Posted on 12/08/2005 7:57:08 PM PST by curiosity
My paranoia tells me that the left is funding the Discovery Institute. Think about it.
The America-haters can acheive two goals at once: 1) splitting the GOP and thereby gaining political power, and 2) getting non-science into science classes. Goal 2) will lead to putting even more Gaiaism (Eath-worship) into science class (under the guise of "environmental studies", industrial (mainly US) global warming, etc.)
This wll lead to an ever more ignorant, easily-led population, IMO the real long-term goal.
After all, if it's OK to teach thinly-veiled Biblical/Koranic creationism as though it were science, why not teach the Gaia hypothesis (the biosphere is a single lving organism) as well? Why not teach Earth-worship as well?
Anyone else see any irony in using the Christian and Muslim creationists as a wedge to eventually allow Earth worship into school?
I don't think the GOP is paying the "gay marriage" people. Should we?
In my Black Helicopter moments I can see where you're coming from.
I forget his name, but one of the major sponsors of DI is a seriously conservative guy who has publicly stated his agenda is to re-introduce Christian teaching into public schools.
I suppose he could be a fraud, but that's what he says he wants, and DI is happy to provide the "intellectual" backup.
Basically, I wouldn't have a problem with that agenda. Teach the golden rule. Let them sing "Silent Night" and a real "Christmas" party. Fine. Even say the Lords Prayer every morning. Great. That didn't hurt me. It didn't make me a Christian for the rest of my life, because I'm not a believer now.
But science class is for science. End of story.
(and to the lurkers who think I'm a troll, bite it. I am what I am, and I don't lie for anyone's agenda)
Not at all, it's just a way to highlight a certain piece of testimony that I WANT to say ;) for someone (like me who does not know how to use italics or black some testimony on this message boards. Do not assume that you know my motives, thanks for your comment though ;D!
Either the BIBLE happened or it didn't (plain as fact), Becuase it claims (I would say rightly so) that God created the world, either what the Bible says is true, or what Man's opionion is IS true..
Evolutionists like to say that evolution is "science" and Creation is not, but this is really just a falacy meant to say that since the Bible is "religion" which means in today's world-multiculturalism/progressivism that Religion is not true, but of coures since the Bible is mutually exclusive it either is true (Along with the history claimed therein) or it isn't!
I would say that not only is the Bible true, but things like the fossile record merely bear that out, and also keep in mind that a historical event cannot be definitively "proven" becuase neither creation by God, or the big-bang can be repeated by experiementation by man!
Look I don't care what you believe (or at least I respect your right to believe it, whether I believe you are right or wrong, and despite the fact that I believe that you are avoiding the issue..), but
I WILL NOT give up the premise that The Bible is OBJECTIVE Truth for ALL, and thereby it is universally and definitively true, and it CANNOT be taken out of the public square (in-otherwords: I dissagree, The Bible is true whether you want to believe it is or not!), and thereby if you seek truth, or want to be consistent then it is very relevant to the PUBLIC square and SHOULD NOT be removed from.
sure it does, it makes perfect sense that Gen chapeter 1 describes God creating the universe, the earth, animals, plants, man, ect, but that Chapter 2 is just a revisitation of 1:25-28, and that man named the animals in 1 day!, and that God created woman if he created in 6 days why couldn't this have happened just as it says in Gen (and in Hebrew?).
Except for things like the "global flood" of course. The evidence for that is thin as a politician's promise the day after an election.
Not, or have you ever heard that there is evidence that "all of North America was once covered with water"- It's just misinterpreted by evolutionists to be a "shallow sea", then there's that point of order that there have "even been fossils" found on the top of everest; other tall mountains..
plus the evidence for a food in the middle east, that is so famous-once again misinterpreted by naturalists to say that it was a "local flood", plus the fact that pretty much every major ancient civilzation has a world-flood type story in their history...
Oh, dear.
And I'm sure you will have no problem with the Koran in "the public square", or paganism, Druids, Indian Totems, etc. After all, fair is fair, and truth for one person is truth for all. That's what you're claiming.
But "the public square" does not include science classes. Forcing the teaching of religion falsely labeled as science is a lie, and children should not be taught lies. Even if the religion were "true", it is not science, and teaching it as science is a lie. To teach religion as science damages science, because it opens itself up to lines of evidence it was not designed for. That is wrong.
By the way, there is no God, and the Bible was written by a bunch of frauds, and that's TRUE whether you WANT TO BELIEVE IT OR NOT!
The creation scientists stopped trying to verify a young earth, or Noah's flood about 50 years ago. The last two scientists to attempt to find such proof gave up, and abandoned creationism in the 50's.
Not even the Discovery Institute, which has promoted Intelligent Design for years, does not even attempt to claim that either a young earth or Noah's flood occurred.
There is one other possibility though. God is a liar. He either lied when he wrote the Bible, or lied when he manipulated the physical evidence on earth (and the light from stars) to make it appear old when it is not.
And I suppose one other possibility, God doesn't exist and the Bible was written by a bunch of scientific know-nothings. That's the option I prefer.
And further. You need to understand when Christian Fundamentalists attempt to force the teaching of ID in public schools, there will be a huge fight with the 75% of the population that doesn't believe in literal translations of the Bible. The second issue brought up in that discussion is the question of whether God exists at all, as we have come to here.
