Sep 14 - 06:11 PM
Musket 22 Sep 14 - 03:15 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 22 Sep 14 - 03:02 PM
Bill D 22 Sep 14 - 05:40 PM
Lighter 22 Sep 14 - 05:46 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 22 Sep 14 - 05:50 PM
Steve Shaw 22 Sep 14 - 08:47 PM
Musket 23 Sep 14 - 03:28 AM
Jack Blandiver 23 Sep 14 - 06:38 AM
DMcG 23 Sep 14 - 07:16 AM
Musket 23 Sep 14 - 08:27 AM
Bill D 23 Sep 14 - 11:37 AM
Greg F. 23 Sep 14 - 12:10 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 23 Sep 14 - 12:54 PM
Greg F. 23 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 23 Sep 14 - 02:06 PM
Mrrzy 23 Sep 14 - 02:22 PM
Bill D 23 Sep 14 - 02:40 PM
Jack Blandiver 23 Sep 14 - 02:55 PM
Musket 23 Sep 14 - 02:58 PM
Lighter 23 Sep 14 - 03:15 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 23 Sep 14 - 03:26 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 23 Sep 14 - 03:28 PM
Musket 23 Sep 14 - 05:17 PM
Greg F. 23 Sep 14 - 05:28 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 23 Sep 14 - 05:52 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 23 Sep 14 - 06:23 PM
Bill D 23 Sep 14 - 06:58 PM
Musket 24 Sep 14 - 03:31 AM
Jack Blandiver 24 Sep 14 - 04:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 06:21 AM
Musket 24 Sep 14 - 07:14 AM
Jack Blandiver 24 Sep 14 - 07:37 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 08:36 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 08:37 AM
Lighter 24 Sep 14 - 09:02 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 09:15 AM
Stu 24 Sep 14 - 09:47 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 09:51 AM
Bill D 24 Sep 14 - 10:26 AM
Musket 24 Sep 14 - 10:44 AM
Lighter 24 Sep 14 - 11:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 11:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 11:25 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 24 Sep 14 - 01:32 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 24 Sep 14 - 02:35 PM
Stu 24 Sep 14 - 02:43 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 24 Sep 14 - 02:52 PM
DMcG 24 Sep 14 - 03:11 PM
Musket 24 Sep 14 - 03:40 PM
Ed T 24 Sep 14 - 03:44 PM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Sep 14 - 04:03 PM
GUEST,MTB 24 Sep 14 - 04:34 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 24 Sep 14 - 04:40 PM
Bill D 24 Sep 14 - 04:46 PM
GUEST,Mrr 24 Sep 14 - 05:55 PM
Stu 25 Sep 14 - 04:25 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 25 Sep 14 - 04:33 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 25 Sep 14 - 07:07 AM
Stu 25 Sep 14 - 07:30 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 25 Sep 14 - 07:46 AM
Lighter 25 Sep 14 - 08:06 AM
Musket 25 Sep 14 - 08:12 AM
Greg F. 25 Sep 14 - 09:21 AM
Donuel 25 Sep 14 - 09:52 AM
Donuel 25 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 25 Sep 14 - 11:15 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 25 Sep 14 - 11:54 AM
Greg F. 25 Sep 14 - 12:21 PM
Lighter 25 Sep 14 - 12:24 PM
DMcG 25 Sep 14 - 01:00 PM
Greg F. 25 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM
DMcG 25 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 25 Sep 14 - 02:28 PM
Greg F. 25 Sep 14 - 02:55 PM
GUEST 25 Sep 14 - 03:17 PM
GUEST,DMcG 25 Sep 14 - 03:20 PM
sciencegeek 26 Sep 14 - 04:07 AM
Jack Blandiver 26 Sep 14 - 06:02 AM
Jack Blandiver 26 Sep 14 - 06:03 AM
Jack Blandiver 26 Sep 14 - 06:06 AM
Jack Blandiver 26 Sep 14 - 06:07 AM
Stu 26 Sep 14 - 06:53 AM
Lighter 26 Sep 14 - 08:40 AM
Musket 26 Sep 14 - 08:54 AM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Sep 14 - 09:02 AM
GUEST,John P 26 Sep 14 - 09:28 AM
Stu 26 Sep 14 - 09:32 AM
Lighter 26 Sep 14 - 10:00 AM
Mrrzy 26 Sep 14 - 10:18 AM
Lighter 26 Sep 14 - 10:51 AM
Greg F. 26 Sep 14 - 11:01 AM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Sep 14 - 12:03 PM
Lighter 26 Sep 14 - 12:23 PM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Sep 14 - 05:34 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars 26 Sep 14 - 05:38 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Sep 14 - 05:56 PM
Musket 26 Sep 14 - 06:04 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars link 26 Sep 14 - 06:05 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Sep 14 - 06:21 PM
DMcG 26 Sep 14 - 06:43 PM
GUEST,Mrr 26 Sep 14 - 08:20 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 27 Sep 14 - 02:42 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 27 Sep 14 - 02:55 AM
Stu 27 Sep 14 - 05:38 AM
Lighter 27 Sep 14 - 07:52 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 27 Sep 14 - 10:54 AM
Greg F. 27 Sep 14 - 11:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 27 Sep 14 - 02:50 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars link 27 Sep 14 - 04:30 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 27 Sep 14 - 04:43 PM
Steve Shaw 27 Sep 14 - 04:48 PM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Sep 14 - 07:44 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Sep 14 - 07:47 AM
DMcG 28 Sep 14 - 01:04 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars link 28 Sep 14 - 02:12 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 28 Sep 14 - 02:56 PM
DMcG 28 Sep 14 - 03:57 PM
DMcG 28 Sep 14 - 04:06 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 28 Sep 14 - 04:30 PM
GUEST,Troubadour 28 Sep 14 - 06:20 PM
GUEST,Troubadour 28 Sep 14 - 06:29 PM
Ed T 28 Sep 14 - 06:30 PM
Ed T 28 Sep 14 - 06:34 PM
Steve Shaw 28 Sep 14 - 08:06 PM
Steve Shaw 28 Sep 14 - 08:12 PM
Ed T 28 Sep 14 - 09:00 PM
Steve Shaw 28 Sep 14 - 09:08 PM
Ed T 28 Sep 14 - 09:18 PM
DMcG 29 Sep 14 - 01:47 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 29 Sep 14 - 02:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 04:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 04:31 AM
Ed T 29 Sep 14 - 05:19 AM
Stu 29 Sep 14 - 05:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 05:53 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 06:03 AM
Musket 29 Sep 14 - 07:58 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 08:50 AM
Ed T 29 Sep 14 - 08:56 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Sep 14 - 09:39 AM
Ed T 29 Sep 14 - 11:31 AM
Mrrzy 29 Sep 14 - 12:20 PM
Musket 29 Sep 14 - 02:14 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 29 Sep 14 - 02:55 PM
DMcG 30 Sep 14 - 01:20 AM
DMcG 30 Sep 14 - 01:27 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 30 Sep 14 - 02:58 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 30 Sep 14 - 05:39 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 30 Sep 14 - 06:14 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 30 Sep 14 - 06:23 AM
Jack Blandiver 30 Sep 14 - 07:14 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 30 Sep 14 - 07:58 AM
Stu 30 Sep 14 - 09:49 AM
DMcG 30 Sep 14 - 10:14 AM
Bill D 30 Sep 14 - 10:28 AM
Greg F. 30 Sep 14 - 10:50 AM
Stu 30 Sep 14 - 11:48 AM
Musket 30 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM
Stu 30 Sep 14 - 12:25 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 30 Sep 14 - 05:42 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 30 Sep 14 - 05:53 PM
Greg F. 30 Sep 14 - 06:22 PM
Bill D 30 Sep 14 - 06:47 PM
Steve Shaw 30 Sep 14 - 07:14 PM
Greg F. 30 Sep 14 - 08:21 PM
Ed T 30 Sep 14 - 08:33 PM
Ed T 30 Sep 14 - 08:52 PM
GUEST,Troubadour 30 Sep 14 - 09:27 PM
Donuel 01 Oct 14 - 12:38 AM
DMcG 01 Oct 14 - 02:16 AM
DMcG 01 Oct 14 - 02:43 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 01 Oct 14 - 03:21 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Oct 14 - 04:59 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Oct 14 - 05:01 AM
Musket 01 Oct 14 - 08:34 AM
Stu 01 Oct 14 - 09:15 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Oct 14 - 09:32 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 01 Oct 14 - 10:48 AM
Greg F. 01 Oct 14 - 11:11 AM
Bill D 01 Oct 14 - 11:23 AM
Musket 01 Oct 14 - 11:27 AM
Ed T 01 Oct 14 - 11:36 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 01 Oct 14 - 11:40 AM
Lighter 01 Oct 14 - 11:56 AM
Greg F. 01 Oct 14 - 12:09 PM
Greg F. 01 Oct 14 - 12:17 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 01 Oct 14 - 12:34 PM
DMcG 01 Oct 14 - 12:48 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 01 Oct 14 - 12:56 PM
Musket 01 Oct 14 - 01:06 PM
Steve Shaw 01 Oct 14 - 06:11 PM
Lighter 01 Oct 14 - 06:18 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 01 Oct 14 - 06:28 PM
Steve Shaw 01 Oct 14 - 06:35 PM
Ed T 01 Oct 14 - 07:24 PM
frogprince 01 Oct 14 - 10:09 PM
Mrrzy 01 Oct 14 - 11:14 PM
Musket 02 Oct 14 - 05:46 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Oct 14 - 06:14 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 02 Oct 14 - 06:39 AM
Lighter 02 Oct 14 - 09:58 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 02 Oct 14 - 10:12 AM
Greg F. 02 Oct 14 - 10:40 AM
frogprince 02 Oct 14 - 11:02 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 02 Oct 14 - 01:17 PM
Musket 02 Oct 14 - 02:26 PM
Ed T 02 Oct 14 - 02:50 PM
Ed T 02 Oct 14 - 02:54 PM
GUEST,Peter from seven stars link 02 Oct 14 - 03:40 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 02 Oct 14 - 03:58 PM
Ed T 02 Oct 14 - 04:01 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 02 Oct 14 - 04:09 PM
Greg F. 02 Oct 14 - 04:37 PM
Lighter 02 Oct 14 - 05:02 PM
Ed T 02 Oct 14 - 05:22 PM
Ed T 02 Oct 14 - 05:28 PM
Mrrzy 02 Oct 14 - 05:37 PM
Lighter 02 Oct 14 - 05:41 PM
Greg F. 02 Oct 14 - 06:05 PM
Steve Shaw 02 Oct 14 - 07:57 PM
Bill D 02 Oct 14 - 08:00 PM
Greg F. 02 Oct 14 - 08:13 PM
Steve Shaw 02 Oct 14 - 08:31 PM
Bill D 02 Oct 14 - 08:52 PM
DMcG 03 Oct 14 - 03:42 AM
Musket 03 Oct 14 - 03:57 AM
DMcG 03 Oct 14 - 04:05 AM
Stu 03 Oct 14 - 04:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Oct 14 - 04:47 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 03 Oct 14 - 05:41 AM
Musket 03 Oct 14 - 06:26 AM
Lighter 03 Oct 14 - 06:52 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Oct 14 - 08:39 AM
Musket 03 Oct 14 - 08:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Oct 14 - 09:33 AM
Stu 03 Oct 14 - 09:43 AM
Greg F. 03 Oct 14 - 10:04 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 03 Oct 14 - 10:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Oct 14 - 10:39 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Oct 14 - 10:43 AM
Musket 03 Oct 14 - 11:09 AM
Bill D 03 Oct 14 - 12:07 PM
Greg F. 03 Oct 14 - 05:32 PM
Steve Shaw 03 Oct 14 - 06:31 PM
Steve Shaw 03 Oct 14 - 06:53 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 03 Oct 14 - 07:03 PM
Ed T 03 Oct 14 - 07:12 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 03 Oct 14 - 07:14 PM
Steve Shaw 03 Oct 14 - 07:46 PM
GUEST,Troubadour 03 Oct 14 - 07:47 PM
Bill D 03 Oct 14 - 08:53 PM
Greg F. 03 Oct 14 - 09:27 PM
Mrrzy 03 Oct 14 - 11:58 PM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Oct 14 - 01:31 AM
DMcG 04 Oct 14 - 02:02 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Oct 14 - 03:16 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Oct 14 - 04:12 AM
DMcG 04 Oct 14 - 08:28 AM
Lighter 04 Oct 14 - 08:53 AM
sciencegeek 04 Oct 14 - 09:05 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Oct 14 - 10:27 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Oct 14 - 10:34 AM
Stu 04 Oct 14 - 10:49 AM
sciencegeek 04 Oct 14 - 10:56 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Oct 14 - 11:03 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Oct 14 - 11:26 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 04 Oct 14 - 11:42 AM
Bill D 04 Oct 14 - 11:55 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Oct 14 - 11:55 AM
Bill D 04 Oct 14 - 12:07 PM
sciencegeek 04 Oct 14 - 02:13 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 04 Oct 14 - 02:51 PM
sciencegeek 04 Oct 14 - 03:00 PM
Greg F. 04 Oct 14 - 03:05 PM
Musket 04 Oct 14 - 03:29 PM
Lighter 04 Oct 14 - 04:33 PM
Greg F. 04 Oct 14 - 05:43 PM
Mrrzy 04 Oct 14 - 06:25 PM
Musket 04 Oct 14 - 06:28 PM
Joe Offer 05 Oct 14 - 03:10 AM
Musket 05 Oct 14 - 03:28 AM
GUEST 05 Oct 14 - 04:09 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Oct 14 - 04:37 AM
DMcG 05 Oct 14 - 04:42 AM
Stu 05 Oct 14 - 05:03 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Oct 14 - 05:59 AM
Stu 05 Oct 14 - 07:15 AM
DMcG 05 Oct 14 - 08:00 AM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 08:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Oct 14 - 08:19 AM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 08:21 AM
Lighter 05 Oct 14 - 08:56 AM
Greg F. 05 Oct 14 - 10:51 AM
Musket 05 Oct 14 - 11:24 AM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 11:31 AM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 11:49 AM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 12:37 PM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Oct 14 - 12:46 PM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Oct 14 - 12:53 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 01:02 PM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Oct 14 - 01:07 PM
DMcG 05 Oct 14 - 01:26 PM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Oct 14 - 01:32 PM
Greg F. 05 Oct 14 - 01:45 PM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 01:46 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Oct 14 - 01:52 PM
sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 02:01 PM
DMcG 05 Oct 14 - 02:03 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 02:14 PM
Greg F. 05 Oct 14 - 02:16 PM
DMcG 05 Oct 14 - 02:34 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 03:11 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 03:13 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 03:17 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 03:19 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 03:20 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 03:32 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 03:48 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Oct 14 - 04:18 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 04:33 PM
Joe Offer 05 Oct 14 - 05:05 PM
Mrrzy 05 Oct 14 - 05:12 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 05 Oct 14 - 06:05 PM
Steve Shaw 05 Oct 14 - 06:07 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 05 Oct 14 - 06:10 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 06:12 PM
Joe Offer 05 Oct 14 - 06:24 PM
Ed T 05 Oct 14 - 06:26 PM
Lighter 05 Oct 14 - 06:26 PM
Steve Shaw 05 Oct 14 - 06:36 PM
Steve Shaw 05 Oct 14 - 06:38 PM
Joe Offer 05 Oct 14 - 06:46 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 06:51 PM
Greg F. 05 Oct 14 - 08:08 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 14 - 08:14 PM
bobad 05 Oct 14 - 08:30 PM
bobad 05 Oct 14 - 08:44 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 08:55 PM
Steve Shaw 05 Oct 14 - 09:04 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 05 Oct 14 - 09:06 PM
Mrrzy 05 Oct 14 - 09:40 PM
Jeri 05 Oct 14 - 10:35 PM
Mrrzy 06 Oct 14 - 12:34 AM
Joe Offer 06 Oct 14 - 12:41 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 06 Oct 14 - 02:58 AM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 10:08 AM
Ed T 06 Oct 14 - 10:34 AM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 10:53 AM
Ed T 06 Oct 14 - 11:05 AM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 11:16 AM
Amos 06 Oct 14 - 11:27 AM
Ed T 06 Oct 14 - 11:28 AM
Bill D 06 Oct 14 - 11:52 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 06 Oct 14 - 12:15 PM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 12:51 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 06 Oct 14 - 01:04 PM
Mrrzy 06 Oct 14 - 01:19 PM
DMcG 06 Oct 14 - 01:21 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 06 Oct 14 - 01:25 PM
DMcG 06 Oct 14 - 01:30 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 06 Oct 14 - 01:37 PM
DMcG 06 Oct 14 - 02:05 PM
Ed T 06 Oct 14 - 02:28 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 06 Oct 14 - 02:34 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 06 Oct 14 - 03:16 PM
Bill D 06 Oct 14 - 03:29 PM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 03:58 PM
Lighter 06 Oct 14 - 04:13 PM
sciencegeek 06 Oct 14 - 06:10 PM
Steve Shaw 06 Oct 14 - 06:24 PM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 06:40 PM
Jeri 06 Oct 14 - 07:35 PM
Lighter 06 Oct 14 - 07:38 PM
Greg F. 06 Oct 14 - 08:01 PM
Bill D 06 Oct 14 - 08:09 PM
Steve Shaw 06 Oct 14 - 08:12 PM
GUEST,Mrr 06 Oct 14 - 08:30 PM
Ed T 06 Oct 14 - 08:41 PM
sciencegeek 06 Oct 14 - 11:12 PM
sciencegeek 07 Oct 14 - 12:43 AM
DMcG 07 Oct 14 - 03:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Oct 14 - 04:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Oct 14 - 04:16 AM
DMcG 07 Oct 14 - 04:24 AM
sciencegeek 07 Oct 14 - 06:32 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 07 Oct 14 - 06:43 AM
Ed T 07 Oct 14 - 06:59 AM
Mrrzy 07 Oct 14 - 11:08 AM
GUEST,sciencegeek 07 Oct 14 - 11:28 AM
Ed T 07 Oct 14 - 04:29 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 07 Oct 14 - 05:07 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 07 Oct 14 - 06:06 PM
Greg F. 07 Oct 14 - 06:28 PM
Steve Shaw 07 Oct 14 - 07:04 PM
Bill D 07 Oct 14 - 08:23 PM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Oct 14 - 04:29 AM
Stu 08 Oct 14 - 06:17 AM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Oct 14 - 06:47 AM
DMcG 08 Oct 14 - 06:56 AM
Musket 08 Oct 14 - 08:02 AM
GUEST,Shimrod 08 Oct 14 - 08:54 AM
robomatic 08 Oct 14 - 11:50 AM
Mrrzy 08 Oct 14 - 11:52 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Oct 14 - 12:27 PM
Mrrzy 08 Oct 14 - 12:45 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Oct 14 - 12:56 PM
GUEST,Shimrod 08 Oct 14 - 01:00 PM
Stu 08 Oct 14 - 01:07 PM
DMcG 08 Oct 14 - 01:17 PM
Mrrzy 08 Oct 14 - 01:19 PM
GUEST,John P 08 Oct 14 - 01:21 PM
GUEST,sciencegeek 08 Oct 14 - 02:37 PM
Bill D 08 Oct 14 - 03:12 PM
Greg F. 08 Oct 14 - 03:17 PM
Greg F. 08 Oct 14 - 03:19 PM
Bill D 08 Oct 14 - 03:27 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:









Subject: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 11:49 AM

I said I might do this. The "Church in Modern World" thread has gotten too long & fragmented. I include religion because many specific arguments against evolution have religious claims at their base.

I request that people keep to the topic here and refrain from insults & personality clashes. I will request editing if it gets out of hand.
(it may be appropriate to C&P posts from the other thread(s) to avoid typing the same things again)

Let me begin with an article I happened across this morning.

walking-fish-evolution

several excerpts for those who want the main points: ", life as we know it began in Earth's oceans. At some point, those fish developed the ability to walk on land, using their fins as simple walking appendages..."

" researchers from the University of Ottawa and McGill University took modern fish known for walking on land, and raised them there for two years."

" "After two years, what they observed was essentially evolution at work. The 'terrestrialized' fish walked much more capably than their aquatic brethren, holding their fins closer to their bodies and their heads more upright. Their skeletons even adapted, developing stronger pectoral attachments and reducing connections with the head, allowing for longer strides and improved head mobility."

Pete has often said that 'we can't see any evolution'... but this seems to be a good example of how it might appear.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 11:58 AM

Well, that's more like Lamark than Darwin, innit?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: olddude
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 12:04 PM

Good job now how about some good old threads on my political views are better than yours..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: olddude
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 12:06 PM

Some people on mudcat stopped at the ape stage


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 12:26 PM

That lasted a long time Bill. Hard luck!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 12:31 PM

Dan... you are already tossing in the kind of remark I asked to be avoided,

Lamarck? No...not really. It's easy to see why some would think that way, but Lamarck never dealt well with the mechanisms of change. One doesn't inherit bigger muscles as such, but merely the capacity to develop them. Those fish seemed to actually experience small, though basic, DNA changes. An individual fish might, thru practice, increase its breathing capacity, but ability to breath better in successive generations 'without practice' requires actual evolving mechanisms. Research & DNA sequencing is required to sort out which ones.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 12:35 PM

We shall see how it goes, Musket...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:08 PM

In religion, it's the other guy who is always wrong.

If you want a bananas vs. Limburger thread, so be it.

My ancestors were climbing trees while yours were limpets on the rocks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:09 PM

You cannot change your DNA. Male circumcision has been practised for a while now and is showing no signs of becoming inherited.

Evolution has nothing to do with belief. Either you know about it or you don't.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:12 PM

That was me


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:13 PM

Correct, Guest...

now I have shop work to do, for God's sake ummm.. I mean for Pete's sake..oh, heck.. just try to keep it sane & relevant, hmm?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Wesley S
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:13 PM

Another popcorn thread if I ever saw one. At least 200 posts and nothing will be decided. Count on it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:35 PM

*peeking in one last time before shop work*

It's not FOR deciding! It's for discussing! Not every human issue has simple things that can be decided!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:36 PM

Wesley, like Monday night football, I go to sleep after the first half of the first quarter.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: BrendanB
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 01:38 PM

There are subjects that can be debated and subjects that cannot be debated. The latter are those which involve an unquestioning faith. This is because such a faith allows no possibility of changing belief. Debating evolution with a fundamentalist Christian falls into this category.
Not all people of faith are unquestioning in their belief. Some believe that because humanity is endowed with intelligence that requires them to think for themselves. It is true that that can lead to difficulties when seeking to align religious orthodoxy with personal morality but seeking for truth in one's spiritual life is a valuable activity in developing self understanding.
There are those who will condemn such an approach as 'boutique religion', well, so be it.
In short, this thread cannot possibly achieve anything. Although it may afford opportunities for the usual suspects to hurl abuse at anyone who admits to having a Christian faith. Strange that some people are so infuriated by perceived homophobia and yet indulge in what might be termed rabid christophobia.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 02:07 PM

Most faiths accept evolution. Some members of them faiths don't. This should not come as a surprise since many members of most faiths don't know the details of their own faith

Best wishes


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: gnu
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 02:20 PM

Viva la religolution!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 02:45 PM

""This seems to be the classic paranoid-fundamentalist mindset: a very small 'elect', in possession of the truth who see themselves as besieged by a powerful elite who control everyone else's thought and expression. It is often possible to believe that you are a member of an oppressed minority and to simultaneously believe that you are silent majority who everyone really agrees with. A lot of the time, proponents seem to see themself as a member of a minority of one."" Taken from 'Upton Park'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,#
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:12 PM

"My ancestors were climbing trees while yours were limpets on the rocks."

Limpet on the rocks.

The devil made me do it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:14 PM

""Once you've managed to believe in Quantum Theory, the Holy Trintiy is relatively straightforward"" Andrew Rilestone


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:16 PM

No problem with Christophobia" or whatever you want to call it. Pointing out bigotry is pointing out bigotry, even if it is carried out by old biddies organising the church fete.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:26 PM

""For the benefit of Americans and people who don't care, I should point out that a complex series of historical accidents means that the British head of state (Liz, not the PM) is also the head of the Church of England. This means that Church and State are bound together in complicated ways; however, it makes very little difference since the Queen gets to keep her political and religious powers only on condition that she doesn't use them for anything. There is a general feeling that disestablishing the church of England—legally separating church from state—would be a bad thing: it would mean that everyone would stop going to church and we wouldn't be able to teach school children about evolution. I mention this only because it gives me the excuse to use the word 'antidisestablishmentarianism.' "
Andrew Rilestone


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: gnu
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:37 PM

BTW... it's a good idea to read the OP every now and then. Jus sayin eh?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:51 PM

from Q: In religion, it's the other guy who is always wrong.

But must it always be that way?

I suppose you could also say, "In Internet discussions, it's the other guy who is always wrong."

But maybe that's the wrong approach. It seems to me that for most questions and most issues, there is no "right" or "wrong" answer - there is a wide variety of valid perspectives.

[well, there are some answers that seem downright ridiculous, but there are also many valid answers]

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:51 PM

A bit dense, today so I looked up OP on Google-

noun informal

-a surgical or other operation
-military operations


Why not a discussion, OPs vs. APs

Fergit it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 03:54 PM

Yes, keep that in mind, gnu;)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bettynh
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 04:26 PM

As for the original article: There's no talk of inheritance or generations. So they're describing the same fish two years apart. If you were required to climb a ladder every day for your food, you'd have stronger arms and legs after two years and you would probably move more efficiently up that ladder. I saw no reference at all to DNA changes. As far as I can see, the point to doing the experiment was to demonstrate that changing environment can change physical structures without needing mutation to cause the change.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 05:12 PM

"Strange that some people are so infuriated by perceived homophobia and yet indulge in what might be termed rabid christophobia."

I'm not 'afraid' of Christians - I just think that they're a bit silly. Having "faith" i.e. a fervent and unquestioning belief in something invisible for which there's no evidence just seems ... well ... a bit silly to me. But, as far as I'm concerned, Christians are free to believe whatever nonsense they like ... as long as they don't try to convert me ... like the two numpties who turned up on my doorstep the other afternoon ... Oh, what fun!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Aug 14 - 05:58 PM

" As far as I can see, the point to doing the experiment was to demonstrate that changing environment can change physical structures without needing mutation to cause the change."


Bettynh- I see why you say this, but upon going to the researcher's site we see:

"Standen's team said that if some ancient fish adapted this way, the pressures of evolution would select the most successful for life on land.

"Potentially an ancestor (to modern land animals) had that same plasticity, which allowed it to engage in new environments," she said.

A couple of years is indeed not a direct demonstration of evolution, but of observable traits that are similar to indications in certain fossil records. We can't, as the relatively short article notes, "view the behavior" of very old fossils, but we can see HOW such things might happen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 09:26 AM

I think the opening post , with it,s link , though interesting does not show evolution in action, as has already been hinted at. true 2 yr is.nt much to go on , but albeit quite remarkable *adaption* is not the information gaining process required for fish to philosophers evolution. you did however claim [or link did] that their experiment was verified by fossil record.....but elucidation required to demonstrate the validity of that claim.
we do know that longer times can be extrapolated by using fast reproducing critters like flies, but again, best I can see, whatever adaption and natural selection may be observed, evolutionism is,nt being observed, ie flys is still flys.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 12:00 PM

But flys ...ummm flies...(my spell checker yelled at me).. change to more interesting flies...not butterflies.

The fish in some fossil records do show fin structures similar to those walking fish of today. This experiment merely shows how survival OF fish which accidentally developed such structures might have been aided. It's just one of many indicators.

(And by the way, a couple of years ago, another outcropping of very ancient fossils was found near the Burgess Shale in Canada. Remember... these fossils, which originally lived under water were found at 8000 ft altitude. It takes awhile to get up there.)

Dozens of scientific discoveries in various disciplines ALL point to extreme age and various dating methods support the basic calculations. Science has to go where the hard evidence takes it, even if the evidence & map has to be re-evaluated due to new data. NONE of the data indicates any 8000-10,000 year age.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bettynh
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 12:23 PM

" the point to doing the experiment was to demonstrate that changing environment can change physical structures without needing mutation to cause the change"

"Potentially an ancestor (to modern land animals) had that same plasticity, which allowed it to engage in new environments"

I see only semantic differences in these statements. The English language can be a bugger.

We're looking at academic science here. Well done for getting it published in Nature! But the point to academic papers is a) to get grants for the lab and b) to suggest topics for further research. As seen here three grants supported the lab. Presumably they're finished supporting this particular research. The potential further subjects are more interesting to me. I don't know what correlations were made to actual fossils (can anyone access Nature to actually look at the paper?). That would be one direction. Someone might look at amphibian muscle and bone structures of the shoulder and neck to see whether the changes observed after birth in the fish had become embryonic in amphibians. That would imply an actual change in DNA. Further along that line, a demonstration of the chemical change in the DNA active in the development of that structure would be strong indication of evolution in action. There may be other directions.

My point is that this study, interesting as it may be, is no answer but an inspiration for questions. I suppose some of those questions might involve God, but as Richard Dyson said once, "I'm OK with not knowing the answers."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 12:23 PM

Pete.. I'm going to try to move the discussion which relate to evolution and to trust/faith --whatever... over to this thread

so. "Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link - PM
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 09:46 AM

joe, if Jesus seemed to regard Jonah as real, I see no reason to mistrust its historicity.,,,


One would distrust it because the basic Jonah story.. as well as the Noah story and the Adam & Eve story... do not seem very likely based on what we know about fish, water, floods, population genetics and systems of writing and preserving exact information. If all you base the truth of Jonah on is the word of Jesus, then you must have some way to verify that Jesus was not only real, but that he knew what he was saying and where HE got his information. Whether Jonah was supposed to have been swallowed by a "big fish" or a whale, it seems unlikely because whale's throats are too small, and the few fish that 'might' swallowa man... i.e. big sharks, would not swallow him whole....and so forth..

If you merely believe it all because of 'faith' in the inerrant word of the Bible.... well, you can only speak for yourself, as those of us who really need solid evidence for such 'interesting' stories can't take it all in.....and there ARE good scientific theories now about how a local flood could have grown into a big story about a World Flood.

Joe Offer has his sincere faith.. but he does a pretty good job of tempering it with the idea of Biblical stories being more guidance than absolute fact.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 01:02 PM

""it seems unlikely because whale's throats are too small, and the few fish that 'might' swalsperm wa man... i.e. big sharks, would not swallow him whole....and so forth..""

Well, while not intending to take sides on the overall issues, the above not totally (scientifically) accurate on the sperm whales throat size. Additionally, there are some fishes that do have the capacity (throat size) to swallow a whole human. While it is unlikely they would do so (from researchers observations), based on that, I suspect the potential is not totally outside the rhelm of being possible.

""Unlike most species of whale, sperm whales have a relatively large throat which is designed to allow it to consume large prey such as giant squid.While these whales do have large throats that would make it easier to swallow a human most of their hunting takes place several miles below the sea, up to 3,000 ft., which is much deeper than a human is able to swim.""

whale facts 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 01:40 PM

Have you noticed how an increasing number of Western citizens have evolved beyond the need for religion?

(As some smart arses have found a link between aardvarks and toast, I thought I'd find the link between evolution and religion.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 02:42 PM

It's likely that what we consider to be a tetrapod style of locomotion is derived from a far older origin than thought. The coeleocanth uses a very similar cycle when sculling, and many fish 'walk' along the substrates in their environment using the same cycle. This is too widespread to be convergent evolution, and it is likely that it's origin lies with early fishes or perhaps earlier.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 02:59 PM

"Have you noticed how an increasing number of Western citizens have evolved beyond the need for religion?"

Well yes, of course-but that does not automatically translate to a disbelief in a God. Beliefs that are established at early life stages residing solidly with many folks, who have no similar attachment to organized religion-for a number of reasons (including bad behavour of some of those in charge).

Many if these folks have made their accomodations for aspects that do not "fit" with what others (including those who have left such beliefs behind) may see as logic stacked against such beliefs.

One can argue and "belittle" those with such a belief as they wish, but that alone will not change much.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 03:12 PM

"...evolved beyond the need for religion?"

Linguistic equivocation on 'evolved'.

Some *societies* have fewer members who identify as religious, but I doubt many individual citizens have 'evolved'. I did alter my view on acceptance of biblical stories soon after I was about 15. If that is what you wish to CALL evolving, then we can agree on a process, if not a name.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 03:18 PM

Oh, and by the way... if I remember correctly from a couple of years ago, Pete explained to me (because I asked politely) that he had also 'changed' from something like 'not sure' to believing. Maybe we can label him as having evolved.... though I suspect he would decline the label.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 04:35 PM

O whoop-de-doo!
Lets not confine evolve-- evolution to one meaning.
It has many, if the dictionaries are to be believed, from its first use in 1622.
Define your usage. A few variations from the Merriam Webster Collegiate (A lot more in the OED:

- One of a set of prescribed movements
- a process of change in a certain direction. Unfolding.
-The action of a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse, to a higher more complex or better state.
-A process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, economic advance...
-The historical development of a biological group....
- meanings related to phylogeny. Modifications, etc.

I find such discussions fruitless.
Having spent my working life as a research paleontologist-paleoecologist with an oil company laboratory, determining ages of strata and their environment from the changes in the organisms through time, and running up against "belief" from time to time, I will no longer argue whether one particular person's dunghill is better or worse than another's.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 06:21 PM

I think that a clear definition is what I was requesting when someone uses a word with those variations.... what I was protesting was use of the word in a context where one definition is not relevant.... but Musket knew that (if he thought about it at all while making clever remarks)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 06:25 PM

Seems like "philosophy lingo" is peeping out of your last post, Bill D.
:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Aug 14 - 06:50 PM

"(And by the way, a couple of years ago, another outcropping of very ancient fossils was found near the Burgess Shale in Canada. Remember... these fossils, which originally lived under water were found at 8000 ft altitude. It takes awhile to get up there.)" Bill D

My birth family had a comfortable answer for that, Bill. They believed that in the Great Flood shells all over the world were left behind as the water receded.

Incidentally I'm not sure what premise this thread is built upon. I read in the other thread from time to time but got bored and quit some time ago.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 02:53 AM

Yes but no but.

I may or may not know what I speak if, but please judge the words printed rather than an estimate of the intent eh?

Yes, the noble art of equivocation did assist me in my use of the word "evolve" in the same way as the word "folk" is used by me in a current thread above the line.

This is what happens ;

Person A has faith and gets on with his life.

Person B doesn't have faith and gets on with his life.

So far, no guns.

Person C has faith and wants to prove why he is right to person B.

Person B says it's all bollocks, so don't bother trying.

Person A accuses person B of belittling faith.

Before person C started feeling embarrassed by his belief in fairies at the bottom of the garden and wanting to assert it to give it credibility, persons A and B had been getting on alright, saying hello as one was leaving church at the same time as the other was off down the pub.

We seem to have a number of A B and C in the Mudcat community.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 04:21 AM

What I speak OF not if.

iPhone and sausage fingers. Interesting combination.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 01:08 PM

Mek Twain told about the disacovery of oyster shells at the top of a mountain (Ararat?) He pointed out that this prove that, in biblical times, oysters could climb mountains.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 01:53 PM

" They believed that in the Great Flood shells all over the world were left behind as the water receded."

