Creationism vs Evolution live debate tonight

[Blake]

Like which ones? The communist countries or the Muslim dominated ones?

" Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution 1580On October 4, 2007, the*Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted its resolution 1580 led*The dangers of creationism in education. The resolution observed that "the war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents most often originates in forms of religious extremism which are closely allied to extreme right-wing political movements", and urged member states "to firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution and in general resist presentation of creationist ideas in any discipline other than religion".[17]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creat...blic_education

http://www.csicop.org/specialarticle...t_creationism/

[I. Hustle]

Mostly Western Europe. The Economists just had an article trying to explain why Americans hold on to creationism so furiously in a January issue. It's a British magazine.

LOL

The Brits don't agree with how America does things? That's intersting. That changes everything.

[apalisoc_9]

Cladiastics used to be based on phyiscal characteristics, but now genetic characteristics. And it's actually pretty easy to tell the age of a gene reliably by looking at its radiation.

Anyway, you continue to misunderstand how evolution is supported. And until you actually take a comparative anatomy class, you'll continue to not understand. Things aren't considered ancestors simply because their older. It's because of how similarities and differences are. Even if people get it wrong at times, the method s still strong. Even if a time-warped raccoon fossil were discovered and labeled a red panda ancestor, that wouldn't prevent the fact that the red panda ancestor likely looked like both a racoon and red panda.

So you admit, Human Evolution itself is not an absolute.

And it will never be as DNA's decay and that's the only way Human evolution can be accurarlty 100% verified.

[pgardn]

LOL

The Brits don't agree with how America does things? That's intersting. That changes everything.

They don't disagree with anything. They were trying to explain how such a scientifically advanced country has such a large % of people who do not believe in what is deemed such a very basic scientific tenet by the rest of the scientific world. Obviously the entirety of our country is not composed of people that don't have a clue how science works.

Most of the current major insights into the tougher evolutionary questions, such as rates of evolution, come from the US.

It's like the unequal distribution of scientific wealth in this country. Why are some so lacking, starving?

[I. Hustle]

" Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution 1580On October 4, 2007, the*Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted its resolution 1580 led*The dangers of creationism in education. The resolution observed that "the war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents most often originates in forms of religious extremism which are closely allied to extreme right-wing political movements", and urged member states "to firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution and in general resist presentation of creationist ideas in any discipline other than religion".[17]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creat...blic_education

http://www.csicop.org/specialarticle...t_creationism/

You want to know the funny thing about this? I have no problem with that. I wouldn't want my kid taught beliefs based on any certain religion. I would prefer that if I did teach them about religion that it was done on my end or through a private school that I chose based on belief in the same doctrine. I am not against taking religious beliefs out of school. In fact, I don't remember ever coming across that at all while I was in school aside from the pledge. If anything I would just do like you are doing and put my kids in a Christian school if I wanted that. I just think that it's impossible to teach evolution as well since it has so many flaws, is constantly changing and is predicated on a belief system as well. Of course not a religious belief so don't go there. We can cal it a belief of "theories".

My argument is that debates like this one that took place don't really offer anything. Nothing is changed because of it. It's just a bunch of idiots that don't, and will not, agree with each other trying to show how much they know.

[pgardn]

So you admit, Human Evolution itself is not an absolute.

And it will never be as DNA's decay and that's the only way Human evolution can be accurarlty 100% verified.

What in science is 100% verified?

[apalisoc_9]

What in science is 100% verified?

There's a few things in Astro sciences that is 100% verified..You can figure it out.

[I. Hustle]

What in science is 100% verified?

SMH

[pgardn]

I just think that it's impossible to teach evolution as well since it has so many flaws, is constantly changing and is predicated on a belief system as well.


What in science is not predicated on a belief system? Are you familiar with logic?

What in science is NOT allowed to change?

From your concerns NO science should be taught.

[Brazil]

This would have been a good time to introduce Alternative Design.
People need to know it's not just always Pepsi or Coke, you can have a Sprite.
I need to make sure I attended the next debate.

still waiting for your explanation btw

[pgardn]

There's a few things in Astro sciences that is 100% verified..You can figure it out.

No this is not true.

Is it possible that dye dropped into water could all come back together at the very top of the container, just like the dye entered the water? Yes.

Is it probable, no.

You tell me anything 100% verified?

[pgardn]

SMH

SMH at you SYH.

[Chinook]

So you admit, Human Evolution itself is not an absolute.

And it will never be as DNA's decay and that's the only way Human evolution can be accurarlty 100% verified.

Of course it's not 100-percent guaranteed to be accurate. I said that last night. It's far and away the best we have, but something better and completely different could come along.

[N0 LyF3 ScRuB]

He's been taking biology courses for three years. He knows all there is to know about The Theory of Evolution Through Natural Selection, except for the fact that it is not also called The Big Bang Theory. He seems to think these theories are the same thing for reasons unknown to me.

As usual, evolution believer twists words because he cannot answer simple presented arguments. Just the usual "lol mythical creature" or "Bible = Comic book". You're a joke.

[I. Hustle]

SMH at you SYH.