I want you to think about this: Many bright believing fundamentalist young people exposed to the evidence for old earth and evolution will conclude as I did, that the Bible is a lie, and God does not exist. Knowing that, maybe ID is a subject left to church, and opposing science is not a good thing for religious people to do. After all, the Catholic church, after their disastrous experience with Galileo now has no problem with evolution, and goes out of it's way to affirm that Catholic doctrine does not contradict science, because they believe God created the science, therefore it cannot be "wrong". If fundamentalists had brains, that would be their doctrine as well.
plus the evidence for a food [sic] in the middle east, that is so famous-once again misinterpreted by naturalists to say that it was a "local flood", plus the fact that pretty much every major ancient civilzation [sic] has a world-flood type story in their history...
None of which is evidence.
The date of the flood is given as:
2252 BC -- layevangelism.comAt this time, there is a continuous archaeological and written record in Egypt. The earliest pyramids were built beginning about 2630 BC; there is no evidence they were underwater, nor is there any mention in the writings of such a flood.2304 BC -- Answers in Genesis (+/- 11 years).
2350 BC -- Morris, H. Biblical Creationism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993.
Where I work, in the western US, we have residential sites occupied before, during, and after these dates. There is continuity in the stratigraphy, fauna and flora (e.g., pollen records), dating, culture change, etc. No way it could have been totally disrupted and leave no evidence.
We have evidence of a migration by early populations down the Pacific Coast from Alaska to the tip of South America, tracked by mutations in Haplogroup A, over a period of 11,000 years. By finding and testing skeletal remains along this route for mtDNA, scientists have been able to track the route of the migration via new mutations. This is all pretty new data, and it does not allow time for complete extinction of people in this area followed by replacement populations from the eastern Mediterranean. That would make a continuity in mtDNA impossible, but we have continuity. There is a whole industry growing up to trace people's ancestry through DNA, and they use the observed fact that populations were moving about in North American many thousands of years before the date given for the flood as part of their technique.
ISN'T THE FOSSIL RECORD THE RESULT OF NOAH'S FLOOD?
Another service of Darwin Central, the conspiracy that cares.
Sorry I am a little late in answering your false acusing post, but I will now respond to your false information and it is not my ~intention~ to cause hatred on toward you because I do not despite my idea that you are wrong (and you have that right to be wrong, but if we discuss this friendly, and in a truth seeking way, then I am sure that we can come to some kind of understanding, with all that said you may hold onto y our opinion when all this is done, but I WILL NOT back down from PROCLAIMING the TRUTH!
http://newcreationstuies.org
answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i1/flood.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org
(These links are merely my way of saying that you are wrong on 1st: THe Point that the Bible is LIE (GOD IS A LIAR), and 2nd that THERE IS LITTLE IF NO PROOF of the Flood, and that ~real~ scientists do not still believe and search for it.
(Why don't we cut the adhominim attacks and falacies) that Creation is not both science (and religion) as well as a Blind faith in Naturalism (without scientific proof would be), THat is unless you ~DON'T~ really have confidence that evolution can withstand the "Scientific" scrutiny of debat..!
OH and lets also cut out the fallacy that "Science is greater"-has greater authority than religion.
Firstlyt this idea is a false analogy that "Science" is in conflict with "religion" (what you call the Bible), when in-fact they are not. Science and the Bible complement eachother (They are not in conflic), (The Bible is in conflict with evolution, but as you hide, evolution-1 theory..) should not be toughted as "(ALL) science"- It is not the scientific method, and TRUTH (Objective) truth is ture no matter where it comes from,
NOW I don't claim to know this truth on my own (authority-opinion), I claim it upon what God has written in the Bible. Opinion does not make fact- FACT IS Fact, Why, then do I believe the Bible as the word of God:
Firstly because God HAS saved me from my sins, and I know Him as my Saviour (as you could as well), secondly I believe that through evidence presented by "science" the natural order- that God has created the world, and man sinned when he disobeyed, and then that produced a need for reconcilliation, which GOd fulfilled on the "Cross"..
Yes, as to your question of allowing religion in the public square "I do believe that if the PEOPLE want religion in the public square they should (AS apparently did The Founders in the 1st Ammendment) be able to (as long as they did not force someone-nonpractincing to take part in that religion).-Allowing them to opt out.
NOW narby THERE IS ONE THING THAT I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO GET AWAY WITH; And that is YOU WILL NOT GET AWAY WITH CONVERTING OTHERS TO YOUR FALSE TEACHINGS (Which I pray that you will abandon, and realize that God is light, trugh, The Way), because I WILL NEVER GIVE UP TEACHING PEOPLE THE TRUTH, DEFEATING FALSEHOOD!
I WILL NOT get involved in this RIDICULOUS argument, where CREATIONIST WEBSITES are cited as AUTHORITY, where using ALL CAPS and EXCLAMATION POINTS is thought to be a POWERFUL argument style, and where NONE of the OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE FACTS are addressed. You guys are ON YOUR OWN!!!
You did not directly respond to my points in post #113 dealing with the evidence/lack of evidence for a global flood. You responded primarily with belief. If that is the case, no problem; but you should not commingle your beliefs and scientific evidence, as they are coming from two different worldviews.
You provided two links. The first was broken but I figured it out. It does not have any specific article on the global flood. The second, answersingenesis has a number of articles on the flood. I have examined them in some detail in the past and they are nonsense. The contortions which they find necessary to make in scientific methods and findings, in an attempt to support a global flood, are simply a disgrace, and in my opinion, cause them to lose all credibility.
I my post I gave you the result of my studies in western US archaeology, not something from some partisan website. Do you have any comment on my points?
If you don't believe them, fine; just say so and that's the end to it. My only contention is with the gross distortion that some folks attempt to make in science to find support for religious beliefs.
Drop in AGAIN when you can STAY LONGER.
PlaCEmArKeR
Decaf.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.