have you seen kirk cameron's croc-a-duck?

[Hatfield]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNTGmoTb8sw&mode=related&search=

got to love the looney tunes

about the 2 minute mark he shows a picture...but the whole "interview" is entertaining

[def_lazer_fc]

dude cracks me up. i love his Way of the Master series. the segment with the infamous banana is priceless. i also saw on TBN the other day, some "scientist" from a creation museum in canada and declared that all fossils we have found originated from the great flood of noah. well, im assumming it was the flood of noah, since there've been many documented well before this particular one. his "scientific" studies leads him to believe that by looking at the skeletal arrangement of the various animals, it looks like they were all trying to swim out of water. conclusion: noah's flood. also, noah's flood made the grand canyon. he was about to give his estimate as to how long it took to form, and i knew his figure was gonna be quite low, but i was shocked when he said it was formed in 20 MINUTES! and you know this guy was legit too, b/c he had on a cute little safari hat and safari jacket. who needs a "diploma" from a "real school". a safari outfit trumps that everytime. hell, a safari outfit trumps anything and everything in my opinion. :D

[rufnek05]

i want that picture.

[achiro]

Feel free to laugh and make fun of us simple minded folk from your front row seats in HELL!

[def_lazer_fc]

Feel free to laugh and make fun of us simple minded folk from your front row seats in HELL!
at least we have great seats!

[rufnek05]

having faith is awesome. but just like everything else, people take it to far. there is so much s*** out there that can't even be explained, so why try.

[Penguin]

Me thinks he's koo koo for God!

[def_lazer_fc]

i just think that guy goes way too far trying to "prove" the existence of god. he claims that humans were made perfectly. far from it. he also states that everything has a creator. so who created god? this guy's arguments have so many fundamentally flawed logical steps in it that it can drive a person nuts.

[def_lazer_fc]

if i ever saw him, i'd like to know if he's seen Boner lately. i miss that dude.

[bri]

Feel free to laugh and make fun of us simple minded folk from your front row seats in HELL!

If "making fun of Kirk Cameron" is the 8th Deadly Sin...there's something very wrong with the universe. :D

[JohnnyMack]

http://img.slate.com/media/1/123125/122958/2156599/2165345/070510_TV_Kirk.jpg

[achiro]

if i ever saw him, i'd like to know if he's seen Boner lately. i miss that dude.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0462809/

[crawfish]

I'm both amused and embarrassed.

[Widescreen]

The point he makes about the complexity of the human body and the belief that it just sort of randomly came together is a sound one. However, I could've lived without seeing the prop.

[JohnnyMack]

The point he makes about the complexity of the human body and the belief that it just sort of randomly came together is a sound one.

Why?

[Ike]

The point he makes about the complexity of the human body and the belief that it just sort of randomly came together is a sound one. However, I could've lived without seeing the prop.

I usually counter the complexity argument by pointing out that the sheer size of the universe and the amount of time it has been around leaves quite a lot of room for "accidents" to happen. Even accidents that we perceive to be "impossible", such as the random formation of life. Given enough opportunities, even the most improbable things WILL happen.

I will state that the formulators of "intelligent design" had the right idea in a way to go about showing that a designer would be probable (not that it must exist) by attempting to show exactly what the probability of even the tiniest building blocks of life are. However their calculations were so flawed that by the time you got to the final number they showed, that number no longer had any connection whatsoever to anything resembling reality.

The truth of the matter is that such a calculation that would resemble reality would in and of itself be insanely complicated...much more so than the authors of ID papers ever gave it credit for.

[Hatfield]

i just like it when o'reilly says all the evidence is clearly on their side and the big bang theory is nonsense. :)

[Widescreen]

Why?
I'm not going to try to convince you of anything because I'm not capable of doing that. For me, it's self-evident. It takes far more faith to believe that an organism as complex as the human could evolve over the eons from sludge (or that life could come from non-life) than it does to believe we were created. You probably think that's crazy-talk and I'm OK with that.

[Ike]

I'm not going to try to convince you of anything because I'm not capable of doing that. For me, it's self-evident. It takes far more faith to believe that and organism as complex as the human could evolve over the eons from sludge than it does to believe we were created. You probably think that's crazy-talk and I'm OK with that.

I do, and I'm really fine with you believing the other way as well, even though I know you think I'm probably full of crazy talk.