Oh right...*grin*... at steep angles and in random patches. I think that Dick's story is better more interesting.

"Incidentally I'm not sure what premise this thread is built upon. "

Simply that Pete & I have been discussing these things for 2-3 years, and several threads started for other purposes have been co-opted by this topic. I just thought I'd see if we could confine it a bit.

-----------------------------------------------\
"Seems like "philosophy lingo" is peeping out of your last post, Bill D."

You noticed! Guilty as charged. I do that in semi-automatic mode when I detect ambiguity in the verbiage,,, (eeek..he's babbling again.)

I also can't easily shorten what I want to say... like the guy who said: "I don't have time to write a short paper!"
I had a professor who sometimes taught a 2 hours graduate level class, and was still always surprised and frustrated when time ran out. Every line of thought led to something else. That what philosophy was about.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 02:02 PM

methinks , bill, that, re Jonah you applied it as if I was addressing you, who is not claiming any belief in the bible, whereas I was replying to joe who seemed to be intimating he does [of sorts] and asking me for my reasons for taking Jonah as historical narrative.
it is interesting to consider whether any existing sea creature that we know of, is capable of swallowing a live man whole, but the text itself says that God "prepared" a great fish. as I said before, if you believe in God, miracles are no problem. I reckon atheists need more faith for their secular miracles, ie ideas that don't jive with observational science.
it is worth noting, bill, that you are asserting stuff as fact that even those who disagree with me, are providing some measure of correction on.
you are also asserting that none of the data supports a more recent creation -
1, I have given data that does just that, but you have faith that science will yet show where observational science is, so far, wrong
2,data and evidence are interpreted according to the researchers worldview and/or peer pressure and need for funding.
but if you have specific evidence of deep time, other than more assertion that all the data and disciplines agree.........
I will say it again, textbook definition or not, that, is an appeal to numbers/authority.
btw, from the aig site was a link to a video of the walking fish.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 14 - 06:26 PM

Talk about picking up the goal posts and sprinting!

God did it.. Poor bugger, it must be difficult for him to live up to pete's expectations...

If anyone wants to explain to me what a secular miracle is, do us both a favour and don't bother eh?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 12:50 AM

"you are also asserting that none of the data supports a more recent creation -"

I am asserting that only certain interpretations of carefully selected data indicates the type of recent creation you prefer.

There is, after all, something to be said for the 'data' about what % of scientists accept such selective data when almost all data shows otherwise.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 02:05 AM

Well, I posted a brilliant response to Pete in the "Church joins real world." I posted there because I was answering Pete, but I see he's saying the same thing here. The other thread should have died long ago, so let me say what I said:

Thread #155013   Message #3655342
Posted By: Joe Offer
30-Aug-14 - 04:39 PM
Thread Name: BS: Church joins real world
Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world

Pete, I can't see how you think Jesus regarded Jonah as "real." Where do you get that impression? And then, of course, what do you define as "real"?

In this day and age, we have a vastly different standard of "historicity" than that of ancient times. Philosophies are different, languages are different, methods of collecting information are different, everything is different.

Does this mean that ancient writings are unreliable, and of no value to us because they do not meet modern standards? Are Homer and Virgil, the Greek and Roman and Egyptian and Celtic mythologies, the Histories of Josephus and Tacitus, all false and misleading? Certainly not.

These ancient writings are what they are. If they are read in the spirit the authors intended, they are of infinite value. And, though they maybe in part fictional, they are of extraordinary historical value. I think, my friends, that the line between fact and fiction may not be as clearly defined as we think it to be. Oftentimes, fiction may be a better conveyor of truth, than can be done by what we consider to be "fact."

Now, the absolutists on both ends of the discussion, will never understand this. The religious absolutists, or fundamentalists, will tell you that their scriptures (and only their scriptures) are incontrovertibly true from all perspectives, and therefore must be binding for all the world according to their most simplistic interpretation (although these fundamentalists may deny even the possibility of "interpretation"). And the atheistic absolutists will argue that these documents (particularly the ancient documents of their target groups) and incontrovertibly false and intended to deceive and control people - and thus they must be suppressed so they can do no further damage.

I don't think there's much value on either extreme of the discussion, but I do think there is great value in learning to study ancient documents, especially ancient sacred documents, with a critical eye. We need to understand historical context, literary forms, the philosophies of the times, and the original intent of the authors. And in our critical study of ancient documents, we must always keep in mind that our interpretation may be wrong or only partially correct; so we must be open to alternate interpretations and perhaps a wide spectrum of interpretations in some circumstances.

But there are no absolutes in the study of ancient writings. If you think your understanding is absolutely correct, then I can tell you with certainty that you are absolutely wrong.

-Joe-


And in fairness, allow me to post how Musket responded.
Thread #155013   Message #3655364
Posted By: Musket
30-Aug-14 - 06:22 PM
Thread Name: BS: Church joins real world
Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world

Brendan. You ask me not to mock you, but when a person with the benefit of education and books, a few hundred years of scientific discovery and shared experience prefaces such debate with "I believe in God," we are not having the same debate.

Hey Joe! You describe me to a T! I don't see it as negative though. Religion fucks up vulnerable people. Not everyone has your intellect and ability to use faith rather than be captured by it. Worse still, those in control of organised religion prefer the petes of this world rather than the Joes.

At the end of the day, I can do more than smile and patronise when people say they believe in magic and expect me to respect it in the same way I may respect a differing political view.

Fundamentally, that's it. Not faith as a comfort blanket or moral compass, not even a sense of belonging and comradeship. But an elephant in the room based on magic and supernatural beings.

Asking rational people to respect such nonsense at any intellectual level is far more insulting than any god botherer, imaginary friend or other derogatory term I might use.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 03:31 AM

Massaging my ego ain't going to get my boney arse on a pew Joe.

I did like your reply. Replies don't have to be nice though. Sometimes they have to be uncomfortable.

The alternative can only be to say things you don't actually believe to be the case in order to not offend. I genuinely feel that this approach is wrong. If someone says they believe in magic, there is no point whatsoever discussing related matters with them. If it walks like a delusion and quacks like a delusion...

pete and his belief have no room for the likes of Joe. If they wish to argue over the last deck chair on The Titanic, go ahead. I'm stood on dry land.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 05:06 AM

" ... data and evidence are interpreted according to the researchers worldview and/or peer pressure ..."

Talk about the 'pot calling the kettle black'! That's exactly what 'creationists' do!!

"but if you have specific evidence of deep time, other than more assertion that all the data and disciplines agree........."

What?! Evidence is evidence, pete. If "all the data and disciplines agree" that's bloody good evidence!

Now provide us with some evidence that God exists and created everything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 05:14 AM

Cue pete quoting Descartes...

Or he would if he could find it on creation.com.......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 05:31 AM

Reminds me of the man trying to improve bad women's morals by giving them lectures in philosophy: putting Descartes before the whores.

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 07:34 AM

I give in. Are you reading my posts or not? I agonise over different ways to wind you up, so need to know if my endeavours bear fruit..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 07:54 AM

I can't see how you think Jesus regarded Jonah as "real." Where do you get that impression? And then, of course, what do you define as "real"?

Jesus gives very clear support of the OT scripture : 'For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.' (Matt 5:18). Very much a man of his time, there's little reason to believe he took the OT stories in any sense other than literally, as all good Christians should of course instead of adopting a secular scientific view of the godless Cosmos as part of their Godly cause. In this sense I'd say Pete from Seven Stars Link has it absolutely spot on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 09:09 AM

Very much a man of his time, there's little reason to believe he took the OT stories in any sense other than literally

Of course, two millennia later, most humans have evolved past such primitive superstition.

Some have not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 09:21 AM

Yeah, you tell them there Christians to behave more like pete! No room for secular science eh Jack?

Reminds me of the two week hiatus on bells at a church not a million miles away last year when the new vicar moaned that none of the ringers stayed for the service and said they had to if they wanted to ring the bells.

After two weeks of silence and a bollocking from his church committee, Bristol Maximus rang out again and the cafe down the road got its Sunday morning business back..

You see, if you want religion to flourish, you have to be pragmatic.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 10:27 AM

" Are you reading my posts or not? I agonise over different ways to wind you up, so need to know if my endeavours bear fruit."

I suspect that he is reading your posts, Musket. But I've realised that he has this little tactic which he uses all the time. He posts a load of tosh and then when challenged he shuts up and keeps his head down. Then, when everyone has had time to forget that particular exchange, he posts another load of tosh. So shifty and dishonest these fundamentalists!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 10:44 AM

Here is an interesting new article about the role of DNA in the domestication of various animals

Pete... this is just one more small study showing how we are gradually learning how evolution actually works. The ability to study DNA and map specific genes directly allows science to comment on issues that Darwin only wondered about.
Who knows... perhaps God created Darwin to stir us up and make us think.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 01:57 PM

well thankyou jack, I believe you are not sympathetic to creation, so very fair of you.
joe, my reply re Jonah on other thread.
" I posted a brilliant response........." and I thought you was such a humble fella ! -grin-
would you care to give an example verifying your charge, shimrod ? ! "exactly what creationists do..." yes, freely admitting our bias, unlike evolutionists who don't recognize, or refuse to admit, their own bias. and certainly creation scientists are swimming upstream against the flow of origins belief in academia.
I tend to skim muskets posts, just in case there is anything of any substance that is,nt clothed in mockery or vulgarity.
bill, I will look at new link, but your previous short response still needs, imo , a counter response,-
"....interpretations of carefully selected data..." those to which I refer, relate to data that accords to observational science.
if you care to look again on creation sites ,you will find articles on many aspects, covering much data, including existing problems for creationism.
"...when all other data shows otherwise"    unless you can demonstrate, bill, that remains just an assertion. I reckon the other scientists must have said the same to galilieo.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 02:08 PM

Nothing more vulgar than trying to put fantasy on the same level as reality and demanding normal people to consider it as an option pete.

I don't mock. I do however play the part of the little boy who points out the emperor's willy on show.

Ok. The joke about how to get Jesus off the cross may have been distasteful in principle, but as the Jesus who died yet came back never existed, poking fun at delusion is fair game.

Mary ! You can see our house from up here !

Etc


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 02:10 PM

This standard-form reply, held in my word-processor memory, is the only response I propose to make to your recent post, Shimrod:—

It is my principle to make no further answer than this to merely abusive posts addressed to me, as I take your last one to be.

No further correspondence will be entered into.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray)
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 02:17 PM

Yeah, you tell them there Christians to behave more like pete! No room for secular science eh Jack?

Damn right! We owe the current enlightenment to the work of scientific objectivism Carl Sagan describes as A Candle in the Dark. I meet too many Christians who want their cake and eat it - i.e. expect their God 'n' Son soap-myth to fit into the wonders of Atheist Cosmology from which they were ousted by Ionian Philosophers hundreds of years before e'er Jesus blathered his platitudes on Mounts and Plains.

*

well thankyou jack, I believe you are not sympathetic to creation, so very fair of you.

I'm not sympathetic to Creationism or Religion, but I am as sympathetic to Christian Individuals to any sufferer of psychosis - as long they don't feel that anything they believe applies to ANYONE else other than themselves. That said, I feel Christians ought to fly their true colours. If they can believe in any sort of God or Supernatural dimension, or that there is any currency whatsoever in Religion, then why not accept the rest of it as integral to that faith?

That said, I'd make it a criminal offence for Christians to proselytize in any public context or have any say whatsoever in matters of education, even of their own children.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 02:30 PM

As you've been told umpty million billion times, pete, science is not about 'belief' - it's about evidence! And the evidence in favour of an evolutionary model has been accumulating for 155 years plus. Meanwhile you creationists have NO evidence to support your rigid beliefs. Note that the Bible doesn't count as evidence because it merely contains unverifiable, often ambiguous (not to mention preposterous) anecdotes with no known authors.

And let's get this 'science is all a conspiracy' out of the way. It's highly unlikely that the corridors of academe are full of closet creationists all shaking in their boots in case their true predelictions are discovered and fudging results in order to placate their peers and appease their funders. You really do live on another planet, don't you pete?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 03:26 PM

at least, jack, you are perfectly honest about your bias and desired censorship of alternative thought. but don't you think there is a contradiction between saying Christians ought to fly their true colours on the one hand, and then on the other hand, suggesting that they should not talk about it to others.
shimrod, don't you have anything specific to bring out of your storehouse of scientific knowledge. it is getting hard to keep coming up with original answers to these assertions and appeal to numbers of scientists who believe the same as you. I might be on another planet, but you seem to be sticking your head in the sand in this one.
ps, I can laugh at myself.....can you ?
pps todays article on the aig site is about blue whales.....swallowed Jonah....?...maybe him, maybe not, but he certainly could swallow a man.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 03:42 PM

ps, I can laugh at myself.....can you ?

You ought to be ASHAMED of yourself. Jocularity doesn't enter into it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 04:06 PM

Pete: "...when all other data shows otherwise"    unless you can demonstrate, bill, that remains just an assertion"

I could say the same thing to you, Pete, about both the veracity of the bible and the claims of so called 'creationist science'. I could cite 379 sites and tests and collection of data that show the basic evidence for evolution, but you would do that circling back to your assertion that we are just 'believing' such things as a matter of 'faith' in science because we are lacking ALL relevant data. Why, someone 'might' dig up a human in the jaws of a dinosaur!~

To shorten this post, I can simply say "yes!" to Shimrod's post above. Your way of changing the accepted sense of basic scientific & logical terms to validate your own opinions is not only unfair, but unsound. I can't say it much more politely than that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 04:07 PM

And then there's my impersonation of Jesus on a rubber cross...

My bodily contortions are nothing to the linguistic ones on this thread though.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 04:19 PM

Woah... I thought Jesus on a Rubber Cross was my thing???   Curse this wretched oral tradition & folk process!!!

*

Contradiction, Pete? Not at all. Just stick to your guns. Discussion - fine. Shouting on street corners, going door to door & indoctrinating innocent minds - not fine. Nothing to do with censorship any more than opposing other forms of crime, violence and child abuse.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 04:54 PM

yes bill, you could say the same thing, but can you demonstrate your claim to the veracity of evolutionism. it is you who are circling round, just saying it in slightly different ways, and it amounts to appeal to numbers of scientists who you agree with. I am not claiming that everything must be known before a theory can be considered sound, but just saying it is , because you could cite any or all of 379 sites, is not providing any other evidence than that 379 sites say it is true !. I have rarely quoted bible, so that part of your charge is hardly relevant ..straw man , maybe...I have always admitted my faith position. however, I regard it as bolstered by the evidence...according to experimental, observational science....against the evolution story.
if you can bring evidence ,other than appeals to numbers/authority you might make a case, otherwise we will just keep repeating our positions.
I don't mind that too much, as there might be open minded people looking in who can assess which of us has the sounder argument.
at a singaround last week someone [not a practising Christian] commented on the weakness of one of shimrods posts, quite out of the blue.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 06:24 PM

"shimrod, don't you have anything specific to bring out of your storehouse of scientific knowledge. it is getting hard to keep coming up with original answers to these assertions and appeal to numbers of scientists who believe the same as you."

Oh dear! Here we go again! It's not about belief or faith, pete, it's about evidence. My "storehouse of scientific knowledge" (scant as it is - evolutionary biology is not my field) is not at issue here. Creationism is a faith position whose adherents believe that they are in possession of absolute truth. Science, on the other hand, is a system for investigating reality. Scientists can never be in possession of absolute truth - there is no such thing. But the accumulation of evidence in support of hypotheses can bring them to a better and better understanding of how reality 'works'.

"at a singaround last week someone [not a practising Christian] commented on the weakness of one of shimrods posts,..."

I'm sure that some of my posts are weak - but then I'm not in possession of absolute truth!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 07:28 PM

Why try to reason with those who reject the relevance of reason to their beliefs?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 08:16 PM

Posted By: Jack Blandiver
31-Aug-14 - 07:54 AM
Thread Name: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion

I can't see how you think Jesus regarded Jonah as "real." Where do you get that impression? And then, of course, what do you define as "real"?

Jesus gives very clear support of the OT scripture : 'For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.' (Matt 5:18). Very much a man of his time, there's little reason to believe he took the OT stories in any sense other than literally, as all good Christians should of course instead of adopting a secular scientific view of the godless Cosmos as part of their Godly cause. In this sense I'd say Pete from Seven Stars Link has it absolutely spot on.


OK, I gotta repeat Jack's post to refute it. I don't think that "literal" interpretation at the time of Jesus, was the same as the literal interpretation of modern-day fundamentalists. I picked Jonah because of all the books of the Bible, Jonah is one character that is most clearly identifiable as fictional, because the entire book is written in language that is clearly fictional (it's a great story, and I think it's the funniest book in the Bible). I would imagine that Jesus took the story of Jonah much as Americans take the semi-mythological stories of George Washington and Abe Lincoln and Johnny Appleseed and Paul Bunyan. We know there are elements of both fact and fiction in those stories, and we don't bend over backwards to separate fact from fiction. The stories are part of our culture and we more-or-less respect the integrity of those stories without really bothering to carefully define what is fact and what is fiction. I mean, why bother? They are good stories and they serve a purpose, so why not just tell the stories and not go to the trouble of careful explanation of what is what?

And then if you go to the creation stories in Genesis (there are two), you may note that both Adam (human) and Eve (living one or source of life) have very generic-sounding names that could well be translated as "everyman" and "everywoman." Those are really big clues that these people with symbolic names are very likely to be mythological. I think the Jews of the time of Jesus had an understanding of their sacred stories that was similar to the understanding that pre-Columbian Native Americans had of their ancient stories. The stories were part of who they were, and they were told as factual - but with an understanding that they were not "facts" as modern-day Europeans and Americans understand fact.

It seems pretty clear that there were fundamentalists at the time of Jesus, but their fundamentalism was expressed in legalism, in seeing the Law as governing every moment of life. And Jesus and his followers were forever getting into trouble for transgressing the restrictions of that legalistic fundamentalism.

Now, I'm sure Jesus didn't spend any time trying to refute what we call the "biblical account of creation" - evolution was most certainly not part of his vocabulary [so, you want to blame Jesus for not teaching evolution?]. But on the other hand, there is no evidence that Jesus followed the anti-intellectual, anti-scientific literalism of current-day fundamentalists.

So, that's my point. I suppose you could argue that ancient peoples took a literal view of their mythology - to a point - but I just can't bring myself to believe that their literalism was anti-intellectual and anti-scientific like current-day literalism.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 08:36 PM

> I just can't bring myself to believe that their literalism was anti-intellectual and anti-scientific like current-day literalism.

Of course it wasn't, because when it came to the Big Questions, the communally agreed-upon authority of tradition was all they had. The only "science" that existed was "common sense." And we know how unreliable that can be. ("Of course the sun goes round the Earth. You can see it with your own eyes!")

There are still unanswered Big Questions, but evolution isn't one of them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Aug 14 - 11:35 PM

Pete.. I typed an answer just as the storms knocked Mudcat off the air for awhile, and I lost my post. Maybe tomorrow.

(yes..I know it's ALWAYS a good idea to compose in a program and save it if things look chancy.... but I've had such good luck lately. Must be my 'faith' getting in the way,)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 01:46 AM

An excellent post, if I may say so, Joe?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 01:52 AM

Jack, it's been part of my "bugger about till I think which song I am supposed to be singing next" since about the mid '80s. I'd love to know where I got it from but like the others , (pigeon coming home from the chippy and the mating call of the giant deep sea clam,) I have no idea.

So yes, it is living tradition. Although judging from Jim 's comments on another thread, I could hardly collect royalties for it on that basis.

Sorry. Religion. Let's see. Not much more to say hopefully.

Joe sees the bible as a book of bedtime stories. pete sees it as a documentary. Both defend the principle of a sentient creator who gives a shit. Me? I believe the result against Nottingham Forest on Saturday was a test of my faith, what with my eldest brother attending that particular church rather than the true church forty miles North of his heretic turf.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 04:46 AM

You think I see the Bible as bedtime stories, Musket?

No, not at all. The Bible is sacred, and rightly so. It's the product of people over a period of a thousand years, who pondered the questions of life very deeply.

But it's a document of faith, not a scientific or historical document.

And my faith is important to me. If it's not important to you, that's fine. But I do wonder why you're so cynical and combative about it.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 04:58 AM

I don't think that "literal" interpretation at the time of Jesus, was the same as the literal interpretation of modern-day fundamentalists.

It never pays to second guess how people felt 2,000 years ago. Their understanding of the observable Cosmos was very different to our own and their myths had arisen in direct response to this - the myth of God, for example, which derives from the illusion of a Geocentric universe coupled with the Patriarchal supremacy of a species more concerned with fabricating answers than asking questions simply because it hasn't yet acquired the nous or technology to do so.

We can look back and see how we invented God and trace the evolution of religious 'thinking' over the last 10,000 years and more (though the Abrahamic God is a relatively new kid on the block). We can despair that humanity's brilliance as storytellers goes hand in hand with our capacity for believing our own hype and massacring those who disagree with us. This is the church's true foundation!

Religion is the measure of the capacity for Mythological Literalism that persists into our own time as a quite frightful anachronism. If it it like this now I shudder to think what it was like back then, especially for a man who believed himself to be the son of a non existent (though to him very literal) God to the extent he was prepared to accept death on a cross. To Jesus, the likes of Jonah and Job would have been veritable role models; not just stories, but literal truths enshrined by a sacred scripture that was the very word of a very God.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 05:03 AM

PS - I love the way you have editing privileges, Joe. It's a shame the same courtesy can't be extended to other members of this forum.
    You caught me. I did correct an error I made above. I had left out one word, and that reversed the meaning of what I wanted to say. If you make a mistake and need to have it edited, just let me know. -Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 07:21 AM

"I regard it as bolstered by the evidence...according to experimental, observational science....against the evolution story."

You've been presented with evidence on other threads Pete, I have linked to papers and articles explaining current evolutionary research, but it all falls on deaf ears. None of the current research bolsters the Biblical creation myth, otherwise it would be the leading theory of how life got to this point. Your apparent imperviousness to evidence speaks volumes; just because the truth at any one point in time doesn't fit our own beliefs doesn't lessen the fact it is the truth nonetheless. There are no absolutes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 08:52 AM

> To Jesus, the likes of Jonah and Job would have been veritable role models; not just stories, but literal truths enshrined by a sacred scripture that was the very word of a very God.

Emphatically so.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 09:32 AM

I reckon, stu, that the same or similar sentiments could be addressed to you........and be just as meaningless.
you keep insisting that you have thoroughly refuted my arguments. my memory must be so bad , though of course you suggest it is more likely dishonesty. I do know though that when I give arguments supported by experimental science ,you just resort to the pious sounding get out, of science not being sure of everything.
yet the obvious attack against creation belies the claim of open mindedness.   "there are no absolutes"......are you absolutely sure of that? !.
shimrod...firstly credit for a clever last line, that made me smile.
other than that your post is just a variation of stu,s. you keep saying that belief does not enter into science, and your objection is noted....and rejected, and I could find quotes by evolutionists who admit the belief and faith dimension of their atheist thinking.
yeh, bill, frustrating is,nt it. I did read the rabbit link , but that appears to be about artificial/natural selection, and that figures into the creation model anyway, but if I missed something, please do point it out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 09:45 AM

Not only do they reject reason in matters of faith, it is virtually a tenet of their religion that they do so.

More back and forth. To what end?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 09:47 AM

" though of course you suggest it is more likely dishonesty"

No pete lad, it's dishonest to suggest scientists are working to some agenda other than the truth, simply because you're blinded by belief (wait for it . . .). I'm not so naive to think everyone is, but I know plenty who work on earth and biological science and who are interested in finding out the objective truth, where ever that leads us. Just because it doesn't chime with your own myopic viewpoint isn't an issue. You're the one losing out with your clingy, simplistic, absolutist world view.


"you just resort to the pious sounding get out"

Yawn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 09:50 AM

There are no absolutes ... but because I don't believe in absolutes, I can't be absolutely sure of that!

"you just resort to the pious sounding get out, of science not being sure of everything."

It may sound 'pious' to you, pete, but it's an inescapable fact.

By the way, pete, if you attack evolutionary biology - which is based on the accumulation of evidence and hypothesis testing - you attack the whole edifice of modern science. You not only attack Darwin and Dawkins but also Newton, Einstein, Hawking etc. The fact is that by steadily revealing the true nature of reality, modern science threatens the whole edifice of religion - and has done for several centuries now. That is, of course, why the Inquisition put Galileo under house arrest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 11:10 AM

That is, of course, why the Inquisition put Galileo under house arrest.

...And why the Vatican didn't admit they were wrong to do so until 1992.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 11:40 AM

Joe. Does your faith also require to read my threads in a light of what you think I put rather than what I do?

How many times have I said that idiots such as pete do the church (s) no favour as they are an embarrassment to those who see religion as a part of themselves rather than a set of medieval instructions by men who wished to control society a couple of thousand years ago?

I agree with everything you say about the history of the bible and how it helps understand the evolution of human understanding as well as a fascinating insight into times when superstition and fact intertwined.

I'd fall short of the word "sacred" though if its all the same to you. It elevates the bible with baggage and at the end of the day, it is no more than a book of stories.

You think I have a fascination with questioning religion Joe? No. I am far bemused by the fact that to get to the bit where I paraphrased your approach to the bible, you had to read about my impersonation of the mating call of the deep sea clam.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 12:57 PM

it is virtually a tenet of their religion that they do so[ i.e., reject reason]

More of a prerequisite.

And not only in matters of faith, as amply proven by the ten thousdand and one repetetive threads on this forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Sep 14 - 08:58 PM

Jack Blandiver says: It never pays to second guess how people felt 2,000 years ago.

...and the alternative, of course, is to understand nothing about them and to view our current age, and only our current age, as the pinnacle of all wisdom.




Musket says: Joe. Does your faith also require to read my threads in a light of what you think I put rather than what I do?

I can't figure out what you're talking about there, Musket. Sorry. I do try to read and understand your messages, but sometimes I just can't follow what you're saying.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 06:02 AM

What we really need here is a special thread on the Evolution of Religion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 06:07 AM

And editing privileges, it goes without say - and a little less of the Papal Bull that appears in the form of red subscripts. But I'm forgetting, such policies are absolute and must never be raised on open forum.
    Shitfire, Jack, I only offered to edit something for you if you needed it. Don't get all bent out of shape.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 09:37 AM

Joe. That being the case, it doesn't appear to stop you from forming an opinion of what I say.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 05:52 PM

well, shimrod,..not so sure there are no absolutes ? that's quite an admission for you.
perhaps you would like to give an example of evolutionary science that threatens the bible. as theology is not your area of expertise, and by your own admission, neither is biology, your assertions are only second hand. i'm no scientist, but I give specific arguments anyway, which you and your fellow believers can only dismiss by hoping that currently held observational science is sometime future proved wrong.
and, btw, I think galileo got into trouble, not for his science , but for
                                                                     portaying the pope as "simplicico" in some writings.

lighter- "..reject reason in matters of faith..." unless you can demonstrate Darwinism is true ,it remains a faith position, as much as creation. in fact , at least creation can point to causation, even if that cant be fully proven.
in the mean time, you all seem to believe it, because it is the accepted dogma. if I,m wrong, prove it by producing evidence, rather than further assertions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 06:06 PM

Considering Galileo was in trouble for his celestial observations, I think pete is trying, rather unsuccessfully to be revisionist.

That he picks on a well recorded trial just shows the shallowness of his argument.

By the way pete, you keep falling at the first hurdle, calling observation "belief." Just because you have to cram things into a "belief" it doesn't mean that normal rational intelligent people have to.

You're the one with the delusion, remember?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 06:51 PM

Contrary to what some have stated here, many people do hold srongly onto beliefs, even where science contradicts these beliefs with evidence. I recall taking a course I the philosophy of science in University, many moons ago, which discussed this in great detail. In many cases hanging onto beliefs which contradict science is a personal choice and does little harm (beyond intensively annoying those that see things differently-nit I did not say Musket:) . Where it does really matter, in daily lives, I suspect people make adjustments to reduce negative impacts.

I link an interesting article on one perspective on why this happens:


Why Many Don't Believe In Science 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 08:15 PM

Funny how the religious claim that all forms of understanding are "faith-based" boils down to the nihilist creed that every form of interpretation is "just your opinion."

Religious "faith" is not the same as "faith" in scientific procedures and results. One is based mainly on authority and the imagination, the other exclusively on logic and the meticulous examination of evidence.

There are few resemblances in either procedure or the proven quality of the results.

And at some point, one simply throws up one's hands and realizes that further discussion on either side is a waste of time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 08:44 PM

""And at some point, one simply throws up one's hands and realizes that further discussion on either side is a waste of time.""

Many wise people state in the past that science and religious belief discussions ard just that, discussions-sharing personal perspectives. Only the unwise, approaches such discussions intent on converting either side to "their beliefs, or way is thinking". That approach most likely leads to frustration, and possibly unintentional loss of respect for other folks and nice people, who merely see things differently (for one reason or another).

I note that Bill D participates in the discussion, and gets his points across in a straight firward way in a most respspectful fashion. A "tip of the old sou'wester" for him in doing so, and adding to what is , at times, an interesting discussion of a potentially divisive topic.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Sep 14 - 10:00 PM

In many cases hanging onto beliefs which contradict science... does little harm

And in a great many more cases it does a great deal of harm. As is usually the case when one substitutes fiction and superstition for reality and fact.

There are serious real world consequences for believing nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 02:19 AM

"perhaps you would like to give an example of evolutionary science that threatens the bible."

Oh, I don't know, evidence for deep time, dinosaurs etc., etc.,etc. For God's sake, pete, you know what the examples are - and if you don't, go and read Darwin and Dawkins (although you won't will you?). And then you'll re-gurgitate some 'facts', that you got off some redneck 'creationist' website, that claim to refute that evidence - and round and round we will go.

Leaving aside evolutionary science, here's an example of just plain common sense that threatens (a literal interpretation of)the Bible: You couldn't possibly get two of every living thing onto Noah's Ark - no matter how big it was. And if somehow you could get two of every living thing onto Noah's Ark, there would not be enough genetic variation in their populations to save them in the long run.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 04:25 AM

I would never say faith doesn't harm.

There are far too many people fucked up, abused and radicalised to say faith isn't harmful. Every King in history has had his preachers to spread his message and control his subjects.

Not harmful? Advocating stupid fantasy explanations to the world around us when objective discovery reveals more wonder than the restrictive shallow explanations of religion could ever dream of?

Our children deserve better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 06:07 AM

As to harm, why confuse a belief in a god and the politics of organized religion? They clearly differ. Many folks have a" hang up" with the previous role of organized religion, which has many negative impacts (in relationship to Christianity this impact has declined significantly), and use this history try to "dictate" what others choose to personally believe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 08:25 AM

"As to harm, why confuse a belief in a god and the politics of organized religion?"

Because they're inextricably entwined. They don't "clearly differ". People don't usually worship alone, do they?

"Many folks have a" hang up" with the previous role of organized religion, ..."

Previous? I've just had a conversation with my Iranian barber about the present role of organised religion in his country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 08:33 AM

Martin Luther admonished us that Reason was "the devil's whore." He blamed Aristotle personally for utilizing it too ingeniously in codifying logic. It may have been the worst thing since the Fall.

Reason, Luther believed, works to seduce us from faith and thus does the devil's work. For real. Do not consort with Reason. If you can help it.

If you buy that, fine. But it does make rational discussion impossible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 09:00 AM

""Because they're inextricably entwined. They don't "clearly differ".

Not at all- a check on more recent surveys show fewer and fewer Christian folks attend church on a regular- or even any basis, and choose their own course on life decisions, versus that dictated by an organized religion (Joe O has discussed this in detail many times, regarding the RCs).

"People dont worship alone, do they?"

That assumption, dressed up in a question, leads one to assume all Christian folks have a need to "worship" anything at all- likely an error in todays world? An increasing number of folks who say they live in a God, but do not attend a church would lead one to a clear answer. The question reminds me of the old song lyrics, "living in the past, is not living at all".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 09:22 AM

(in relationship to Christianity this impact has declined significantly)

We're living in a post-religious age. I doubt anyone believes in God in the same way they did even 200 years ago, let alone 2,000. Religion is elective, like Folk Music, or Fantasy Role Play, any other essentially hobbyist pursuits that in no way reflect the current status of humanity as a whole where spirituality is more likely to found in the writings of atheistic scientists such as the late Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins, than it is in the mumbo-jumbo of 'believers', whose message is invariable one of despotic obedience to a terrible law. Christianity represents a very terrible law - ethically and morally its foundations are one of an all powerful God who created humanity simply to indulge his misanthropic jealousy. We can see this in the effects of Roman Catholic Doctrine on such matters as homosexuality, contraception, the status of women and abortion which remain the cause of untold misery and atrocity getting worse by the day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 09:29 AM

An interesting perspective on the declining influence of organized Christian religions and a belief in a God in today's Christian world, JB.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 09:36 AM

Ed T's link from yesterday is worth a look by everyone on this thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM

"...ethically and morally its foundations are one of an all powerful God who created humanity simply to indulge his misanthropic jealousy"

One of the major flaws of Christianity is the contradiction between the loving, benevolent God presented by those with faith and the reality we see around us every day, where human suffering is ubiquitous, where lies and deceit are part and parcel of everyday life, so much so we don't even consider them most of the time. I don't know why the misanthropic God of a group of desert tribespeople has become so popular, but the core ethics and morality of the various abrahamic religions do have a source.

If we take Christ's teaching of compassion and love as being the real core of Christianity, we can also recognise these concepts in many disparate religious philosophies. They are universal, deeply held values held by people regardless of their religious beliefs. Tolerance, compassion, altruism and love are an integral part of the human condition and not some God-given gift we previously lacked. We evolved to be like this.

Sagan knew this, and he understood we don't need a god to understand the preciousness and beauty of all life and the universe of which we are a conscious part of. This is way more profound than any story imagined by man, and all these religions catechisms, teachings and shallow attempts to impose rule are crude attempts to codify and explain this deep, wondrous and scientifically explicable core of our very being. That we don't recognise how incredible that is and fail to reach our potential and understand the innate beauty of everything is one of our most problematical flaws as a species.

We are the universe made conscious, curious, enquiring and intelligent, contemplating it's own nature and origin and that is true profundity.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 10:56 AM

I love to be amazed by the wonder of the universe, the fascination you can have with quantum mechanics, the intense beauty of discovering how we got to how and where we are today.

Why would anybody prefer anything as mundane and restrictive as the imagination reduced bible could ever offer?

As I keep saying, and people who can't see beyond their in built superstition get offended by.. Most people are far too sophisticated to actually believe, and of those who have a belief, those who believe think that having belief is the same thing so get confused when what they call boutique christians call the bible a set of fictitious stories.

I tell you, its about time rational people stopped humouring them and (in the case of The UK) allowing them to disregard laws designed to protect the rights of all equally.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 11:20 AM

> but the core ethics and morality of the various abrahamic religions do have a source.

Which is thus human and encouraging.

