I noticed a false dichotomy in this article and wanted to challenge it. I don't think you can just dismiss this debate on when so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins. Creationism is not just the playground for "recalcitrant" fundamentals; but truly something being studied at the physical and cosmological level of Einstein, Hawking, and Sandage. Your article just passes it by as if 7 day creation, 6000 year old earth, etc. etc is all of Creationism. I know you are trying to move on from this debate; but you mislead in your caricature of Creationism. Did God cause beings to appear or did he just deistically set in motion our evolution from soup and microorganisms is a better question to argue over, not at the level you are suggesting where one side are stubborn baffoons and the other side are cool headed intellectuals...much more nuanced and sophisticated than that. Read anything about Michael Behe or Stephen Meyer to get some info on design and origin of life if interested.
31 comments
Here's something you can read about Michael Behe, although accreditted and a teacher of science he has violated the actual practical use of the scientific process. He ignores evidence and claims that's acceptable within the system.
Whatever he once was he's a shill for the creationist circus now.
Wasn't Behe completely discredited in court because he could not defend his position and had no credible evidence to back up his claims.
"there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred". ~Michael Behe, Kitzmiller v. Dover
I thought Behe lost at the Dover trial when he had to concede that, under ID, astrology could be taught as science with the same footing as astronomy.
"fundamental science" P-G IDiot, is that where a god pops into existence from nothing and creates the universe out of nothing, then creates a dust man and rib woman (or is it dust man and woman, the bibble is unclear on this) who eat some fruit and everybody is cursed forever? Makes real sense!
nuanced and sophisticated
Just like theology, it doesn't matter how "nuanced" or "sophisticated" an idea might be, if it's not true, then it isn't worth pontificating about.
Adey, that's just a restatement of your own shit. The bible says "from things unseen"
Meanwhile your own big bang standard model cosmologists say 96 percent of the universe is unseen and undetected. ie. Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Those are just words on a page to you though.
Your basically here just to hate Christianity. Not Islam, Muhammad, Buddha, just Christianity.
Well how upsetting this is for me. There I was thinking we really needed you. Another day watching anti-fundamentalism fundamentalism, the nexus of hypocrisy and venal projection.
Fundies are pathetic. Even when there's an explanation they still plop god in there saying he allws it to happen. Example; we know the moon causes the tides but did you know that Jesus created the moon therefore creating the tides. It's nothing more than making god a one upper. It's pathetic. Almost as pathetic as that ass clown PG.
P.S. eat a dick Philip boy
"Read anything about Michael Behe or Stephen Meyer to get some info on design and origin of life if interested."
For a moment, I read Stephenie Meyer. Oh, welp, that's just about of the same credibility...
Moving the goalposts much?
so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins.
I chose atheism because I didn't see any evidence for a god, and saw plenty of evidence that all gods were made up by man.
Behe and Meyer are both baffoons. Though Rob has a point about the debate being far more sophisticated than baffoons vs intellectuals, Behe and Meyer are about the worst possible examples he could have possibly used (except for PG).
Would probably not be fundie apart from using Behe and Meyer as the "nuanced and sophisticated" examples.
(Indicible)
*laughs* I did that, too.
@PG
"I don't think you can just dismiss this debate on when so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins."
I think we can just dismiss this debate because nobody becomes an atheist on grounds of origins. You misunderstanding of basic science causes you to obsess over so-called "origins" when they are completely irrellevent to the debate.
Except you guys are the ones who adamantly insist that evolution and ID are incompatible. And even on a front that God guided evolution, we cannot prove that through any scientific method, and as such, still cannot teach that as science, so you can't even backdoor ID that way.
"so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins."
No amount of sofistication or intellectualism (none of which is present in creationism) makes a theory more legit. For example, the Marxian class model or the Marxian model of surplus value are equally sofisticated, that doesn't change a thing about them being absolute bullshit.
I don't think you can just dismiss this debate on when so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins.
I've never heard of anyone saying "creationists are full of crap; therefore God doesn't exist" - it's the other way around: "God doesn't exist; therefore creationists are full of crap". Most atheists, I think, come to their beliefs based on the "Problem of Evil", the fact that there are thousands of different religions all saying something different and the fact that God almost always seems to want us to do what the holier-than-thou, judgmental religious people themselves want us to do. Creationism doesn't enter into it.
Ok so you are saying the debate shouldn't be about whether or not a god or gods created the universe, but should instead be about figuring out how your particular god created the universe...
I see what you did there...
Creationism is not just the playground for "recalcitrant" fundamentals
Yes it is, because no matter what their brand of creationism is, it always boils down to "Goddidit".
but truly something being studied at the physical and cosmological level of Einstein, Hawking, and Sandage.
Do you, by chance, have the names of those who are studying Creationism at this same level then? Can you name their field of study, their scientific credentials, their peer reviewed articles in scientific journals?
you are suggesting where one side are stubborn baffoons and the other side are cool headed intellectuals
Well, you did mention Michael Behe and Stephen Meyer in the same paragraph with Einstein, Hawking, and Sandage. So... yeah.
Your total ignorance of Science is obvious. Creationism is no more a science that is Astrology. It was quite obvious to me when I was ten years old and inspected a limestone cliff on the shore of Lake Erie. The vast number of shells in the cliff could not possibly have accumulated in thousands, or even a few million years. That follows from the quantity of shells beaches and simple arithmetic. Get your head out of your Bible, buy a fossil collecting kit, and find out for yourself.
Well, he has half a point, seeing as mainline Christianity has no problem with evolution, the big bang, science, etc.
Depending on the denomination, it's usually a belief that God achieved Creation via guiding natural means, or that he created via divine intervention which he hid all evidence for.
Either way, we then live in a logically consistent universe that needs no deity and has no evidence for a deity, which is why we put so much emphasis on *faith*.
when so many choose to embrace atheism on the grounds of origins
Extremely doubtful.
but truly something being studied at the physical and cosmological level of Einstein, Hawking, and Sandage
No, that's just a lie.
Did God cause beings to appear or did he just deistically set in motion our evolution from soup and microorganisms is a better question to argue over
OK, I agree, there's a good discussion to be had there. So what's your evidence?
Read anything about Michael Behe or Stephen Meyer to get some info on design and origin of life if interested.
I have eaten things brighter than those two.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