[Widescreen]

I do, and I'm really fine with you believing the other way as well, even though I know you think I'm probably full of crazy talk.
Well yeah, but it has nothing to do with this discussion. ;)

[JohnnyMack]

I usually counter the complexity argument by pointing out that the sheer size of the universe and the amount of time it has been around leaves quite a lot of room for "accidents" to happen. Even accidents that we perceive to be "impossible", such as the random formation of life. Given enough opportunities, even the most improbable things WILL happen.


There it is folks. Ike's explanation of 35 - 7.

[Harry Beanbag]

There it is folks. Ike's explanation of 35 - 7.


Damn you! I had successfully blocked that out of my mind. I don't think I've thought about that for at least 6 months...until now. :mad:

[Ike]

There it is folks. Ike's explanation of 35 - 7.


Yup. This explanation is also often summed up with the phrase "Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while" :)

[Harry Beanbag]

Yup. This explanation is also often summed up with the phrase "Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while" :)


How long do we have to wait for your theory to go into effect with Sicem?

[Vaevictis]

It takes far more faith to believe that an organism as complex as the human could evolve over the eons from sludge (or that life could come from non-life) than it does to believe we were created.

From your point of view. From the mathematical point of view, however, it's a little different.

If the probability of it occurring randomly isn't zero, then over enough trials, it becomes almost certain that it will occur.

If you go so far as to assume infinite trials, it will happen. It's not even random at that point; it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

[Vaevictis]

How long do we have to wait for your theory to go into effect with Sicem?

The assumption in Ike's statement is that the probability is greater than zero.

So in that specific case, you'll have to wait forever.

[Widescreen]

From your point of view. From the mathematical point of view, however, it's a little different.

If the probability of it occurring randomly isn't zero, then over enough trials, it becomes almost certain that it will occur.

If you go so far as to assume infinite trials, it will happen. It's not even random at that point; it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.
What if the probably of it occurring randomly IS zero? The math can work both ways too.

[Vaevictis]

What if the probably of it occurring randomly IS zero? The math can work both ways too.

Ah, but then your original argument morphs into: It takes more faith to believe that the probability of life occurring randomly is non-zero than it takes to believe in a creator.

Which is, on the face of it, considerably less plausible (to me, and I imagine most people) than your original statement.

[yermom]

How long do we have to wait for your theory to go into effect with Sicem?

that's "a" blind squirrel, not every blind squirrel ;)

[Mongo]

Ah, but then your original argument morphs into: It takes more faith to believe that the probability of life occurring randomly is non-zero than it takes to believe in a creator.

Is that what you believe?

quick honest question.

What is the probability of God existing? If there is a chance for everything to randomly happen, cant you mathematically prove that God exists?

[Widescreen]

Ah, but then your original argument morphs into: It takes more faith to believe that the probability of life occurring randomly is non-zero than it takes to believe in a creator.

Is that what you believe?
Actually, yes (assuming I understand the statement the same way you do). Since I believe in creation and don't believe anything that has ever lived came from non-life.

[Ike]

What if the probably of it occurring randomly IS zero? The math can work both ways too.


I would have a hard time believing that that probability is zero, without cold hard facts that could say otherwise (which as far as I know, there aren't any), for a few reasons, simple chemistry being one of the biggest. Life on earth is after all, a collection of atoms, arranged in particular ways. Chemistry dictates that given the right conditions, certain arrangements of atoms become favorable. We also know that from a small sample of atoms arranged in certain ways in certain conditions, that these collections of atoms can replicate themselves, and divide and grow and become life. This happens every time a child is born. 2 small collections of atoms eventually become one large collection of atoms.

We don't, as far as I know, know what conditions make the formation of DNA where there was no DNA favorable, but it is not impossible to imagine that these conditions do exist, and that they may have been present somewhere on this planet in its lifetime. Or, it could even be that these conditions existed elsewhere in the universe and that DNA made it to earth simply by floating around in space. Who knows. However, until one can definitively show that there are no conditions whatsoever that allow for the formation of DNA where there was no DNA to begin with, assuming that the probability for life to form "on it's own" is zero is certainly not something I would stake my life to. It may be small. It may be really small. But I have strong doubts that it is zero, and any claims that it is zero should really be met with a ton of skepticism, because to prove that would be a difficult thing to do.

[Vaevictis]

quick honest question.

What is the probability of God existing? If there is a chance for everything to randomly happen, cant you mathematically prove that God exists?

That's a question lots of people have tried to answer. And I'll give you my best shot at it, but I have to say in advance that it is probably just as crap as everyone else's has been.

