Creationism taught in Libertyville science class

[PatrickSharpRules]

Exactly... who/what created matter?

 

[ginnie]

Exactly... who/what created matter?

WE DON"T KNOW.



That's a lot different than "GOD DID".



And that's basically how religion came about in the first place - what is the sun? we don't know but lets call it "God...



Fire is very hot and powerful - God must have made it...



The winds and storms are giant forces ... must come from "God"



and on and on and on...

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

We DON'T KNOW that God doesn't exist either.

 

[jakobeast]

This thread was hot until Jako got involved.

But this is my first post.







You like my dance?

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

We DON'T KNOW that God doesn't exist either.

But of all the gods in the history of man any of the ones still in circulation today are highly unlikely to be the actual god.



As I said, look to the Sheen. He has all the answers. He has one speed.......

 

[TSD]

We DON'T KNOW that God doesn't exist either.

You are correct, but there is ABSOLUTELY no evidence leading us to the conclusion there is. None. Religious texts are the only evidence, but are not evidence of anything, you have to have "faith" they are truthful, we have no way to determine if they are or are not.



Now here is where people usually say "well why do you believe stuff from history?"



1. Multiple sources.

2. Physical Evidence.



Even then admittedly historians have to draw their own conclusion and make estimates when sifting through ancient written histories. Take the story of the 300 spartans. It was more than 300 spartans and a hell of alot less than 1 million persians, because other sources and physical evidence suggest that.



That is not to say nothing in the bible is historically accurate, of course there is plenty, but we have absolutely NO evidence, on written or physical, of any of the supernatural aspects of the bible, basically all of the stuff that proves God exists, anywhere except the bible itself.



Evolution is a supported theory, because there is alot of physical evidence it happens.





Stu you are completely mis-interpreting how this works.



"We dont know God doesn't exist" != "We dont know how the universe came to be"





"God Exists" == "werewolves exist"



Those two statements are EXACTLY the same, the both have the exact same probability of being true, yet people would dismiss the latter, even religious people.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Nobody knows either way and no one is going to prove either way any time soon. Beats the shit outta me why anyone even fuckin bothers to discuss it. It's a stupid circular argument and no one is going to change the other side's mind. Just a dumb waste of time to argue about it IMO.

 

[Tommy 0]

This thread was hot until Jako got involved.

Frigin jako

 

[TSD]

Nobody knows either way and no one is going to prove either way any time soon. Beats the shit outta me why anyone even fuckin bothers to discuss it. It's a stupid circular argument and no one is going to change the other side's mind. Just a dumb waste of time to argue about it IMO.

It absolutely does. People base their lives on what some mythical being allegedly said.



The majority of people are not so extreme and rationalize their belief with what society expects, but look at people like Fred Phelps. I know for the time being it seems trivial, but Hitler was a goddamn lowlife criminal and look what he became. All it takes is the right situation and people like Fred Phelps become a real problem, and the only reason he is the way he is, is due to his belief in God.

 

[the canadian dream]

It absolutely does. People base their lives on what some mythical being allegedly said.



The majority of people are not so extreme and rationalize their belief with what society expects, but look at people like Fred Phelps. I know for the time being it seems trivial, but Hitler was a goddamn lowlife criminal and look what he became. All it takes is the right situation and people like Fred Phelps become a real problem, and the only reason he is the way he is, is due to his belief in God.

This is true. People will attach themselves to people who are telling them what they want and need to hear esp at the lowest moments in their lives and most desperate. This is why weird cults with self appointed prophets always seem to pop up.



This stretches beyond the religious sectors though. It goes into politics, marketing and commerce etc etc etc. This is human nature. We are a very bendable and shapeable bunch of yahoos. None of us are immune to it and all of us are suckers in one way or another.

 

[ginnie]

We DON'T KNOW that God doesn't exist either.

Before I comment any further - which God are you talking about?

 

[TSD]

Before I comment any further - which God are you talking about?

Absolutely relevant. Good observation.



Believing in a God that adheres to no religious dogma is irrelevant, at that point, if all the religions have no actual inspiration from the actual "God", whether people believe or disbelieve is completely irrelevant.



My question to agnostics is "why believe at all?" you dont believe the religions are correct, then where is your basis for belief? Then if you pick a religion what makes you think that God is real over the others?



In my humble opinion, the existence of multiple religions IS supporting evidence for a lack of a God.



One would think if get had a set of rules, his people were to adhere to or suffer an eternity of damnation, he/she would ensure all of his people are drawn to his word equally. As it stands, people, in general follow the religion for which they were raised in. There is no "shine" to any particular religion that enlightens people to its true, there are converts from from multiple faiths to multiple other faiths. i.e. were christianity real people born into christian families, would have an advantage over those who are not or vice versa.

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

Stu heres why the argument of God is so weak. Read the following....





I absolutely believe that I am god, I know everything I have special insight and that is it. There is not proof to prove me otherwise so praise me.







^^^That is basically your argument for whatever god you've been mentioning. There is no way I am god, but there sure as **** isn't any evidence saying I'm not, same deal as any god you will ever mention.

 

[BiscuitintheBasket]

You are correct, but there is ABSOLUTELY no evidence leading us to the conclusion there is. None. Religious texts are the only evidence, but are not evidence of anything, you have to have "faith" they are truthful, we have no way to determine if they are or are not.



Now here is where people usually say "well why do you believe stuff from history?"



1. Multiple sources.

2. Physical Evidence.



Even then admittedly historians have to draw their own conclusion and make estimates when sifting through ancient written histories. Take the story of the 300 spartans. It was more than 300 spartans and a hell of alot less than 1 million persians, because other sources and physical evidence suggest that.



