Creationism vs Evolution... not the usual 2cents.

[Jack]

Sandman is referring to his "chips in the bucket" logic he likes to use. Meaning that if you don't have your chips in bucket A they must be in different one because you can't have them scattered all over the place; replace chips with belief and you get why he thinks no belief in God is still a belief unto itself.

What that has to do with anything beats me. Since it is a vague and circumstantial point he made; like most of what he writes.

Simply not believing in God is one, disbelieving is another and that is a belief.

"I don't believe that God exists because there is not even scientific evidence to support the claim"

"I believe that God does not exist and that no evidence will be found, as there is obviously none to find"


I'm not saying I agree with the [insert bannable comment here], just that not believing something exist and believing that it does not are entirely two different things.

[Thriller]

Sandman is referring to his "chips in the bucket" logic he likes to use. Meaning that if you don't have your chips in bucket A they must be in different one because you can't have them scattered all over the place; replace chips with belief and you get why he thinks no belief in God is still a belief unto itself.

What that has to do with anything beats me. Since it is a vague and circumstantial point he made; like most of what he writes.

Simply not believing in God is one, disbelieving is another and that is a belief.

"I don't believe that God exists because there is not even scientific evidence to support the claim"

"I believe that God does not exist and that no evidence will be found, as there is obviously none to find"


I'm not saying I agree with the [insert bannable comment here], just that not believing something exist and believing that it does not are entirely two different things.

Exactly depends on the context; thats why i said it was vague and circumstantial.

Whos captain obvious now?

yah i know jack its still me.

[Mister Sandman]

Last i checked sandman, "Taliban" was not a race; just a group of oppressive close minded Muslim fundamentalists who would slit your throat for political favor.

Lets pretend he said you were worse than Charles Manson. He would be comparing you to something that he distastes; condemning Mr. Manson in the process.

Now if you disagree with condemning the taliban and Mr Mason; that's a completely different ethical issue which is definitely off topic.

@death rider

Sandman is referring to his "chips in the bucket" logic he likes to use. Meaning that if you don't have your chips in bucket A they must be in different one because you can't have them scattered all over the place; replace chips with belief and you get why he thinks no belief in God is still a belief unto itself.

Wrong. The logic is, the chips isnt in a bucket, it is somewhere else. It can be scattered all over the place; but there must be chips.

Such with a belief. I.e I do not believe that there is no God. Thus, I believe there is a God. Still a belief. One may have no belief in God. But still that is a belief. One cannot not just have 'no belief'.

Note this is an example.

What that has to do with anything beats me. Since it is a vague and circumstantial point he made; like most of what he writes.

race
n.

1.

A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
2.

A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution:
3.

A genealogical line; a lineage.

Thus, Taliban can be considered as a race. Also there are many considerations that you are not taking into.

[semper]

nihilism:

[Juliette]

Oh, in a racism trial, just claim you're black.
Works everytime. Unless, by chance or your mother's chaste monogamy and pureblood lineage, you don't happen to be *somewhat* black.



As for this:

Also there are many considerations that you are not taking into.

Heh. *grin* That's the cutest argument ever.

[Thriller]

My argument is your lack of context or coherent thought sandman.

more specifically your confusion that belief and faith are analogous. Saying a person has no faith when referring to god makes perfect sense. Since "faith" is referring to trust in a belief regardless of rational thought. Faith is not a preexisting condition of the human faculty. Having beliefs are; but there is an important distinction your forgetting between faith and belief, I hold beliefs based on rational evidence, faith describes held belief in the absence of it.

[Deaths_Rider]

well in the interest of getting back on topic...

niether should be taught as both are largely meaningless to science the theory of evolution makes no difference to how you practically study biology so bringing it up in high school seems redundant likewise creationism dosn't effect the way the thing in frount of you worksor functions. both are just atempts to mold your view of the world which is not the aim of science so don't teach them in science class teach them something usefull in biology instead.

(as a physics student i must add biology is usless and hardly a science anyway)

[BenjaminMS]

Mmm...

Evolution theory should be taught in Biology lessons, not in Science... Since Evolution is for the majority an case of biological conditions

Also... the evolution theory is for the majority confirmed through field study (and the remainder is theorized), while creationism robs parts of the studies of the evolution theory, mixs it with the Bible and then yells 'This is the truth'.
Problem is that if you want teach both, you'll get a lot of trouble. Why?

- The evolution theory, no matter the flaws it still has (like pointed out, there are still some explanations missing for certains things that cannot be explained yet by the theory), can explain the majority of things. Not all, but the most.
- Creationism however is a different thing... it uses partially the same data as the evolution theory - but then throws away the best parts of the evolution theory and instead uses parts of the Bible for it. It is pointing at possibilities for what it *could* be what is missing in the evolution theory, but creationism is flawed in a few thousand ways... it doesn't explain much and lacks to support the data for almost all ways of evolution...

Besides that, science (evolution theory) and the church (creationism) don't go along together. Both claim to be better, and the theories, if taught BOTH, will be contradicting each other - confusing any student who would follow both classes till no end.

[unseen1]

Look what crawled from under the rock.It took only 21 days to reply me.And what did you do?Did your priest gave you amphetamine to buff up your faith ?

Now show me where in evolution theory does it say we come from an ape?

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-aqu ... thesis.htm
The aquatic ape hypothesis. Enjoy.

The rest has been shot to pieces before i got to write this response.

No,no,no nothing was shoot to pieces and you still owe me an answer or two.But in your fully logical mind you choose to deliberately ignore them isnt that right Mr.Faith,
Mr.GobuyahamburgerinshoestoremaybeAlBundyhasone?

Anyways questions If I may and yes I know you will ignore it for hole 21 days again....
When did you start to believe in GOD?

Who taught you to believe in God?


"There is a giant rock.....cant it be lifted...can it be to heavy....why cant we comprehend....remember....cargo god????native Americans....different views of same thing?!?!?!primitive...21st century....FOX?"

[ljietuvis]

I'm sorry I was too lazy to read all the posts before me, but here's mine.
Evolution is both a theory and a fact. The fact of evolution is the evolution that we can observe directly, so it's the evolution that is happening right now. The theory of evolution explaines how all species came into existence. It can't be called a fact, because we can't observe it directly, although it is based on lots of evidence from fossils and genetics. It's just like gravity. Gravity also isn't a fact, it's a theory.
Now creationism (not intelligent design), the Adam and Eve story, is just a myth. It's as plausible as the story that Prometheus stole fire and gave it to humans.

[Mister Sandman]

Look what crawled from under the rock.It took only 21 days to reply me.And what did you do?Did your priest gave you amphetamine to buff up your faith ? again, im not a Catholic or Anglican


Anyways questions If I may and yes I know you will ignore it for hole 21 days again....
When did you start to believe in GOD?
When I found out there logically is a God. When I knew that it was impossible for God not to exist.
Who taught you to believe in God?
Wrong question. You cant teach real belief or faith.

[Brdavs]

Mmm...

Evolution theory should be taught in Biology lessons, not in Science... Since Evolution is for the majority an case of biological conditions

Biology is science silly.

Granted I dont know first hand how you have it set up in your schools but where I live we have bio, chemistry, math, physics etc. seperate classes that are all "science classes" by virtue of teaching and being based on science content and sceince process. In context of not wanting creationism in "science class" it is naturally assumed its place would be in biology class as the science class pertaining to subject matter creationism makes claims of.