If you assume the type of Judaic God that I'm familiar with -- the kind that has always existed, then the answer is that probability never comes into the equation. If such a God has never not existed, then there was never a chance for it to randomly occur. Hence, you can't use probability to address this problem.

That aside, there are other problems. There's a proof known as the "Godel Incompleteness Theorem", which states, in short (and please excuse me if I'm butchering this), that in any mathematical language that you can define, there are going to be things that are true that cannot be proved from within the language. I think that this is at the core of the problem with trying to address God using science and math; I believe that if God exists, he has placed himself smack dab into one of those truths that can't be proved.

Another issue is that, well, assume a perfect, omniscient, omnipotent God. Assume that this God decides that s/he is going to be unmeasurable from his creation. In such a case, no matter how hard the things in the creation try, they're never going to be able to prove existence unless and until that God changes his/her mind about being measurable.

[Vaevictis]

Actually, yes (assuming I understand the statement the same way you do). Since I believe in creation and don't believe anything that has ever lived came from non-life.

Ah, but then I would suggest the following: The reason you feel that it takes more faith to feel otherwise is because you are already convinced. Your opinion on the matter is biased in such a way that you are incapable of taking an honest measure of how much faith it really takes to believe one way or the other. :)

[Ike]

quick honest question.

What is the probability of God existing? If there is a chance for everything to randomly happen, cant you mathematically prove that God exists?

The answer to this question highly depends on your definition of God. If God is simply the thing that originated the Universe (whether or not that thing is a conscious being), then the probability is pretty good.

Now thats probably the broadest definition of God you will ever find anywhere, but hey, you have to have a starting point right?

Now, if you just go from there and start ascribing other traits to God, that probability probably gets whittled down with each characteristic you pile on.

If you insist that there is and has always been only one God, with certain characteristics, then the infinite probability limit no longer applies.

[Mongo]

That's a question lots of people have tried to answer. And I'll give you my best shot at it, but I have to say in advance that it is probably just as crap as everyone else's has been.

If you assume the type of Judaic God that I'm familiar with -- the kind that has always existed, then the answer is that probability never comes into the equation. If such a God has never not existed, then there was never a chance for it to randomly occur.

That aside, there are other problems. There's a proof known as the "Godel Incompleteness Theorem", which states, in short (and please excuse me if I'm butchering this), that in any mathematical language that you can define, there are going to be things that are true that cannot be proved from within the language. I think that this is at the core of the problem with trying to address God using science and math; I believe that if God exists, he has placed himself smack dab into one of those truths that can't be proved.

Another issue is that, well, assume a perfect, omniscient, omnipotent God. Assume that this God decides that s/he is going to be unmeasurable from his creation. In such a case, no matter how hard the things in the creation try, they're never going to be able to prove existence unless and until that God changes his/her mind about being measurable.

OMG!! You totally butchered that!!:D

Thanks.

The biggest thing that comes to mind is: people are so willing to use science, and in return, believe it(like the mathematical probability of evolution), that they are not using the same principles to look in the other direction.

And the existance of God will never be proven by man, I will agree with that.

[Vaevictis]

It really just boils down to the fact that science, by definition, is not designed to address the question of God. Anyone who tries to use it for that purpose has a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is.

[Ike]

It really just boils down to the fact that science, by definition, is not designed to address the question of God. Anyone who tries to use it for that purpose has a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is.

I'd generally state that the other way around, but yeah. Now, if God was a thing we could see and feel and Heaven and Hell were places we could visit, then that would be a whole other can of worms.

But everyone has always told me that these places exist "somewhere else" than our universe. Science can only describe the things in our universe.

[Mongo]

What's the probability of this thread turning uncivilized?

[Vaevictis]

What's the probability of this thread turning uncivilized?

This is the SO. You don't even need the length to go to infinity for the probability of that occurring to go to 1. :)

[Ike]

OMG!! You totally butchered that!!:D

Thanks.

The biggest thing that comes to mind is: people are so willing to use science, and in return, believe it(like the mathematical probability of evolution), that they are not using the same principles to look in the other direction.

And the existance of God will never be proven by man, I will agree with that.

I'm willing to believe that the mathematical probability of evolution is non-zero, and thus, probably happened. I'm also willing to believe that the Universe had a creator.

I'm less willing to believe that the creator has played an active role in the universe since it's beginning.

[crawfish]

What's the probability of this thread turning uncivilized?