That is not to say nothing in the bible is historically accurate, of course there is plenty, but we have absolutely NO evidence, on written or physical, of any of the supernatural aspects of the bible, basically all of the stuff that proves God exists, anywhere except the bible itself.



Evolution is a supported theory, because there is alot of physical evidence it happens.





Stu you are completely mis-interpreting how this works.



"We dont know God doesn't exist" != "We dont know how the universe came to be"





"God Exists" == "werewolves exist"



Those two statements are EXACTLY the same, the both have the exact same probability of being true, yet people would dismiss the latter, even religious people.

And when wrong, historians will eat crow and adjust the history to what newer and more bonified evidence shows. Granted that eating of crow make take decades, but it almost always happens. History very much follows the scientic method for determination of the unknowns.







For me I defer back to earlier posts about creationism being taught as a seperate class. The scientific method is only rarely applied to the theory, so it cannot be called science. I also defer back to earlier posts about why just creationism, why not all of the other religions with differing opionions (Buddism, Shintoism, etc). While not as major in the Western World, they are still well practiced religions by large groups of people, and a fair amount in the US.





And werewolves do exist, I heard they were seen drinkin a pina colada at Trader Vic's...And his hair was perfect.

 

[supraman]

Supraman, if the State willingly just let christian creationism in schools, nobody today would have ever heard of the term "Intelligent Design".



Intelligent Design is simply one step in the ladder of trying to get the book of genesis added to a science book.



If they want to teach it in a philosophy class i am perfectly fine with that. In the philosophy classes I took, we discussed many things that would fall into that category.





ID doesn't belong in a science class because there is nothing scientific about it.



"I think thats too complex to have occured naturally" is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested.

I'm an an atheist and a man the believes firmly in science and I have heard some of the scientific theories about how life came about and they are to put it mildly FUCKING Special person and actually one of the scientific theories actually uses Intelligent Design.



Watch Ben Stein's No Intelligence Allowed. It is a great documentary and sure it has an agenda but all forms of media have an agenda it is up to the viewer to decipher it.



I am Scott Hahn's Answering the New Atheism because my sister asked me to and even then he makes a very convincing and logical argument for Intelligent Design.



I don't have a belief on the matter one way or the other but I keep an open mind about it ID is about as reasonable as all the other theories I've heard.

 

[Tater]

This thread was hot until Jako got involved.

Holy **** is that hilarious.

Good find.

 

[supraman]

You are correct, but there is ABSOLUTELY no evidence leading us to the conclusion there is. None. Religious texts are the only evidence, but are not evidence of anything, you have to have "faith" they are truthful, we have no way to determine if they are or are not.



Now here is where people usually say "well why do you believe stuff from history?"



1. Multiple sources.

2. Physical Evidence.



Even then admittedly historians have to draw their own conclusion and make estimates when sifting through ancient written histories. Take the story of the 300 spartans. It was more than 300 spartans and a hell of alot less than 1 million persians, because other sources and physical evidence suggest that.



That is not to say nothing in the bible is historically accurate, of course there is plenty, but we have absolutely NO evidence, on written or physical, of any of the supernatural aspects of the bible, basically all of the stuff that proves God exists, anywhere except the bible itself.



Evolution is a supported theory, because there is alot of physical evidence it happens.





Stu you are completely mis-interpreting how this works.



"We dont know God doesn't exist" != "We dont know how the universe came to be"





"God Exists" == "werewolves exist"



Those two statements are EXACTLY the same, the both have the exact same probability of being true, yet people would dismiss the latter, even religious people.

There is NO evidence to prove OR disprove the existence of a divine being(s). You cannot simply state that a divine being does not exist as fact. There is absolutely ZERO evidence to support either side.



Sure evolution is a supported theory, that's not in question but the origins of life certain is a different beast.

 

[ginnie]

My question to agnostics is "why believe at all?" you dont believe the religions are correct, then where is your basis for belief? Then if you pick a religion what makes you think that God is real over the others?

I am an agnostic.

One of the definitions for agnostic is "b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism." and/or "a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)"



The basis for my "belief" being my lifetime experience of being raised Roman Catholic, and the experiences of my spiritual journey throughout my life.



I feel spiritually closer to Buddhism than any other religion.

 

[supraman]

I am an agnostic.

One of the definitions for agnostic is "b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism." and/or "a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)"



The basis for my "belief" being my lifetime experience of being raised Roman Catholic, and the experiences of my spiritual journey throughout my life.



I feel spiritually closer to Buddhism than any other religion.

Hey whadya know I'm actually agnostic

 

[roshinaya]

I'm an an atheist and a man the believes firmly in science and I have heard some of the scientific theories about how life came about and they are to put it mildly FUCKING Special person and actually one of the scientific theories actually uses Intelligent Design.



Watch Ben Stein's No Intelligence Allowed. It is a great documentary and sure it has an agenda but all forms of media have an agenda it is up to the viewer to decipher it.



I am Scott Hahn's Answering the New Atheism because my sister asked me to and even then he makes a very convincing and logical argument for Intelligent Design.



I don't have a belief on the matter one way or the other but I keep an open mind about it ID is about as reasonable as all the other theories I've heard.

The problem with ID is that it comes out from an assumption that some kind of supreme being is behind it all, which is basically unscientific. And most of its arguments, mainly the "irreducible complexity" argument, has been shown to be simply wrong and arguments for it are from ignorance or downright dishonesty. ID is no more than pseudoscience. And in debates about evolution vs. creationism, the question of the origin of life is often involved, which has nothing to do with the theory of evolution and is a completely separate field of study, which currently has a number of different theories, but there is somewhat of an understanding on how the process from inanimate molecules to living organisms could have happened. However, even if there are gaps in our current scientific knowledge, there is no point in placing "god in the gaps", which seems to be one argument made by creationist to have it taught in schools.