BTW, have you ever observed that the popular understanding of "Thou shalt not kill" has evolved to encompass much more than the literal biblical injunction of "Thou shalt not murder"? Are some theologies then becoming more humane, even though they originate with screwed-up human beings?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 12:25 PM

Who knows Stu, your last post could be found in the internet rubble of the future, forming the basis of a new organized religion? LOL

Why should human-kind not revere such good social messages, rather than belittle them? If there were "one source of all of this", should one expect the messages to be different from the various historic delivery sources?

Of course most religions, even buddhism, proposes goodness and kindness to others. How humans (and organized religions) interpret and deliver these messages is much of what leads to the many historic downsides of organized religion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 12:40 PM

I strongly suspect that the most insidious aspect of Christianity is its teaching that man was made by God to have 'dominion over the Earth and everything in it'. In fact, at this moment in time, for all of our much vaunted 'God given' 'intelligence', we are nothing more than locusts devouring the Earth. And it's happening blindingly fast. I've noticed the environment deteriorating noticeably around me in my lifetime - and my lifetime is no more than an infinitesimally small fraction of a geological eye blink! We're basically fucked - we're extinct already! And when we're gone, all of these arguments about religion will mean fuck all (as will art and science and history etc., etc., etc.).

Apparently we of the 'end times' are living through the sixth episode of extinction in the history of the planet. Although, of course,life, in some form, will continue after us.

The only thing which gives me the vaguest thread of hope is that this sixth extinction is being studied, in meticulous detail, by representatives of the causal agent. And that's yet another reason why we need to dump the supreme irrelevance of religion and concentrate on the thing that might (only just) save us - science and the understanding it gives us of who we are and how we relate to the rest of the planet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 12:44 PM

U.S. church sign:

"God Wants Spiritual Fruits, Not Religious Nuts"


http://www.beliefnet.com/Inspiration/Funny-Church-Signs.aspx?b=1&p=25&utm_campaign=Yahoo&utm_medium=paid_distribution&utm_source


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 12:51 PM

""Apparently we of the 'end times' are living through the sixth episode of extinction in the history of the planet. Although, of course,life, in some form, will continue after us. ""

So, if one excludes the notion of the importance of the human life form, why would that be a bad thing, and not just another aspect of the evolution of tge various life forms?

What would be your answer to that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:02 PM

well, I read the link, ed. as usual there is the confusing of observational , testable, repeatable, experimental science , with evolutionism that can only superficially, at best equate with the former. dropping cannonballs off towers is of the first, and digging up some fossil, for example, is of the latter. the researchers might not even agree on it. there is interpretation of data, not experimental science, as in the gravity experiment.
evolutionists, of course love to make us think that these are the same.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:07 PM

I "believe" you missed the main points in the article Pete7*.

Regardless, whatever interpretation turns your crank works fine with me:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:09 PM

lost another post last night. I think I am getting behind.

several things...first, thanks to EdT for the vote of confidence in my 'style'. I try to discuss/debate only with those who listen ... whether they agree with me or not. Agreement is not required- civility is. It is awkward... to me, anyway... to have the not-so-civil on my side of the issue, 'helping'.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

so, a reply to Pete from several days ago:
Pete, you said
"I am not claiming that everything must be known before a theory can be considered sound, but just saying it is , because you could cite any or all of 379 sites, is not providing any other evidence than that 379 sites say it is true !. I have rarely quoted bible, so that part of your charge is hardly relevant ..straw man , maybe...I have always admitted my faith position. however, I regard it as bolstered by the evidence...according to experimental, observational science....against the evolution story.
if you can bring evidence ,other than appeals to numbers/authority you might make a case,...
"

First, "straw man" is not relevant...but bible is always relevant as a general case, as it form the basis of your position. You say that it..(the authority of the bible) is supported by "experimental, observational science". Some biblical history IS obviously supported.... certain kings, places and stories were referred to in other writings.... some can still be visited. None of this supports taking everything in the bible literally as a basis for 'faith' in the many complex and often contradictory religious claims. How can I say it? Faith is faith is faith....the word MEANS belief in something that cannot BE proven by science or observation.
   When you deny the strength of 379..or 1486.. sites & studies, you undermine the very basis of what it means to have experts who collect and correlate data! If the topic were farming practices, or the efficiency of diesel engines or of the relative use of fire retardant materials, you'd not have too much difficulty in seeing the value of agreements of experts, even if a few could be found who disagreed on certain concepts.
But when the topic is carbon dating of human remains back to 35,000 years or so, or comparative DNA studies between humans and other primates, or contradictory translations of ancient documents, you place **subjective filters** based on interpretation of biblical passages between the data and its analysis. Then you cite 'creation scientists' who use the same filters to deny the collective wisdom of the vast majority.
You can 'believe' that the basic origin of "everything" is spiritual... *shrug*... but it is not rational to insert a religious view to decide issues which are not in its realm of study. The very process of doing so is circular and depends on assuming the very things which are being used AS proof.

When I was in high school, 60 years ago, I was shown the argument:
1)God is, by definition, the most perfect being that can exist.
2)The most perfect being must obviously have existence as one of its attributes'
3)Therefore, God exists.

I shook my head in awe at the clear flaws in that, even though I didn't then know the technical words for its errors. Since then, I have seen many arguments (not all religious) based on similar misunderstanding of reason. In the above example, #1 implicitly assumes #3. #3 'may' be correct, but the syllogism is totally flawed. In the same way, the attempt to use logic to refute the definitions and conclusions of science one does not approve of, must itself be subject to the rules OF logic, and not just arbitrarily 'interpreted'. If that sounds complicated, read it again...carefully.

Science is designed to be self-correcting when new data is found. The process can be slow & awkward in some cases, but when many experts attack the same issues, progress usually results. Gould explains this in great detail in the early chapters of "Wonderful Life"..the story of the Burgess Shale. The early researchers assumed that the strange fossils they found were just odd forms of current phyla. It took a number of years and some technological advances and some "ah-ha!" insights to re-evaluate most specimens as totally different, many eons extinct forms. Once that barrier was broken, many other things fell into place about age, continental drift, tectonic uplift and the means of preservation. No one claims that 'we' are descended specifically from things like Wiwaxia, but there is NO compelling, testable evidence that we 'just appeared' about 8000 years ago. God may have kick-started everything, but he left it to us to sort out the details as best we can.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:23 PM

Fundamentally, how can you have a discussion on any philosophical basis with someone who believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden?

I chat in the pub with the most ill informed bores you could imagine about whatever subject you like, but in my past work, I doubt I would tolerate such views or factor them in our deliberations. Same with religion. My brother in law, a vicar, had to move house and all the cost etc, I wanted to help. "The Lord will provide" he said, declining politely. Fine, and I said "that's nice." Between you and I, I think he 's a fucking looney, but of course in real life, we don't say that. We just hope his family isn't being denied any of the comforts we can give them just because he puts a fairy story above his responsibility to his wife and kids.

The internet is like a few pints. Say it like it is...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:30 PM

Wow... a lot happened while I was composing.

Regarding EdTs link on "not believing in science", it is startling on one hand to see the steady 46% here who favor the "within 10,000 years" idea of human existence, but they have done a decent job of show how just "being human" colors our way of coming to conclusions.

I have argued for years that simpler answers just 'feel better', and don't require so much taxing study. Add to that the natural tendency to 'like' the simple answers that are more emotionally satisfying, and you have a formula for widespread ignorance. (NOT 'stupidity'... that is inability to learn. Ignorance is just not being aware.... whether thru carelessness or being misled by others.)
No one can do all the basic research and learn all the math & science required, but almost anyone can absorb the basic claims of a concept they already 'like' the feel of. In today's world there are so many things competing for our attention... from political problems to internet forums (grin) to just how to keep the kids fed. No wonder following the myriad working of science is not topmost in many minds.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 01:45 PM

well, shimrod, where do you think I,m going to get the other side of the story to counter all the Darwin propaganda ?. it is surely evident that I have read more of your evolutionist stuff than you have of creationist.
"...evidence of deep time..."    which is?
"..dinosaurs..." maybe, you have,nt even read my posts. the discovery of stuff that should not have survived[ found in dino bone]is evidence that the dinos could not possibly be as old as alleged. but as I keep saying, you got real faith, and are waiting for observational science to expand to accommodate evolutionary belief.
as to the ark, it has been estimated that all the requisite passengers needed to repopulate after the flood, would fit with room to spare, on the 450 long, 3 deck construction. my information is that there would be diverse genetic information on board to diversify after, producing the array of life we now have.
btw, what is your area of science, and how does it confirm Darwinism for you?.
..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 02:29 PM

" it has been estimated that all the requisite passengers needed to repopulate after the flood,..."

Would that include invertebrates - beetles, butterflies and moths, bugs, flies, bees and wasps, spiders, slugs and snails etc., etc., etc., pete?
And what about plants? Would there have been enough room for redwoods and oaks and birches and maples as well as ferns, mosses, primroses, saxifrages, tulips, narcissi, daisies, buttercups, irises, forget-me-nots, orchids etc., etc., etc.?

"my information is that there would be diverse genetic information ..."

And what would be the source of that information, pete?
'redneckcreation.com' by any chance?

"the discovery of stuff that should not have survived[ found in dino bone]is evidence that the dinos could not possibly be as old as alleged ..."

Yes, I dimly remember some of that stuff from previous threads. But when a scientist finds an (alleged in this case) anomaly she/he doesn't immediately throw up her/his hands and shout: "Oh no! The whole of modern science must be wrong and the Bible must be right!" That's illogical and stupid (but par for the course for creationists, I suppose).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 02:37 PM

My brother in law, a vicar, had to move house and all the cost etc, I wanted to help. "The Lord will provide" he said, declining politely. Fine, and I said "that's nice." Between you and I, I think he 's a fucking looney, but of course in real life, we don't say that. We just hope his family isn't being denied any of the comforts we can give them just because he puts a fairy story above his responsibility to his wife and kids.

Musket:

How could he determine that your offer of help was not the way the Lord chose to provide?

Dave Oesterreich


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 02:56 PM

Pete.. we have gone over that "discovery of stuff that should not have survived" several times. Finding of soft tissue was unexpected, but once discovered after a new type of test it had to be investigated.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/soft-tissue-dinosaur-fossil1.htm Read about it...carefully! Nothing in there contradicts the basic age of the find.. it merely adds new data to what can happen under certain conditions.
You cannot just keep referring to an argument that has been refuted without a relevant counter argument! "It shouldn't be there!" is not relevant if it WAS there!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 05:53 PM

But you "weren't there," I "wasn't there," Creationists "weren't there."

So - according to some - anything is possible!

Why argue with a viewpoint that, combined with a rejection of Reason, leads to blind belief in whatever sounds good?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 06:22 PM

Why argue with a viewpoint that, combined with a rejection of Reason, leads to blind belief in whatever sounds good?

Because that's what ignorant, deluded idiots DO!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Sep 14 - 08:23 PM

How do you, Greg, distinguish between "ignorant, deluded idiots" and average people who just have a deep, emotional commitment to a church and its doctrines? Do you simply define anyone who doesn't 'see' the reason & logic the same way as you & I as 'idiot's?
   I have known quite intelligent people I considered to be "ignorant & deluded" but who had been deluded & rendered ignorant by very clever means. It can be very awkward to back out of some 'delusions', especially when one's entire life has been permeated by the situation.

Remember Jonestown?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 02:54 AM

Here's a very simple question for pete:

Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?

I wonder if I'll get an answer?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 03:45 AM

Quick answer for you, Shimrod: you shouldn't "believe" any ancient creation story.

But I don't think you should dismiss them, either. There's too much that can be learned from them. The absolutists will tell you either that they should be believed completely as absolute truth, or they should be dismissed completely as absolute falsehood.

My response to both sides is, "Not so fast, buddy."

But what is the value of these ancient sacred writings? It seems to me that modern "enlightened" people are quick to dismiss and ridicule the myths of their own culture, while sometimes holding the myths of foreign cultures in esteem? What is it that determines what is "good myth" and "bad myth"? Personally, I tend to think it's all mostly good, and worthy of consideration.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:06 AM

Thanks, Joe. A sane and rational answer as ever. But I'm really interested in pete's answer to my question.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:18 AM

Uncle Dave. That reasoning leads to drink and I am trying to lose weight...

Joe. I'm not sure anybody is dismissing stories. Most on here are dismissing so called historical accounts though.

In the meantime, pete is finding a way for marsupials to leave the ark and swim to the antipodes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:35 AM

Good Myth inspires the soul with dreams of perfect wonder and no one is left under any doubt as to its allegorical (at best) relationship with Truth which it nevertheless manages to enrich by simply being told. Bad Myth. OTOH, oppresses the soul with lurid histories that glorify rape, massacre, oppression, racism, misogyny, infanticide, and every other human atrocity ever devised in the name of a totalitarian Godhead.

Good Myth is devised to tell us about ourselves and our sacred relationship with Nature in archetypes, dreams, patterns and fluid morphologies that were ancient when the stones of Avebury were being raised. Bad Myth, OTOH, is devised to be enforced as Truth at the point of axe and sword and is thus drenched, every word, in the blood of the countless millions of innocent souls who have been massacred to that end.

Sadly, the ancient sacred writings of the bible belong very firmly to this latter category.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 05:56 AM

"is evidence that the dinos could not possibly be as old as alleged."

Oh pete.


"It seems to me that modern "enlightened" people are quick to dismiss and ridicule the myths of their own culture..."

Like many, I hold the myths of my own culture very close to m y heard. Jack says it better than I ever could.

An like he says, Christian culture is a relative newcomer to my own traditions, which are far more relevant than those of some desert nomads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 05:57 AM

Foithermore...

Bad Myth is recounted by rote into the numb skulls of the dead-eyed offspring of The Faithful to inhibit, repress and propagate ignorance in the name of absolute truth by dry & joyless pedagogues convinced of the righteousness of their cause and woe to any child who doesn't conform. Bad Myth abuses the natural joys of childhood inspiring a lifetime of guilt and routinely obedience in dread terror of the hellish torments consequent on any form of deviance. Bad Myth teaches that We are right, and that They are wrong; that We are not They, and that They are worse than We are.

Good Myth, OTOH, inspires the laughter of children and fills their eyes with a light that is an honour for any storyteller to behold in the realisation that they are but a conduit in a process of inspirational recounting in which human individuality is magnified in the name of an all-inclusive objectivism in which the wonders of the universe are there to be questioned, verified, understood merely as part of one evolving brother-sisterhood of 50,000 years of human cultural evolution that seeks and celebrates Unity in Diversity. Good Myth is Myth Unity in which there is no We let alone They for all is togetherness as part of the oneness of The Cosmos which is the whole of the case.

To paraphrase Chris Cutler : Bad Myth deals in force and reaction; Good Myth deals in self-criticism and revolution.

*

Interesting that the only Good Stuff in the bible was filched from elsewhere and attached to seasonal traditions derived from pagan archetypes in which Nature is duly revered by way of rebirth and renewal inspiring a host of vernacular lore by way of an oral apocrypha which is pretty suspect however so intriguing. In folk song we have The Bitter Withy and The Cherry Tree Carol, to name but two; these intrigue because there's no priest up there telling us it's true by way of corporate mind-fuck. And still they celebrate the birth of Jesus on the Winter Solstice, and his death on the first Friday after the first Full Moon after the Spring Equinox.

A simple equation : Whenever Myth becomes in anyway True, it becomes irreversibly Bad. In this sense the bible is positively putrid.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:34 AM

This link relates to different approaches used to interpret the Bible.

I post it for Petes consideration. Others are free to review the link. But, if you are offended by people who interpret a book you dont have any use for, what would be the point?


For Pete7* consideration 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:38 AM

Interesting that guest Musket knows how to abuse children?

Hopefully the moderators will spare us any further details? Musket is always logged in.


There was a flurry of trollish posts overnight, and alas, many of them abused the good name of "Musket." They are gone, but there may appear to be blips in threads where individuals responded with disbelief to the spoofed posts. --mudelf


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:53 AM

But, if you are offended by people who interpret a book you dont have any use for, what would be the point?

The biggest Myths inherent in the bible, is that it's a) God's Word and, therefore b) Sacred. This is has been the source and scourge of humanity for millennia and is cause enough for offence whether we have any use for it or not.

Interpret it any way you like, it still reads like the ravings of a mad horse and represents the very worst humanity has ever dreamt of. Starless and bible-black; the nightmare continues not just for those who have elected to believe in it, but to those whose very innocence is afflicted by it noxious content.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 07:26 AM

Why be shy, why not clearly state you hate the Bible, JB, and by association, anyone who has a contrary opinion. :)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 07:54 AM

Life's too short for hatred, Ed. We're here to love, be joyful & engender liberation through learning in a Cosmos of infinite beauty and wonderment. To this end, we must forever be wary of the obstacles in the path to all-inclusive objective enlighenment. The bible is one such obstacle - be it in terms of fundamentalist literalism or allegorical liberalism, much less the suffering it has caused, and continues to cause, thousands of years down the line.

It's more about fear than hate; fear of the sort of goodness it inspires in the dark hearts of the faithful; fearful that the guttering candle-flames of Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking et al will soon be snuffed out by a literal starless & bible-blackness and consigned to same fate as the Ionian Philosophers of 500-600 BCE.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 08:08 AM

I agree JB.

My life experience is kindness and understanding of other perspectives can do more to "open ears", and minds, versus an alternative aporoach. I state that with an understanding that other approaches at times also make an impact - just not for me, and IMO not likely here and less likely on this topic. That is, of course, if the desired result is to change viewpoints, not just silence them?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 08:49 AM

"Good Myth" encourages good: like the Good Samaritan.

"Bad Myth" encourages bad: like the idea that "God hates unbelievers."

"Great Myth" encourages thought: like Job and the Trojan War.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 09:37 AM

"The God Deusion" and "The Demon Haunted World" and "The Martyrdom of Man" also encourage thought.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 09:48 AM

Scientific reasoning (as an abstraction) has certainly been a tremendous boon to mankind.

Unfortunately you can't separate the reasoning from the reasoner.

Hence nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, among other gifts of science.

Whether the existence of the human race is enhanced by science or eliminated by it remains to be seen.

(Just trying to complicate the issue.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 10:07 AM

More importantly, you can't separate the un-reasoning from the non-reasoner.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 10:11 AM

Still no answer to my recent question from pete. Funny that!

Anyway, here it is again, pete:

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

Still waiting for an answer, pete ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 10:29 AM

Does anybody on this forum personally know anyone who is not an American who denies biological reality as revealed through science? In this I include people who know biology but say it doesn't apply to them because they were created, people who refuse to learn the biology because it's wrong, obviously, since everything was created, and people who won't even let their children learn biology either because ditto.

My take on people from anywhere else is yeah, biology is real, and we learn it in school, but I am still somehow a child of god with an undying soul (or you can just stop at "biology is real" if you are an atheist).

I wish that the American freedom of religion hadn't mutated into freedom from information that contradicts my religion. The way science is taught here, with "respect" for "beliefs" in counter-reality, has done generations of my fellow citizens a great disservice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 10:55 AM

Mrzzy, you might find Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free by Charles P. Pierce of interest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 11:29 AM

Mrrzy.. I have known people who I suspect held that view, though we never got quite that far in discussing the idea. It is not always a good idea to prod them about such things, as one can either get sanctimonious preaching or cold, angry accusations regarding one's destiny. It just isn't worth stirring up a hornet's nest.

I discuss it with Pete, because he is willing to compare views and has at least read some of the arguments on both sides and does not insult me for being 'unconverted'.

In the US, there certainly are many who hold the approximate view that Pete defends. I used to live in Kansas, and I can assure you they are there.

-------------------------------------------------------

Shimrod... Pete has essentially answered that general question a number of times. He admits it is 'faith', but then asserts that there is scientific evidence that supports HIS view against MY view.... we continue to discuss the details.

I asked in the original post for reasoned comment on BOTH the science of evolution...with examples... and on religion in so far as it disputes the scientific view of evolution. (At least that is what I intended to convey). It seems that this often devolves into general condemnation of religion in general, which is sometimes interesting, but not particularly helpful.... especially when it becomes a sarcastic dismissal of the intelligence of those with 'traditional' religious faith.

Ed T just posted an article about various ways to interpret the bible, in hopes the Pete will respond to it. The article is pretty good, though I doubt Pete will care to answer the lengthy questions it raises. Still, it is interesting and keeps to the basic topic I hoped for.


   I DO hope for more comments on evolution itself and the advances in science that support it.... like... a program I saw last night on the domestication of dogs. Here is one basic article
It seems that DNA/genetic studies have found the specific genes that allow the complex developments in canine characteristics (making dogs the most widely varied type of mammal on earth). It seems that certain pairs of genes make it possible for breeders to control a wide variety of dog sizes, shapes, hearing, smell, and general 'attitude'. The line in the program was (paraphrased): "A cow (bovine) anywhere will look like a cow, but dogs can vary from a Mexican Hairless to a Great Dane and still have 99% of the same genes."
The relevance of this is that we can essentially see evolution at work in dogs when WE selectively breed for certain traits! They now have a 'mutt' bred for sniffing explosives that simply LIKES to do it, and will make choices about where to search, instead of being led to suspicious areas by the trainer.
Other examples were given about herding dogs, digging dogs,..etc.

Repeating the point: By selective breeding, we are seeing traits develop that 'might' have developed accidentally over time in random evolutionary ways, but can be controlled and found in just a few generations.


(I am aware of Pete's general answer to these articles, but that's why I started this thread....there's more to a forum than Pete & I typing opinions... and LOTS more than people taking righteously indignant pot-shots at Pete *grin*)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 11:34 AM

[ Pete] asserts that there is scientific evidence that supports HIS view against MY view.

Yet he has failed so far to produce any. Just garbled pseudo-scientific nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:02 PM

shimrod, I don't sit on top of my puter waiting for you to post. even once a day is difficult sometimes as I am quite a busy man.
I am not evading your question.
btw, did you say what your science line is, and how it informs your evolutionism ?.
by all means trust the findings of science above the bible ,.....if you can demonstrate those findings disprove the bible. as you are not claiming much knowledge of biology or theology, maybe your own discipline will help you. I can wait a few days , if you are busy too.
and bugs and plantlife were not requisite passengers on the ark.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:02 PM

Greg... he has produced his version of the requested answers. I disagree with them. YOU denigrate them and him. This says more about you than about the science. (you never never answered MY question above)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:11 PM

he has produced his version of the requested answers

His VERSION of reality?

So do the Holocaust Deniers, Birthers, climate change deniers, and folks that think the moon landing was filmed on a movie set in Hollywood.

So whawt?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:23 PM

"By selective breeding, we are seeing traits develop that 'might' have developed accidentally over time in random evolutionary ways, but can be controlled and found in just a few generations."

This indeed proves what can be done through selective breeding, but falls far short of proving what occued in a real-life, "free range" situation. Unfortunately, such breeding often reinforces meducal problems, making long term survival success (including the generated adnormalities) in the wild less likely.

One related quote I once heard was "if one let all the inbred dogs run loose and freely breed, in a few generations all of the inbred features would dissapear and the result would be dogs that mostly look like the dogs running wild in many third-world countries today."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:23 PM

"and bugs and plant life were not requisite passengers on the ark."

Plants maybe not, but where does it say no arthropods? According to biblegateway.com verse 20 of Genesis says this:

" Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive."

You're making this up Pete. If you don't read the bible what hope scientific papers?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM

Here is another story of dinosaur studies and here is the shorthand, popularized translation

----------------------------------------------

"This indeed proves what can be done through selective breeding, but falls far short of proving what occued in a real-life, "free range" situation. Unfortunately, such breeding often reinforces medical problems, making long term survival success (including the generated adnormalities) in the wild less likely."

Quite so, Ed... but it shows HOW the mechanisms work. By observing both positive AND negative results of breeding, they show in a relatively short time what might have happened if natural selection didn't ...ummmm... select.
The program made the specific point that many of show dogs (about 1 in 4) do have medical issues that would affect their survival. By metaphorically 'playing God', we better understand better how Nature works...

(off to get some shop work done)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 01:08 PM

bill, can I ask that you frame your own arguments. posting a link is fine, and if I knew how to do it , I might do so too, but I hope as extension of the point rather than instead of actually making the point myself. the fact is , the dino bone soft tissue argument has not been refuted as yet. but I will look at links later, if I get time. but , unless this link proves otherwise, these finds contradict experimental science, IF- dem bones is really myo !.
I do note that you express the ideas about dog breeding as evidence for evolutionism, but again, that is natural/artificial selection, and is part of the creation model also.
and now to your post many post past.
maybe, I had not expressed myself well, but you are quite right that many of the bible details are confirmed in archaeology, but I was referring more to experimental science being more in line with creation than evolutionism.
in your next paragraph you again do the bait and switch thing. of course I would be unlikely to doubt the scientists in regard to farming, as their findings are observationally, experimentally verified in the present. what happened in the [alleged] aeons past is not observable, but is interpreted from data. worldview colours this interpretation.....as testified to even by hostile witnesses.
your charge that I am discounting the mass of sites that believe evolutionism, is just, seems to me, yet another appeal to numbers and authority.
the last paragraph, looks like you are saying that I am using illogical arguments, by comparing them to a formulae you heard 60 yr ago [and which I have not used!]. I may well make some logic errors, but sometimes you say I have, but I have not always agreed.
even college educated can get it wrong sometimes!.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 01:22 PM

So Pete, you didn't go to college? How far DID your education proceed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 01:24 PM

You are reading it Greg...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 02:16 PM

""the dino bone soft tissue argument has not been refuted as yet.""

Maybe the findings will be svientifically, refuted, maybe not. If not, that does not mean it will not be added to the scientifuc knowledge base.

But, I suspect that you still don't grasp fully how this type of science knowledge evolves, Pete7*?

Like with all science, knowledge builds on what can be proven (using standard processes) to be seen as reliab3le (aka peer reviewed) information. If new credible information becomes available, and is found to be solidly based, it is incorporated into the mosaic of existing "reliable" knowledge. Rarely does any new, (and previously seen as unlikely) knowledge come forward that cannot be accomodated within existing scientific knowledge framework. When it does, it is unlikely to totally break down the walls of all existing knowledge, as you seem to suggest should occur. The knowledge is accepted and accomodated, even if there is uncertainity as to where it fits in the science knowledge puzzle. It is not ignored, thrown away, nor will it be given meaning beyond what it can be proven to inducate. Quite often the science knowledge process is slow and methodical, to avoid error. This can frustrate those seeking a "quick and dirty" answer to the meaning if the new information..

On a similar note, you do not tear your entire solidly built house down because one brick building block seems to be different than the others. It certainly does mean it is wise to check your house out to ensure the other bricks are solid, and that the new brick does not impact the structure. But, only a nieve fellow would "run off" in all directions crying in wild speculation that this solidly built house is bound to fall because of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 02:22 PM

"and bugs and plantlife were not requisite passengers on the ark."

But they're "requisite passengers" on the earth.

Anyway, back to my question. Just in case you've forgotten what it was, here it is again:

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

You answer my question and I might consider having a go at answering the questions that you chose to ask me in order to avoid answering my question.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 02:28 PM

But, I suspect that you still don't grasp fully how this type of science knowledge evolves, Pete?

Of course he doesn't- he's stated many times that he does not know anything about science, that he has never read anything about science and/or the scientific method science, and he doesn't intend to.

You're trying to discuss nuclear physics and quantum theory with a 12-year-old.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 03:24 PM

ah, but I did answer it , shimrod. your question assumed the answer, wheras I say,...if it is the reality revealed by modern science...then you need to demonstrate that it is what you say, and not just you believing what you have been told.
so, as you are not too busy, how about telling us what your scientific discipline is, and how that convinces you of evolutionism.
well, ed, if I built my house and then discovered that the foundations were shaky at best, and missing at worst,....you bet I would dismantle it. deep time is at least one major block in evolutionary foundations, and until or unless the evidence for a far younger creation is refuted, I reckon your structure is being held up by scaffolding rather than solid foundation.
yes, greg/musket, my education did,nt amount to much, but I seem to be giving more coherent posts. your contributions probably only reinforce my position ,and be an embarrassment to the more moderate skeptics here. so mock on!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 03:39 PM

What I love about the biblical creation myth is that God creates the universe some 2,000 years before he was created himself, at a generous estimate. The only existence of such a being is in the stories that are told about him. I'm supposing Christians are atheists are far as other equally credible deities are concerned (Thor, Odin, Horus, Ra et al - see

Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:08 PM

Where's the rest of my post???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:13 PM

Ah, but pete7*, but, we are not talking about the finding of a support wall in a house but one brick. You would likely sue a carpenter that tire your house down because one odd brick was found in the wall. Even the Christian believing scientist finding the anomoly cautioned Christians not to read too much into this discovery.

You are willing to shoot down the foundation of all science, because a scientist found one item that currently seems not to fit in the otherwise logical science puzzle. Why, because it suits a theory you already hold.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 04:53 PM

pete reckons I mock his education.

Wrong.

I agonise over how my tax appears to have been wasted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 05:29 PM

but I seem to be giving more coherent posts

Now, that really IS amusing.

your contributions probably only reinforce my position

Of course they do. Ignorant, uneducated persons can be very set in their delusions, and and no facts need apply.

You are attempting to discuss things you have absolutely no knowledge or experience of, pete, and thus all you can do is spout nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 05:31 PM

By the way, pete - have you ever been abducted by space aliens and had fiendish experiments performed upon you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 05:45 PM

In response to Jack Blandiver, allow me to say that what  I  love about the biblical creation myths is that they are beautifully poetic, and I read them as such.

Yes, these myths were written in accordance with the cosmology of the day, and our modern scientific discoveries have rightly refuted that cosmology. But I don't think the cosmology is the central aspect of these creation myths. The author unfolds the beauty and wonder of our beginnings in six "days," six parallel poetic descriptions of the amazing world that surrounds us. I think the most important phrase in the first creation myth (Genesis 1:1-2:3), is the oft-repeated statement, "And God saw that it was good." And then it ends with a statement of completion, that God rested on the seventh day and thus blessed rest and time for appreciation as a good and sacred thing.

Now, the second biblical creation story (Genesis 2:4-3:24) is the creation and fall of Adam ('Everyman') and Eve ('Everywoman'), and their eventual discovery of the knowledge of good and evil, symbolized by the eating of fruit (in Latin, "malum," a play on the words meaning "evil" and "apple" which is not present in the Hebrew). The end of this story is often described as the "fall" of Adam and Eve, but it's also the beginning of their adventure outside the protection of Eden and into the challenge of the world.

Now, there are those above who say that they don't need such poetic myths for them to appreciate the world that surrounds them, and that's completely true. We don't need art, or poetry, or fiction, or music, or myth. Hell, we probably don't need natural beauty, either. All these things aren't pragmatic, and they're a waste of money, and a lot of people won't understand them. Some may even use these useless and hard-to-understand things in wasteful and even destructive ways. So, I guess that some of the people above would then conclude that we shouldn't have these possibly dangerous things, because somebody might misuse or pervert them.

Jack Blandiver clearly characterizes the Bible as Bad Myth [which] oppresses the soul with lurid histories that glorify rape, massacre, oppression, racism, misogyny, infanticide, and every other human atrocity ever devised in the name of a totalitarian Godhead.

I'd say Jack is reading something into scripture here, just as some religious and anti-religious fundamentalists have done for millennia. The Bible doesn't glorify - it reports, warts and all. If the patriarchs rape and pillage, the Bible doesn't sanitize the story and leave that out. And it also honestly reports the deep shame of mighty David after he seduced and impregnated Bathsheba and arranged for the death of her husband. It reports the grief he felt over the death of his son Absalom, who was trying to overthrow him.

The Bible is a very complicated document, full of internal contradictions that do not fit the oversimplifications of some religious and anti-religious fundamentalists. I think that normal people can read the Bible and get a lot from it, but it's a dangerous thing if they can't read it with an educated and open mind. To read the Bible (or any ancient sacred myths) wisely, one must be skilled at critical thinking.

Despite what some assert above, I just can't believe that the Bible or most sacred writings are meant to be an instrument of control. I don't think that's what the writers intended at all. Now, it's clear that people of power and authority through the centuries have abused sacred writings as tools for asserting their power, but I don't think that was the intent of the authors. I've read propaganda, lots of it - and it doesn't sound anything like what I read in the Bible.

These people I call "absolutists" (both religious and anti-religious) - I think they are people who tend to see the bad side of other people; and I think they also tend to see the power in their lives as being outside themselves, rather than within. There are lots of people like this - authority is a very big thing for them, because they see their lives as being controlled (or at least seriously impacted) by external forces. And they have good reason to fear these forces and fight to see them controlled. Many religious people use their religion in their fight to control or subdue or defeat these forces, which of course they see as evil. And many anti-religious people see religion as the evil they must fear and subdue and defeat.

Many of the rest of us see the power in our lives as being within us, and thus we have less to fear and can be more relaxed and tolerant in our world view.

And then some of us just don't care, or maybe we have burdens or responsibilities or joys in our lives that are far more important then worrying about our Weltanschauung just now.

But anyhow, for those of you who have no need of sacred myths, that's fine, although I hope you take the time to let art and music and poetry and nature affect you. But don't be afraid of myths - they are what they are, and many people find great value in them.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:08 PM

So, nobody knows any biodeniers that aren't American? I can't decide if that is good news or not.

And finding value in mythology is not the same as belief that the myths are historical truth. That fallacy/delusion is dangerous and should not be "respected" any more.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:26 PM

No, pete, you wrote:

"by all means trust the findings of science above the bible ,.....if you can demonstrate those findings disprove the bible."

That is not an answer to my question. My question was:

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

And if you must know, I trained as a chemist and worked for more than 40 years in commercial labs. For the last 17 years I was responsible for all testing related to product claims. This entailed having a detailed knowledge of how to design scientific experiments and how to interpret the data. Of course, this had nothing to do with evolutionary biology - which, of course, I have freely admitted. Nevertheless, pete, I suspect that I've had more scientific training and 'hands on' experience of practical science than you have.

I'm also an amateur botanist and, since I retired, I've had the great privilege of working with some of the best field botanists and ecologists in my part of the country. Because of my interest in natural history I have read fairly widely around the subject.

Oh yes and plants are the most important organisms on the planet. The process of photosynthesis ultimately sustains us all. So why did Noah leave them off the ark? And what does the Bible have to say about photosynthesis?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 06:35 PM

So why did Noah leave [ plants ] off the ark?

God told him to, obviously, since God don't make mistakes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 07:45 PM

Goes to show ya that God is carnivorous. He ain't no friggin' vegetablarian...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 08:06 PM

""So why did Noah leave [ plants ] off the ark?""

Beats me where Mary Jane came from, then:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Sep 14 - 08:09 PM

Pete.. we have a basic disconnect.

"bill, can I ask that you frame your own arguments"

It seems that because I trust science and logic, you expect that I should type, at great length, a defense of all the points and experiments and discoveries that might bear on my position. And to each of them you merely need to reply that ...'those don't really **prove** your claims, because there are too many missing links or some scientists who don't agree'...
On the other hand, your ultimate fall back position is 'faith', and one doesn't need to prove faith positions. Then you use for support a few creationist scientists who use their versions of MY science & logic to cast doubt on the majority of their disciplines.
Doesn't seem fair to me.