Significantly better than evolving a croc-a-duck.

[Scott D]

this thread was uncivilized the moment someone mentioned kirk cameron.

[Mongo]

I'm willing to believe that the mathematical probability of evolution is non-zero, and thus, probably happened. I'm also willing to believe that the Universe had a creator.

I'm less willing to believe that the creator has played an active role in the universe since it's beginning.


I agree with the top, partially. I believe in evolution after creation(of Adam and Eve).

The bottom part is where a person's faith comes in.

[stoopified]

You either believe in GOD or not,as for me I believe.

[LilSooner]

I'd generally state that the other way around, but yeah. Now, if God was a thing we could see and feel and Heaven and Hell were places we could visit, then that would be a whole other can of worms.

But everyone has always told me that these places exist "somewhere else" than our universe. Science can only describe the things in our universe.


Ok boys let me break this down for you heathrens.

God=Bob Stoops

Heaven= Norman on a fall Saturday

Hell= Stoolwater any day that ends in y.

Got any more brainbusters? :D

[Mongo]

Ok boys let me break this down for you heathrens.

God=Bob Stoops

Heaven= Norman on a fall Saturday

Hell= Stoolwater any day that ends in y.

Got any more brainbusters? :D

What is Tulsa?

[Sooner98]

I think the biggest arguement in favor of creationism is the existence of the universe itself. Why does it exist? Why does space exist? Why does matter exist? Where did it all come from?

It's much more plausible to me to believe that it was all intelligently created for a purpose, rather than to believe that everything has always existed for no reason, to serve no purpose, and that it came from nowhere.

[LilSooner]

What is Tulsa?


Purgatory.

[Fraggle145]

I would have a hard time believing that that probability is zero, without cold hard facts that could say otherwise (which as far as I know, there aren't any), for a few reasons, simple chemistry being one of the biggest. Life on earth is after all, a collection of atoms, arranged in particular ways. Chemistry dictates that given the right conditions, certain arrangements of atoms become favorable. We also know that from a small sample of atoms arranged in certain ways in certain conditions, that these collections of atoms can replicate themselves, and divide and grow and become life. This happens every time a child is born. 2 small collections of atoms eventually become one large collection of atoms.

We don't, as far as I know, know what conditions make the formation of DNA where there was no DNA favorable, but it is not impossible to imagine that these conditions do exist, and that they may have been present somewhere on this planet in its lifetime. Or, it could even be that these conditions existed elsewhere in the universe and that DNA made it to earth simply by floating around in space. Who knows. However, until one can definitively show that there are no conditions whatsoever that allow for the formation of DNA where there was no DNA to begin with, assuming that the probability for life to form "on it's own" is zero is certainly not something I would stake my life to. It may be small. It may be really small. But I have strong doubts that it is zero, and any claims that it is zero should really be met with a ton of skepticism, because to prove that would be a difficult thing to do.

What about the Miller-Urey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment) experiment? granted it isnt DNA, but it is organic compounds from inorganic compounds and nucleic acids, which are the building blocks of DNA. This leads me to believe that the probability of life rising from an inorganic origin is much more probable than it is given credit for.

2ndly, I am surprised noone has brought this up. With evolution, nothing is perfectly formed even when it is highly complex. What eyes are now are nothing more than derivations of organs that could sense light and dark. There are several instances throughout nature where a less derived form of an organ or an appendage has been used for something entirely different.

Hence natural selection isnt always directional. Nothing started out as complex as it is. Hell half of our complexity is in the microbes that we have a symbiotic relationship with, such as mitochondria, which live in each one of our cells, provide us energy, and have their own DNA. Not to mention the numerous other bacteria that live in our guts. Even these microbes have changed tons since they arrived in cells, and we can tell approximately how much via loss of DNA and comparing their DNA with the many other types we have sequenced for the different microorganisms out there.

I guess I am just saying to me it seems much more far fetched that there was a creator that is responsible for creating life and complexity in one swoop rather than a series of incremental steps. Not that I have a problem with people who believe the other way.

:pop:

[Fraggle145]

I agree with the top, partially. I believe in evolution after creation(of Adam and Eve).

The bottom part is where a person's faith comes in.

I am confused here... do you believe that Adam and Eve have been around since the beginning of time?

[yermom]

I think the biggest arguement in favor of creationism is the existence of the universe itself. Why does it exist? Why does space exist? Why does matter exist? Where did it all come from?