Well then SMD @ u SYH @ my SMH

[I. Hustle]

Of course it's not 100-percent guaranteed to be accurate. I said that last night. It's far and away the best we have, but something better and completely different could come along.

LOL

[pgardn]

This whole debate again reinforces the very obvious conclusion that people truly don't know how science works.


They have been taught science is some monolithic force determined to destroy their beliefs.

Believe anything you want. Just don't force your misconceptions of science in a science classroom with my kids in them. Like scientific creationism, the oxymoron deluxe. Wondering when math will be attacked...

[pgardn]

Well then SMD @ u SYH @ my SMH

I just think that it's impossible to teach evolution as well since it has so many flaws, is constantly changing and is predicated on a belief system as well.




What in science is not predicated on a belief system? Are you familiar with logic?


What in science is NOT allowed to change?


From your concerns NO science should be taught.

Read the above again.^

[I. Hustle]

I just think that it's impossible to teach evolution as well since it has so many flaws, is constantly changing and is predicated on a belief system as well.




What in science is not predicated on a belief system? Are you familiar with logic?


What in science is NOT allowed to change?


From your concerns NO science should be taught.

Read the above again.^

LOL

Maybe you don't understand Science as well as you think you do. There are tons of things that can be explained scientifically and are fact. They are not all theories. There are things we know as concrete and things that are full of holes.

[rascal]

Wow, N0 LyF3 ScRuB is a ing idiot. He's using the same old, tired, ignorant responses that theist apologists have been using for years. He first stupidly asks where the evidence for evolution is, as if he is incapable of using Google for five seconds. Then he completely changes the topic to abiogenesis and The Big Bang, as if those two are somehow synonymous with evolution. Then he uses the idiotic "The Big Bang is just a theory" excuse that many theists who have no understanding of what "scientific theory" actually means usually use.

And robdiaz is a moron. Nobody should take him seriously after his absolutely pathetic performance in previous evolution threads. This guy knows absolute about evolution, yet tries to talk about it. The worst part isn't him being an wilfully ignorant moron; it's his complete unwillingness to even try to defend his belief in an invisible sky daddeh. He'll throw around emoticon after emoticon when other people actually defend something he disagrees with, but when pressed to explain what he believes and why, he changes the topic.

Here we go like usual with the atheists calling others morons.

I wouldn't trust an atheist with anything. They don't believe they have to answer to any wrong they do so watch out, an atheist will stab you in the back first chance he gets if he believes he can get away with it. The happiest people I have seen are those devoted to a belief in God and family following the principles layed out in the Bible.

[rascal]

How is not having proof, makes sense?

You can match a thousand similar looking animals and you would still know they're biologically different...

Did Bears evolve from Pandas?

No.

So unless otherwise, Science can come up with a much more convincing Proof...Human Evolution should never be equated to Gravity or any other Scientific theories.

It's absolutely delusional to equate that two.

I would say gravity is a fact. It is a known proven force that exists.

[Leetonidas]

Here we go like usual with the atheists calling others morons.

I wouldn't trust an atheist with anything. They don't believe they have to answer to any wrong they do so watch out, an atheist will stab you in the back first chance he gets if he believes he can get away with it. The happiest people I have seen are those devoted to a belief in God and family following the principles layed out in the Bible.

And this is exactly why zealous bible thumpers are ing hypocritical pieces of

[Leetonidas]

Which is funny considering you deluded s have an excuse to do bad

" it's okay to be sinful because man is imperfect and jesus died for us so we just have to repent and it's okay "

Sounds like an excuse to be a dumbass to me

[baseline bum]

I would say gravity is a fact. It is a known proven force that exists.

The theory of gravity is way way way more controversial than the theory of evolution. Einstein's theory of gravity is incompatible with quantum physics. No one has ever found the hypothesized graviton, the force carrying particle thought to exist for gravity (the corresponding particles for e&m forces, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force have all been found). The only thing that ties is together is string theory, which is little more than speculation that makes the math turn out nice right now. And then there is the finding that gravity is likely repulsive at very long distances where the inverse square magnitude becomes tiny (e.g., dark energy or the cosmological constant). Gravity is one of the biggest question marks in science, and has been ever since Newton published the first decent theory of it (Newton and other physicists weren't at all comfortable with the action at a distance pull Newton hypothesized). Gravity can even be considered a fic ious force, like centrifugal force that makes it seem like you're pulled to the other side when making a sharp turn in your car.

[Leetonidas]

The theory of gravity is way way way more controversial than the theory of evolution. Einstein's theory of gravity is incompatible with quantum physics. No one has ever found the hypothesized graviton, the force carrying particle thought to exist for gravity. The only thing that ties is together is string theory, which is little more than speculation that makes the math turn out nice right now. And then there is the finding that gravity is likely repulsive at very long distances where the inverse square magnitude becomes tiny (e.g., dark energy or the cosmological constant). Gravity is one of the biggest question marks in science, and has been ever since Newton published the first decent theory of it (Newton and other physicists weren't at all comfortable with the action at a distance pull it exerted).

He probably thinks gravity means what goes up must come down