Now, a few people have made remarks about your education. Do remember, you occasionally mention that in your explanations about not delving into technical web sites or following detailed arguments about physics or chemistry.
   I do not make fun of anyone's education. It is not necessary to go to college to follow the basic ideas about most issues, (and yes..*I* see your posts becoming clearer, even when I disagree)..... but suppose you had followed a different course and found yourself in school, taking courses in biology, geology, logic, etc. There you are, face to face with supposed experts in the very topics we are now discussing, trying to follow the same data you ask ME to explain simply in my own words for you.
Assuming you still follow the same religious beliefs you now have, do you raise your hand in class and dispute what these experts tell you? These guys who can answer the question and explain the theories in detail? Would you tell a logic teacher that his concept of circular reasoning and "appeal to authority" and "straw man" are just a matter of opinion and that yours are just as valid? That is what you have done with mine on several occasions.
   Some definitions and rules of proof...etc... are just not arbitrary, and I HAVE studied them and learned whether & how they conform to standard rules. But you find that 'inconvenient' when I point out some error in your position. You are not dumb.. but you are some combination of stubborn and resolute that you have the right answers..or at least that you don't have to accept that I DO because 'not everyone agrees with me'. You are flatly, absolutely, demonstrably incorrect about what 'appeal to authority & numbers' really means and when it is applicable. You apply a standard rule of argument incorrectly. But...*shrug*... that is about the only way you can deal with much of the points about science and evidence that I & others have made.... and at the same time you assert that religious beliefs are not required to meet the same standards of proof and evidence. You assert broadly that " I was referring more to experimental science being more in line with creation than evolutionism."...and you base this on - what? Experimental science confirms evolution-- over & over & over! And the 'dino bone soft tissue argument' has been refuted! You cannot demand that all possible data be required before the unusual situation is sensibly explained.


Do I sound frustrated? Yup....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:29 AM

In the "Church Joins the Real World" thread, BrendanB said, "This forum is a refuge for fundamentalists, Christian and otherwise."

I had to laugh, because it sure doesn't feel like much a haven for even my far more moderate views. Bill, you may be frustrated with Pete, but he states his position honestly and tenaciously. If we didn't have people like Pete to stand up for the conservative point of view, we wouldn't have any representation of the opposing position. So, he fulfills a valuable function, and he does it pleasantly and quite well.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:12 AM

Bill D makes some very good points about the sheer bloody-minded unreasonableness of your position, pete. Of course, you still stubbornly refuse to answer my question:

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

Let me take a stab as to why you refuse to answer it.

You believe that the Bible is 'the word of God'. It is because it says it is - but that's circular reasoning - there is no independent authority which confirms that the Bible is the word of God. You could fall back on concensus and authority (within the established churches) but you've arbitrarily decided not to believe in those (except the authority of so-called 'creationist scientists'). Alternatively, you could fall back on faith - but faith is not logical - it is fervent and unquestioning belief in something invisible for which there's no evidence. Therefore, if you rely on faith to support your own position, you can't demand that others use logic, reason and evidence to support theirs. Every time you post, you paint yourself further and further into an illogical, and frankly rather stupid, corner, pete.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 04:11 AM

". . . .and he does it pleasantly and quite well."

That explains a lot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 04:50 AM

Joe. There's nothing pleasant in scoffing at the advances in knowledge, dismissing reality and insisting on children being taught fairy stories as real purely because religion attracts people without the wit or wisdom to distinguish fact from fiction.

No. pete and his like aren't harmless. They hold society back, or would do if people weren't too sophisticated to be gullible these days.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 06:30 AM

Like I say, Myth becomes Bad when people assume that its in any way True, or Sacred. Sacred things are enshrined by Myth; enriched and glorified with humility, wit, wonder, humour and humanity. All the bible tells us is that some psychotic god created an entire & infinite Cosmos billions and billions and billions times bigger than need be simply to make miserable the lives of a few pathetic human beings though punishment or mindless obedience. It is dark demonic turgid dogma that underwrites the repressive religions it has inspired, and continues to inspire, dragging us down into the dark as we struggle towards the light.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 06:47 AM

I was going to say that lots of people seem to take a literal view of the biblical story of creation, and they seem to be very nice people, for the most part. But I guess I have to admit I don't know anybody who rejects the idea of evolution, except for a few people I've met online.

Still, it seems to me that a person's thinking about evolution or the lack thereof, is just not all that important. Most people who are not ideologically inclined, can go for years without thinking about evolution at all.

I want my children to know about evolution and accept it as reality, because that's what literate people do. I suppose I see rejection of evolution as a sort of illiteracy, but I don't see it as an evil thing. If I come across illiterate people, I try to be polite and to work around the shortcomings brought about by that illiteracy.

Now, Pete isn't going to like that any more than what he gets from all the people who want to do battle with him.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 06:49 AM

The lauding of those that engage in evasion, obsfucation and fallacy amazes me. The idea that the misrepresentation of methodology and result, insinuations of dishonesty and intimation of agenda where there is none, when presented in a certain way is admirable shows how myopic our collective vision has come as a society.

This is the same myopia that allows climate change deniers the run of the media, the anti-vaccination crowd to frighten uninformed parents into exposing their kids to deadly but preventable diseases and is intent on rolling back all the advances made in science, art and culture since the enlightenment, and way before.

Things are better said straight.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:01 AM

The bad part if the anti religion myth is the obsessive negativism some people opposed exhibit, here and elsewhere.

It surely must take much "dark" internal energy to focus on maintaining a myth (with little actual evidence) that none of the millions of people currently experience any positive benefit-socially, personally or otherwise, from their association with an organized religion, or in a belief in a God. A myth that seems to be well maintained in some obsessive anti-God and religion quarters, sometimes masquerading as logical thinking.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:21 AM

So let's get this straight.

Did God invent the parasitic worm that resides in children's' eyes in parts of Africa, causing them to go blind?

Sometimes, it needs straight questions to get there. When regulating healthcare, it included inspecting and assessing children's hospices. I actually got angry when I recalled school assemblies and RE, being told God is love. Jesus seemed to be harvesting sunbeams alright.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:28 AM

> one doesn't need to prove faith positions.

Nor can one.

> Would you tell a logic teacher that his concept of circular reasoning and "appeal to authority" and "straw man" are just a matter of opinion and that yours are just as valid?

I've had one or two students (out of thousands) who, while not going that far, would indeed question axiomatic concepts because they ran counter to what the students already believed. As I recall, they quickly dropped the course.

For the rest (and I can recall myself in their position), the fallacies Bill mentions became immediately obvious as soon as the prof explained, with examples, just why they were fallacies. And treacherous ones, at that.

Our textbook also grouped them under "propaganda techniques."

Joe, evolution deniers used to be harmless. Then they decided on an education and political agenda, backed by rich evolution deniers.

You might remember the 2012 Republican debate when five of seven Presidential candidates publicly denied that he or she accepted evolution as a fact.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:34 AM

""I actually got angry when I recalled school assemblies and RE, being told God is love."" 

I propose that there is ample evidence that: For every "angry guy" obsessed with promoting anti-God, and attempting to seek recruits to feed this anger, there are millions of good, hapoy and kind religious folks who feel and practice goodess and exhibit the opposite of anger and disrespect towards others- and their personal life choices.

Why dwell on feeding an anger monkey an angry banana? (Aka, get over it and move on to more positive exploits). Just a suggestion, btw, to promote inner peace.:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:47 AM

I think you will find it is god botherers who recruit. Dragging rational objectiveness down to the level of a cult just proves how blinkered cults are.

I just point out the stupidity of perpetuating it in the light of a reality the shamans and their acolytes cannot answer.

Again. To what degree is god putting children in the hospices?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:58 AM

There are plenty of reasons to be "very angry" with past bad (and often disgusting) practices of those in power, and individuals directly associated, with many organized religions and also the many government enablers.

However, belittling and targeting all good religious people with such misdirected anger, merely because they have a God belief, IMO, is a misguided and illogical persuit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM

If we didn't have people like Pete to stand up for the conservative point of view...

Joe, Pete isn't standing up for "the conservative point of view" - he's standing up for fantasy, nonsese, ignorance and anti-intellectualism.

it seems to me that a person's thinking about evolution or the lack thereof, is just not all that important.

Its important, Joe, because if people like Pete are weak-minded enough to embrace creationist hogwash, what OTHER idiocies they are prepared to embrace?

There are real-world consequences to believing nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:47 AM

Hang on, I feel a Voltaire moment coming on again.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:16 AM

Did God invent the parasitic worm that resides in children's' eyes in parts of Africa, causing them to go blind?

Yes, I believe he did - and there was a little jar on Noah's Ark reserved especially for a breeding pair...

I prefer the Gnostic view of things in which the despotic creator God of the Old Testament is, in fact, The Devil, and all His Material Works are inherently EVIL. Good is the pure spark of spirit that resides in us as our souls. Hell is therefore Earth...

Just as much bollox as the other lot of course but it provides a neat allegory for the essential duality that rests at the heart of the human condition even if it tells us SFA about the real substance of Cosmic purpose, micro or macro.

Myth is Dead; it was killed off by Religion. Religion was killed off by Philosophy, and, as Stephen Hawking tells us, Philosophy was killed off by Science which illuminates our very souls - in a strictly allegorical sense of course.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:17 AM

"what OTHER idiocies they are prepared to embrace?"

One assumes a fundamentalist and literalist treats all parts of their holy text in the same way. Disturbing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM

While Stephen Hawking is very good at his job, in his field of science - beyond that, should one seek his advice/opinion to guide ones life, that which is unrelated to his field of science? Probably not, as I would not likely seek his guidance on doing concrete work at my house.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:37 AM

If it were only the holy text it would be disturbing.

But it often carries over into secular idiocies as well - which is frightening.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:47 AM

So Ed T, what's your job and your field so we know better how to deal with what YOU have to say?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:54 AM

as I would not likely seek his guidance on doing concrete work at my house.

Er - we're discussing Cosmology and The Meaning of Life here, Ed T, not bleedin' DIY, for which you'll find all the advice / materials you need down at your local B&Q.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 11:47 AM

Mercy! My reply to Pete got some replies, though not yet from Pete.

Joe said: ", but he states his position honestly and tenaciously."... and that is why I keep talking to him. It IS frustrating to me to have my detailed arguments & explanations denied in what I am quite aware are fallacious ways. For all I know, it may be frustrating to Pete that we smart-alec liberal "evolutionists" (I even dislike that word!) can't see the logic of HIS position.
Yes... I feel at times like I'm beating my head against a wall, but I'm learning a lot in the process about the structure and resilience of certain types of walls, and the exercise hones my wall-chipping methods. I don't necessarily expect to make holes in a strong wall with my poor, aching head....but I hear the echoes that show my banging is getting some attention....and... I always have the option of getting a ladder and bypassing the wall if it gets too wearying.
Enough silly metaphor? Okay.
I have debated Pete for several years... (how time flies when you're having fun)... and he IS honest as far as I can tell... and 2 people who know him personally have assured me that is the case. I look at it this way... there are people who hold Pete's basic position MUCH more strongly and with far less concern for even trying to construct a defense of it. Those are the ones who frighten me. Pete has, at least in here, made no attempt to convert anyone or insult anyone. He is locked into a position which requires certain re-doing of logic, definitions of proof & evidence, etc.. in order to proceed. That is why I keep banging my head on that block in the wall.

    I have said that I wish it were possible to meet Pete at the Seven Stars and spend some time going over things face-to-face... and replying with no hours or days long breaks. *shrug* It is not exactly crucial that I get Pete to see/admit my points, but it is important to ME to practice making them as carefully as possible.

(Hi, Pete... I've been talking about you. You are a tough nut to crack....)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:19 PM

The danger in the US at least is one of willful (wilfull?) ignorance. The idea that you can opt your children out of education, or that education is tilted to "respect" the deniers' denials, has resulted in a level of ignorance of science that is unparalleled in the world unless it's where there is no education at all.

The fact that Americans can get all the way through high school without knowing arithmetic, let alone the basic biology that would allow them to know how making babies works, and whatever is even stronger than "let alone" enough to understand the reality of evolution...


...whether god made it the way it is, or not, in your opinion.

It isn't dangerous to believe that a) science does show an old world but god made it look the way it does, and he did it 4000 years ago, or b) the world is old and evolution happened but god made it happen so that we would be the result. What is dangerous is c) Science is wrong and it *isn't* the way it is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:24 PM

?.."what's your job and your field so we know better how to deal with what YOU have to say?""

So, why would that matter as to a posters opinions? My preference would be to be dealt with respectfully. No one has to deal with, "what I say" in any particular way, other than to take it as opinion, nothing more.

Like others here, I am only expressing my personal opinion.That olinion changes nothing on how the world or universe evolved. I am hardly telling others how to think, what to believe, how to live their lives, nor am insisting that others share my views on the, so called, meaning of life". However, I do occasionally suggest, to maximize interest, the discussion remain respectful and logical-though I have no say in what others choose to do.

""Er - we're discussing Cosmology and The Meaning of Life here, Ed T""

Discussing Cosmology? That one passed me by, I musta blinked.

Where did Hawkins get his science acccredition on to be considered an expert on "the meaning of life"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:28 PM

That may be the case, mrrzy, in some situations. But, is it reasonable, logical and fair to put all "Americans" in the camp you suggest? That would eems very odd to me, and I susoevt you do not intend to suggest that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM

"Did God invent the parasitic worm that resides in children's' eyes in parts of Africa, causing them to go blind?"

"Yes, I believe he did - and there was a little jar on Noah's Ark reserved especially for a breeding pair..."

Oh, Jack! Don't you know that: "... bugs and plantlife were not requisite passengers on the ark." Do try to keep up!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:41 PM

"Where did Hawkins get his science acccredition on to be considered an expert on "the meaning of life"?"

Lots of famous people get 'noticed' when they speak on any subject. Linus Pauling made his 2nd round of fame discoursing on Vitamin C.

Some famous people are famous because they have learned to think deeply, which 'may' help them see points in areas other than their specialty... it is up to us to be careful not to automatically nod in agreement just because they are famous.

(*I* am an expert on the Meaning of Life, because I have collected many dozens of cartoons on the topic. )


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 12:42 PM

Where did The Archbishop of Canterbury get his?

Prof Hawking has described, using evidence based measured observation, how the universe could come into existence, using time as a variable within the laws of said universe, and not require any divine intervention.

I believe it was Martin Luther who said that proof denies faith. Which was well timed as he lived when people were beginning to observe, record and measure.

And god was found wanting...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:02 PM

So, why would that matter as to a posters opinions?

So, then, why would matter as to Hawkins' opinions?

Where did Hawkins get his science acccredition on to be considered an expert on "the meaning of life"?

Where, then, did you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM

That may be the case, mrrzy, in some situations. But, is it reasonable, logical and fair to put all "Americans" in the camp you suggest?

You misunderstand. He's not saying that all U.S. citizens are ignorant fundagelical lunatics. He's saying ALL "Americans" are negatively impacted when this lunatic garbage infects (infests?) public education, public health, politics & etc.

May I suggest to you the same volume I've suggested to others:
    Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free by Charles P. Pierce.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:15 PM

Ooops- that should read Hawking. That's what I get for quoting another poster....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:29 PM

""So, why would that matter as to a posters opinions? 

So, then, why would matter as to Hawkins' opinions?""

:)

Yes, you finally got it, sych opinions, IMO, are all the same. Hawkings opinions are no better or worse than other opinions, yours, mine, Tiny Tims,   nor Petes, in fields outside their expertise. I make no claim that my opinions are more than that, mere olinion, unlike some. His only potential advantage, if reasonably exercised,-which we have no evidence that it is, is the pitential use of surperior logical reasoning-again, if reasonably applied.

""Where did Hawkins get his science acccredition on to be considered an expert on "the meaning of life"?

Where, then, did you?""

As earlier stated, I claim none, just as I suspect Hawking would. Thus, consider the relative value of Hawkings quotes, outside his field of expertise, including concrete work.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM

""You misunderstand. He's not saying that all U.S. citizens are ignorant fundagelical lunatics. He's saying ALL "Americans" are negatively impacted when this lunatic garbage infects (infests?) public education, public health, politics & etc.""

Thanks for that- posdibly the case. However, fir accuracy, I normally prefer to have explanations made first hand, where possible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 01:41 PM

> "Did God invent the parasitic worm that resides in children's' eyes in parts of Africa, causing them to go blind?"

Yes and no (say my religious friends).

Yes, he did "invent" it. But it was thoroughly harmless in the Garden of Eden. Original Sin (humans and Satan) screwed up the world and introduced evil right up and down the line.

There is disagreement about whether the Fall is a factual story or a symbolic one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 02:52 PM

Hawkings opinions are no better or worse than... Petes, in fields outside their expertise.

Hawking's opinions are a GREAT DEAL better than Pete's as Pete's are opinions derived from absolute ignorance and are easily proven to be utter nonsense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 02:59 PM

But it was thoroughly harmless in the Garden of Eden.

So once upon a time Ebola and Smallpox and ALS were harmless, too?

Damn that Adam and Eve anyway!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:07 PM

well ed, what you call an insignificant brick, I consider to be a major component that I reckon destabilizes what is already an unproven,and philosophically constructed edifice derived from data that can be otherwise interpreted.   seems a bit like the minecraft building our youngster does on his laptop....its on the screen, and of wondrous proportions, but would collapse in real life.
as for shooting down science, I freely confess to that , when it is of the above origins interpretive sort. contrariwise you hope for an out , for the observational science that contradicts the myo dogma.
did you read what the scientist first said when she discovered that "anomaly".
being as she trusts long age theory more than the bible account, I bet she wishes her comments had been more guarded.
operational science will get along just fine without Darwinism. can you name any inventions that needed any imput from evolutionism?

joe- now I know why the apple choice of word!.

thankyou shimrod for answering my question,....and even more for conceding that your science education and interests has no bearing on evolutionist beliefs. to my mind, that means that you do in fact take what you are told about it on faith.
and also, confirming that evolutionism serves no useful purpose, other than providing some well paid jobs for propagating evolutionism.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:18 PM

If Hawkings, as a science celebrity, was quoted as saying " cats are better than dogs", should we accept this as true, based on his science authority? Or, would we ask , did he say this, was a personal observation from a personal experience, and in what context? Would questions arise on whether he had expertise to base this on, and on what evidence and criteria was it based? Possibly not.

If an entertainement celebrity, lets say Wolf Blitzer, Bob Dylan, or Axl Rose made the same statement, few would take it as more than personal opinion/preference, without asking the same questions.

The issue is, in all cases, the statement may be based on the same information, but its legitimacy taken differently, as to whether it was merely opinion. Why should we not logically subject notable scientists, and their opinions, to the same, or similar, litmus tests and caution?

BTW, I am a supporter of science, the science method, and scientific logic and feel Pete is " out to lunch" on his thories on creation. However, I am never too closed minded nit to question something I see as "out of whack", as my standard of evidence is high. Applaud Petes tendancy to seek such evidence, though I have little patience for other agendas, nor what seems to be a "fixation" to disregard what does not fit in a preconceived picture of one perspective on Christian history.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:44 PM

Considering such a massive amount of evidence collected to date, Pete, it is hard to fathom (seems highly unlikely) that one piece of new information, which will most likely be accomodated into science within time (science works that way), could collapse such a solid scientifuc structure. I will respectfully file this scientific collapse theory under the catagory of "wishful, if not fanciful, thinking, in my minds memory time capsule, Pete.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:45 PM

yes bill...a disconnect
here is how I see it. I am allowed to debate but not to question the opinion of experts even when I explain why I disagree. they are experts and therefore are right.
that probably looks simplistic to you, but I will say it again [because I did not make any promises - smile] your very long post looks to me, another and eloquent angle on appeal to numbers and authority.
dino bone soft tissue argument refuted ? I have yet to see it.
there was the claim that iron might have been a binding preservative, so they soaked ostrich bone in it, and after 2 yr, it was still "recognizable"
then there was the.... we never knew it could last so long till we found it in dino bone......don't you call that circular reasoning!
and lastly of course the usual....science is about looking at new data and this is just an anomaly to be resolved in future.
I call that selective handling of the data.
now, was there something I missed in this "refuted" ?
it seems to me that the supposed overwhelming evidence consists of what can not be produced, except by expansive and complex information.
when I ask for the evidence [ie what can only be evolutionaly interpreted] nothing is forthcoming except assertions that there is overwhelming evidence!.
"experimental science confirms evolution...." such as ?
I can understand why you are frustrated.....the only creationist here wont accept that evolution is confirmed without evidence.
true, there may not be anything you could say, but you never know, if I am thoroughly stumped I may bow out quietly!
mind you , it did. nt stop dawkins.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 03:53 PM

"thankyou shimrod for answering my question,....and even more for conceding that your science education and interests has no bearing on evolutionist beliefs. to my mind, that means that you do in fact take what you are told about it on faith."

That weasely response, which was entirely predictable, suggests to me, pete, that you're a dishonest little creep. Now how about keeping your side of the bargain and answering my question, which is (for the umpteenth time):

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 04:14 PM

Applaud Petes tendancy to seek such evidence,

Ed, pete does not seek "evidence"- he spouts dogma. He HAS no "evidence", nor IS there any for his nonsensical claims.

The issue is, in all cases, the statement may be based on the same information,

No its not, as pete's statements are based on preposterous nonsense and ignorance.

Why should we not logically subject notable scientists, and their opinions, to the same, or similar, litmus tests and caution?

Why should we not so subject Pete and his fellow fundagelical lunatics?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 04:27 PM

"Why should we not so subject Pete and his fellow ...?""

Why not, indeed. But, why be like Pete, and have a preceived answer before such an opportunity is provided-as Bill D was attemoting to provide? why cant it be done in a respectful manner? By not doing so, it provides those envolved with an avenue, a reason, not to participate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 04:38 PM

all that learning , shimrod, and the best you can do is abuse !.
but I am still thankful to you for confirming the points I made.
your religious devotion to evolutionism is not making you very nice.
when you can demonstrate what your idea of scientific reality is I may be able to give another answer. in the mean time you have just conceded that your learning has no bearing on evolutionary belief, so why should I believe you, who follows the fashion, or the changeable opinions of men, rather than that there is a God.

so, ed, it should not be too hard to give some of this massive amount of evidence, then all the evolutionists and atheists here can gloat when this simpleton is silenced!.
I rather suspect that near all that you might cite has been answered.....
I will respectfully file this massive amount of evidence assertion as wishful thinking !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:02 PM

But, why be like Pete, and have a preceived answer before such an opportunity is provided-as Bill D was attemoting to provide?

I checked the last couple of Bill D's & you've lost me , Ed. Can you cast that in simple English?

why cant it be done in a respectful manner?

I'm sorry, Ed - you may choose to respect ignorance, anti-intellectualism, denial of fact and bloody-minded bullheadedness, but I can't and don't.

YMMD


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:03 PM

"there was the claim that iron might have been a binding preservative, so they soaked ostrich bone in it, and after 2 yr, it was still "recognizable""

eeeek! "claim" that it 'might' is not a serious claim! It was a guess... and 2 years, against millions of years is hard to test !

" then there was the.... we never knew it could last so long till we found it in dino bone......don't you call that circular reasoning!"

NO! As I said back up there, you are flatly misusing the term 'circular reasoning'! **WHEN** it was found in old bones, a reasonable scientific explanation had to be found. One WAS found. Circular reasoning would involve making the conclusion without doing the tests! It was simply the scientific method of modifying a theory to fit observable evidence, then understanding how & whether the newly modified theory held up.
You MUST understand that the hard evidence, gathered over many years and using many tests, is that the basic age of the bones was no in doubt! YOU wish to go "ah-ha!" and cast doubt based on one odd discovery before the odd discovery was explained. THAT is a logical error of making an assumption that the odd discovery could not BE explained, because you 'knew' or 'believed' that the bones could not be that old in the first place!
You never quite explain how, if dinos & humans were there at about the same time, why no references to being chased by a tyrannosaur is found in old writings.. including the bible.... and why, if they lived together, soft tissue is not found in most of them!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:09 PM

why no references to being chased by a tyrannosaur is found in old writings.. including the bible...

Obviously because the potential writer in each case was eaten, Bill.

You MUST understand that the hard evidence...

No, he mustn't, and doesn't, and never will. Nor does he understand the definition of evidence, and never will.

Hey, its your time to waste, but.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:21 PM

Where did Hawkins get his science acccredition on to be considered an expert on "the meaning of life"?

'To understand the universe at the deepest level, we need to know not only how the universe behaves, but why. Why is there something rather than nothing? Why do we exist? Why this particular set of laws and not some other?

This is the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything. We shall attempt to answer it in this book. Unlike the answer given in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, ours won't be simply "42".'

Stephen Hawking, The Grand Design, 2011.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:22 PM

Ed T says: Thus, consider the relative value of Hawkings quotes, outside his field of expertise, including concrete work.

....and I wouldn't consult God for advice on concrete work, either.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:24 PM

Pete.. I forget to ask about this

"when I ask for the evidence [ie what can only be evolutionaly interpreted] nothing is forthcoming except assertions that there is overwhelming evidence!."

What do you do with overwhelming evidence? It is there.. all the tests and measurements and data that I and others have pointed at many times. There is no need to repeat the details every time the topic is mentioned. You never have any way to dispute overwhelming evidence other than the sidestepping trick of saying that 'some do doubt it' or 'there are pieces missing'.

Experts are experts for a reason.... I am closer to knowing the scientific details than you are to having faith defense. I have read the bible quite a bit, and many discussions about the bible... you barely skim the sites on evolution and the related science, explaining that you "don't have the education."

overwhelming evidence is... ummmm....overwhelming evidence


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:30 PM

A good one Joe O.

Greg, I will have to get back to you, off to an Italian food festival for awhile.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:38 PM

"when you can demonstrate what your idea of scientific reality is I may be able to give another answer. in the mean time you have just conceded that your learning has no bearing on evolutionary belief,..."

At least I've got some learning - you know fuck all about anything! Why, precisely, do I have to demonstrate my learning to you? Your arrogance is astonishing you stupid, ignorant, fundamentalist twat! Is that nasty enough for you, pete?

Oh, and by the way: "Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

As I wrote earlier today, let me take a stab as to why you refuse to answer it.

You believe that the Bible is 'the word of God'. It is because it says it is - but that's circular reasoning - there is no independent authority which confirms that the Bible is the word of God. You could fall back on concensus and authority (within the established churches) but you've arbitrarily decided not to believe in those (except the authority of so-called 'creationist scientists'). Alternatively, you could fall back on faith - but faith is not logical - it is fervent and unquestioning belief in something invisible for which there's no evidence. Therefore, if you rely on faith to support your own position, you can't demand that others use logic, reason and evidence to support theirs. Every time you post, you paint yourself further and further into an illogical, and frankly rather stupid, corner, pete.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 05:41 PM

> Why is there something rather than nothing?

Hold on, Professor H. Maybe the real question is "How could there be nothing rather than something?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 06:30 PM

Ed. I tried taking you seriously.

You appear to be a fucking loony after all.

Ah well.

Mind you , you and I have one thing in common. Neither of us has the right to lick the boots of Prof Hawking. He has access to experiments, conclusions and theses to back up his conclusions. I may have written a PhD thesis , but I was delighted to be on the viva panel of a student who ripped a section of it apart.

Show me a creationist willing to be me on such a topic.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 06:31 PM

well bill, you know how to lift former posts and repost them. I guess it should not be too difficult for you to repost all these evidences. that way you don't have to write all the details again.
" overwhelming evidence is ummm overwhelming evidence"....is not evidence !.
again you say that a reasonable scientific explanation was found....but don't say what that is, unless it is your "knowing" all the evidence is that they are that old, and therefore soft tissue can last that long. still sounds like circular reasoning to me.
"..were in no doubt...".....and how many binned scientific -facts- have had that said about them in time past?.
dinos in the bible?...the term was not coined then, but leviathan sounds like it might be a dino. job 41. there are accounts of dinos/dragons in history and artifacts picturing them, though of course such might well be otherwise interpreted, esp by evolutionists.
"....not found in all of them" quite frankly, I think it was a surprise that it was found in any of them, but some has survived as they are only thousands of yr old. that any at all would have persisted, even in the most favourable conditions..eg very low temp...beggers belief, except for those committed to deep time.
we are away for weekend.......that's for the benefit of those who think I,m evading all this [alleged] evidence for evolutionism!.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:48 PM

I learned long ago that you can't argue with fundamentalists - but yet you have to live with them, and sometimes need to work in harmony with them to achieve common goals.

Everything Pete says makes perfect sense to him. He believes with all his heart that God can do anything, so of course God can defy the rules of nature and logic. If you believe God can do anything, then why can't this God create everything in its current or near-current status in a period of six days?

I see it as overly simplistic and many of you see it as an outright lie, but that's the way Pete sees it. I think he has a right to hold that position. But I also believe he has a right to speak up and express his position, even within earshot of me and my children. I don't think he has a right to force schools or teachers to teach his position.

I visited the American Natural History Museum of the Smithsonian Institution a couple years ago, and I was fascinated by the exhibit on evolution. I was humbled by the complexity of it all, and realized that my basic understanding of evolution is oversimplified - but it works pretty well for me. I wondered, though, what American fundamentalists think about this kind of stuff being presented in a government-owned institution. There was no mention whatsoever made in the exhibit of the "biblical view of creation."

A while back, I read a number of Internet screeds condemning the fact that there was a "creationist" book for sale in the bookstore of Grand Canyon National Park. I went to that bookstore a few months ago and found hundreds of different books. I didn't see any creationist books there, but I don't know how anyone would find one creationist book among the hundreds.

I think many of you get too darn upset about what fundamentalists think. They have a right to have idiotic incorrect ideas, as we all do.

-Joe-

P.S. Pete, I have to say that lately you've been getting a little testy toward Bill D, and treating him a lot less fairly than he's treated you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 07:58 PM

Everything Pete says makes perfect sense to him.

Same with most scizophrenics, racists, alien-abductees, holocaust deniers, Raelians, & etc. etc. etc.

So?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 08:07 PM

It is obvious from your last comments, Musket, you are having diffuculty "keeping up" with the discussion.

No one disrespected the contribution of Hawkings expertise in his field (Nor Dylan or Axl Rose, for that matter). Since there are no crib notes to assist, you will have to pay attention and read to be in the know, before you post-maybe younwill then show evidence here that you earned the phd( that you brought up for some odd reason).

Prematurely shooting "lip from the hip" does little to "impress me much"- nor likely many others, as a popular Canadian country singer once stated in a song.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 08:40 PM

By the way, Joe - did Pete have to pay you for his enconium, or was it gratis like the one for BeadedBS - or did Bruce pay you, too?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: bobad
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 08:55 PM

Give it up Greg, no one cares.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:12 PM

Oh, BullShot cares, Boo, you betcha! - and you must too if you felt it necessary to comment.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:15 PM

By the way, Boo - aren't you the one who's always pissing and moaning and whining about being "stalked"???

What brings you here now right after a post of mine since you've never posted on this thread before, eh?

Do tell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: bobad
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:28 PM

I'm feeling up for a little stalking myself tonight if you must know. It's Friday night, I'm watching a football game, having a few pops as a prelude to celebrating my upcoming birthday - I'm feelin' alright.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jeri
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:30 PM

Man, you guys really throw yourselves into your hate! What a worthy use of Mudcat...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:33 PM

BTW, on being looney:

A good friend of mine has been a news reporter for many years, and has interviewed many people and personalities throughout.Once over a beer he confided to me a general observation from this unique exposure to many people: "give anyone enough time to speak freely, and they will eventually hit a topic that shows you clearly their looney side. Yes, and we all actually have at least one", he added.
:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: bobad
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 09:38 PM

C'mon Jeri, I don't hate Greg, I even offered to meet up with him over a beer but he turned me down. I'm not giving up though.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Sep 14 - 10:10 PM

Pete... I have read Job... and Leviathan clearly indicates whales.

biblical scholars seen to agree

" I guess it should not be too difficult for you to repost all these evidences. "

You gotta be kidding!

" but some has survived as they are only thousands of yr old." Land leviathans? Like the big thing they just found in Patagonia"? There were people in Patagonia 8-10000 yrs. ago. They probably didn't think anyone would believe that big thing, so they didn't mention it.

error..."Assuming the consequent" . You believe stuff is only a few thousand years old, so any soft tissue found is that old. *sigh*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 02:39 AM

I see that, yet again, you've avoided answering the points that I've made, pete.

Is it because I called you a "stupid, ignorant fundamentalist twat"? Well, there's no getting away from it, you are! Here's what reduced me to 'calling-a-spade-a-spade':

"when you can demonstrate what your idea of scientific reality is I may be able to give another answer. in the mean time you have just conceded that your learning has no bearing on evolutionary belief,..."

In that 'chunk of words' that passes for a sentence, you casually dismissed, belittled and mocked the learning that I have gained in my lifetime and the things that I have achieved in that lifetime. I do not have to 'demonstrate' anything to you! How about you 'demonstrating' something for a change - something other than appeals to the dubious authority of the Bible and stuff you've re-gurgitated from creationist websites. YOU have conceded that you've got no scientific "learning" or background so it's your conclusions and statements which can legitimately be called into question.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 03:22 AM

Ed. Try reading what you put. Back-pedalling is fine but you run the risk of the chain coming off.

I referred to a thesis Prof Hawking wrote and inferred that if a published doctoral thesis isn't good enough for you, I have to dismiss you as a loony. I also pointed out that a key point in a thesis of my own has subsequently been kicked into touch after new research, and that rather than argue the toss, I was delighted. I compared that to when people point out the lack of possibility of biblical accounts being true.

If you are having problems keeping up, ask rather than state. Less embarrassing that way. Your defence of faith is honourable, but doesn't alter the flaws it contains.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 06:09 AM

I've read a number of "published doctoral theses," Musket, that just don't ring my chimes. I hate to have to tell you this - but to me, they're no more infallible than the Pope...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 06:19 AM

True. But unlike papal utterances, physics theses are based on observed and measured phenomena. They make conclusions fit evidence rather than evidence fit conclusions.

Don't confuse them with divinity, which is, like music, an abstract art.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 06:38 AM

"**WHEN** it was found in old bones, a reasonable scientific explanation had to be found."

Bill D: There is a fair amount of ongoing debate about what Schweitzer et al did actually find in their T. rex bone. For instance it was argued the presence of iron in the samples was what helped preserve them (iron is important in fossilisation), but iron is a very common metal and might have found it's way in to the bone spaces during fossilisation, rather than being present from the start. I personally attended a talk at the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology meeting in North Carolina whose author had tested proteins in the bone and found biomarkers from native fauna, indicating the presence of proteins associated with birds could have been introduced from the outside environment (that's sort of how it went, I haven't looked up the abstract). Then there's the whole biofilm debate, which goes beyond soft tissues in dinosaurs to biomarkers in feathers and other integument. It's a very interesting area of research, although I'm not that up to date with it as you can tell.

Pete's not even keeping up with the current debate, as he's missed quoting a right old rumpus that has occurred in the past year or so involving this very subject, but with wider ramifications.


"I also pointed out that a key point in a thesis of my own has subsequently been kicked into touch after new research, and that rather than argue the toss, I was delighted."