It's much more plausible to me to believe that it was all intelligently created for a purpose, rather than to believe that everything has always existed for no reason, to serve no purpose, and that it came from nowhere.

and what purpose is the earth and space here for?

[yermom]

i'm just glad Fraggle is here now


that way i don't have to rehash what i said in the last thread about this ;)

[Mongo]

I am confused here... do you believe that Adam and Eve have been around since the beginning of time?

No

[Vaevictis]

Adam was sixth day material dammit. There's no way they existed from the beginning of time! ;)

[achiro]

Oh my goodness you people are so darn smart and stuff. You have convinced me with all your science mumbo-jumbo(Miller-Urey...WOW!). Does anyone know where i can turn in my believer card tomorrow and get one of your Mr. Smartypants cards?

[OCUDad]

How can anyone read the SO and still believe there has to be a purpose to things? :D

[Mongo]

Oh my goodness you people are so darn smart and stuff. You have convinced me with all your science mumbo-jumbo(Miller-Urey...WOW!). Does anyone know where i can turn in my believer card tomorrow and get one of your Mr. Smartypants cards?

Gentlemen, START YOUR ENGINES!!!!!!!!!!!:D

:pop:

[Fraggle145]

i'm just glad Fraggle is here now


that way i don't have to rehash what i said in the last thread about this ;)

heh. I still love that sig. here is the past thread (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92812&highlight=Atheist).

[Fraggle145]

Oh my goodness you people are so darn smart and stuff. You have convinced me with all your science mumbo-jumbo(Miller-Urey...WOW!). Does anyone know where i can turn in my believer card tomorrow and get one of your Mr. Smartypants cards?

I think goodwill takes donations on Tuesdays and Thursdays. :rolleyes:

Get your panties out a knot. I said that i dont care what your beliefs are, believe whatever you want. :hot:

[Fraggle145]

here lets have some real fun... here are some of the highlights from the debate on nightline.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/
This is just highlights.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-rKiGJrcNw&mode=related&search=
This one has all of the videos that you can go to one at a time

[mdklatt]

It takes far more faith to believe that an organism as complex as the human could evolve over the eons from sludge (or that life could come from non-life) than it does to believe we were created.


What's the appendix for? Or the coccyx?

[Vaevictis]

Clearly, they were put there by Satan to trick us.

[Hatfield]

Oh my goodness you people are so darn smart and stuff. You have convinced me with all your science mumbo-jumbo(Miller-Urey...WOW!). Does anyone know where i can turn in my believer card tomorrow and get one of your Mr. Smartypants cards?

ok 2 things....

1. how do you think a post of this nature is helpful to a civil discussion? If you are so maligned over a discussion on existence in a thread that you can choose not to enter then I think you need to address the issues you have within yourself. There is nothing wrong with discussion.

2. Vae....what is the mathematical probability of the croc-a-duck because that thing is the awesome

ok 1 more....

with conclusive proof there would be no need for faith

[Hatfield]

What's the appendix for? Or the coccyx?

ever put something together for the first time? ever have extra parts? ;)

[Widescreen]

Or the coccyx?
Post reported.


with conclusive proof there would be no need for faith
Which means that there is a lot of faith in science as well.

Don't get me wrong - I love science. It gets me all the cool gadgets that I goob out over. :)

[Mongo]

ok 1 more....

with conclusive proof there would be no need for faith

interesting, but you know you have a car. You know it is there. Do you still trust it, or have faith in it to get you from point A to point B and to be as safe of a vehicle as it could be?

Now I am not comparing faith in God to your car running, but you can see where I am getting at.

[mdklatt]

interesting, but you know you have a car. You know it is there. Do you still trust it, or have faith in it to get you from point A to point B and to be as safe of a vehicle as it could be?

Now I am not comparing faith in God to your car running, but you can see where I am getting at.


You're talking about a different kind of faith. There's nothing miraculous about a car. Nobody should try to take the miracle out of religion. That's what I don't understand about the "intelligent design" crowd...what's their goal? If you give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're not just trying to find a way to force religion into public schools (an assumption I do not ascribe to, BTW), why are they trying to take the faith out of religion? If God wanted us to know he was here, he could do it. If you believe the Bible, he has done it repeatedly in the past. I don't think he needs the help.

[crawfish]

You know, if you had an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters, eventually one would evolve into William Shakespeare.

[Harry Beanbag]

You know, if you had an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards, eventually one would evolve into William Shakespeare.


