Quote:
Originally Posted by XXdarkclarityXX
*Looks up at previous post* Looks like someone's disagreeing about calling a draw :( . Please!!! Stop the carnage!
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by XXdarkclarityXX
*Looks up at previous post* Looks like someone's disagreeing about calling a draw :( . Please!!! Stop the carnage!
Since when did a score of 53.85 to 36.81 constitute a draw? I claim victory for evolution! And a very respectable runners-up score for the creationists.
It's the 9% that don't know what to think that worries me. Are they waiting for someone to tell them? Or do they just prefer not to think?
And why have we heard nothing from the 'none of the above' faction? I'm sure they have lots of interesting theories as to how we got here - why didn't they share them?
Anyway, if we stop now, someone'll just start another similar thread in a week or two. May as well just keep going and avoid the déja vu. ;)
They might prefer not to think. They might also be weighing their options still, looking at evidence and trying to figure out what is most compelling. It was a long time before I figured out what I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xamonas Chegwe
I used to think that there was no beginning, that everything just always was and always would be, but that was when I was a little kid and the present was all that mattered. Ah, those were the good days.
Well, not really. I prefer knowledge to ignorance, even blissful ignorance.
So if anyone is wondering, I go with evolution.
There seems no reason to believe in Creationism. All evidence seems against the idea of the Biblical account. I was holding an ammonite in my hands only yesterday thinking, how incredible it is that anyone with any sense could imagine this to have lived less than 6000 years ago. But, of course, though we live in a world that has had 400 years of science and 3,000 years or more of philosophy, society is still ruled by irrational superstition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xamonas Chegwe
I put 'none of the above' and I gave my opinion. I couldn't just pick one (creationism, evolution) 'cause I believe in both.
And I do believe we should call it a draw, even if another thread is brought up. This one's getting so long it's giving me a headache.
l believe in the two ..too.. i guess
So,
Green Lady & Falling Moon,
I guess what you're sayng is not "None of the above" but "All of the above" - an obvious oversight by the thread's founder. I can respect that (while disagreeing of course). :nod:
Do we have any "Prefer not to think"s out there - will they own up?
Excuse me if "hijack" the thread and make a comment about creationism and natural diversity. that is the topic here is it not?
I think that it is absolutely naive for anyone to selfishly consider the planet earth to be a christians only mechanism, where all the creatures and resources on the planet were created to benefit one species that christians chauvanistically call "man".
Were all the animals were created to be used or eaten by "man"?
Were all the trees were created by a supreme entity for the exclusive use of "man"?
the earth may be polluted, raped and destroyed just as long as 'man' is benefitting from this outcome?
maybe god is in the form of a cockroach who created "MAN" for the sole purpose of carelessly discarding pizza boxes, so that the cockroach race, created by the cockroach god in His likeness, would have free food to eat forever, and "man" is just a supporting character, insignificant and disposable? Hmm?
there are too many genetically unique species out there to think selfishly that everything was created for "mans" exclusive use and abuse alone, regardless of the needs of the millions of other threatened species that are forced to share the world with "man"; the taker, the destroyer.
Creationism is antiquated sentiment, just like the idea that the earth was created in less than a fortnight.
this idea is disrespectful to the creatures with whom we share this planet, and who's destiny is ultmately our own.
om
I just got back from a talk given by Dr. Pigliucci at EKU, so I'm revved up for this one!
Creationism or evolutionism? First off, it's a false question. Science is a method that is applied to certain questions that can be answered empirically. And frankly, being a lit-hack-wannabe, I'm amazed that there seems to be this attitude out there that if something isn't science, it isn't worth studying. Out of the whole pie of human knowledge and experience, that which can be called "science" is a tiny sliver!
Still, the Creationists, at least the hardcore ones, want "Intelligent Design" taught as science. Well, it isn't science 'cause you can't empirically prove or disprove the existence of God. And that's not saying that the idea of Creationism isn't worth studying. It's saying it isn't science, which is totally different. And to me, as a lit-hack-wannabe, the question of "Why was it so easy for Iago to make Othello jealous over Desdemona on such flimsy evidence?" is WAY more interesting than science. So is the whole "is there a God?" thing, though nothing groundbreaking has been done on that since the Existentialists. And so, for that matter, is the question of "Intelligent Design".
So, that's me on my fourth beer. Man, I'm gonna be **** at work tomorrow! And why the **** can't I sleep?!?
Pretty dag nab quite round here. Must be that there is no debate (imagine that). We can once again hoist the victorious on our shoulders.
Darwin rules from beyond the grave!
Excuse me while I gloat.
Oh my, why debate?
If you are Christian be content that God made you, if not be content that apes appropriated you.
And if your an Anarchist be in-content with everything.
The more you tell either that they are wrong, the harder they will stiffen their resolves toward their ideals.
It like beating the waves of the sea with a bat.
Just as long as you dont beat any people with that bat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theshizznigg
What if someone doesnt have a category? Does one have to be christian or not christian? Antichrist? Is there another choice? You got somethin against apes? you refute your prehistoric ancestry for what? So that you can wear your hair like a god? I spose its easier for someone to torture a primate in captivity if they refute thier genetic similarity. Fish dont have feelings right? So givem another bash with your bat.
I am a part of this earth, related to rock and stone, bee and fluff, ape and man. A book of scriptures doesnt make me better or worse than a wombat or a slug. we all share this earth in union with all its living creatures. when we place ourselves above other tenants here, we ultimately are alone and alien, unforgiven for our destrutive capabilities. Part of the entropic process: Part of the problem.
How many molecules of carbon dioxide did you liberate last year?
looks like ther is no debate. Victory is ours!Quote:
Originally Posted by jollyollie
you know...there IS a good solution for this....would someone create a time machine to send a group of people back in the beginnings of time and see, feel, hear, smell err...taste..(uh whatever) just experience it all with his five senses?...and then when they come back with the info we can all relax while battering one another yelling "I told you so!" :lol:
Hmmm...It seems like this whole question has a lot to do with another thread in this forum, about what was before God...
The basic questions which neither evolutionists or creationists can answer are
1. If God created everything, where did God come from?
2. If the universe was created by the eruption of the 'cosmic egg', where did the cosmic egg come from?
If you consider it, the questions are identical: Where does the beginning begin? Something creates something else. Why not postulate a God? It's as logical as a cosmic egg... ;)