This is the way of science, and if I ever finish my own PhD I fully expect the same might well happen to my own work; our hypotheses have to be tested. Our research is part of an ongoing process of discovery and correction. Brill it is!


"give anyone enough time to speak freely, and they will eventually hit a topic that shows you clearly their looney side."

Never ask me about whelks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 07:38 AM

Well, Musket, nice to see you seemingly matching your education to post content. Good job in contributing to discusdion versus shoiting off repeating one line statements.
Keep it up, I have regained confidence that you have the staying power to read posts and comment in a manner that makes a contribution.

Since Joe Offer responded, and jt is a side isdue to tge OP, I will leave it at that.

Today, you get a shiny gold star in your homework pad for paying attention in class, not wiggling around too much in your school seat and for not putting the red headed girls pigtails in your grade schools inkwell (or, petes either) Keep up the good work, there are more shiny stars with your name on em waiting.
:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:19 AM

By the way Musket, you "somehow" amazingly suggest that, in my recent posts, that I am defending faith-"wrong".

My related posts (if you were paying attention at tbat point in Pete and Bills main discussion, on this thread refer to the logic of using quotes (where the context is uncertain) of a science personality to score any point, in a field (religion ir not) where the scientist has no clearly stated scientific expertise. If the discussion related to his or her scientific research or science expertise, that is fine. If it is not, then it clearly an opinion-and unless shown otherwise, why it shoud be considered a better opinion than others?

My case was not made to defend and prop up religion nor shoot it down, but relates to the logic of using opinion quotes of personalities-whether scientific, entertainement, sports or political, to score points for any position in a debate on a topic.

My other point in the discussion related to giving those attempting to actually debate the OP topic, Bill D and Pete 7* the opportunity to do so, without disrespectful comments from the side. IMO, those comments, mostly attacking Pete, using mistly repetitive and disrespectful phrases, serve only the interests of thise who wish tk silence the discussion and scare Pete away from participating. If you were paying attention, Bilk D requested this in frustration awhile back. There is another thread on religion with ample opportunity to fling shit. My recollection is, Bilk D set this one up to avoid that disruptive aspect/influence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 09:09 AM

That red headed girl? Why should I pull her pigtails when she offers to pull my plonker behind the bike sheds? Her name was (hopefully still is) Nicky. She did have pigtails, was a redhead and I lost my cherry to her. The force is strong in you, young Skydreamer.

You'll have to help me out here. What's a grade school?

In reply to your withering subsequent post. pete is the one being dismissive, disrespectful and insulting. I, as ever, respond merely in kind.

You speak of religious opinion as if it has any relevance in this thread, and put forward the idea that all opinions are equal. Not when they dismiss reality in a desperate attempt to make fairy stories look real, they aren't.   I love Tolkien's fairy stories myself but I don't try altering geography to fit Middle Earth into the equation....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 10:38 AM

". pete is the one being dismissive, disrespectful and insulting. I, as ever, respond merely in kind."

Your concept of 'insulting' is as broad a brush as I've ever seen. Pete is merely frustrating... he doesn't stoop to the name calling and ridicule that you seem to relish whenever someone doesn't reach the level of reason YOU demand.

I accuse Pete of overusing/misusing certain terms... you match him and then some.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 10:40 AM

There is worm tonic for the wiggles, Musket.

Because unlike you and pete, I have not made my mind up on many things, and am open to give the opportunity to reasoned logic from anyone.Even if I find their position
lacking in logic, I appriciate that others may not.

I do draw the line in intervening when folks are unkind, or promote hate to individuals or groups, a topic which I suspect we share some solid ground on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 11:04 AM

and am open to give the opportunity to reasoned logic from anyone.

That, then, leaves pete out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 11:20 AM

I don't demand anything. I certainly haven't made my mind up on anything. Believing make believe and having an imaginary friend has never been something I considered in the first place.

Demanding a level of logic is one thing, but when people introduce absurd notions outside the bounds of physics and want them to be respected, I find "fuck off" to be appropriate in response.

In humouring him and trying to be logical to an absence of logic, I think it could be said that the Bills of this world are the ones taking the piss out pete, not those of us who have no time for creationist nonsense and the harm their influence is having on our children.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 12:34 PM

""I think it could be said that the Bills of this world are the ones taking the piss out pete, not those of us who have no time for creationist nonsense and the harm their influence is having on our children.""

Indeed so, that is exactly why I suggested others back off with thedisrupting insults to Pete, and let Bill D have this discussion with Pete, which I recall he requested a few times, and I suspect has not completed. Contrary to what you say, some folks here seems to be plenty of time for that, versus giving Bill some room for his OP discussion.

On the face of it, it seems to be lacking in logic that pete holding a belief hurts anyone ellse. Do you have evidence Musket, that pete is promoting his belief on creation in schools, to children. If so, you should present it, and I suspect that would matter to other folks here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 12:37 PM

""and am open to give the opportunity to reasoned logic from anyone.

That, then, leaves pete out.""

OK, I also have time to allow people to state their case, to clearly expose the lack of logic in their case.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 01:01 PM

Yes Ed. It's called Mudcat. In particularly the thread regarding YEC.

That is where he went from a harmless fruitcake to a worrying trend. Harmless fruitcakes are needed in order to keep the rest of us sane. I have mentioned my mate who thinks the moon landings didn't happen. I have friends and family who genuinely think there is a god and has the thoughts and deeds of what the bible says of him. I even remain civil to a neighbour who has a season ticket for Sheffield United.

But you know what? None of them feel their take on life needs promoting and spreading.

Perhaps that's why I don't tell them to fuck off. Although a vicar friend who said that believing in god isn't actually a prerequisite for the job got both barrels when he went on to say the job is merely to ensure others do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 01:04 PM

pete holding a belief hurts anyone ellse

Ed, if pete was the only idiot holding & promulgating these absurd beliefs you'd be right. Unfortunately, there are hundreds of thousands (possibly millions?) JUST LIKE HIM in the U.S. doing real harm collectively as well as individually. I'm assuming you're in Blighty?


OK, I also have time to allow people to state their case...

Hey, if you like listening to idiots and psychotics babble, knock yourself out. Most folks have better things to do, but what the hey, that's what makes horse races.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM

I'm afraid that, for me, the gloves have come off with pete. He is not only deluded and lacking in logic (not to mention illiterate) but he's also arrogant and disrespectful. For a start, he thinks he's in possession of absolute truth and, leaving aside anything else, that's a pretty arrogant position to take - about as arrogant as you can get!

Further up the thread I asked him a simple question; for the record:

"Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"

He has consistently avoided answering this question and instead demanded to know about my scientific qualifications. When I supplied him with these he belittled them and suggested that they did not qualify me to distinguish sense from nonsense. And this from a man who has no scientific background whatsoever and, by his own admission, has never read a standard, or even popular, text on evolutionary biology and who thinks that regurgitating rubbish that he has read on fringe creationist websites makes him some sort of expert on a par with the likes of Stu who has genuine, real world qualifications in evolutionary biology. We really should not be wasting our time debating anything with this fool!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 02:36 PM

Well, I never followed pete before this thread (just mostly saw a couple of his posts)!-it looks like some folks seem to be shell shocked on religion evolution discussion. If so, it ouzzles me why they would even consider entering this thread and and even staying here?

While there may be masses of creationist folks, engaging in nasty things somewhere, Bill seems eager to engage in a "meaningful" debate with Pete-I see no reason, nor harm, or reasons to put barriers up to such a wish? Mudcat is hardly a spot where mass numbers of creationists gather to plan sinister creationist plots. It seems like it is mustly Pete, treading water against a big current of opinion-I have yet to encounter others, though I have not checked in every corner, nor under the Mudcat dirty laundry basket.

With all the negative forces facing young children in many locations, I would put Pete and his beliefs very low on the "danger in growing up in school" reichter scale.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 05:30 PM

Bill seems eager to engage in a "meaningful" debate with Pete

Unfortunately, that's not possible - for Bill or anyone else, as even a small exposure to pete should make abundantly clear.

Mudcat is hardly a spot where mass numbers of creationists gather to plan sinister creationist plots......I would put Pete and his beliefs very low on the "danger in growing up in school" reichter scale.

Ed, You put things a lot more flippantly than you would if you were personally acquainted with the very real harm creationist fundegelical assholes do. If you're in Britain this is to some extent understandable, but you should look a little more closely into the situation in the U.S. before dismissing the problem.

If you're in the U.S., you're just not paying attention and there's NO excuse for that.

(And that's Richter.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 05:43 PM

Dunno about The UK. Religious bigots have successfully lobbied for equality legislation to not include their organisations. In fact, it was made illegal for Church of England churches to conduct gay weddings in order to throw legal challenges to their obscene bigotry.

We still have a state religion. A theocracy we share with Iran. The Queen is head of the church. Yet less than 1% of the country attend their churches. When Prince Charles said he would alter the role of monarch when he ascends in order to be defender of faith rather than defender of the faith, which puts the monarch against 99% of the people, the church bigotry brigade used money they raise "for the poor" to get a legal opinion on whether he can or not.

Whoa betide you if you are Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu or rational, if the bigoted Christian cult under The Archbishop of Canterbury get their way. They want to see us as constitutionally second class citizens.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 06:36 PM

Greg,
I live in neither location-where there is little exposure to non-evolution theories-so, it is not an issue. I have no notion as to who believes what in my neighbourhood, and I suspect my neighbours feel the same-regardless, it never seems to get in ones way or face.I almost never hear the religion topic being raised in the workplace, at functions, or, in fact, elsewhere.

In China and India, a huge percent of the worlds people have some wacky ideas (in my opinon) that go against scientific reasoning. I could stay awake and fret about it-with little actual impact. I dont know about you, but, pete believing odd things about the age of the world wont keep me from sleeping-and I doubt that it would change things much if I did. Personally, as one who is not attached to any religion, I cant fathom how the issue of religion stirs up so much emotion with individuals on either side. But, I guess it has followed this pattern for a long time in history, and will be with us for a long time-and likely be so to the end.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 07:00 PM

I live in neither location-where there is little exposure to non-evolution theories-so, it is not an issue.

Gotcha, Ed - it don't effect you personally, so it's nothing worth worrying about. The rest of the people in the country?-screw 'em. Not your problem. The spirit that has brought the U.S. to the current deplorable state its in.

Check This out.

Or possibly This


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 07:38 PM

You seem kinda uppidy and" flippent" yourself in the last post Greg- Having a bad day, possibly?

In fact, I never heard creationism as being an issue amongst my fellow countrymen in the country where I live-I suspect because most if us are tolerant of the views of others, and mistly do not get into their personal affairs. Most people attend public schools, free of religion. We dont have a connection between state and church, our constitutional provides for religious freedom.

So, put that in your pipe and inhale, matey, before you sling insults at people of other nations, where it seems that you have little direct knowledge.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:24 PM

So Ostrich Ed - Stop beating 'round the bush: who are your "fellow countrymen" and in what country DO you live?

And which constitutional are you talking about? Post-prandial or otherwise?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:27 PM

*sigh* Is it even possible to have a discussion of evolution and the relevant aspects of religion without it drifting into a general condemnation of religion?

I KNOW that there are religious extremists in various countries who tax the soul patience and cause thinking people to worry about their influence. I have met some of them.... several have knocked at my door. They send me mailings. They are tedious.

YOU can start a thread about it.   That is not what I want to do here....

I thing we need a thread about people who have knee-jerk responses to anything resembling their favorite pet peeve, whether it was specified or not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:38 PM

I think you are onto something Bill D, Unfortunately, like with wars, bringing up the topic of religion most often uncovers the worst on both sides,with representatives of each frequently claiming the hallowed ground - and illogical attacks anyone calling for logical thinking in the middle.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 08:47 PM

Sorry Greg, you can do your own homework, if you have the interest and capacity to do so-and I assume you have the capacity, if you have the staying power. However, I never rule out that some folks just prefer to "blow smoke" versus using their noggin.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 09:08 PM

Still no answer to my question, "How could there be nothing instead of something?"

Makes as much sense as the more popular version. How do we know that "nothingness" is the default setting and "somethingness" the exception?
Even Stephen Hawking seems to make this baseless assumption.

Bill's quest for a reasonable discussion is doomed to failure when the thread's chief, perhaps sole, disbeliever in evolution won't even respond to the simple question of why his view is preferable and his understanding of science and belief is more profound than anyone else's.

When one advances a position on anything, one generally says why it should be accepted. Otherwise it can be ignored, because there's no basis for discussion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 09:25 PM

"My own homework" Ostrich Ed? Please. What's the big secret of your nationality? You're not a spook are ya? Just answer the question.

And the discussion isn't about "religion". Its about idiots who wilfully reject fact in favor of bullshit, and those that condone and enable their so doing.

Apparently, you're one of the latter- and yet you prate on about "logic" and "blowing smoke".

Fascinating.


evolution and the relevant aspects of religion

Uh, Bill - there ARE no "relevant aspects of religion".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 09:34 PM

Good luck finding someone to argue with greg, versus meaningful discussion, since this seems to be your main preoccupation-based in my snapshot observation, of course. :)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 09:38 PM

Lighter asks: Still no answer to my question, "How could there be nothing instead of something?"

Look in my bank account...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 10:00 PM

Nothing, a turd with the crap taken out of it:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 10:17 PM

""Ere Time and Place were, Time and Place were not,
When primitive Nothing Something straight begot;
Then all proceeded from the great united What.""

Earl of Rochester: "Upon Nothing"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 14 - 10:41 PM

The generally accepted specific formulation of the "Something Rather Than Nothing" issue in philosophic studies came from Martin Heidegger, but has been so widely used.. even to book titles, that it is almost a universal topic now.

A.N. Whitehead said early in "Process & Reality"... "everything must be somewhere" and went on to assume (in a MOST convoluted way) that 'something' must have always been... ummm.. here.

Too bad those guys didn't have Greg F. to clarify it all and save them all that thinking. (there sure are relevant aspects of religion when the Texas school board meets.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 07:12 AM

But even Joe assumes that there *should be* something in his bank account.

The nothingness he finds is the aberration. The bank wouldn't have granted him an account on a deposit of nothingness.

Any mere assertion of what came first cosmically, however, is just an opinion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 07:47 AM

"On the face of it, it seems to be lacking in logic that pete holding a belief hurts anyone ellse."

Pete does come here to engage in debate and it's not the fault of UK catters if the Americans don't have or understand our debating culture. That said, phrases Like " the gloves have come off with pete." don't sound too nice at all and I don't like that. He does bullshit though. Lots.

I've had plenty to say to pete, and he's given as good as he's got even if it's gone over the heads of his advocates. He's a teacher at the very least (from a buddhist perspective), but he isn't interested in debating the core issues. But then who is?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 08:17 AM

> he isn't interested in debating the core issues. But then who is?

Looks like Bill, Shimrod, Joe, and me, for starters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 08:52 AM

Good luck finding someone to argue with greg

Atta boy Ed! When the questions become too difficult, or you find yourself on the losing end, take your ball & go home.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM

Do " teachers at least" cut and paste their arguments from creationist websites, then get all flustered when asked to justify their sneering contempt for the real world though?

Thought not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:18 AM

Greg,
When you post in a disrespectful manner, you normally win at your own circular arguments, versus meaningful debate- as you remain alone.

From what I have seen of youer aporoach here, (I havent seen much of your posts before) I suspect you feel like such a winner quite often. Good luck with that, and your attempts to lure others into such a pointless solitude.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:26 AM

Look arouund atbothers, even on thisvthread greg, maybe you will, by chance, learn something on how to discuss versus argue. While I suspect you have no interest or capacity for that, surprises do occur.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:49 PM

Proof read your posts, there's a good lad.

It's difficult to see whether you are lazy or no concept of spelling or grammar. Such things help decide whether to debate or dismiss you as simple, what?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 05:12 PM

A deal Musket. I will proof read my posts if you agree to proof-wash some of your posting "pottie" language.

It oft colours your debating style to a whores breakfast. Kinda makes one wonder if your oft-braged phd is in pottie language.

:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 05:38 PM

Fuck shit arsehole Sheffield Utd.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:09 PM

I suspect Musket has the stickiest keyboard on Mudcat.

No, don't jump to conclusions- you have it all wrong. It's not from self abuse. It's from the keyboard-humping enjoyment I suspect he gets from a bit of internet attention that cums his way throughout the day-good or bad. Like kids who get excited when they hear the word "poopie".

Get down, Rover ! Down boy.

:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 07:56 PM

Hi. I'm back, I was away, there was a wedding, it was great, there was no religion in it. Anyway.

EdT, back to your question about Do I think all Americans are biodeniers and ignoramuses (ignorami), no, but I am beginning to notice that all biodeniers and ignorami that are actually high school and sometimes even college graduates, rather than uneducated (say, girls in places where girls aren't allowed to *be* educated) are Americans.

My twins went through public schools here and could have never learned anything and still passed every single grade.

The only reason they know basic science is not they were smart, minimally motivated, but that I jumped in and taught them reality where their school failed (like AP history explaining judaism and islam as beliefs but then claiming christianity as documented history, citing the bible as the documentation, I kid you not) because I went to French schools where you can be assumed to be christian but you certainly still learn biology in science classes, as did the moslems, atheists and animists. Religion was irrelevant although discussed in philosophy class.

I also teach here in the US at the college level and the ignorance of my public-educated student body is appalling. Absolutely bloddy appalling.

*That* is the danger of "respecting" willful ignorance. It is not a danger of faith itself, just the idea that beliefs should be treated as equal to facts. What nonsense. Time to stop it. Seriously.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 08:02 PM

You got MY vote, Mrrzy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 08:20 PM

I haven't seen locally what you have stated, Mrzzy. But, then I am not realy "in tune" with the USA educational system. Is religious education actually offered in all USA public schools-if I understand you correctly, (I suspected it would be so in private religious schools), or is it limited to specific areas? This seems very odd to me?

I suspect a failure to focus more on science related preparation in the school system is, from what I read, broad in many western countries. This may explain why some Asian countries have leaped ahead (or, caught up) of western nations in many fields of science- in recent years.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Amos
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:28 PM

Actually, I think it is possible that the "something" and "nothing" stress might well be at the root of religious impulses.

You won't find the entity known as the spirit within the framework of time and space, so if you are convinced that existence is identical with matter, energy and space-time, then you're bound to conclude that such things as the human spirit are non-existent.

Should you be among the minority who admit existences byond the material universe, then you may find the spirit is actually "something" (meaning an existent thing) even though it is not a matter-and-energy "thing".

Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer cherce.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:43 PM

It wasn't billed as "religious" education, it was supposed to be an Advanced Placement (that is, a college-level class being offered to high schoolers who'd finished the high school levels) history class that had a textbook stating, not implying or mealymouthing around, that the bible stories about jesus were historical, and citing passages as fact, while islam and judaism were not treated as historically factual but as global phenomena which people studying history should know about.

Also, this is the free and obligatory education being offered all children in my city, I didn't pay my money and I shouldn't have had to correct this kind of crap in their textbook.

I remain absolutely bloody appalled, even if I don't proofread well.

Bill, if I ran / stood for office, I'd be run out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. I live in Virginia.

Not to be mistaken with its neighbor, West By God Virginia.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 11:04 PM

Mrrzy.. I have friends in Virginia, including the southern part. I have met some of the people near my friends who'd heat the tar for you. I lived in Kansas till I was 37. I had good friends who were sane and non-religious. We often felt outnumbered.... and that was in a larger city.
   It was perfectly possible to go for months & years without a confrontation, but one learns to know when not to speak one's mind in public. Most of the schools avoided direct religious pressure, but one could sense it and hear remarks.
When I was a graduate teaching fellow in Philosophy, we had to grade shortish papers on an assigned topic. We made a mistake the first time and thought we'd make the topic 'interesting' and assigned "The Existence of God". We explained several times that this was not about accepting or denying God... but about understanding the philosophic arguments for each side. We might as well have explained in Sanskrit. (Well, maybe a dozen or three out of 300-400 got it... their religious background made the majority slip into expressing their faith..often to the exclusion of understand the basic assignment.)
   It was a learning experience for ME!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 02:19 AM

"Should you be among the minority who admit existences byond the material universe, then you may find the spirit is actually "something" (meaning an existent thing) even though it is not a matter-and-energy "thing"."

It seems to me that there are far too many people in the world who don't know the difference between a notion and a fact. It's all very well to posit "something" beyond "matter-and-energy" but unless evidence is available to support such a concept, it remains a mere notion. Is it possible to find evidence for "something" beyond "matter-and-energy"? Well that is not my problem - but the problem of the holder of the notion! Trouble is there are far too many holders of such notions who would impose them on others - including children.

The other day a couple of 'fundagelicals' knocked on my door and asked me if I believed in God and if I believed that God created everything. I replied that I had seen no evidence to support such notions. One of the fundagelicals then touched my doorframe and said, "well someone created this house so someone must have created the universe." I replied, "I'm sorry but that's just an hypothesis based on an analogy; have you got any evidence to support your hypothesis?" They left rather smartly!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:15 AM

They leave rather smartly when you shout "Fuck off!" loudly and slam the door too...

The problem is Shimrod, your approach may have wit that is wasted whereas my approach may be understood.

What is clear here is that superstition has to be taught whereas logical reasoning can be deduced.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:49 AM

One thing I've spent a lot of my life exploring, is how to carry on respectful and friendly dialogue with people who are never, ever going to agree with my point of view. Usually, this requires finding the common ground between us, and discussing what we have in common while politely skirting what divides us.

But I would really like to talk about the "elephant in the room" - whatever it is that we profoundly disagree about. I find it can sometimes be possible once we have built a relationship over a period of time, but oftentimes it seems to end up destroying the relationship.

It's even harder here on the Internet. There's something about the Internet that brings out division. I wonder how to get past that.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 05:32 AM

Yes, Musket, that's the approach that I have finally had to take with, pete. I believe that he insulted me by (a) refusing consistently to answer a simple, but fundamental question and (b) belittling my scientific qualifications and insisting that they invalidated any views that I might hold about evolution (and this from a man who has no scientific qualifications himself!). I'm a gentle soul at heart - but can only be pushed so far.

And, yes Joe, I believe in dialogue too - but when idiots attempt to take the piss, I won't stand for it!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM

I once attended a private boys' school that was connected with the YMCA (that's "Young Men's *Christian* Association," just to remind you.)

We had one course - one semester - when I was twelve, called "Comparative Religion." It stressed the sincerity of all major religions (including Hinduism, Shinto and Jainism, BTW) and the attempts of their believers to achieve peace and benefit others.

No sectarian propaganda, no insistence that one was "realer" than another.

But that was half a century ago. I dunno what might be goin' on now.

(By today's educational standards it was pretty demanding: lots of info, no "activities.")


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 09:26 AM

Mrrzy:
I observed no religious-related content, nor religious discussions in my school years, nor none in my childrens schools.

However, I did observe that the local education system did a poor job of preparing students for science related careers, which I suspect would have an impact on some students considering future careers in science. In biology, information on human evolution was presented, with no related religious discussion.

What seemed puzzling to me in school was how my early grade history classes tended to show a strong western bias (mostly pro British and USA) in history, wars and governing systems- and little to explain the perspectives of the other sides. My recollection is educational materials related to socialism and communism were more akin to propaganda-versus descriptions that stimulated a students thought processes. But, this may have changed since, and, on reflection, may have been influenced by the cold war period when I was in school. Additionally, the material may have mirrored the perspectives of the societies where the books were published, which were mostly not local?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 09:56 AM

"What seemed puzzling to me in school was how my early grade history classes tended to show a strong western bias (mostly pro British and USA)..."

no need to limit it to lower grades... I never expected much during my first 8 years in St. Joseph's... I often knew more history & definitely science than my teachers.   So it was with great anticipation that entered 9th grade in our public jounior/senior high school and saw that 9th grade history was called World History. I felt like crying when I opened my textbook and discerned that it was world history as seen through western european eyes... it was a crushing blow to learn that it wasn't just my old parochial school with had tunnel vision.

Thankfully, my mom and dad loved books and our home library also contained several TimeLife series that included ancient history and various world cultures.

And this is the crux of the issue here... fundamentalists reject viewpoints that do not wholeheartedly support their own... there never seems to be an honest attempt to consider alternatives or examine various viewpoints in an unbiased manner.

While many (if not most) atheists and agnostics support the science of evolutionary theory, this is NOT a requirement... there are as many or more folks of religous conviction that accept science and scientific method as the valid tools that they are. It is only those who not only do not understand science, and seem to reject any attempt to understand because to do so would jeopardize they cherished beliefs, that are so vocal in their attempts to discredit science, scientific method and the information gained through it.

This has just been one more tired exercise in futility... because you can lead a zeolot to knowledge, but you can't make them learn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM

guest, just because this particular creationist is not a scientist, does not mean that this is true across the board, though such a notion might be comforting to Darwinist fundamentalists. he does however know that there is a difference between the scientific method, and origins ideas.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:35 PM

How many more times...

You can use scientific approaches to your day job, whatever that may be. You can believe in creationism whilst promoting randomised clinical trials of a new lotion for athletes foot, still fine.

But.. Creationist science is an oxymoron. Not through my or anybody else's opinion but because there is no observational phenomena that leads to a creationist hypothesis being a credible explanation.

None.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 02:34 PM

hi joe, me again with my "idiotic" ideas ! "evolution...humbled by the complexity" funny that...sure I,ve been told what a simple idea it is !.
"testy toward bill" ? I,m sure bill knows I am not being disrespectful, though maybe more direct. the claim that the soft tissue in dino bone has been refuted , had not itself been substantiated by bill, nor anyone else, though stu,s post since seems an interesting angle.

seems to me that shimrod is upset because I caught him out in a couple of things.....
there are NO absolutes....but he is not absolutely sure about that !.
he is well versed in science but none of the areas of expertise or interest have a bearing on evolutionism . sounds like an own goal to me. I usually am led to believe that it was vital to science....so I was most sincere in thanking him for the info and insight.

so musket...what is the observational phenomenom that makes evolutionism a credible hypothesis ?.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:08 PM

well bill, maybe I was kidding.....one reposting of the a. .rgument refuted will do. I rather suspect that your meaning of "refute" is really -commented on -. if that be the case, I am sure thatyou really thought it had been refuted.
leviathan = whale....well maybe, just like a lot of scholars say behemoth [job 40] is a hippopotamus.
maybe believing dinos are myo and therefore soft tissue can last that long, is some sort of fallacy too.
I,m off out now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:10 PM

Pete, even in the mostly unlikely case you were to provide good evidence, and convince anyone here, of the flaws you see in what science has shown us about evolution-this in itself does nothing to build onto the creationist theory and the age of the world.

For example, if you were to provide convincing evidence that my dog is not a German Shepherd, it does nothing to add to a potential notion that he must be a Poodle.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:14 PM

"what is the observational phenomenom that makes evolutionism a credible hypothesis ?."

if you really want to understand, then I suggest you get rid of the term "evolutionism" which may have been useful in the 1800s but is worthless today. One thing about science... it moves on, based on new information that helps explain observable facts.

If you want to know what is going on today, you need to use the phrase "modern evolutionary synthesis" which is seen as the best explanation of current data.

Things that were unknown in the mid 1800s, such as nuclear decay, plate tectonics, molecular genetics have been merged with new paleontological finds around the globe - among other sources of information- and these widely disperate disciplines have supported the theory of evolution.

Scientific method is asking questions that provide information used to ask better questions. The answers are used to formulate a better understanding of the world/universe. The goal is to increase our overall knowledge and understanding, not to cling to an ignorant past.

If you really believe in an all powerful, all knowing God... why do you then insist that said being is restricted to only what you can "understand". Sounds like the sin of pride to me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:30 PM

"he is well versed in science but none of the areas of expertise or interest have a bearing on evolutionism . sounds like an own goal to me."

But you have no scientific qualifications whatsoever, you silly arse!! So, by your reckoning, you're not qualified to take part in the evolution vs creation debate at all!

And if you really wanted to know about evolutionary biology you would read something other than crackpot creationist websites. There's lots and lots of books out there - want us to supply you with a reading list?

And if you didn't understand the subtleties of the no absolutes/not absolutely sure 'joke' - then there's no hope for you.

Oh, and by the way: "Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:12 PM

When I complained to the publishers of the textbook my kids were being preached to out of (take that, grammar police!) I was informed, well, that's what Virginia wants; we have textbooks that don't preach in our history line but they aren't bought by your schools. I was unable to interest the ACLU in taking on the publishers, and now my twins are out of high school and majeurs so am no longer in charge of their educations.

And there is really no aspect of science that doesn't have a bearing on evolution since evolution underlies the life sciences, it isn't a separate discipline. Take some biology, chemistry, physics, and you can understand evolution. There isn't such a thing as teaching "evolution" but rather such a thing as teaching science, life sciences in particular.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:27 PM

Thanks science geek.

Saves me calling pete a fucking looney and upsetting Joe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:38 PM

Einstein had some"opinions" on science and religion. As noted, they are just
Opinions, no better of worse than manybothers and I suspect reflect his upbringing and the times he lived in.

Einstein, Science and Religion  


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:43 PM

> we have textbooks that don't preach in our history line but they aren't bought by your schools.

This comment shows (surprise!) that educational publishers may be more interested in $$$$$ than in education.

Textbooks tailored to heavily fundamentalists states like Texas have been a problem for almost as long as I can remember. They buy so many books that it's can be too costly for some publishers to print anything the locals might object to. (That includes a "liberal" slant on American history.)

Local school boards (made up of local parents and teachers) purchase (and reject) whatever books they wish. If a fundamentalist history book is likely to bring in extra $$$$$, the publishers are happy to provide it. After all, if they don't, their competitors will.

This foolishness essentially disappears at the college level - except for a number of small private colleges that pride themselves on their fundamentalism.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 05:23 PM

It is the government, through the Department of Education, Book Bureau, that selects school books for programs from grades one to 12, where I live.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 05:34 PM

A bit off topic, but, government science has its problems, which especially impacts, to some, degree, the environment.
.


some additional problems impacting science 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 02:22 AM

I suspect that I know why Pete7* does not concede that he may be wrong. It is because it would, in his opinion, be disloyal and disrespectful to his God- and that could have dangerous consequences.

Years ago, my sis reared her daughter with what I considered short sighted, ignorant mores; she didn't appear to want to consider anything than the fundamentalist viewpoint, no matter what anyone in the family believed.

The poor girl went through a rough time after she became grown and left home, going through drug use and various other experiments.

Guess what- the 'girl' is now about 50 years old and as dogmatic as her mother...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 05:26 AM

I don't know what the consequences for pete would be if he upset his god but after demonstrating my "Jesus on a rubber cross" in the pub last night, perhaps I should keep a lookout for stray thunderbolts ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 11:25 AM

There's an article about the Nigerian, Islamist terrorist group, Boko Haram in today's (09.09.2014) Independent newspaper (UK). My attention was caught be the following quote:

" ...Boko Haram, whose name translates colloquially as "Western Education is sin" and which began life in 2002 as a movement to reject concepts such as evolution and the big bang theory ..."

So religious fundamentalists, who reject the findings of modern science, can be very dangerous indeed!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 11:41 AM

"guest, just because this particular creationist is not a scientist, does not mean that this is true across the board, though such a notion might be comforting to Darwinist fundamentalists. he does however know that there is a difference between the scientific method, and origins ideas."

and here we have a clear example of why pete will never understand science... "Darwinist fundamentalists" are purely a construct of creationists and their propagandists...

"Darwinist fundamentalists" are imaginary people who follow the false prophet and blindly accept his writings... in other words - creationists actually believe that anyone who accepts the validity of evolutionary theory are mere counterpoints of themselves. They can and will not accept the reality that we do not think as they do. We question and question and question... and when we stop questioning is when we stop behaving as scientists. And the questions that we ask are more discerning than earlier questions because we take what we learned from the first questions and applied that to the new ones.

Fundamentalist do not question their own "knowledge"... they restrict their questioning to those that do not share their beliefs. They do not even understand how to craft proper questions. pitiful...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM

I'll repeat my favorite bumper sticker:

"Don't Believe Everything You Think."

Of course, a creationist will simply say that it applies to evolutionists only.

There's a reason why universities offer courses on logic and argumentation. Cogent reasoning doesn't often come early or naturally.

But if you believe that Reason is the devil's whore, you're not likely to sign up for a course like that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 12:11 PM

Love that bumper sticker. Also I used to like god, protect me from your followers, but then decided not to pretend there were gods to beseech... another good one is god was my copilot until we flew into a mountain and I had to eat him.

Sorry for the thread creep.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 12:33 PM

I can't help noticing that pete, as well as being a bit of a gullible, arrogant dork, is a sort of 'digital' person, i.e. he thinks only in 0s and 1s, yes's and no's and black and white.That's probably why he didn't get my 'joke' about absolutes. pete's religion represents, to him, absolute truth; anything which contradicts that truth must be wrong.

I suspect that, deep down, pete is terrified by the complexity of the world/universe - so he tries to simplify the world/universe by adopting fundamentalist religious beliefs and making himself wilfully blind to any of the difficult bits of reality.

Of course much of the world/universe isn't digital. Most sets and classes of things exhibit natural variability. So members of a specified population will display a range of values for a particular parameter or characteristic. For example, all adult men within a specific ethnic group, will display a range of heights but these heights will be clustered around a mean value with exceptionally short and exceptionally tall men in the 'tails' of the distribution. This is a statistical concept and statistical thinking is central to many areas of science - including evolutionary biology. It's not difficult to see that when a species is subjected to changes to its environment, such changes may tend to select sub-populations in a tail of a distribution and the mean will tend to shift in the direction of that tail. Such changes, accumulating over long periods of time, will mean that one species may change into a new species.

Have you ever studied statistics, pete? Silly me! Of course you've never studied statistics - you've only ever studied the pages of www.redneckcreation.com - haven't you? For the record, I spent most of my working life making measurements and analysing the data statistically - that's one thing that qualifies me to compare the claims of the science of evolutionary biology with the pathetic pseudoscience of 'creationism'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:04 PM

GUEST,sciencegeek - PM
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 11:41 AM

he said it well.

I will say this ONCE... if no one has anything to contribute beyond petty pot-shots at Pete and his motives & intelligence, I will ask for this thread to be closed!
I wanted a place to debate the issues... not the psychology & character of anyone.

I have made many attempts to clarify the importance of new discoveries in various areas of science, while at the same time seeking to show the logical & scientific flaws in various of Pete's claims and analysis.

This thread is supposed to be about those ISSUES, not a a vehicle for snarky insults!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Pete... I asked once if you would consider becoming a member so some comparison of views could go on without the knee-jerk personal remarks... it's not a big deal, but I don't think you've ever said why you don't bother.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:31 PM

Just wondering:
Does this thread have a purpose in being open any more, beyond the "manly sport" of heaving personal attacks at Pete 7*s?

IMO, that's about as interesting as watching someone kick their pet dog.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:32 PM

Check this idea out: evolution is not to be believed or disbelieved, but either understood or not.
Why you should stop "believing" in evolution.