I think you give SO posters too much credit.

[Mongo]

You're talking about a different kind of faith. There's nothing miraculous about a car. Nobody should try to take the miracle out of religion. That's what I don't understand about the "intelligent design" crowd...what's their goal? If you give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're not just trying to find a way to force religion into public schools (an assumption I do not ascribe to, BTW), why are they trying to take the faith out of religion? If God wanted us to know he was here, he could do it. If you believe the Bible, he has done it repeatedly in the past. I don't think he needs the help.


The car idea is a simplistic model I used, not an apple to apple comparison.

I dont make a miracle out of religion. Religion is man made. Man, not just Christians, tend to get things wrong, so I agree on that, but religion is more of a fellowship. Iron sharpens Iron.

ID in class should or shouldnt be in the class, I dont know, but it deserves as much right in the class as evolution. None. If both are not stonecold facts, why teach them.

[soonerinabilene]

Faith is believing in something that cannot be proven. I believe in Jesus. What follows should not be taken as me saying that anyone who believes otherwise is ignorant or stupid, nor am i condemning anyone who doesnt agree:
I believe that God is perfect. Most of the major religions are based on that. Most religions also believe in Heaven and some form of hell. If God is perfect, in order for someone to be in His presence, they must also be perfect. Christianity is the only religion that offers a chance of that. We, as humans, are not perfect. We sin. Everyday. God is the judge at the end. When you die, you will be judged on your life. No human, no matter if you are the pope, a preacher, a teacher, NOBODY, will be found to be perfect. Therefore you must be punished for your sins. That punishment is not being able to be in God's presence for eternity. You go to hell. But God offers you something while you live. He sent His Son, who lived on Earth as a human, but WAS perfect. He was God in the flesh. He took the punishment for all who would believe in him when he was crucified. He died, and rose from the tomb three days later. IF you believe that, when you die, you will still be judged. You will still be found to not be worthy of God. BUT because you believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and that he died for you, and that he took your punishment on his shoulders, you will be forgiven of your sins and made perfect. That is what I believe.

I used the word religion a lot, because that is what we as humans call believing in God. But religion is a man-made word. Religion is man's attempt to reach a god. Christ is God's attempt to reach man.

Like I said, I am not condemning those that believe different. This is just what I think makes the most sense. I know it sounds far fetched to some to believe that God created the Earth and man, offered us free will, we became sinners, so he made a virgin pregnant with His Son, who was himself in the flesh, who then lived perfectly for 33 years, died on a cross and then rose from the dead 3 days later. It does sound crazy. But to me, it is no crazier than the idea that we are here by the chance that the conditions were just right for us to come from some premordial soup and form over millions of years into what we are today. I have faith, and that satisfies my need for answers.

[Harry Beanbag]

I believe in God, it's organized religion that I have a problem with.

[Vaevictis]

ID in class should or shouldnt be in the class, I dont know, but it deserves as much right in the class as evolution. None. If both are not stonecold facts, why teach them.

If that's the standard, you might just toss science out of the classrooms altogether. There's a damned lot of theory that's not stone cold fact, but is very, very useful for explaining things.

[Mongo]

If that's the standard, you might just toss science out of the classrooms altogether. There's a damned lot of theory that's not stone cold fact, but is very, very useful for explaining things.

Then, by the reasoning of your last sentence, maybe the kids can use ID to explain things in their life, but people are quick to throw it out.

Basic science is easy. Why water freezes, the elements, simple stuff like that can be taught. In public schools, there isnt any need for high level scientifc theory, it is just a chore to keep them from finger painting the classroom with poo.

And you cant toss science out of school. How will kids learn sex ed from their hawt 5th grade teacher, like I did.

[sanantoniosooner]

I believe in God, it's organized religion that I have a problem with.
That's why I attend a disorganized church.

[Mongo]

I am done with this topic. I need to go sacrifice a goat to purify myself of the filth yall exposed me to.:D

[Vaevictis]

Then, by the reasoning of your last sentence, maybe the kids can use ID to explain things in their life, but people are quick to throw it out.

People throw ID out because it's got little or no scientific support. Almost no research has been done on it; it's all conjecture at this point. I'm not advocating teaching every crockpot theory someone tries to shoehorn in (of which ID is one), just the stuff that is well supported by research, and is useful.

Evolution just happens to be one of these things that is well researched and is useful.

Get back to me when ID has a serious body of research work done. Like any decent scientist, my views are subject to revision in the light of better evidence.

[Hatfield]

Has anyone else read the story of b by daniel quinn? (or really any of his books: ishmael, my ishmael)

i find them fascinating reads....story of b deals more with religion and I was impressed with how he handled it.

[achiro]

ok 2 things....

1. how do you think a post of this nature is helpful to a civil discussion? If you are so maligned over a discussion on existence in a thread that you can choose not to enter then I think you need to address the issues you have within yourself. There is nothing wrong with discussion.

Because I think it left "civil" a long time ago. these conversations come up time and time again and every time, the "look at how smart I am because this is SCI-ENCE" crowd jumps right out and starts quoting these "studies" that supposedly prove their argument. Time and time again we get to hear how stupid this person or that person is because they happen to believe differently than those that can pull some study out of their pompous arse. The attempt to make someone feel inferior because they have faith in something is pretty rampant. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that the Bible actually talks about this.;) You may not see it because you are a part of it Mr. "Maligned"(seriously, do you talk like that in person?) I particularly like when someone brings up a study that shows the opposite side and it gets jumped on as bogus science, etc. BTW, the validity of research, and even more so the application of said research to particular issues, can be questioned with most research. An example is the Miller-Urey study mentioned before. The research is valid, I have no issue with it but the application of that research to say that it shows that life can begin randomly is a big jump. Just a couple things jump out very quickly, the "random" particles where not random, they were controlled in a lab. Who really knows for sure what elements where there at that time, we have some decent guesses but even those have changed over the years. Then to jump from an amino acid to "life" well, I'll leave that one to you brainiacs.

Speaking of life, We can talk about the structures of the human body and how amazing they are, how nothing random could really make something so complex(I agree with Ike that from a scientific/mathematic pov, that it isn't quite "nothing") To me though, the real amazing part of life, is life itself. The "soul" if you will. Thoughts, feelings, memories, free will. Try as they might, there is no scientific explanation of this, sure we understand signals and chemical movement during thought(kind of) but the essence of thought is far from being understood scientifically.

[achiro]

Oh and btw, my "panties aren't in a knot", and I'm not "maligned" at all. In fact, it was meant purely for humor purposes. Truth be told, unlike many of my Christian brethren that struggle with the thought of lost souls, I wouldn't mind being the one pulling the handle to the trap door that sends you to your infinite inferno.:D

[Sooner98]

and what purpose is the earth and space here for?

It's in the Bible, somewhere near the back, I think. ;)

Seriously though, in God's plan, the purpose of the earth is to provide living beings a place to live and exist. Pretty simple.

[def_lazer_fc]

It's in the Bible, somewhere near the back, I think. ;)

Seriously though, in God's plan, the purpose of the earth is to provide living beings a place to live and exist. Pretty simple.

i thought it was just a breeding ground for things to worship him? talk about an ego. you foster the whole foundation of life just so it may/or may not worship you. creepy.

[Fraggle145]

Because I think it left "civil" a long time ago. these conversations come up time and time again and every time, the "look at how smart I am because this is SCI-ENCE" crowd jumps right out and starts quoting these "studies" that supposedly prove their argument. Time and time again we get to hear how stupid this person or that person is because they happen to believe differently than those that can pull some study out of their pompous arse. The attempt to make someone feel inferior because they have faith in something is pretty rampant. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that the Bible actually talks about this.;) You may not see it because you are a part of it Mr. "Maligned"(seriously, do you talk like that in person?) I particularly like when someone brings up a study that shows the opposite side and it gets jumped on as bogus science, etc. BTW, the validity of research, and even more so the application of said research to particular issues, can be questioned with most research. An example is the Miller-Urey study mentioned before. The research is valid, I have no issue with it but the application of that research to say that it shows that life can begin randomly is a big jump. Just a couple things jump out very quickly, the "random" particles where not random, they were controlled in a lab. Who really knows for sure what elements where there at that time, we have some decent guesses but even those have changed over the years. Then to jump from an amino acid to "life" well, I'll leave that one to you brainiacs.

Speaking of life, We can talk about the structures of the human body and how amazing they are, how nothing random could really make something so complex(I agree with Ike that from a scientific/mathematic pov, that it isn't quite "nothing") To me though, the real amazing part of life, is life itself. The "soul" if you will. Thoughts, feelings, memories, free will. Try as they might, there is no scientific explanation of this, sure we understand signals and chemical movement during thought(kind of) but the essence of thought is far from being understood scientifically.