From slate.com, always a great place.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 02:44 PM

Well pete has become a bit of a target because he's the only one, on here, pushing full strength, undiluted creationism. You argue with him, you argue with full strength, undiluted creationism. And with his one-track, bloody-minded, wilfully blind stubborness he doesn't do himself any favours!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 02:58 PM

""Well pete has become a bit of a target because he's the only one""

Well, yes. But, it kinda reminds me of a heavily lopsided football game, with not many interested watching- only a few players idly kicking a ball about. At some stage, is it not reasonable to ask the question-"whats the point in that"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 03:23 PM

Problem solved. From wiki-proof alone that the world is older than some speculate:

""The world's oldest known dildo is a siltstone 20-centimeter phallus from the Upper Palaeolithic period 30,000 years ago that was found in Hohle Fels Cave near Ulm Germany.""


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 04:17 PM

I guess I have no particular reason not to be a member, bill, but though it might be in some ways advantageous to have a one to one , and thereby bypass all the badmouthing and vulgarity, those same offenders do their own case no favours, but rather demonstrate the poverty of their argument. that leaves you and I, and a couple of others debating in a civil manner. anyone else looking in can form their own conclusions, and as neither you nor I look to be bending in belief , private debate would only be on my radar if I had the time to tackle private and thread.
shimrod flatters himself. I got the joke, but the joke is on him, as either there are absolutes or there aint...I think it is known as a self refuting argument.
he also makes completely unwarranted comparison of Christian creation belief with violent islamists. if you want to go down that road again we can talk about atheist democide also.
sciencegeek.....what you posted may sound convincing , but only if what you assert can be verified. essentially, you are making the same argument as bill, and others, that all the scientific disciplines converge on, and support evolutionism [ that term is accurate enough for me , and I am not about to let you tell me the terms of discussion], but again, as I said to bill,....an argument from authority/ numbers[or variation thereof] really you are expecting us to just believe, that if we do just enough evolutionary reading we would all be evolutionists. the corollary of this, is that you are not able to produce much, if anything specific to evidence your position.....or maybe anything that creationists would grasp !
we on the other hand do deal in specifics, and I am happy to let anyone unbiased decide on explanations of the data.
mrrzy...I read the link...the usual equating of observable , testable science with unobservable ,unproven Darwinist belief.
ed...if you got an Alsatian, I got no interest in claiming its a poodle. in fact we could debate whether its one of scores of breeds..
origins, best I can tell, are a choice of 3, or variation thereof-
steady state
evolutionary
creation
does anyone still follow the first?
that essentially leaves the two options. I fully recognize that there is the faith factor in creation, though, I believe more in accord with observational science. my aim is to dent the faith of evolutionists, and inform those who accept it blindly of the evidence against it. thankfully, though being a scientist would be a great benefit, some of the more simple arguments are useful too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 04:23 PM

Shimrod!!

"You argue with him, you argue with full strength, undiluted creationism. "

So bloody what? That IS the issue! If he were just sort of vaguely unsure, we'd probably have won him over by now.

Unquestioning youngEarth creationism IS an issue. Pete presents it because of a deep conviction, and we (at least several of us) try to counter his explanations because we accept the evidence & logic of science!

It is not **relevant** to turn the entire discussion to calling him insulting names and implying his beliefs 'insult' YOU.
If you cannot refrain from remarks like "wilfully blind stubborness", you don't do yourself any favors.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 04:28 PM

sigh...

the human lifespan is simply not long enough to conduct "experiments in evolution". BUT we do have other observations which support the theory of evolution.

this is not faith, this is observation, study and peer review. once again, there is no faith of evolutionists. nada

please be respectful enough to accept that


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 04:47 PM

Ok, Pete..(you beat me by a few minutes).

I will see how it goes, but even if you are willing and have the fortitude to ignore most of the abuse, I may not be willing to see the discussion diluted by their digressions.

More a bit later.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 05:22 PM

Where is there "unobservable darwinist belief" in that article? isn't darwinism by definition science-based?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 05:46 PM

yeh bill, I understand where you are coming from. but if you get the thread closed, I predict someone will raise the subject again, such is the thinly disguised animosity to people with Christian faith...esp those termed fundamentalist because they believe the bible.
respect goes both ways, sciencegeek. true you are qualified and I am not, but as you know, not every scientist is an evolutionist either, and such are routinely dissed by evolutionists.
and since you see fit to preach at me on post 8/9/14 3;14, I shall return the compliment. it is not pride to accept the teaching believed to be Gods word, whatever faults I might otherwise have. pride, rather is shown by those who rebel against God, refusing to believe both biblical revelation, and the witness of creation.
....so , what are these observations that support evolution[ism] ?.
and they must support the microbes to man sort of evolution, and therefore going beyond the creation science model, to be convincing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 06:10 PM

"shimrod flatters himself. I got the joke, but the joke is on him, as either there are absolutes or there aint.."

Oh digital pete! 0s and 1s, yes's and no's, black and white?

"It is not **relevant** to turn the entire discussion to calling him insulting names and implying his beliefs 'insult' YOU."

But he DID insult me. I asked him a simple question and he refused to answer it and then, rather irrelevantly asked me about my scientific background. I politely complied with his request and he then proceeded to belittle my experience and career by insisting that they did not entitle me to have an opinion on evolutionary biology. I considered this to be a bit rich coming from a man with no scientific background whatsoever! He continually dreams up arbitrary rules which only appear to apply to his opponents and not to him. When one of his opponents transgresses one of his made-up rules he jumps up and down claiming some sort of great victory.

I've been debating with him for a couple of years now, and I've tried to be as polite as possible but I'm getting heartily fed up with his appalling lack of logic, his fatuous tricks and his sneaky, underhand subterfuges when on the ropes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 06:12 PM

Pete, my above question was directed to you...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 08:43 PM

"I asked him a simple question and he refused to answer it ..,"

It was only a "simple question" in the phrasing. It was NOT a simple question to answer.

""Why should I believe the account of 'creation' that is written in the Bible rather than the reality revealed by modern science?""

He did not suggest that YOU should believe it..(though he'd probably be delighted if you did)... he said HE believes it. The short answer is that he believes it because he believes it. That, of course, is not a very good answer, but it is the position held by millions of Christians... and of course, there are similar positions held by Muslims, Astrologers, racists.. and superstitious people all over the world.
   The long answer is a complex description of how he came to his belief, what he hears from those who share his beliefs and his understanding of the place of logic & evidence and how to recognize & evaluate each. I have been debating these things with Pete for several years.

You... and several others... fail to note that Pete is quite a rare bird. He takes the time to TRY to face the combined might of several learned of us who disagree with his basic concepts and definitions and, to us, odd conclusions. I enjoy... well, am fascinated by, the insight into how fundamentalist creationist/YEC positions are defended.
   I do NOT feel 'insulted' by having my position(s) misunderstood and denied. I feel frustrated and vaguely 'worried' about how the human mind can work in order to follow such amazingly awkward tracks. Pete is no threat to me, and if I understand the trends in the UK, no threat to any of you either.



I am reminded of one of my 5 or 6 all time favorite Peanuts cartoons...(this can apply to either side of an argument, but here it seems similar to the idea that yelling at Pete will help)

Lucy is standing in front of Charlie Brown, demanding..."Change your mind!"

Charlie Brown looks startled.

2nd panel..louder.."Change your MIND!"

Charlie Brown looks upset..

3rd panel..screaming"CHANGE YOUR MIND, I SAY!"

4th panel..Lucy, walking away muttering.."I wonder why it's so hard to get people to change their minds these days."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 09:59 PM

I found this linked article interesting, on why people establish illogical beliefs and why they continue to hold onto them, even when faced with significant evidence that such beliefs are not based on logic.

Below is one interesting statement I cut out:

""We need to be clear that the overall purpose of understanding the drivers of beliefs in pseudoscience or alternative beliefs is not to ridicule, but to understand.The "Ha ha ha, aren't you dumb" approach, common among some sceptics and critical thinkers, wins few arguments. It might feel easy to triumphantly declare one way of looking at the world is superior to another, but fail to note that some people get enormous purpose and meaning from the way they do.""

Why clever people believe in silly things 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 04:43 AM

Thumbs up on that one, Ed - but then, I give a "thumbs up" to almost everything you say.

We don't win people over by defeating them in rational combat. We win them over by drawing them in, respecting them while slowly presenting our own point of view.

Not that I think we'll ever convert Pete - and that's OK with me.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 01:28 PM

mrrzy, what evolutionists do , is bait and switch. they point to observations of changes in organisms, and extrapolate from that, that microbes became man, even though that can not be observed. of course, they say that other scientific areas support the theory, but just about any data can be alternately interpreted. even Darwin conceded his own observations were open to other interpretation. sciencegeek observed that human life was not long enough to do experiments in evolution [well, origins science and observational science are not exactly the same !], however observations have been made on fast reproducing organisms, such as flys, but however much change is observed the fly is still the fly.

methinks ,shimrod you are forgetting, that it was you that said your areas of science were not relevant [or similar wording] to evolution.
like I sais.....own goal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 01:39 PM

Despite the title, there is nothing special about this thread. It is merely one more series of postings by members and guests who are unable to actually create a discussion or dialog because of entrenched positions and an unwillingness to make an honest effort to understand the actual issues.

Before you can engage in meaningful dialog, you need to set the ground rules… and then try to stick to them. Think of peace talks… to even get to table there is usually a list of demands/requirements that need to be met before anyone agrees to show up.

Trust vs Faith - this is where I suspect our inability to discuss the issue of evolutionary theory in relation to faith and/or revelation dogma. Religion requires faith and science requires objective observation and trust in those who use the tool of scientific method to do so properly. That's why science relies upon peer review and the ability to replicate observations. Science relies upon trust in the process. There is no other way to build upon a body of work without the need to replicate centuries of prior work. And when an observation does not agree with what was previously learned or thought, then that's when more work is done to explain the discrepancy – either as an error or a special case that better explains the facts.   So faith and trust are not the same… faith is internal belief and can resist outside influences. Trust must be supported… if trust is betrayed, trust is lost. Trust is maintained by verification… I don't need faith to accept that 2 plus 2 equals 4… it's an equation that I can replicate for myself. I have taken college courses that deal with chemistry and physics. I know there is more than one form of carbon and that carbon 14 is radioactive and can used to determine the age of organic samples as old as 50 thousand years.   Using uranium decay we can age rocks from the earth and the moon in the range of 3 billion years. This is trust, not faith.

People of faith take from their dogma the facets that they select… facets that fit their personality. They take for themselves what them want or need to believe.   How else to explain how a single book(s) such as the Christian bible or the Islamic Koran can be used by both rational moderates and extremist zealots to support their viewpoints.    Can you really have it both ways? Which is truth and which is heresy?

Throughout this and other thread on science and religion, there has been a pervasive refusal by those supporting the creationist viewpoint to accept the assertion that science does not rely on faith. This includes Pete because he is the one posting on this thread and who keeps coming back to phrases that imply that anyone who accepts evolutionary theory as clinging to faith or belief.

I regret that Pete is like those door to door evangelists… who come to "save" you whether you need it or not.   They listen only closely enough to formulate a response that is designed to put their viewpoint as the correct one and really make no effort to understand, much less accept, what you may tell them. They parrot back to you what they have been told are legitimate arguments. You can not hold a discussion with a parrot any more than you can converse with a wall.

Pete, I am sorry that you find it so upsetting; but the world is far older than 6 thousand years and it has been billion or so years since the earliest discovered lifeforms arose. And no... we do not have all the answers, but we do have enough to support evolutionary theory and nothing at all to support the garden of Eden.

Harking back to my reference to peace talks… world peace is as likely as an actual discourse on this thread. Mores the pity.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 01:46 PM

"Refusing to believe god's word" isn't pride, its simple, rational common sense.

Why do you keep insulting people pete?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 01:56 PM

I read that rather long link, ed.
highly educated tend to accept evolution....well they would, if they are not told how it don't stack up....
the more intelligent are more likely to suffer "backfire"....
and quite a few of them here playing the "scare card"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 02:01 PM

"...extrapolate from that, that microbes became man, even though that can not be observed"

Oh, sure it can... all that is required is a 4 billion year life span.

If there is a God, HE observed it as He watched His creation develop. I do wish he'd drop in and clear all that up. Our ancestors 2000-4000 years ago were a bit confused with how they copied down the instructions.

( and yes... Ed T is usually right on the mark.. as is Lighter)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 02:07 PM

No- nothing special about the link, as it is kinda common sense to me.

Unfortunately, common sense seems not that common at times, especially when people have entrenched positions, or feel they have (infallible) superior ideas and mostly put others down - those who merely see things differently, for one reason or another. Interesting and productive debate works best with tolerence and respect (as Bill D does). But, some see it differently and feel compelled to act in other ways.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 02:15 PM

Well said, Geek.

Except for the part about the Christian bible being a single book. It is a collection of books by a number of authors. And I believe you mean the "Judaeo-Christian" bible, since the New Testament is an organic outgrowth of the old. It couldn't have come into existence without it.

(There is some disagreement about the relevance of a few established books deleted by the Council of Nicaea - after a couple of centuries of equal status. But they still appear in most bibles as the Apocrypha.)

And then there's the Book of Mormon, a very popular outgrowth of the New Testament. Whether Mormons are "really" Christians is another focus of debate - by those who love labels above all. (I have also heard the "Christianity" of Catholics impugned.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 02:45 PM

well, Lighter, I settled for book(s) because I didn't want to go too deeply down that road... I also left out the Talmoud or eastern religions... too much like a tar baby...   also a bit distracting from the point.

I once had the dubious pleasure of meeting a couple at a friend's house who got quite exicited when I mentioned a local group of performers who called themselves Orion's Belt. At first I thought they were pulling my leg, but they actually believed that humans were galactic refugees from somewhere in Orion's Belt and somehow contact was being kept through crystals... the details of their tale are fuzzy but the feeling of shock and disbelief on my part are with me still. I did manage to remain politely quiet - though I'm sure my body language would have given me away eventually.   

By my fifth year in parochial school - 8 total- I had looked closely at belief systems that rely on faith and determined that I am not a person of faith. Faith really does not make sense to me. I know enough people of faith... many different faiths at that... to accept that there are those who value or need their faith. But I see nothing in the various dogmas out there to see how one is right and all the others wrong. The best we can hope for is to be able to agree to disagree.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 03:21 PM

true bill, you would need an awful long time to observe microbe to mudcatter evolution, but the best we got, is a few human generations that can observe multiple generations of fast reproducing organisms.
as the desired effect has not been achieved, I presume evolutionists need more human generations, or ultra fast reproducers.
as a highly skilled scientist, sciencegeek, I assume you can tell me if the dating techniques know the starting conditions/amounts, whether they can be certain of the rate over the unobserved ages, whether you can be sure that nothing added or subtracted/escaped over those ages in a test sample.
in the mean time, I take the view that , if rocks of known age have been wildly incorrect, why should I trust any other reading.
yes, I should like to see you all "saved" ,but remember, it is not me starting these threads , and I am not planning on letting you have an agreefest!.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 03:46 PM

Pete... you are free to prattle on, but please do not insult me with "offers" to dispute your points. You are not listening and have no intention of listening. Your own words give us your true intentions... which are to throw whatever monkey wrench or distractions you can into what might otherwise become a productive discourse (however unlikely).

"yes, I should like to see you all "saved" ,but remember, it is not me starting these threads , and I am not planning on letting you have an agreefest!."

"Agree fest?!?" Are you so insecure that the very thought of a civil discussion of "heresy" compels you to take up the gauntlet against those who disagree with you? Might not prayer ( if not action) for world peace be a better use of your religious convictions?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 05:18 PM

"..., if rocks translations of known age scripture have been wildly incorrect, why should I trust any other particular reading?"

It does work both ways,Pete... and dating rocks is more accurate than translating many old manuscripts.... not to mention the wildly different interpretations OF the many translations.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 05:27 PM

By the way... I have reading one of Gould's books (the one discussing in overwhelming detail the Burgess Shale), and there is more relevant analysis in just one chapter on just 'how to think about science' than I can possibly condense into a few paragraphs here.

He does not just assert 'truth', he explains at length how science work, how 'scientists' work and fail to work, and how corrections are done & recognized.
I will not expect you, Pete, to go read that book, but I would wonder how, in your view, all those translations & interpretations of scripture are corrected & correlated?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 05:34 PM

If you'd care to dip into the basics, this review is pretty good

(scroll down to Opabinia if you want the very brief treatment)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 05:48 PM

Pete, please cut and paste where you think the article I posted does the bait and switch thing you mention. I don't agree that molecular evidence in dna diversion can be alternatively interpreted if it is properly understood. I don't think they are talking about what you think they are talking about, to paraphrase The Princess Bride.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 05:52 PM

I was about to mention the amazing variations in translation - respected translations - but have none at my fingertips.

The usual claim is that while some idioms have been "modernized" or "can exhibit more than one shade of meaning," the "essential meaning" of every verse is identical across translations since before KJV.

In my experience this is not always true. I do not have examples at hand, but someone else might look into it.

BTW, I grew up as a "spiritual person."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Sep 14 - 07:37 PM

One simple example of differences of interpretation is regarding the age of Methuselah... and by extension, other ages and calculations.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 02:28 AM

"methinks ,shimrod you are forgetting, that it was you that said your areas of science were not relevant [or similar wording] to evolution.
like I sais.....own goal."

And 'methinks', pete that you have NO scientific qualifications(?)So using your own 'reasoning', how is it that you are uniquely qualified to discuss science with scientists?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 04:44 AM

I could add, how many here are qualified to deal with pete? I'm certainly not a trick cyclist.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 08:30 AM

suggestion: why not concentrate instead on ALL the other religions and philosophies out there and their take on evolution?

As a greatly lapsed Catholic, I'll start with them from wiki:

Catholic schools in the United States and other countries teach evolution as part of their science curriculum. They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains why evolution occurs. This is the same evolution curriculum that secular schools teach.

uhmmm no problems here... guess they learned a lesson with the Galileo mess... knowledge 1 inquisition 0


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM

What I don't understand is that while mainstream Protestantism and Judaism have no problem with evolution, many people insist on creationism - even though creationism (and as far as I know *even a literal interpretation of everything in the bible*) is not a requirement of basic Jewish or Christian faith. (Islam is a different case.)

And there are all those other important religion followed by millions.

I was once told, rather sternly, by a Native American with a college degree that "evolution" was a white man's myth. Other Native accounts were similarly wrong. The Crow account of creation was the truth, recognized as such since the birth of the Crow nation in the immemorial past. It was *absolutely* obvious to her.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:01 AM

Interesting, science geek.

My parents enrolled me in Christian church education when I was a youth (I was never too eager to attend). I do not recall any teachings nor material mentioned, challenging evolution. I did not see it to be an issue, until the creationist stuff was raised in the media in recent years, mostly from the southern USA, if I recall correctly. Locally, it is a non-issue, except possibly it is discussed in private, among folks in some small religious groups. While the notion gets media attention, as it is odd, I suspect that few Christians or others, actually subscribe to such an strange interpretation of Christian documents. Taking it farther, and rigidly challenging the basis of important science, IMO, is just weird. But, then, weirdness is certainly not exclusive to this case.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:02 AM

So in February 2010 the Church of England declared that evolution and faith are compatible. Wonder if Pete went to spoil their little "Agreefest"? Am I correct in presuming that the King James version of the bible is the one approved by the Anglican Church? Maybe Pete should check out his version. The blurb is below:

The Church of England's governing body on Friday approved a motion that emphasizes the compatibility of belief in both God and science.

Dr. Peter Capon, a former computer science lecturer, introduced the motion arguing that "rejecting much mainstream science does nothing to support those Christians who are scientists ... or strengthen the Christian voice in the scientific area."

He urged Christians to take scientific evidence seriously and avoid prejudging science for theological reasons.

The vote comes as more than 850 congregations throughout the globe are celebrating Evolution Weekend with the aim of demonstrating that evolution poses no problems for their faith.

Religion and science are not adversaries, they say. Rather, the two fields should be seen as complementary, they maintain.

Evolution Weekend, which kicked off Friday, is supported by those of various faith traditions including Christians, Jews, Muslims and Unitarian Universalists.

"Religious leaders around the world are coming together to elevate the quality of the discussion about this important topic. They are demonstrating to their congregations that people can accept all that modern science has learned while retaining their faith," said Michael Zimmerman, founder of Evolution Weekend and professor of Biology at Butler University in Indianapolis.

Since 2004 more than 12,400 Christian clergypersons from various denominations in the United States have signed "The Clergy Letter," expressing their belief "that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist."

In the letter, Christian clergy contend, "Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information but to transform hearts.

"We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth."

Zimmerman, who is leading "The Clergy Letter Project," says those who promote "narrow religious views" and reject the compatibility of science and faith do not speak for all of the world's religious communities.

"Evolution Weekend shows that the disagreement is actually not between religious leaders and scientists, but rather between those who believe that their particular religious views should be incorporated into the science curriculum and clergy who recognize and respect the diversity of different faith traditions," he noted.

The compatibility, or lack thereof, of evolution and faith remains a hot debate among Christians. Prominent evangelical theologian Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr. has said he finds it impossible to reconcile the two. While he does not deny that changes do take place in the animal kingdom and that there is even a process of natural selection, he firmly rejects theistic evolution and the argument that the process is entirely natural and in no case supernatural.

"God was not merely fashioning the creation of what was already pre-existent, nor was He merely working with a process in order to guide it in some generalized way, nor was He waiting to see how it would turn out," Mohler has said.

Evolution Weekend is scheduled to be celebrated in conjunction with Charles Darwin's birthday and the anniversary of the publication of his book, On the Origin of Species.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:06 AM

ah yes... our Native People of North Ameica... at least since the last glacial retreat.

Have you noticed that most tribal names translate out to "the People" and other tribes are the "not People" or often derogatory terms.

Classic US vs THEM....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:58 AM

Hi pete,

May I just remind you of this recent exchange?

"methinks ,shimrod you are forgetting, that it was you that said your areas of science were not relevant [or similar wording] to evolution.
like I sais.....own goal."

"And 'methinks', pete that you have NO scientific qualifications(?)So using your own 'reasoning', how is it that you are uniquely qualified to discuss science with scientists?"

So come on, pete, what scientific qualifications have you got?? What's the matter - Old Testament prophet got your tongue?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:19 AM

Religion and science are not adversaries, ......

God said "Let there be light" and e equalled mc2.


DC


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:27 AM

just a thought, Shimrod, but since pete is very clear about his lack of qualifications in science and keeps referring to biblical references, perhaps we should really be inquiring about his qualification in that area...

a divinity degree perhaps. Surely something more than the occassional Sunday school session or weekly visit to the local church... what ecclesiastical scholarship does he have... or is merely parroting of some creationist propaganda site?

I'll wager that he is unlikely to disparage the scientific training of any medical staff that provide him with treatments or forego such treatments as a testament of his faith.... the same science that developed said treatments also supports evolution theory.

It does get a bit tiresome with their "I want to have may cake and eat it too" attitude. If you want scientific progress, you get a complete package not some adulterated piece of garbage. That's the problem with truth and reality... it gets uncomfortable at times...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:31 AM

But when did he say it Doug?

Cause and effect.

Before e equalled mc2, there was no time, so nothing could have caused it. Time is a result of the Big Bang, not a prerequisite.

A bit of a bugger for superstition when it was deduced that you didn't need a god to create the universe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM

Re the 0902 post. What a spectacularly pusillanimous & question-begging copout. As ever in attempts to reconcile the irreconcilable, both positions come out as untenable.

ROTFL.

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:37 AM

"Us" vs "Them" is a deeply ingrained universal pattern of thought.

You're born into a family: "us." A little later you identify most strongly with your tribe - religion - nation - etc. Outside there's everybody else, some of them scary and threatening, all of them more or less unpredictable.

Realistically, what other mindset was possible?

(Of course the contempt of some Mudcat Brits for Americans - see the "gun control" thread - remains inexplicable by reason.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:40 AM

A propos -- I remember some years ago OP-ing a thread called "What went Big Bang?"

It ran & ran -- Sep 09 to Nov 12; but no satisfactory answer ever emerged.

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 10:43 AM

Unjustifiable drift, Lighter. We do not contemn you; simply think you mistaken about the social desirability of guns. If we can't say that much without being accused of showing "contempt"- why, deary-me. what a sad world we do live in!

Best regards

≈Michael≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 11:07 AM

I didn't mean you, M.

There are others, who need not be named.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 11:28 AM

Today there was an online article explaining the sequencing of Gibbons' DNA, the last primate species to be finished. There were some surprises of sorts, but even the unusual results gave some new insights into how continental drift and environmental changes affected the evolutionary model and made Gibbons divide into different sub-species very early.... like about 4,000,000 years early.

This and other discoveries just add to our growing list of data which clarify the basic concepts of evolution.

Pete... you, of course, hold to the view that 'scientists are making some basic mistakes, because no DNA/tissue can be more than a few thousand years old'. In all your defenses of that claim, you end up relying on 'faith' in a religious position which itself is defended by purporting to show 'scientific' studies disputing the majority.
   In a strange circular way, those who deny evolution depend on science to argue against science. When specific anti-evolution assertions are supposedly answered, the response is to demand *more proof* in ways that go against all standards of defining scientific method. There is a principle that: "The burden of proof is on the asserter."
   Standard evolutionary theories constantly add & revise THEIR evidence, while those who deny evolution never seem to have anything new to say, but merely re-state the same objections which have already been answered...or invent new definitions to suit their pre-defined conclusions.

It's enough to make one dizzy.........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 12:13 PM

Me Lighter! Name me!

Look at me! I crave attention!

Mind you, I don't have contempt for Americans. After all, the vast majority seem to share my disgust at the gun lobby and what it says about reason, democracy and progress in the modern world. Come to think about it, try getting on in US politics without pretending to believe in god...

He says,

Dragging it back to the thread...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 12:15 PM

OK, so, why is it that the Americans, alone of the educated world, have gone back to clinging to mythology? The Scopes trial was, what, in the 40's?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 12:25 PM

What I meant to add was, and then there were generations where science was taught as normal, and then what happened?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 12:52 PM

what happened? good question, Mrrzy, and one we ask ourselves...

how did the REpublican Party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower turn into the pack of Tea Party clowns we have today???

politics, money & power are a good start. JFK's shooter was perched atop the Texas Book Depository... A giant warehouse that was owned by a private firm that stocked and distributed textbooks for public schools in north Texas and parts of Oklahoma. A single buyer with tremendous purchasing power and able to influence education in accordance with their own personal agenda. What publisher is going to offend a major customer like that?

No one has ever accused the Bible Belt of being socially progressive... heck they used the Bible to defend slavery, while the Abolitionists used the very same Bible to condemn slavery. They spawned the KKK, segregation and worse following the American Civil War. It's their legacy that continues to bedevil our country... and influence others like our friend Pete.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 01:43 PM

The Scopes Trial, just in interests of accuracy, was in 1925.

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 02:14 PM

> they used the Bible to defend slavery, while the Abolitionists used the very same Bible to condemn slavery

That should tell you something about biblical literalness right there.

Of course, the reply could be that slavery didn't matter because the soul is more important. The bible is not a political manifesto.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 02:30 PM

"..." try getting on in US politics without pretending to believe in god...


Pretty much true.... sadly.(well, above local, anyway) Dwight Eisenhower was a major example. He 'may' have had some sort of faith- or not- but when he was nominated, he had to quickly go looking for a non-controversial church, and he & Mamie 'attended' semi-regularly.

I'd love it if the media would refrain from even mentioning a candidate's religious leanings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 02:59 PM

I'd love it if the media would refrain from even mentioning a candidate's religious leanings. ....

I'd love it if they actually got their facts straight. As for FOX News... sigh ... they've turned freedom of speech into freedom to slander.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 03:12 PM

In the past, I suspect Christians, and many other religions, and non-religious folks condoned slavery, for one convenient reason or another. The research link below gives some historic Christian information.

Christianity and slavery 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 03:14 PM

another group heard from:

United Methodist Church General Conference, the only entity that speaks for the United Methodist Church, makes these three statements regarding evolution:
•        "We find that science's descriptions of cosmological, geological, and biological evolution are not in conflict with theology." (¶ 160. F. The Book of Discipline 2008)
•        "The General Conference of The United Methodist Church goes on record as opposing the introduction of any faith-based theories such as Creationism or Intelligent Design into the science curriculum of our public schools." (Resolution 5052 of The Book of Resolutions 2008)
•        "[The United Methodist Church] endorses The Clergy Letter Project and its reconciliatory programs between religion and science, and urges United Methodist clergy participation." (From resolution 1027 of The Book of Resolutions 2008)

WOW Christians who recognize that Creationism is not only NOT Science, but should be kept out any science curriculum. Nice to know that there are those who want to avoid a repeat of the Dark Ages.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 03:50 PM

Generally speaking, the vast majority of slave owners thought slavery was a great idea.

"It worked for them."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 03:57 PM

a couple weeks ago I rewatched Amazing Grace and last night rewatched Amistad... sobering

though I will admit watching the special features for Amistad and going fan girl on the ships and Mystic Seaport...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 03:58 PM

""It worked for them""

Depends on which "them".

:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 04:55 PM

Notwithstanding that the bible was written by men with an agenda.

It is whatever you want it to be, which is why it is of interest as an historical book of tales but otherwise irrelevant to anyone with the benefit of education and the heritage of sophistication.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 05:02 PM

If you insist, American slaveholders thought it was to everyone's benefit, not least the slaves'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 05:06 PM

""Anyone with the benefit of ....the heritage of sophistication""

Would this refer to the Royal family? I mistakenly understood that Eliz 2 was the head of the Church of England? Silly bunt was I.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 05:11 PM

I suspect slave holding was in existance longer and broader geographicaly than in the USA. And, many of the slaves were likely delivered by ships from the enabling motherlands. But, indeed, the USA south could have been better at it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 07:42 PM

> I suspect slave holding was in existance longer and broader geographicaly than in the USA.

As a matter of fact it was. I don't see your point.

Slavemasters like to have slaves do the work. In the American South, the owners believed that they were doing the slaves a favor.

If they weren't slaves, they'd be non-Christian heathens in Africa at the mercy of lions and hyenas, living the lives of primitives.

Slavery was said to be better: it taught them Christian values (including the virtues of work) and it protected them from wild nature.

Did other slave-holding societies think that way? Undoubtedly some did: Brazil, for example.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 07:48 PM

My point was thatslavery was not limited to the USA , directly, or indirectly. Nothing more deep than that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 08:46 PM

Slavery got its start here in the Triangle Trade, but when the cotton gin was invented, it became profitable to grow LOTS of cotton, and cheap labor was needed. When large amounts money was involved, moral concerns got rationalized. Religious rationalization was easy to work in.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:30 PM

Slavery was old, old long before the triangle trade, probably long before hte evolution of white people. People have been selling their neighbors on one side to the neighbors on the other side since there have been people; thousands and thousands of years of prehistory involved taking and selling slaves. The old testament has instructions on how to do it, the code of hammurabi says how to treat slaves and it's thousands of years older than that...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Sep 14 - 09:31 PM

Oops I missed the word "here" there - you were talking US slavery. Very recent. And they think they have a monopoly on it, but that's a whole 'nother thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 06:03 AM

WOW Christians who recognize that Creationism is not only NOT Science, but should be kept out any science curriculum. Nice to know that there are those who want to avoid a repeat of the Dark Ages.

Also Anglicans, Catholics, Presbyterians, ........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 06:49 AM

"But I would really like to talk about the "elephant in the room" - whatever it is that we profoundly disagree about."

This is the most pertinent point in the entire thread (in fact ion all these threads) and deserves further consideration. Funnily enough, I was thinking about this very issue on the train on the way home yesterday morning, so it's great it's been raised.

The answer to this isn't as simple as it first appears.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 08:18 AM

We disagree equally on many things, including epistemology, ontology, theology, and teleology.

Where to begin....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 08:46 AM

well, I really do not think that the elephant in the room is belief or disbelief in a diety...   though that does get dragged into it by both sides.

using scientific method I have to base this conclusion on observation... my own personal observations.

My own college advisor was a wonderful person who encouraged his students to explore and seek answers. He taught ecology and used evolutionary theory as one of the tools to understand the natural world as it is today. He and his family also attended services at the local Unitarian church.

Trying to be a "good Catholic" as a school child, I tried to reconcile the Inquisition with the ideals taught by Christ... how could anyone imagine that torture and brutal execution was part of the teachings of Christ... yet there they were, cross and bible in hand burning heretics. Then there were the sad examples of the burning of witches...

We were taught about the mayrterdom of saints... what can we make of those murdered at the hands of Christians? Was this the work of the devil? Did I even believe in the devil? In my case the answer is no... I neither believe in a supreme being nor an eternal adversary.

So if you can have two individuals who accept evolutionary theory... one an atheist and the other a believer... then the conflict is not intrinsic to that issue.

I would say that it is only a small, but very vocal, group that are offended by the thought that they are not the sole reason for the existence of the universe. Call it pride or hubris, but it is their egos that can't abide the threat to their own self styled "godhood"... made in the image of god... follow the rules and you will be exhalted in heaven.

I was eleven years old when I came to the conclusion that if heaven existed and was filled with the hypocrites I observed around me, then hell probably attracted a better class of people. I decided that I was a good person and for anyone else to say I was going to hell because not agreeing with them made me a "bad" person was an example of the real evil in this world. The desire by humans to control other humans.

Older now, I see positive actions than improve our condition and negative actions that harm ourselves and others. No good ... no evil. I'm Ok with htat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 09:45 AM

More discoveries...

Scientists report first semiaquatic dinosaur

Very rare find, which will mean some careful analysis to work out where it fits in the evolutionary scheme.

One more piece of evidence for Pete to explain as inadequate to prove anything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 10:02 AM

IMO, while the argument- often for arguments sake, seems big, I suspect differences among most here are small. "The elephant", may be the desire to argue and put other folks down- those folks, for one reason or another,merely see things differently, or whose perspectives (sometimes unreasonably determined), pose some type of threat?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 10:39 AM

ah... the very term, argument, has more than one meaning in regards to civility... especially as human emotions become involved.

but more to the point regarding threat... there is a very real threat to the human endeavor of investigation and promotion of information/knowledge posed by "militant" Creationists. This threat is every bit as dangerous and repulsive as Nazi book burnings, religious burning of "heretic" books - including the destruction of written records kept by pre-Columbian cultures. The list goes on about censorship promoted by religous zealots.

So I identify the proverbial elephant to be zealots - regardless of their affiliations... and those who manipulate said zealots for their own gain. Those who feel their's is the only correct belief and therefore gives them permission to discount or destroy any and all opposing viewpoints.

While pete's belief that he has every right (in fact, more an obligation) to prevent an "agreefest" of those who accept evolutionary theory is pretty innocous, it only differs in degree.

I know I have no hope of "converting" pete, anymore than he has a snowballs chance in you know where of persuading me to his viewpoint. However, there is always the hope that a reasonable presentation of as unbiased information as I can make will help others who are not polarized to make an informed choice. I try to teach or inform, not indoctrinate. At least, that is my intent.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 10:48 AM

What bothers me, is that so much of the talk in this thread about "creationism," seems to be seeking to suppress it. Some posters here seem to think that the idea of evolution is threatened by "creationism" - and that that therefore, "creationism" must be suppressed.
The suppression of ideas, even of incorrect ideas, is dangerous.

And I really can't believe that "creationism" poses any threat to evolution (evolutionism?). After all, the fittest will survive....won't they?

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jeri
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 10:57 AM

The theory of evolution is not an "ism", and people who try to label it as such wish it to be seen as equal to their beliefs. It's not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 11:02 AM

I don't see any effort to suppress it, just the inability to overlook its political ramifications - which resurfaced almost out of nowhere during the 1980 Presidential run.

Well do I remember an astonishing headline in a New York newspaper, possibly on the first day of the campaign: "Reagan Takes Swing at Apeman Theory."

Think of it: the candidate of one of the country's two major parties opening his campaign by rejecting the theory of evolution. That candidate was elected by a landslide. During his time in office, he wondered aloud if events in Lebanon might not be setting the superpowers up for Armageddon - with the implication that they would be powerless to avoid it. (Which is not to suggest he wouldn't have tried.)

Pete is not a threat. His clergyman is not a threat. Their confusions about biology are not at threat. Taken to an extreme, however, ignorance - especially willed ignorance (as much the product of free will, it might be argued, as anything else) - is a real threat, and it always will be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 11:49 AM

I have to agree with Lighter and take it further...

I got my teaching certification in 1983 and we were already seeing a real dilution in the teaching of biology at the High School level. Where colleges have to include remedial biology in order to get students up to a level where they can actually start to understand enough to move forward.

We have seen too many voters who are single issue voters... electing officials not because they will do a good job, but because they parrot the correct phrases that push folk's buttons at the ballot box.

Creationists are the new Flat Earth Society... do you want your grandchildren being taught physics or geography by people who think the eart is flat and the Lunar landing was a giant hoax? Some of these poor deluded souls have moved onto other conspiracy theories... but these people exist and seem to swell the numbers of our current Tea Party... and look at what havoc those folks are causing our country.

Abraham Washington 1492 is not a partial credit answer... it's meaningless jibberish.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM

Nobody wants to suppress a fairy story of historical significance Joe. But brainwashing children into believing it to be true suppresses their objective thought process and ability to discover the world around them.

That stupidity and child abuse does need stamping out. Telling children lies in order to control them? This is supposed to be 2014 for fucks sake!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 12:01 PM

"After all, the fittest will survive....won't they?"

Evolution isn't survival of the fittest . . . it's survival of the best adapted to react to contingency. In terms of organisms, the generalists tend to be the ones that survive whatever environmental change places stress on an ecosystem.

"The suppression of ideas, even of incorrect ideas, is dangerous."

The challenging of them is not, and perhaps here we get a glimpse of the elephant. Is it OK to challenge ideas, even the most fundamental ones that might be a foundation so much is built on? This could be scientific or religious in nature.

Can we challenge everything and anything, or are some things inviolate? Is this where faith and science part company?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 12:03 PM

"We have seen too many voters who are single issue voters..."

And far too many 'single' issues linked lumped together in order to lure voters to support one candidate or party whose basic goal may be at odds with stuff they don't want or care about. Abortion & guns & taxes & immigration and God. Which one is the candidate's real interest?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 12:45 PM

> colleges have to ... get students up to a level where they can actually start to understand enough to move forward.

About a dozen years ago I was teaching a group of third- and fourth-year college students (and perhaps even a grad student or two) a literature course that required come knowledge o history.

I was floored when they told me that *none* of their mandated high-school American history courses went *beyond 1945*!!!

And none of the students had taken an elective history course in college - at least yet.

The reason high-school history stops in 1945, of course, is partly because of an overemphasis on some earlier periods, but largely because after 1945 it becomes "controversial."

So they had "heard of" the Cuban Missile Crisis, but had no idea what it was. Martin Luther King, Jr., led the Civil Rights Movement, but what exactly did he stand for? They didn't know. Vietnam? Pretty confusing, but either protesters wouldn't let us win, or else we were trying take over Vietnam for the oil.

Watergate? Something about Nixon. "Reagan Revolution"? Oh, he was the President who won the Cold War. Everybody knows that. What *was* the Cold War? Um, America and Russia yelling at each other about politics and who was better?

That takes you to 1988. Some stuff may have happened since then.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 01:10 PM

"And I really can't believe that "creationism" poses any threat to evolution (evolutionism?). After all, the fittest will survive....won't they?"

And here is part of our failure to accurately communicate important details that support our position... or maybe even the position itself.

No dictator or polical party has been able to repeal the Law of Gravity. Pass whaterver bill they want and gravity continues to operate. Now... is gravity a directive by a supernatural being or is it the function of the nature of space/time and governed by the extrapolated rules that define the Law of Gravity?

When mankind reached the moon, they got the opportunity to perform the classic physics experiment... dropping the feather and hammer at the same time. Without the interference of an atmosphere, the objects were observed to undergo the same acceleration and strike the lunar surface simultaneously. Newton lived in the so called Age of Enlightenment and came up with his law of universal gravitation in the 1680's.   The lunar experiment was based upon the work of Galileo who had figured out much of the basics a century earlier than Newton's work.

Who was lucky not to be burned for heresy (like Bruno before him); and who was acclaimed by his peers? The difference in the two cases? Religious intolerance ruled during the lifetime of Galileo and much less so during Newton's.

Gravity went on as it has since the Big Bang... it's the affairs of humankind that was affected.

I have no intention of letting religous zealots to control science or medical research or decisions based on their silly superstitions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 01:21 PM

well said joe. seems to me , that most of the evolutionary fraternity do want to muzzle descent from their dogma. what are they afraid of.
maybe, that those facts that don't fit , might make doubters, but there also seems to be an elitist mindset that reminds me of the gnostics....only the initiated by expansive learning will understand it. this , of course is convenient, and the corollary of which is, that anything that don't fit..or is evidence against it, can be left till the expected answer can be found, because we "know" evolutionism is true !
shimrod keeps digging himself into a hole-
3 sept 01;45 pm "btw, what is your area of interest, and how does it confirm Darwinism for you"   pete
    his eventual reply.. part of...
"..of course, this had nothing to do with evolutionary biology-which of course, I have freely admitted"    4 sept 06;26 shimrod, after detailing his quite extensive science experience.
my reply was to thank him for his answer and insight.....ie that evolution was not relevant to his [regular] science.
like I said....own goal.
then there is there is diversionary tactic of my qualifications!
I freely admit, that the best I have done is distance learning ,with London bible college at certificate level, and nothing compared to the dizzy heights attained by the scientists here.
however, it is the validity of the argument that matters, not the letters a debater may have after his name.
having said that, I have no argument with shimrods concession that his science fields have no bearing on evolutionism !.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 01:27 PM

Dogma? You really are a tedious, vacuously-ignorant man. I don't know why any of you lot bother with him any more. Waste of space.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 01:56 PM

nicely sidestepped sciencegeek. just in case anyone does not know, dating methods as c14 etc operate by measurements taken in the present, but do not tell you any unseens in the unobservable past. these are subject to interpretations controlled by assumptions.
to simplify,,, for MY sake. if you saw an hourglass with sand running through, you might calculate how long it had been running, but supposing some sand had been added or subtracted, or the flow had been slowed or speeded somehow, then your calculation would be out. you were not there to observe the whole time.
you, nor I were in the long gone past, so only assumptions can be made about the amounts and conditions in the past.
and as I said, some results have been spectacularly wrong. I certainly hope that if I have to go into hospital that the doctors practise much better science than that. and if I have to have an MRI scan, I can be thankful that it had a creationist inventor !.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 02:14 PM

what are they afraid of....

ignorance coupled with arrogance, for a start.
blind faith without judgement

your bible talks about stoning people to death for adultry... is that going to be next on your agenda? where will it stop?

pete, it is your choice to remain ignorant. but it so chosing, your are not following any teaching of Christ that I am aware of... in fact, it stikes me more that you are aligned with opposing side to help foster ignorance.

you can keep insisting that 2 plus 2 does not equal 4... but 2 + 2 = 4 regardless of your assertions and distortions of facts... why do you hide from reality?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 02:56 PM

so bill, a water capable dino bigger than t rex...maybe he was leviathan ? !.
"...use science to dispute science.." so what do you think should be used to demonstrate that a theory lacks scientific validity.
"the burden of proof is on the asserter"   quite agree ! when I assert that soft tissue/dna could not last myo, I think there is experimental, observational, repeatable substantiation for that.
when you assert that evolutionism is true....prove it.
"...dating rocks is more accurate than translating many old manuscripts". i.m surprised, bill, you using this argument, as it sounds like a logical fallacy to me. which is more accurate, is open to question, but seem to me irrelevant . even if you were correct, it says nothing about the dating in question. ie even if there were massive problems with mss, it would not mean dating rocks was not problematic.
however, we have been here before, and I explained that infallibility only applied to the original ms, and i have never claimed that mistakes have not arisen since. despite this, these mistakes are relatively insignificant. your methusaleh example is a case in point.
the Masoretic [Hebrew] text has him dying in the year of the deluge, while the Septuagint [greek translation] has him expiring after.
a copyist error is the most likely explanation.

mrrzy- I don't know how to do c an p, but if you can pull out the validity of extrapolating bugs to botanist evolution from the observable adaption and variability using that link, or any other, please do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 03:48 PM

I can understand indifference... there are plenty of things in the world that facinate some and leave me quite cold...

but pete is not indifferent, he is fearful... fearful of what I regard as part of the beauty of the universe. Some find joy in equations, others in how different aspects of the universe work... but there seems to always be those who find fear instead of facination. Who not only want to run and hide, but work to deny others their joy. Why is that?

As I said earlier... science builds on trust. There are people of faith who also possess that trust. Pete is not one of those people. He has his faith and has demonstrated no ability to place any trust in those who do not accept what he accepts on faith. He gives lip service to me and others on our education and training, but then refuses to trust what we tell him. Because we are in error - at least, to him we are- by simply disagreeing with him and his beliefs.   

And Pete, you are lying to yourself when you say that you want to save me or any of the rest of us. You only care about yourself and make these absurd comments to reassure yourself that your blind faith will assure your own salvation. I truly believe this because of the smug attitude I find in your posts. There is nothing humble about your belief or your inability to even try to understand our position and what we are saying. That is why there is no hope of a meaningful dialog with you and why there is unlikely to be such in the future.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 04:46 PM

Is it possible, through science physics, that Pete 7* and sone others are connected through Quantum Coupling, where when Pete posts it has an immediate impact on others.

Just wondering, from a sciece perspective, of course.

:)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 12 Sep 14 - 04:49 PM

Sciece=Science, that one was for Musket. :)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 02:41 AM

" MRI had a creationist inventor."

Dunno where to start with that one.

Once we saw that X rays can produce images, there was a race to use magnetic flux in a similar manner. A hell of a lot of people worked on that.

Application of science.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 04:58 AM

Nobel prize for medicine awarded to MRI inventor

Published October 6, 2003

(AP)- An American and a Briton won the Nobel Prize in medicine yesterday for discoveries that led to MRI, the body-scanning technique that has revolutionized the detection of disease by painlessly revealing internal organs in exquisite 3-D detail.


Paul Lauterbur, 74, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Sir Peter Mansfield, 69, of the University of Nottingham in England were honored for work they did independently of each other in the 1970s.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 05:07 AM

New York Times, March 23 2004

" In his notes, Dr. Lauterbur acknowledged that he had been inspired by Dr. Damadian's work.

Dr. Mansfield refined the techniques, making them more practical.

Dr. Damadian built the first machine for medical M.R.I. scanning in 1977 and named it Indomitable, producing the first images of a human subject, his assistant Larry Minkoff. That machine is now at the National Museum of American History of the Smithsonian Institution."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 05:31 AM

".....only want to run and hide..." sciencegeek says.....
does it look like it ?
pride on my part ?   maybe
"the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, who can know it" jeremiah 17 v 9
seems sciencegeek is a pycho anylizer , distance diagnosing me as well.
I suppose , one way to deal with debate is to demean the debater !.

musket..i don't think I meant to imply there was no others imput in the MRI scanner. the point is, that belief in evolutionism plays no part in operational science....other than the expected references to it in papers. can you name one invention that needed Darwinist imput ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 09:44 AM

" I think there is experimental, observational, repeatable substantiation for that."

Don't think it, share it with us here.


"you were not there to observe the whole time"

Yer wot? You initially assert the vast majority of geologists, sedimentologists, petrologists, mineralogists and palaeontologists are wrong because they weren't there to observe it first hand because only first hand observations count (which is why I don't believe in Blue Whales or wombats), but in the statement on dinosaur bone quoted above you say observational data is there to show soft tissues cannot be preserved in the fossil record, which means you have data obtained by someone who sat to check the entire fossil record.

Let's see it! This is great stuff! I'd be very disappointed if you were, er, making this up again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 12:49 PM

Find a grownup and ask them

Try googling "rational person free from superstition" to find one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 01:03 PM

pete, I had a sudden vision of you the other day (hallelujah!!). You are valiantly defending an unassailable 'edifice' called The Bible from an evil 'edifice' called Modern Science. Your favourite mode of defence is attack!! You crawl all over the second edifice with a magnifying glass looking for cracks, chinks and flaws. When you find such a flaw (or think you've found one) you cry in triumph, "Ahaa! Science is wrong and that means that the Bible must be right! Hallelujah!!"

All that, of course, is nonsense. The Bible may be an edifice (of dubious unassailability) but Science isn't. Science is a collection of methods and techniques for investigating reality. Through a process called 'peer review' Science advances, changes and (dare I say it?) evolves. Genuine peer reviewers make you look like the eccentric, obsessional, not very clued-up, amateur that you are. And, of course, if Science (currently) really is wrong about some things, this most emphatically doesn't mean that the Bible must be right! There are, almost certainly, lots of other, much more plausible, explanations.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 04:35 PM

stu, I am not sure if I don't explain enough what I mean, but I am rather inclined to think that you know what I mean, even if you can get some other meaning out of my posts.
it is my understanding that it was universally accepted that there were limits to how perishable things like soft tissues and DNA [IF THE WIDER SCIENCE COMMUNITY HAS ACCEPTED ITS PRESENCE IN ANCIENT BONE YET]could last. I would be very surprised if this was just assumed, rather than based on observation . it is also my understanding, that there was never any doubt that such perishables would not be detectable in anything myo. in fact , it is reported that when the scientist discovered it, she expressed disbelief because that was indeed her understanding. but the deep time paradigm trumped formerly accepted experimental science, because we "know" they are myo !.

well shimrod, such imagery is contained in some creationist articles.
seems to me, that cracks in your edifice are not hard to find, which is hardly surprising when it has such poor foundations.
at the very base is whether nothing can produce anything, or there is a creator. I say that is self evident, and you say there is no evidence. what have you left but something out of nothing via no one.
"in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"
so what are some of these more plausible explanations then ? !.
oh, and can either of you tell me what invention could not be, without recourse to darwinistic ideas ?.
at least, I suppose, you are trying to erect an edifice, instead of still digging yourself into a hole !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 13 Sep 14 - 05:42 PM

The man who first said "In the beginning god created etc"

Where was his evidence? Did he publish his research, conclusions, reasoning, rejected hypotheses, analysis of evidence etc etc?

No? Well stop confusing it with scientific reasoning then. Give objective evidence for converting a superstition and metaphor into fact before trying to convince educated rational people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 02:56 AM

"in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"

That's not evidence! It's a myth recounted in an old book. At the moment all of the evidence that we have points to something like 'something from nothing'. But all of the evidence probably isn't in yet. Will it ever all be in? Who knows? You see, pete, there is probably no such thing as certainty ... although it's very close to certain that all knowledge is NOT contained within the pages of an old book! Just because you and your creationist and fundamentalist mates don't like some of the conclusions reached by modern science is utterly irrelevant. In the real world, real scientists, often disagree with each other - that's how science works and how it evolves (that word again!). But standing on the side-lines booing and jeering and grabbing little bits of the various, on-going debates and twisting them to bolster up your rigid, pre-conceived ideas is just - well - silly!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 03:32 AM

Don't forget the programme on Noah's Ark on Channel 4 tonight!

The Real Noah's Ark: Secret History

I confess to a certain Fortean fascination on this one from childhood when I read of the various evidences of the ark, such as The Boat Shaped Object on Mount Ararat and (of course) the Noah's Ark Drogue Stones of Durupınar. Sadly the perfect weirdness of all this is all too easily eclipsed by dour biblical literalism, but my fascination still persists, so I'll be tuning in (or at least recording it to watch at a later date) tonight's show which promises (gulp!) New Evidence. I can't wait!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: bobad
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 08:36 AM

"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."

Scott Weitzenhoffer


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 10:48 AM

Love that quote, bodad! I will have to remember that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 11:29 AM

Pigeons know when to give up.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 11:59 AM

Pete... you said:

""...use science to dispute science.." so what do you think should be used to demonstrate that a theory lacks scientific validity."

What a strange phrasing. It sounds like you are verifying that some who accept Creationism do begin with the premise that certain scientific theories 'lack validity', and only wish to cast doubt on them.
The proper concept is 'test'. Science, using proper methods and logic, *IS* the way to test, analyze and evaluate scientific theories. I have no difficulty with that. What I am criticizing is the amazing idea that it is ok to deny, condemn and dispute certain standard scientific theories as 'unproven', and then to turn around and pretend to defend those actions by claiming scientific reasons!
How can I put it very simply.... IF you understand and employ the scientific method properly, you do not find the contradictions and flaws asserted by Creationists! They are ignoring widely demonstrated and proven measurements and data and then using careless, misinterpreted and just plain silly *bad* science to dispute the science they are against because of their religious beliefs... which they assert do not NEED scientific verification.
   I find myself struggling to express simply the flawed, convoluted argument form that "creation science" is forced to use in order to oppose the vast majority of standard theories about topics like evolution! It involves several logical fallacies, and one of the most egregious is 'circular argument'. It can take long explanations to show how they can even deceive themselves by using words in non-standard ways and inserting unwarranted assumptions to appear to dispute a theory, when they are actually fooling themselves with circular reasoning

I sometimes use a quotation to show a short example of what some of this form of thinking looks like.
An old woman is quoted as saying: "Of course it was a just war, my son died in it!"
There are various unstated but assumed premises in such a remark.... but it might be very hard to talk the woman out of her feeling because it is so emotionally important to her to believe things about her son, her country and some 'other country'. She ASSUMES her son would not be involved in anything unjust, then adapts her reasoning to fit.


Think about it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 12:15 PM

""Pigeons know when to give up.""

Not when people keep feeding them. ;)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 01:33 PM

Smoked.

Had one as a starter last week in fact. The best contribution to society feathered rats offer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 03:50 PM

pretty intelligent then , them pigeons .
there you go...one silly retort to one silly quote.
bill,- it is certainly true that creationists begin with the position, that the bible is Gods word to us, and to be trusted [whilst still acknowledging some relatively minor copyist errors]. in other words, as relating to this subject, they would not start by looking at the creation account and see if it is true scientifically. the bible is our admitted presupposition. so there is a measure of agreement with you there. but scientific ideas continually change [as you's all rejoice in!] whilst we say that a reliable eyewitness is preferable to mens constantly changing stories.
is that a faith position ?....yes, but not without good scientific backup. even in the simple concept of causality, creation is a clear winner. shimrod claims there are other more plausible explanations. he has not said what these are, retreats to waiting for these explanations to be discovered, and then concedes that we might never know. is that a faith position....you bet it is !
as you know bill, I argue that religious devotion does not only relate to theism, but atheism also. you express yourself quite mildly, but most of your fellow believers express their fervent devotion to their belief by the verbal jihad evidenced here.
even if you bulk at the charge of religious, it is imo, mistaken to think that scientists are totally impartial, and rather, actively pursue what conforms to their preconceived ideas, and worldview. in other words evolutionists have their presuppositions too
of course, my critics will remind me that I am not a scientist.....to which I reply.....shall I quote evolutionist scientists again to reinforce my point ?.
circular reasoning?....you mean like...we know dinos are myo, so soft tissue and DNA must be able to survive that long....
"....proven measurements and data..." no problem with that, its the interpretation of these that are often wrong. the reasoning of, and examples of, often posted before.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 04:01 PM

whilst we say that a reliable eyewitness is preferable

You ever read the studies on the accuracy (or rather, inaccuracy) of eyewitneess testimony, pete?

Also, which translation (these keep changing) of the several "bibles" are you referring to?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 04:20 PM

pete just put that devotion applies to atheism as well as theism.

Wrong

Most people are too intelligent, stable enough to live without a fantasy to justify themselves and believe what can be believed.

Don't judge rational people by your own silly inadequacies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 04:28 PM

have you got a bible , greg, that don't say "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" ?.
if the eye witness is God, that is supremely reliable. if you read the whole post, you will , I think, see that this is my presuppositional position. I admit to my presuppositions, but you do not, but most of your antagonistic posts belie any claim you might make to non bias.
ps, as your post was not abusive this time, I have answered. thankyou.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 04:47 PM

So . . . If God is the eyewitness, he wrote those words himself did he? That's a first hand account from God himself is it? He, in his infallibility, actually put those words down?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 05:15 PM

" ... it is certainly true that creationists begin with the position, that the bible is Gods word to us ..."

Have they (or you) got any evidence for that? Or do they (and you) believe that the Bible is God's word ... err ... because it is written in the Bible that it is? I seem to remember that you're familiar with the phrase "circular reasoning", pete? Is there any independent evidence that confirms that the Bible is God's word?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 06:20 PM

have you got a bible , greg, that don't say "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" ?

Sure do, pete - the Wycliffe Bible. There are others.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 06:42 PM

"as you know bill, I argue that religious devotion does not only relate to theism, but atheism also. "

As YOU know, this really bothers myself & others. You are trying to imply that it is 'denial' of God. A-theism simply means 'not theism'. It is merely the absence of belief. The assertion by theists is that there is a God. A-theists say "you haven't convinced me, and I will not be convinced without a different kind of evidence than you offer." They don't begin with a claim... they respond to a claim. Theists assert... atheists resist. (Agnostics do have sort of an opinion... "it might be and it might not")(Skeptics, like myself, distrust certain ideas by the way they are defined and expressed.)

And calling God an eyewitness is a gross form of assuming what you wish to prove. We need and eyewitness TO God... and Moses (if there was a real, historical Moses) seems to us skeptics as having made claims impossible to verify.

"scientific ideas continually change [as you's all rejoice in!] whilst we say that a reliable eyewitness is preferable to mens constantly changing stories."

Rejoice? Not exactly... We just see changing ideas as being honest about the addition of data and analysis. As to "reliable eyewitness"...you can't even get one to most auto accidents! 'Mens constantly changing stories'..... like all those different translations & interpretations of scripture? It simply won't do to assert that the 'first' version was inspired and then some mistakes were made in copying if you don't have and can't identify the first version! If 'mistakes were made', how can you be sure that some basic facts were gotten wrong in the 2nd copy and that '6 days' merely meant "a long time"? etc. etc. etc. And who knows what some copyist thought a leviathan was? Nothing we can identify could both swallow a man and still spit him out.

I guess I will never understand how a group can hold to literal versions of creation when all you'd need is to 'believe' in God and that he made it work like science is discovering.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 04:19 AM

It's unfortunate that Atheism is seen as a negative term. It's akin to Non Smoker - it's something people don't do despite the fact that people were Atheists countless aeons before ever they were Theists, just as they were Non Smokers before ever there Smokers. Non Smokers & Atheists breath the good clean air of Cosmic Default without the noxious fumes of cigarettes and religion afflicting our minds and bodies with carcinogens that run very much contrary to the common good.

Atheism is not a matter of exclusive subjective faith, it is a matter of all-inclusive objective reality, one which unites each and every one of us whether one chooses to believe it or not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 04:56 AM

You may have the academic definition of the word right, Bill; but I'm not so sure that what you describe is the reality of it. It seems to me, that a good number of people who call themselves atheists, go well beyond simply not having a belief in God - they actively deny that God exists. And in this age of Internet Infallibility, they're avid crusaders against those who dare to profess any sort of belief in a deity. We have some of those crusaders right here at Mudcat. These infallible atheists are every bit as rigid and intolerant, as are the religious fundamentalists they oppose.

The ones you describe as saying, "you haven't convinced me, and I will not be convinced without a different kind of evidence than you offer." - those are the ones I think of as agnostic.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 06:40 AM

I actively deny there are beasties under the bed!

What do you mean by actively deny Joe?

The reality is that there is no more evidence for a god concept than there is for the beasties, so why say "actively deny?"

You make it sound as if normal people capable of rational thought have some disfunction?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 06:40 AM

These infallible atheists are every bit as rigid and intolerant, as are the religious fundamentalists they oppose.

Funny how as a Believer you expect Atheists to be Agnostic. Are you agnostic, Joe? Where's the evidence for your belief? As an Atheist I see plenty of evidence everywhere I look - at least an absence of evidence - for God only exists in a scriptural context with a vague sort-of mythological provenance by way of a twisted mirror-metaphor on the very worst attributes of patriarchal human nature based on earlier pantheistic traditions. There's nothing so very fundamentalist in saying this - or infallible, or intolerant and rigid : it's simply pointing out the obvious.

Religious people actively elect to believe, just as smokers actively elect to smoke, and junkies actively elect to use heroine. Non-religious people don't seek that sort of fix, rather they find it in the everyday wonders of cosmic nature or the joyful diversity of human society whatever they believe or don't believe and feel, rightly, we'd be better off without the obfuscations of a non-existent God because nature is the whole of the case & every more wondrously so the more that is discovered.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:38 AM

> nature is the whole of the case

Well, yes, but the human mind is part of nature, and if that mind everywhere on earth has demonstrated the need to believe in a meaning-imparting deity or deities to keep it from emotional disorganization and collapse, complaining about it seems to be extraordinarily small-minded.

The most significant argument is not with theism but with the negative - and often dangerous - effects of certain beliefs and practices. (Or with deism, for that matter, which at least requires fewer imaginative assumptions.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 11:38 AM

"The ones you describe as saying, "you haven't convinced me, and I will not be convinced without a different kind of evidence than you offer." - those are the ones I think of as agnostic."

Is that is agnosticism? I don't deny the existence of God or the Gods or endless Gods, and I don't deny that if they did exist they were unknowable. I have, however, zero data that confirms the existence of a deity of any kind and haven't seen any, apart from personal experience which is gloriously unquantifiable.

So I'm open to the possibility God or Zeus whomever, but although I don't deny their existence, I don't accept it either. I'm open to be convinced, but not by hearsay. That might seem like missing the point but as far as I'm concerned if that means I fail the test, so be it.

This opens the possibility if we could somehow detect the presence of God using scientific methodology (perhaps not by direct observation Pete), would She still be divine? Might She simply be a being so old, massive and powerful that Her technology and/or ability to alter the fabric of the universe seem (as the man said) indistinguishable from magic?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:56 PM

"... that a good number of people who call themselves atheists, go well beyond simply not having a belief in God - they actively deny that God exists. "

but, you can't prove a negative, so why bother going about it?

Yes Joe, there are those... it is hard to define simple categories. Humans have more sub-categories than we have words for. Perhaps, pragmatically, 'atheist' needs sub-categories, just as 'believer' of 'Christian' do. A 'fundamentalist atheist'? to go along with 'fundamentalist Christian'? I personally try to follow the etymological rules in order to clarify the point I am making, but it ain't easy when everyone has their own notions of what words convey.

There really are, as Jack Blandiver notes, those who simply don't fight a battle that they see can't be 'won' by either side. I call myself a skeptic because that word still carries the connotation that I wish to express.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 01:00 PM

and if that mind everywhere on earth has demonstrated the need to believe in a meaning-imparting deity or deities to keep it from emotional disorganization and collapse, complaining about it seems to be extraordinarily small-minded.

A big If... But no, it's not small minded, on the contrary. It accepts all of the above as one small part of the picture, but it also accepts (as we must) that they can't all be right, but they can all be wrong - and that wrongness is inherent in the nature of religious belief, that the real dangers come from believing it to be true for others.

So we fit that into the Human Scheme, our capacity for delusion and idiocy which exists side by side with The Questing Mind which will never come to an end of its questioning, that the next lot of questions haven't even been dreamt of yet. Meanwhile, the myth process continues - from The Kalevala to Rendezvous with Rama - in the hope that no one starts to believe any of it, or, more to the point, judging others for being of a different mythic mind.

Atheism and Adeism are still the default states. God is no more driving the universe than Captain Kirk is at the helm of the Starship Enterprise.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:31 PM

It's this shallow mindset that thinks everybody has considered religion and rejected it. Really gets my goat.

To a growing population it is something many have never considered. As said earlier, religion is elective. I would add that it is socially coerced in some quarters too.

I suppose if I were superstitious I'd feel less embarrassed about it if I thought everybody had been earlier in their lives and lost their way.

Dream on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:51 PM

reasons for "non-faith" are as varied as the reasons for the various faiths... and the number of different belief systems (both present and historic) should stand as mute evidence to the lack of unity among believers...

so why should it be any different for those of us who do not profess faith in "whatever"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 06:13 PM

I wouldn't say that I deny the *possibility* of deity, it's just not a *reasonable* hypothesis if you actually have an education.

I don't have any belief in anything supernatural, and haven't since I was too old for Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny. Don't remember ever believing in ghosts or ghoulies or things that go Bump! in the night on purpose. But were actual evidence for it (such that you wouldn't need faith to believe) to start appearing, I would adjust that conclusion along with any other critical thinker.

However, or furthermore, I also do not see any reason in today's world to pretend that it's reasonable for people to attribute anything we actually do know how it works, to deity.

I think people should not be permitted to "protect" their beliefs by avoiding reality.

I do not believe that freedom of religion means freedom from education.

I think keeping evolution out of science in K-12 education is child abuse and should not be allowed.

Any mollycoddling of these ridiculous beliefs is tantamount to betraying humanity, and it IS betraying our intelligence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:24 PM

Ummm... Mrrzy... 'amen'... however you wish to take it. ;>)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 01:04 AM

Please note that I did not and would not say that all atheists are rigid, intolerant crusaders against belief. Here's what I said: It seems to me, that a good number of people who call themselves atheists, go well beyond simply not having a belief in God - they actively deny that God exists. And, I might add to explain what I mean by actively deny,, these people seem driven to redefine, refute, and ridicule religious belief.

Most religious people believe what they believe, because it works for them - not because they feel compelled to prove themselves right and somebody else wrong. Most atheists are the same - they don't believe because believing doesn't work for them, and then they go on with life and do their best to get along with the people they encounter.

But there are a few fundamentalists among both theists and atheists, and these people just don't seem to fathom the concept of accepting and respecting people who see things differently. Maybe that's the primary aspect of a fundamentalist mindset - an obsession with proving oneself right and others wrong.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 01:44 AM

Good point, Joe. For some, justifying their existence involves bringing others around to their POV, whether for or against a god. I would hazard a guess, though, that there is a subset that finally feels free to push back after being bullied by the believers for a long time. It is certainly that way with non-smokers who were put upon for many years by smokers, until the wind shifted, so to speak.

I haven't read the entire thread, I just dropped in at this point to see who was here and how the topic had evolved. So this is a statement without reference to anything before about five posts back.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:23 AM

I still can't see how you can be a fundamentalist on a subject that is other peoples's hobby.

You can complain about how superstition shouldn't be allowed to influence society, but that doesn't make you a fundamentalist.

From most Christian cults treating gay people and all women as second class citizens to beheadings in the false name of an excuse some religious men refer to as God, it ain't rational people who are fundamental.

Trust me.

I'd personally like the shops to be open all day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:54 AM

""I would hazard a guess, though, that there is a subset that finally feels free to push back after being bullied by the believers for a long time.""

I suspect this may be so, especially for some, with a big dash of bittnerness, for one reason or another.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 07:26 AM

go well beyond simply not having a belief in God - they actively deny that God exists.

Well, eh, yeah. That's the nature Atheism. It goes even further than that - they'll also tell you why God doesn't exist by pointing out the evolution of such thinking from basic mythological animistic impulses (in which God emerged as a metaphor of Nature) to hardline religious orthodoxy (in which nature was belittled as a metaphor of God). They'll also point out that Religion was killed off by Philosophy, and Philosophy by Science; that Human Spirituality exists in our relationship with eternal infinity of the quantum cosmos which is far richer than anything we've dreamt of hitherto and all the more so for being utterly Godless.

On the latest Sky at Night (BBC's monthly half-hour astronomy slot) it was suggested that humanity has only been truly intelligent for the last 100 years or so. A sobering thought!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 08:40 AM

> far richer than anything we've dreamt of hitherto and all the more so for being utterly Godless.

Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on the observer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 08:50 AM

You don't deny God exists any more than you deny the washing machine is connected to a sock sucker, cos be buggered if I can ever pair them up afterwards...

There is nothing to deny. Not sharing a delusion isn't denying it, it's noting old fashioned custom and superstition still exists.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:06 AM

Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on the observer.

Not at all, because this is a common objective reality we all share in whether we know it or not. Thus we can sit in our respective regions of planet earth tapping away on our laptops, MacBooks and PCs having this discussion. It's not a matter of opinion that these things work - they work because of the universal laws of nature.

Of course the observer might be of a a deistic cast of mind, believing it all to be the work of a creator, but the onus is on them to say why they think this to be the case when all the available evidence indicates otherwise. I have heard it said that God created the illusion of his non existence, in which he did a very through job. 10/10 in fact.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:14 AM

It's hard for some to accept the concept of a universe indifferent to our suffering.

Except . . . we are the universe made conscious, and for the most part are not indifferent to each other's suffering.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 09:53 AM

It is the certainty that defines the fundamentalist.
An intelligent atheist might say God is unlikely, improbable and unproveable, but not impossible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:07 AM

It all depends, Jack, on what you mean by "far richer."

In other words, on the observer.

Reality is objective, but we appreciate it in different ways.

You believe science makes it richer; others may believe that the continued interest of their ancestors in them makes it richer, or the existence of a glorious afterlife, or the assurance that God thinks they're doing good works.

The Greeks thought the Olympians, unpredictable as they were, made it plenty rich.

The estimation of "richness" has nothing to do with "what's out there," everything to do with what's in one's own head.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:43 AM

"An intelligent atheist might say God is unlikely, improbable and unproveable, but not impossible."

And that is what many, if not most, of us do say. But saying that it no impossible DOES NOT mean, much imply, that any given alternative scenerio is automatically to be assumed to be correct. And that is what annoys me about fundamentalists and zealots... they make no allowance for alternatives to their own thinking/beliefs. There is no "agree to diasgree" in their way of thinking...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 11:38 AM

BillD, I'll take it as the crusty old southern country doctor in Red Planet kinda translated Ipsi Dixit - they sure said a mouthful!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 12:29 PM

An intelligent atheist might say God is unlikely, improbable and unproveable, but not impossible

Intelligent? That's barely literate. All the indicators are that God is impossible other than in terms of highly specialised fiction and absurdist make-believe. He he thus on the same level as the Starship Enterprise and Mr Bean - I derive great joy from both these latter, even the former, but never in the sense of literal truth or anything so conceited as sacred. Not only do we do such concepts a disservice by taking them literally, we do ourselves a disservice by allowing that our mythic dreamings can be in any way true.

If we allow for the God of Abraham being real, then we must allow for them all being real. That's quite a pantheon of possibility you have there, which must also include astrology, ETH-UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, Ghosts, Trolls, Goblins, and a myriad of subjective supernatural bogeyman humanity has created by way of folklore down the ages. Far better we understand these things for what they are than what they, most evidently, are not .