Oh and btw, my "panties aren't in a knot", and I'm not "maligned" at all. In fact, it was meant purely for humor purposes. Truth be told, unlike many of my Christian brethren that struggle with the thought of lost souls, I wouldn't mind being the one pulling the handle to the trap door that sends you to your infinite inferno.:D

Well it sure didnt come off that way, when someone looks at your previous posts in the thread. Seriously though, sometimes I do talk that way and sometimes I cuss like a sailor. I wasnt trying to put anyone's intelligence down with my original post. As i stated in that post, everyone's belief or understanding is just that. And noone here has posted a legitimate study of Intelligent Design as a counter point.

The fact that it was lab controlled is a side effect of if it werent it would be contaminated by microbes within seconds. And the molecules they used were based on those guesses as to what were the most common elements available. I wasnt saying it made it an absolute that life must emerge from them I said it made it more probable to me. the other point I was making is that there are many examples throughout organisms of less complex apparatuses being used for different things and then being used for something completely different in in a more complex form.

thoughts, feelings and memories have arisen multiple times as well, look at dogs, dolphins and elephants to name a few. Now understanding what and how information is past in those things is way beyond my reach beyond knowing that synapses fire and nerves pass the information, but it is several fields psychology neurology etc. Souls on the other hand are debatable from my viewpoint.

And how very christ-like of you to hold the door, I was feeling a bit chilly. :D

[crawfish]

i thought it was just a breeding ground for things to worship him? talk about an ego. you foster the whole foundation of life just so it may/or may not worship you. creepy.

Actually, no.

"Worship" is really for us, not him. It is to help us keep our minds focused on the truly important things.

[sanantoniosooner]

Amused reply.

Counter point.

Mean jab.

[Hatfield]

Because I think it left "civil" a long time ago. these conversations come up time and time again and every time, the "look at how smart I am because this is SCI-ENCE" crowd jumps right out and starts quoting these "studies" that supposedly prove their argument. Time and time again we get to hear how stupid this person or that person is because they happen to believe differently than those that can pull some study out of their pompous arse. The attempt to make someone feel inferior because they have faith in something is pretty rampant. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that the Bible actually talks about this.;) You may not see it because you are a part of it Mr. "Maligned"(seriously, do you talk like that in person?) I particularly like when someone brings up a study that shows the opposite side and it gets jumped on as bogus science, etc. BTW, the validity of research, and even more so the application of said research to particular issues, can be questioned with most research. An example is the Miller-Urey study mentioned before. The research is valid, I have no issue with it but the application of that research to say that it shows that life can begin randomly is a big jump. Just a couple things jump out very quickly, the "random" particles where not random, they were controlled in a lab. Who really knows for sure what elements where there at that time, we have some decent guesses but even those have changed over the years. Then to jump from an amino acid to "life" well, I'll leave that one to you brainiacs.

Speaking of life, We can talk about the structures of the human body and how amazing they are, how nothing random could really make something so complex(I agree with Ike that from a scientific/mathematic pov, that it isn't quite "nothing") To me though, the real amazing part of life, is life itself. The "soul" if you will. Thoughts, feelings, memories, free will. Try as they might, there is no scientific explanation of this, sure we understand signals and chemical movement during thought(kind of) but the essence of thought is far from being understood scientifically.

but i really wasn't seeing any attacks on anybody in this thread...just a lot of people talking over my head...and being uncharacteristically civil about it...i mean this is the so and all.

[crawfish]

Amused reply.

Counter point.

Mean jab.

Post. Reported.

[JohnnyMack]

Religion is a hedge, used by the unsure. Just in case.

[crawfish]

Religion is a hedge, used by the unsure. Just in case.

Sureness is a mask that covers the fact that one really doesn't know what the **** is going on. ;)

[JohnnyMack]

Sureness is a mask that covers the fact that one really doesn't know what the **** is going on. ;)

I ain't sure, just too lazy to get up early on Sundays.

:P

[PhilTLL]

Ok boys let me break this down for you heathrens.

God=Bob Stoops

Heaven= Norman on a fall Saturday

Hell= Stoolwater any day that ends in y.

Got any more brainbusters? :D

http://members.cox.net/phamilton/08[1].jpg

:confused:

[stoopified]

How can anyone read the SO and still believe there has to be a purpose to things? :D
Strongest arguement for aetheism I have read yet. :D