As Carl Sagan says : '"It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 01:22 PM

As Carl Sagan says : '"It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out."   And I say be careful what you wish for...

When hubby was young and went on long car trips with the family, his spinster aunt would keep him quiet by betting him a million bucks he wouldn't find a pink cow in the many farms they would pass.

Sure enough, that came to an end the day he spotted a very sunburned Holstein out in a field. LOL ... He never did get that million bucks.

Anyway... I'm not holding my breath waiting for divine revelation, nor am I walking around with lightning rods to protect myself from bolts from above.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:05 PM

Jack, could you provide a list of "All the indicators are that God is impossible."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:07 PM

They say their god is infinite.

I know what they mean now. I can't say he doesn't exist any more than my next door neighbour's Aunty's podiatrist can say my super sock sucker isn't attached to the washing machine.

If something has credence simply by the fact you can't prove an abstraction is otherwise, we'll be here all night!

Prove your god is anything more than an invention of man to control others and I will accept the sock sucker is just an excuse for my domestic inadequacy.

In the meantime, laughing at people who are superstitious is not a sign of lack of intelligence, it is enjoying the absurdity of it still being relevant to shallow people.

No problem in people having hobbies, it's when hobbies start affecting people not involved in silly games that they deserve scorn and ridicule.

I remember saying, just as a turn of phrase, when a work colleague said he accidentally forgot to pay for a newspaper he took at the train station, that I would pray for him. He took me seriously and said, "You don't believe in that fucking rubbish do you?"

No, I said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:24 PM

?Jack, could you provide a list of "All the indicators are that God is impossible."

FKWT, would you pleas provide a comprehensive list of all the hard evidence that God exists?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:25 PM

Yes, yes, yes we've been here before - but if God exists, His existence raises more questions that it answers. I'm talking, of course, about 'infinite regress'. If God created the Universe, who, or what, created God - and who or what created the God creator etc., etc., etc.?

At this point, pete, and his fundamentalist mates, look all pious and intone that "God is unknowable". But that's just a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card - and I don't trust people who pull 'get-out-of-jail-free' cards. In addition, if they're not prepared to even think about the Big Questions like the possibility of infinite regress and its implications, they certainly shouldn't be tinkering about with questions connected with evolution and other areas of contemporary science which make them uncomfortable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:27 PM

You pray... I'll say 'amen'.

Those who care will understand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 03:07 PM

"Jack, could you provide a list of "All the indicators are that God is impossible."

Could you provide a single indicator he is?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:00 PM

we certainly have been here before, shimrod, though your memory is a little hazy. I said that God was eternal and spirit, though of course, he is in a sense also unknowable in his complete attributes. can there be such a thing as infinite regress ?. the Christian has an answer from the bible. you don't accept that. I do. equal ? well, as I said before you are left with believing that everything came from nothing via no one. that is totally against science and logic. you and your fellow believers elect to believe that. atheism [whatever your dictionary says] must believe in some sort of self creation. that goes against logic and science. is that a faith position...you bet it is ! and then jack says God is impossible, perhaps the most outlandish of his eloquent but unsubstantiated assertions. and the animosity with which most exhibit, it seems, betray evidence of their religious devotion to their no god worldview.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:37 PM

and then jack says God is impossible

I do indeed, because we can trace his invention in the inventions of scripture which are neither infinite nor eternal, but only a few thousand years old, before which time - no God. Other Gods - lots of Gods, any amount of the bloody things, but not the idiot bastard God of the Bible. And I say this without animosity to anything or anyone other than a total disrespect for the whole biblical mythos which reads like a particularly bad episode of Dr Who.

God is VERY knowable in terms of fiction, folklore and bad myth. Look outside scripture - look at nature, look at the sun, moon, stars, clouds, galaxies, planets - all the things that move our out hearts to a sense of the numinous. It's right there - Nature, the Cosmos, the whole of the case in all its Godless & godless glory.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:58 PM

"well, as I said before you are left with believing that everything came from nothing via no one. that is totally against science and logic."

It's neither against science nor logic! Your assertion that everything has to have been created by someone is actually an hypothesis based on an analogy i.e. in your very, very, very, very etc. limited experience of 'everything', pete, people create (some) things. That does NOT mean that everything has to have been created by someone! Where's the evidence to support your hypothesis? Oh and by the way - the Bible doesn't count as evidence - it's just an old book containing, mainly unsubstantiated (or poorly substantiated) stories. Oh, and further by the way, I'm not expressing a 'belief' here - I'm merely asking you to produce evidence in support of your belief.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:24 PM

God is not an impossibility. The problem for God and his advocates is that he is, by any stretch of even the wildest imagination, extremely improbable. Nothing in nature is inexplicable. Much in nature remains to be explained, but we are closing in, and the endeavour is wonderful. But as soon as you insert that dismal copout of an "explanation" for everything, in other words God, you are sidelining that wonderful thing that you might have expected the God-squadders to laud above all other human attributes, our intellect. You can't believe in God and also be entirely rational. Not that being entirely rational is always a great thing, as we are not all Mr Spocks, and a good thing too. But to have your life, your behaviour, your relationships and your moral compass all based on an irrational notion is a bad thing. Just think it through. Nothing you see in nature cannot be explained by natural laws, and whatever we have yet to understand will one day be explained once we understand those natural laws better than we do. But God is above natural laws. He is supposed to explain all of nature and the laws that govern it, yet be not just above nature but also against nature. All-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful, no beginning and no end - all these supposed attributes are counter to nature. But the real clincher is that there is absolutely no evidence for his existence. Not a scrap. But that doesn't mean he doesn't exist. It just means that he's about as likely as a duff bottle of Hirondelle. I'm an atheist and I don't know whether God exists or not. But I'm not what you might call fifty-fifty.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:26 PM

oh, and of course, creation is an indicator that he is, greg !

bill, a lot of the above has bearing on your post too.
"...they don't begin with a claim..." I have read lots of atheist claims here. and of course the underlying assumption is that we all and everything came from nothing. I suppose I could do the atheist tactic and say, you cant prove a negative, so maybe it could make itself. only trouble is, it would not be entirely honest, as I believe it accords with science and logic to say there must be a creator.
it may "bother" you that I describe atheism as a religious belief, but I am not intending to leave atheists comfortable in their unbelief, it seems to bother you, even as a "skeptic", but I guess we can agree that we speak from our own perpestive
"..God as an eyewitness." I was not trying to convince you of that, merely expressing what my preconceptions are. I am fully aware that I could never provide enough evidence to convince you of the bibles trustworthiness....let alone the crusading atheists.
having said that, your dismissal of my explanation for the [minor] mistakes, fails to take account of the much greater agreement of most of the mss with each other. despite gregs claim that gen 1v1 does not read the same in the Wycliffe, there are, I am sure ,no biblical ms that say anything other than God creating, and in 6 night/day cycles.
that is further attested to in ref to the Sabbath commandment [exodus20 v 11], so it is clear that deep time is not taught in scripture.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Ed T
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:33 PM

It's is not only religeous folks who have all the odd beliefs/notions. Scientists can also come up with a lot of weird stuff (theiries and notions) -some of it "loosely hitched" to quantum theory science (aka quantum physics).


scientific notions/theories linked quatum science 


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:55 PM

I see jack has proved the point , that he is actively against [he would say the idea of] God, and prefers to stifle discussion by aggressive badmouthing.
"...nothing in nature is inexplicable. much remains to be explained... " says steve. now that seems like, either a contradiction, or a faith position....and a very big one.
"..but we are closing in..." another faith statement.
shimrod, as I keep saying, I admit to my presuppositions, but causality and the impossibility of an infinite regression, imo, makes a logical case for an eternal, supernatural creator.
so, where is the evidence for your belief/hypothesis that there is no need for a creator ?.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:15 PM

" ... but causality and the impossibility of an infinite regression, imo, makes a logical case for an eternal, supernatural creator."

No they don't!

Define "eternal". Define "supernatural".

" ... where is the evidence for your belief/hypothesis that there is no need for a creator ?"

I have not expressed a belief and neither have I formulated an hypothesis.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:20 PM

oh, and of course, creation is an indicator that he is, greg !

What the fuck is that supposed to mean, pete???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:53 PM

and prefers to stifle discussion by aggressive badmouthing.

I'm only bad-mouthing a fictitious God based on the crap in the bible in which he comes across as an idiot misbegotten bastard. As Richard Dawkins famously put it in The God Delusion:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

Amen to that! Though I doubt the God of the New Testament is any better. Dawkins again:

"It's a horrible idea that God, this paragon of wisdom and knowledge, power, couldn't think of a better way to forgive us our sins than to come down to Earth in his alter ego as his son and have himself hideously tortured and executed so that he could forgive himself."

*

so, where is the evidence for your belief/hypothesis that there is no need for a creator ?

The evidence is EVERYWHERE and in EVERYTHING (excluding religious fiction, natch). God is in NONE OF IT. It is not belief, it is not hypothesis, it is simple commonplace beautiful joyful all inclusive objective natural REALITY.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 07:40 PM

I'm not "against" God. I could say that I'm just waiting for him to turn up. No luck so far. Nor is it a "faith position" to accept that, whilst science has explained a lot, much is still left to be explained. It is not a "faith position" to predict that much that is yet to be explained will be explained by scientific endeavour. After all, that is exactly how everything we understand about the world so far has been explained, and by no other means. The trouble with you and your ignorant ilk, pete, is that you wish to superimpose upon us an "explanation" for the mysteries of the universe that is infinitely more inexplicable than those mysteries themselves. He is infinite, all-powerful, all-knowing and all-seeing. No law of nature can apply to this fellow, yet we are supposed to accept that he is the explanation for everything that has either been resolved already or is still being closed in on by good science (which you know nothing about, and, sadly but entertainingly, which you appear to be proud of your pig-ignorance of).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 07:43 PM

"Impose" would have sufficed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 07:53 PM

Infinite regression is less opposed to reason than the existence of an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful, all-benevolent, all-present deity, because infinite regression is just one phenomenon (regression) extended infinitely into the past.

The deity, on the other hand, has many infinite attributes, not just one - and infinite regression in the form of eternal existence in the past is one of them.

Furthermore, infinite regression, if true, does not conflict in any way with what we see around us every day of our lives.

Zoroastrians believe in two gods - one good, one evil - who are constantly at war in the world. That at least is more consistent with everyday experience.

It is very difficult to believe that the sort of unitary deity described above could approve of things like Ebola, rabies, and the Japanese earthquake-tsunami, none of which can logically be chalked up to the human misuse of free will.

Unless, of course, Original Sin is invoked to explain and justify them. But the only evidence of Original Sin is the assertion of it in the bible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 10:09 PM

Deity didn't "approve" of ebola, rabies etc, they made them happen, I thought, if you went that way.

The above "where is the evidence for your belief/hypothesis that there is no need for a creator" shows a lack of understanding of the concept of a hypothesis. You posit the null then seek evidence of its *contrary* - there is no such thing as evidence *for* a null hypothesis. It is the position that a creator is needed that calls for evidence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:33 AM

    Thread #155384   Message #3660870
    Posted By: Bill D
    16-Sep-14 - 02:27 PM
    Thread Name: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
    Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion

    You pray... I'll say 'amen'.

    Those who care will understand.




I think there's a song (click) in there....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 04:04 AM

""where is the evidence for your belief/hypothesis that there is no need for a creator" shows a lack of understanding of the concept of a hypothesis. You posit the null then seek evidence of its *contrary* - there is no such thing as evidence *for* a null hypothesis."

Very well expressed, if I may say so, Mrrzy?

So you see, pete, the onus is on you to produce evidence for a creator. You might also like to brush up on what the word "logic" means. It certainly does not mean "something that I can believe in" - as you seem to think it does!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 04:14 AM

What's all this about atheist claims pete?

There's no such thing.

You re the one with the unrealistic proposition. Justify your claim rather than saying that dismissing your claim is a claim in itself.

Which it isn't.

Steve, you are being too realistic, logical and accurate. I've told you about this before. No use, it goes over too many heads. You can't tell a mason not to roll up his trouser leg...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 04:52 AM

Greg and Stu, I never claimed, and do not claim there is "hard evidence that God exists" or that there are any "indicators" that he does.

Jack did state, " All the indicators are that God is impossible"

It is reasonable to ask what those indicators are.
Do you know what they are?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 05:56 AM

It is reasonable to ask what those indicators are.

Essentially it comes down to two things : 1) Understanding the mythological / folkloric origins of the very concept of God and 2) Understanding the utter redundancy of the concept in the light of ongoing scientific discovery. Also, it's about the incompatibility of the concept within the sheer diversity of 'supernatural' options on offer - the old 'They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong' equation. I remember an old very non-PC cartoon featuring a psychiatric ward full of delusional messiahs. The caption, spoken from one orderly to another, was : "They can't ALL be Jesus."

As ever, objectivism is the key. The human predeliction for mythological invention and storytelling is NOT evidence of God, Gods, UFOs, Ghosts, Fairies, Monsters, Angels, Demons, Men in Black etc. rather evidence of our equal capacity for a) inventiveness and b) delusion. Basically, we invented God in our ignorance and science has shown us the error of our ways as it reveals to us the origins of the universe, our solar system, our planet, the evolution of life and, ultimately, ourselves.

Then comes our culture, our myths, our dreams, our religions, our wild imaginings born from the very depths of awe, wonder & terror from the dawn of human consciousness that gave rise to cognition and language. And there we were, unique in all of nature; the very cosmos contemplating itself and asking itself : 'What the fuck???' and coming up with a myriad of different certainties all of which claim monopoly on the truth.

50,000 years or so down the line, Science asks the same question, though it doesn't make shit up to fill in the blanks, much less does it put ourselves at the centre of it all. As it said on The Sky at the Night recently, humanity has only been truly intelligent for 100 years - the nature of that intelligence is a) peer reviewed and b) ever-evolving. Who knows where we'll be in another hundred?

Fear not ye faithful Godly believers! Chances are we'll fuck it up and be plunged back into an apocalyptic pagan / Abrahamic nightmare of rancid tribalism in which our Gods and Demons will rule supreme once more. Sounds like a fair few of you are already there, cozying in for the long dark night of the human soul when Planet Earth will be cold and silent once more...

Still, at least the wildlife might get a chance to recover. Every cloud, as they say...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 06:41 AM

steve, whatever science has discovered, you cannot know that it will explain what it has'nt as yet. you just believe that based on your a priori assumption that there are only naturalistic explanations to be found.
lighter, that is a clever argument , but just because the simplest explanation involves belief in a deity encompassing multiple attributes, does not mean that infinite regression is more viable. do you think that stacks up in observational science, better than , everything [that has a beginning] must have a sufficient cause ?
yes, as a biblical Christian, I do believe original sin is the reason and outcome of all that is evil and disastrous. why should zorastrianism be considered a better explanation.
mrrzy, whether or not I misuse word- hypothesis- does not alter the fact that , if you think about it at all, you must believe in self creation, or steady state of some description .
you posit nothing to start with [I presume ] ,I posit God.
despite claims that there is no evidence for him, it is at least logical that if there is a deity/creator , creation follows.
if there was absolutely nothing, where is the logic in anything from that [ except that "that" implies something when actually there is [         ....       ]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 07:48 AM

Jack, neither of those two indicators make God "impossible."
If there was any "indicator" that made God impossible, there would be fewer intelligent people who believe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:35 AM

I don't think intelligence and belief are incompatible; just as I don't think believers are fools. I know a lot of very clever believers - and a lot of very idiotic atheists. Like music, it's all a matter of taste. This has nothing to with the nature of the God Myth, or the nature of belief, or yet of religion which serves to engender and exploit that belief in a myriad of ways all of which are utterly inconsistent with one another. I spend a lot of time immersed in religious folklore, maybe too much (pity my long-suffering wife last week on the Three Hare Trail in darkest Devon!) but it's something of a passion of mine. The humanity of these things is paramount, just as an awareness of the inhumanity inherent therein is worth bearing in mind, but such is life.

There is one common reality we all share in; we are all born from it, and we we will all die back into it. Matter can't be created or destroyed, like it says in the Egyptian Book of the Dead : Existence is for all eternity. We are starstuff. As human beings we tell stories, and some of them catch on, for whatever reason. This doesn't make them true. Science is ongoing and revelatory, it is engendered by enlightenment that is (slowly but surely) replacing a need for the supernatural with something far greater than anything we have ever conceived of hitherto. Furthermore, it is real, it is everything, it is everywhere and it is common to us all. Unlike God, who is just a character in a book of noxious fairy tales told to children to get them to behave. Thus do I maintain, God is impossible simply because he is nowhere else other than in human fiction and, just like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, there are NO indicators whatsoever of him being a possibility. Least of all belief, no matter how intelligent the believer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:45 AM

That reminds me. I clean forgot. I am a signed up member of The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I signed up in order to put it on a form I had to fill in when doing some public sector advisory work.

We pastafarians tend to forget our faith from time to time. A bit like anybody of any other faith when it suits them...

pete says sin is the reason there is so much evil. Considering Christians consider themselves sinners, stop sinning then!

Never mind. Let he who is stoned cast the first sin.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 09:19 AM

You can probably tell me then, Ian, some things I have long wondered:—

Is that True Deity worshipped ketchupped or plain?; Bolognese or carbonara?; with or without Holy Parmesan? I think these most vital theological and liturgical points, which I require settled before I could even think of becoming a worshipper.

≈M≈
      Post number 500. I think you win a prize, Mike. Damned if I know what the prize is or who gives it out...but it is significant that this thread has gone on in relative peace for 500 posts.
      -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 09:56 AM

Jack, I accept and agree with your first sentence, which is not compatible with God being impossible.
Only a fool would believe in that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 10:34 AM

Many of you may scoff, but the divinity I seek and sometimes glimpse, is a divinity that is beyond the ability to describe or define. Words can only approach that divinity, but can never encompass it. Myth and metaphor approach that divinity far more effectively than can doctrine or theology or logic. The Orthodox Christian tradition is to speak of that divinity in oxymorons - Trinity being one of the better-known of these. The Jewish tradition is not to pronounce the true name of G-d, YHWH. There are many different traditions or "systems of belief" that attempt to approach this divinity - all are valid, but all can only approach the reality of the divine, whatever that reality might or might not be. The "system of belief/unbelief" that holds that there is no God, is also valid. But since all have validity and all fall short of the reality, all should owe respect to each other. Western religious tradition, particularly Christianity, tends to anthropomorphize this divinity - and most of the arguments above are about this anthropomorphic god. I see the arguments on both sides, as futile. How does one argue a metaphor? Too many "religious" people worship the myth or the anthropomorphosis or the metaphor, and then they lose sight and fall short of whatever is Beyond.

Perhaps God is, and perhaps God isn't...or maybe the both. Whatever the case, all things would be the same either way. If this God is, then human belief would neither increase or decrease God's essence or efficacy. But somehow, I find value in exploring the question of God. Perhaps it doesn't matter, but it works for me. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine - but I don't walk in your shoes, nor you in mine.

My working definition of The Divinity is That Which Is Beyond and That Which Is Within. I've explored that oxymoron for years, and haven't come up with any answers. But the exploration has opened many doors for me.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 10:35 AM

"whether or not I misuse word- hypothesis- does not alter the fact that , if you think about it at all, you must believe in self creation, or steady state of some description .
you posit nothing to start with [I presume ] ,I posit God.
despite claims that there is no evidence for him, it is at least logical that if there is a deity/creator , creation follows."

Continued misuse of the words "hypothesis" and "logical". And you're the one doing the "positing". The scientific evidence, so far, points to something like something from nothing - I'm keeping an open mind (but I'm an aganostic - and that's what agnostics do).

I've thought about it, pete, and I find that I don't develop any sort of belief in "self creation" (whatever that is) and I'm not even sure what you mean by "steady state" - let alone believe in it!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 10:53 AM

Wow, Joe. Thank you. I will watch every mail agog to see what my prize will be!

Reminded --to drift for a second [blame Joe -- he started it!] -- of a cartoon in one of my old bound volumes of Punch magazine from about 1920s; caption:

Proud Father: Young man, the man who marries my daughter will win a prize.

Young Man: By Jove, Sir, that's a wonderful idea! Will it be a cash prize or a silver cup?

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:03 AM

"yes, as a biblical Christian, I do believe original sin is the reason and outcome of all that is evil and disastrous."

Do you blame the victim then? How come the totally innocent suffer?


"Thus do I maintain, God is impossible simply because he is nowhere else other than in human fiction and, just like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, there are NO indicators whatsoever of him being a possibility."

But surely if we have no indication of him that doesn't preclude him from existence? I doubt we are close to recognising what life actually is, as obsessed as we are with our own carbon-based makeup. Even then I'll warrant we can't detect some carbon-based life forms, let alone the denizens of the wonderfully-named 'shadow biosphere'.

Extrapolate that lack of understanding to a cosmic scale and all bets are off. Sentinent gas clouds, beings so old we can't even recognise them as being alive let alone attempt communication as a single thought might take eons to form for them. We might be able to detect god but not have a clue what we're looking at.

Until it's disproved nothing is impossible, even god. At the moment, at this level of technology and understanding there is however not a jot of evidence he exists, only hearsay.

I heard a voice in a stream near our house once (true).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:08 AM

"Voice" in what sense, Stu Did it just say 'gurgle gurgle' in tones approximating to some sort of human voice; or did it say "Men may come, and men may go, but I go on for ever"?

I think we should be told!

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:28 AM

"Sentient cloud."
Such a thing was the subject of a fictional story by the brilliant astronomer Fred Hoyle.
Early 60s?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:45 AM

I'm going to look the Fred Hoyle story up, not sure where I heard it but I love the idea.

MGM: I'm not rising to the bait ;-) I am. I could hear the voice but not make out the words, it was as if is was muffled or heard through a wall. A case of aural pareidolia I guess, but really quite wonderfully odd.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM

Lightly tossed in olive oil, served with tomato, buffalo mozzarella, basil and pine nuts.

The simplest deities are often the true ones.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:07 PM

science fiction... where we get to color outside the lines and play round with ideas...

Issac Asimov's The Last Question is a lighthearted piece that no one should be taking seriously either...

I was still a kid when Fred Hoyle graciously conceded that the Big Bany theory had more supporting evidence than his theory of a steady state universe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:10 PM

Spaghetti Monster? I'm more of a Linguine Demon myself, though since buying our Gefu Spiralfix Spiral Cutter all of our noodles are now 100% vegetable - mostly courgette, but carrot is good too. Consequently my pasta faith is wavering rather.

I must tell you, we ordered our first one from Selfridges and when it arrived it was a £200 Vivienne Westwood shirt. In my size? I think not! But since replacing proper noodles with vegetable ones, I'm getting there.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:26 PM

> more supporting evidence than his theory of a steady state universe.

Unless it turns out that what we see is a three-dimensional holographic projection on the "shell" of a black hole formed by the collapse of a four-dimensional star in a far larger universe.

Think I'm kidding?:

http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,sciencegeek
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:51 PM

which all goes to illustrate that science moves on with better and better questions, Lighter.

think anyone was in a position to ask that question 40 years ago?

be interesting to see how they test for answers to this one... the cosmic background noise was found by Bell engineers looking for answers to a totally different question/problem.

and back to science fiction... Arthur C. Clarke had some "fun" with "The Nine Billions Name of God" & "The Sun"...   again, not to be taken literally...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 12:59 PM

2000AD did a great Future Shock 30+ years ago where the action starts in a school biology class where the pupils are looking into microscopes at life in a single drop of water on their slides. We then pan back and back until we see our universe was in a drop of water on a microscope slide being studied by unimaginably huge aliens pupils in a classroom and the voiceover was the alien teacher all along.

Much of this modern physics is way more weird than any religion dreamt up by humankind. I can be really quite odd indeed.

Bostin stuff!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 02:44 PM

steve, whatever science has discovered, you cannot know that it will explain what it has'nt as yet. you just believe that based on your a priori assumption that there are only naturalistic explanations to be found.

Oh yes I can. Science is the only way that anything that has already been explained has been explained. That has been the trajectory of the human race since, er, Adam were a lad. I do not believe, but I am certain, that science will go on explaining things. I am also pretty certain that there will be things that will be unexplained even as the last human dies out. And I have made no assumptions, a priori or otherwise. In all of human endeavour, not one phenomenon has ever been explained, with evidence, by non-naturalistic means. To suggest that, aha, currently unexplained things may yield to non-naturalistic explanations makes you no more more than a fraudster suffering from severe sour grapes just because it's never happened.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 02:51 PM

Many of you may scoff, but the divinity I seek and sometimes glimpse, is a divinity that is beyond the ability to describe or define.

I won't scoff, but I will point out that this is exactly how big religion deliberately puts their invented God safely beyond explanation. Religion doesn't want a God who is vulnerable to the challenges of human intellect, hard evidence and rationality. That would lead to far too much doubt and uncomfortable discussion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 04:04 PM

The best creation myths : 2001 : A Space Odyssey and Quatermass and the Pit. I'm a huge fan of both Nigel Kneale and Arthur C. Clarke. I love Carl Sagan's Contact as well for deep spirituality & a keen awareness of a Creator in terms of classic mythic narrative. The Alien mythos is pretty neat too; I love its recent extension into the realm of Prometheus, not the best of films but a top concept.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 05:29 PM

shimrod,- presumably you now know what is meant by the "steady state" .
so what is this scientific evidence that points to "something like something from nothing" then ?.
stu says " how come the totally innocent suffer then " I don't pretend to have the complete answer to that, and as much as I do know from scripture, certainly wont be accepted by you.
following adam and eves disobedience God pronounced a curse on the earth. suffering came into the world as a consequence of sin and judgment. I know that raises more questions and challenges, but my job is not to defend God ,where I don't know all the answers, but proclaim his message.
well steve, as you know, I don't accept that science has explained as much as you claim, and even your beloved Darwin acknowledged that the data could be otherwise accounted for beside his ideas.
and if anything, there is even more to explain as science uncovers even more complexity. now the genetic code is found to have another code on that, so that there is even more accounted for in DNA. seems the complexity is often irreducible....but of course an evolutionist is committed to deny that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 05:58 PM

"My job is to defend God..." Well, tell the all-powerful bastard to stop wasting your bloody time and bloody well defend himself! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 05:59 PM

Oops, misread that one!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 06:33 PM

following adam and eves disobedience God pronounced a curse on the earth. suffering came into the world as a consequence of sin and judgment.

According to apocryphal Christian folklore, when Adam died, certain seeds were planted in his mouth which grew into the wood which was used to make the rood, the cross on which Christ was crucified. In Norwich Cathedral cloister there is an amazing Foliate Passion in which Christ is nailed to the same foliage afflicting the neighbouring foliate heads (erroneously known as 'Green Men' since 1939) possibly depicting Adam as Everyman in a state of natural fallen sinfulness. Adam is often portrayed as looking like Christ / God in medieval iconography (i.e. in his literal image).

One of the more remarkable medieval foliate heads is a 15th century wooden boss in the church of St, Andrew's at Samford Courtenay in Devon which depicts a possible 'Green Christ', but as the face is quite obviously dead, this is more likely to be Adam, and the growth symbolic of the sinfulness for which Christ died on the wood of the cross thus grown. Here's a picture of it from my visit there last week.

Green Christ, or Dead Adam, Sampford Courtenay, Devon


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 07:08 PM

Begod, you could have called in for a pint! Steve, of Bude...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 11:39 PM

Reminded of the lines from Donne

"We think that Paradise and Calvary,
Christ's Cross and Adam's Tree'
Stood in one place"

on which one annotation [by Redpath, I think] comments, "We don't any more".

≈M≈


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religi
From: Mrrzy
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 12:27 AM

Sigh, OK, we had our debate about whether Neil deGrasse Tyson was a mealymouthed weasel about whether we was an atheist or not, and grumble grumble ok ok well, maybe, by distancing himself as a scientist from those awful atheists, yeah, ok, I can see that maybe he did *science* a favor. By buying into the whole badmouthing atheists things. And more science means more atheists in the long run... grumble grumble ok, yeah, maybe weasel is too strong a term. What do y'all think? Does distancing their lack of belief in deity from the term atheist do more good for science than it does harm for atheism?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 03:28 AM

pete says he is not defending god. We worked that out a long time ago. Joe manages it with a modicum of thought and appreciation of the subject.

Still, considering we understand science to work on the relative level, let's be relative about religion.

So many cults. So many claims that contradict each other. Perhaps the brethren amongst us might consider which tenets they hold dear that a different religion might have a better explanation for?

Haven't you already carried out such a study? No?

Well stop trying to put superstition on a level with the sciences. Try the arts department instead. They have a better understanding of abstract thought.

By the way, there is more written about the Noodly one now than had been written about the Christian god in Victorian times, when you were socially conditioned to be superstitious.

Makes you think...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Stu
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 04:05 AM

"following adam and eves disobedience God pronounced a curse on the earth. suffering came into the world as a consequence of sin and judgment."

It does raise more questions, but that's what we're here for. I don't understand why innocents should suffer for the sins of Adam and Eve?

Didn't Christ pay for our sins? How can those without guilt or guile be made to suffer if they have done nothing wrong?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 04:54 AM

Interesting Jack.
Do you know the old carol Jesus Christ The apple Tree?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm3fZDZxiko

1. The tree of life my soul hath seen,
Laden with fruit and always green:
The trees of nature fruitless be
Compared with Christ the apple tree.

2. His beauty doth all things excel:
By faith I know, but ne'er can tell
The glory which I now can see
In Jesus Christ the apple tree.

3. For happiness I long have sought,
And pleasure dearly I have bought:
I missed of all; but now I see
'Tis found in Christ the apple tree.

4. I'm weary with my former toil,
Here I will sit and rest awhile:
Under the shadow I will be,
Of Jesus Christ the apple tree.

5. This fruit doth make my soul to thrive,
It keeps my dying faith alive;
Which makes my soul in haste to be
With Jesus Christ the apple tree.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 05:21 AM

Steve, of Bude...

Looking at the map the nearest we got to Bude was a toilet stop-cum-pilgrimage at Tescos in Launceston - reputedly the supermarket of choice for Tori Amos, but what are the chances?? Didn't do any pubs / folk in' at all this time; back in 2009 I remember a pleasant evening at a singaround in Bideford...

*

So many cults. So many claims that contradict each other.

Objectivism is a problem for so subjective a thing as religion. Whilst we might revel and draw strength and succour from the amazing fictions of Arthur C. Clarke and Dr. Who, there is, as yet, no one who insists these things are in any way true to the point of wholesale massacre of heretics or suicide bombings or the simple conviction that whilst they are saved, those of a different mind are damned for all eternity, much less actively propagating ignorance, AIDS, misogyny, homophobia, institutionalised child abuse or else making saints out of evil old cows who routinely withheld painkillers from those in her care so they might better experience the love of Jesus.

This is but another signifier on the impossibility of an all powerful supernatural omniscient God. Though I don't doubt that somewhere in the infinite multi dimensional quantum possibilities of the cosmos resides a being of such advancement and complexity that I can no more contemplate their essence than the slugs in our Lancashire kitchen can conceive of Tori Amos doing her weekly shop at Tescos in Launceston. I doubt, however, such a being would be a) supernatural or b) at all bothered with the goings on here on Planet Oith any more than Tori Amos is bothered about our slugs.

For the most part though, I reckon LIFE is a matter of perfect ordinariness. Indeed, it's the very ordinariness of life that makes us seek the divine. If, as Carl Sagan believed, life is a cosmic inevitability then the lot of any sentient civilisation must lie in the mundane. Light years away, as I write this, an alien intelligence will be contemplating eternity whilst stuck waiting for a space in the supermarket carpark of some rural backwater hoping to catch a glimpse of Godlike Genius going about their everyday business. To some of us, it doesn't get more sacred than that - the special treasures of subjective ordinariness that might transfigure the objective commonplace into something truly numinous.

*

On our way down to Devon we stopped of at Worcester (very exotic fort us!) where I headed for the cathedral and my wife headed for the shops. Half an hour later, she rang me to say she'd found something very special in Oxfam and could't wait to give it to me. I don't have the words to impart the joy I felt at so perfectly ordinary a juxtaposition (much less that I'd been after a copy for years) so here's the picture I took on her Nokia Lumina so I might upload it to Facebook and share my happiness with the world:

Numinous Exultation! 6th September 2014

Each to their own, but we're all in this thing together. There is nothing more sacred than that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 05:30 AM

Keith - I do indeed, but only from the singing of Jane Siberry (another of my wife's little pantheon along with Tori Amos, Laura Nyro, Judee Sill, Bat for Lashes et al.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XYNNVLKuyJg

*

I dare say Tori Amos might have had more of a hand in remaking it, as evidenced by her recent(ish) album of Christmas carols. Here's one to get you in the mood - only 14 weeks to go! I can just see her singing this getting in the Xmas goodies in Launceston Tescos...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHZYmffegXc


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Lighter
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 09:20 AM

A first-person explanation:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maria-portas/god-speaks-the-reason-we-are-here-on-earth_b_5826348.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 11:15 AM

My counter to Musket's last post.

How can any one person have the one true answer about relegion?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 12:12 PM

The prodigal returns! Where did I put that fatted calf?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 01:10 PM

everyone was happy when the prodigal son came home, except the older brother and the fatted calf !
that foliate thing is interesting, jack. the Christ/adam likeness may stem from pauls comparison and contrast, in his letters to the romans, and Corinthians.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Musket
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 01:25 PM

Jack. Are you the one checking his arse or holding what you mistakenly think is his willy?

How many answers do you have? 42 perchance?

I don't quite understand your jibe. You cannot come up with answers about religion any more than you can about Star Wars. As I didn't write the bible, I don't have a single answer and neither do I wish to come out with one.

A christian might have a stab, but it is irrelevant to rational people. Except how superstitious people insist on wishing it to be relevant to others, forcing bigoted agendas under the disguise of God wants it that way.

Quite.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 01:46 PM

mrrzy ,- I don't think more science will make more atheists, more likely the reverse. take Anthony flew for example, a committed atheist till he looked into the complexity of DNA.
IF YOU MEAN...MORE EVOLUTIONARY PROPAGANDA, I would tend to agree.

musket, there are quite a few different evolutionary stories also. so saying that different ideas of God is an argument that there is none is a non starter.

well stu, as I said, I can only go so far, as the bible does not give all the answers. in fact, it infers that we should leave the things to God that he has not revealed, and trust him for those.
in one sense, no one is innocent, because we are all sinners, but of course small children and others without moral responsibility suffer. I can only conjecture that this is because they are part of this world ,and I don't know that parellel systems are a credible option.
yes , Christ did die for our sins, and those that repent and believe will be saved. that death[ and resurrection] also reverses the curse so that there will come a return to a paradise state. the suffering of the past will be past and the innocent will be eternally recompensed.
I don't know that you wanted all that....but you did ask !.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 01:59 PM

but of course small children and others without moral responsibility suffer. I can only conjecture that this is because they are part of this world

Or is it because the "God" you worship is a real prick?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Special thread on Evolution & religion
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Sep 14 - 02:03 PM

And now, a Musical Interlude


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate