If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Creationists are working hard to make Europe the new Florida   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 764
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

12159 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Feb 2008 at 6:03 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



764 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-02-10 01:57:59 AM
BooRabideau: whatshisname: BooRabideau: you're kidding for trying to lump him in with everyone else right?

Why is it that whenever someone mentions a specific person or example, you immediately accuse them of lumping them in with everyone else?

i only remember doing it with the phelps reference, if i did it it other than that, remind me and i'll try to clarify.

the fred phelps church is widely known to be fanatical and not accepted by any other person of faith . . . as i said before, he's about as christian as osama bin laden (he sure represents himself as one but his values and actions undermine the teachings in the bible)


What realm of existence do you live in? I think I might like to visit this mystical world.

I live in Southeast Texas. Surrounded by Baptists. Texas not only put a ban on gay marriage, they then went the extra, redundant mile of also making it illegal.

You obviously have limited experience with Christians if you think there aren't MASSES who hold beliefs that go against the spirit (no pun intended) of Christianity.

Honest question: how old are you?
 
2008-02-10 01:58:20 AM
BooRabideau: every one i attended (there's several too as i moved around a lot), among other things

If you're not making crap up, then that's f*cked up and stupid. However, anecdotal evidence is NOT proof.
 
2008-02-10 01:58:32 AM
every one i attended (there's several too as i moved around a lot), among other thingsSleepyMcGee: BooRabideau

Out of curiosity, who in the public education system do you think is telling students (or making students think) that they are stupid for believing in religion?


they may not all do it, but i know i had it . . . they pushed science and made the religious kids feel like fools (i know all teachers don't do this but there were some out there) . . . i didn't think that science was false, so to speak, but i always felt that you can have science and belief in a higher power

i think allowing students to take this would allow science to be taught and would allow people to believe if they so choose too (in faith or against it)
 
2008-02-10 01:59:25 AM
BooRabideau: which would be fine in school if you didn't want your kids to take ID, then don't sign them up

See, now we can agree on something. Creationists want their belief system taught in public schools. By LAW, my children (should I have any) are required to go to school. If I am unable to afford a private school (most of which are religious) then what option do I have left?

I hope you see what point I am driving towards. Placing Creationism in public schools is akin to forcing whatever church you happen to belong to to teach Fred Phelps version of Christianity, accept you do not have the option to withdraw.
 
2008-02-10 02:02:13 AM
from the start, i've been saying that people should have the choice to take it if they want and to not take it if they don't

never forcing it on anyone, but allowing choices

and i do see what you are saying but there are already exceptions, for whatever reason, where they teach religion to some degree in those very same public schools . . . i don't think you should force this ID on students but why shouldn't they \all have the choice to take it if they want?
 
2008-02-10 02:02:33 AM
BooRamideauthey may not all do it, but i know i had it . . . they pushed science and made the religious kids feel like fools (i know all teachers don't do this but there were some out there) . . . i didn't think that science was false, so to speak, but i always felt that you can have science and belief in a higher power

i think allowing students to take this would allow science to be taught and would allow people to believe if they so choose too (in faith or against it)

Science teachers SHOULD push science. They should endeavor to help their pupils to understand the foundations of modern science. That's their JOB. They're SCIENCE teachers, not "Science but religion is okay too" teachers.

They are welcome to teach ID or creationism, but NOT IN A SCIENCE CLASS. It should not be treated as a science class, nor should it count as a credit toward science requrements.
 
2008-02-10 02:03:49 AM
fanbladesaresharp: ninjakirb Please let me remove my eyeballs and my left nut trying to understand that. I know it's Sunday and all and you have places to be later....

I read that as:

A)"I'm an asshat with bias and a crusade and if you don't believe me I'll just staple myself to a stick. Or you. Either works.

B)I try NOT to be an asshat and quietly disemminate my bias, take their money, and call it a day with a wide stance.

C)Fark is the church, here is my steeple, open up my fingers and there are the people.

/really read that as: I just like to annoy people.
//s'okay I do it to, just not for religious purposes.



What?
 
2008-02-10 02:04:18 AM
let me try in another way (before i give up), how about if they teach ID in an, optional, ID class?
 
2008-02-10 02:04:23 AM
BooRabideau:

you teach science in science class, and you can allow students to take this ID class too

i get that it is not science, no matter how much you single this question out


What do you want then? Teach science and theology on different sides of the building then. Or campuses. Or states. You CAN major in science and theology or world religions if you wish. But make them required is prerequisite for failure if you expect them to believe both.

You can still teach both sides. Both sides of a story are a good thing. Take Christianity and Scientology of late. Christians have a crucifix as their "symbol" and Scientology has one in there too with a couple graphic changes. Both are are so farking different in methods and beliefs I would just rather take a nap on a lake and not deal with either.
 
2008-02-10 02:06:00 AM
ninjakirby: See, now we can agree on something. Creationists want their belief system taught in public schools. By LAW, my children (should I have any) are required to go to school. If I am unable to afford a private school (most of which are religious) then what option do I have left?

I hope you see what point I am driving towards. Placing Creationism in public schools is akin to forcing whatever church you happen to belong to to teach Fred Phelps version of Christianity, accept you do not have the option to withdraw.


Actually ninjakirby, you do have a choice. You can homeschool your kids. Most states provide subsidies to families who homeschool, to help offset the cost of materials and supplies. But everyone knows that homeschooled kids are just weird and socially undeveloped, and nobody wants their child to be known around the neighborhood as the weird one. :)
 
2008-02-10 02:06:03 AM
xkillyourfacex: So they are forced to send the children to public schools. Where they do not learn about God.

Well duh. That's the point: public schools shouldn't denigrate any particular religion -- but neither should they advocate any particular one.

The scientific evidence for evolutionary biology is damn good. For creationism, not so much, IMHO. It smells like religion.

So, teach it yourself, in your own church. If it's such a great idea, it'll catch on by its own merit. If you persuade a critical mass of people that way, then you can force it on everyone...

...but the fact is, you're nowhere near that critical mass, and your bizarre fixation on it just makes you look like loonies to everyone else.

Give it a rest. Does it really matter whether some Hypothetical Supreme Being took 7 days -- or 10 billion years -- to create the universe?
 
2008-02-10 02:06:39 AM
kidsizedcoffin: SleepyMcGee: zeph`: Where's your non-abrasiveness now!?

I don't know, but I'm grabbing another beer...

If ID is real, remind me to thank god for brewers yeast.


Save that one for the offseason when we're not so pissed off at each other. :)
 
2008-02-10 02:06:45 AM
BooRabideau: they teach religion to some degree in those very same public schools

The story of 'islam in california public schools' was thoroughly debunked by Snopes. You continue to fail to provide ACTUAL sources for your claims that are actually RELEVANT to your claims.

why shouldn't they \all have the choice to take it if they want?

Why wasn't I allowed to take a class in woodworking at my high school? My high school did not offer woodworking. That did not prevent me from seeking out some education in woodworking on my own, namely from my father and from library books. Students can learn whatever the HELL they want about ID, but, constitutionally and logically, it can NOT be part of a science class.
 
2008-02-10 02:08:57 AM
snopes disagreed to what degree, the second link i posted showed them discussing islam in california schools . . . so they still studied about religion in public schools (the only argument is to what degree)
 
2008-02-10 02:09:54 AM
ninjakirby: fanbladesaresharp: ninjakirb Please let me remove my eyeballs and my left nut trying to understand that. I know it's Sunday and all and you have places to be later....

I read that as:

A)"I'm an asshat with bias and a crusade and if you don't believe me I'll just staple myself to a stick. Or you. Either works.

B)I try NOT to be an asshat and quietly disemminate my bias, take their money, and call it a day with a wide stance.

C)Fark is the church, here is my steeple, open up my fingers and there are the people.

/really read that as: I just like to annoy people.
//s'okay I do it to, just not for religious purposes.


What?


Sorry. I may have misquoted you as the author. Shiat this thread is getting long.
 
2008-02-10 02:10:06 AM
BooRabideau: let me try in another way (before i give up), how about if they teach ID in an, optional, ID class?

If it's not counted as a fulfillment of a science requirement, schools are more than welcome to take it and more than welcome to offer it. However, if it's called 'science' or counted as a science credit, it's unconstitutional and illogical. It's also unconstitutional if it's taught in such a way as to indoctrinate students or if it is taught as 'fact' in any way. It should be thought in such a way as to make students understand exactly what intelligent design is and what cdesign proponentsists actually are.
 
2008-02-10 02:12:41 AM
i'll agree to not being counted as a fulfillment of science requirement, no doubt.

i'll agree to never call it science.

i'll buy that . . . give 'em an option if they want it.

sold, in agreement!

i'm out.
 
2008-02-10 02:13:03 AM
BooRabideau: 0Icky0: BooRabideau: either way, the point i was making was that apparently it is okay to have religion taught in school, for better understanding, so that wouldn't prevent ID

But not in science class.
Is it possible that you still don't understand?

no matter how you repeat it or how clever it sounds in your head, i understand that ID and religion is not a science

what they are trying to do is add an element to science that doesn't tell their students that they are idiots to believe in the religion that they're parents do . . . it's weaving it, so to speak (trying to make it so that you understand now)

you teach science in science class, and you can allow students to take this ID class too

i get that it is not science, no matter how much you single this question out


If you get that it isn't science, then why do you keep insisting on teaching it in a science class?

If a student believes something that patently isn't true, then why is it wrong for the school to tell that that it's not true?

Over 1 billion Christians believe in evolution. They have no problem reconciling science and their faith, so why should we devote time teaching Christian lies and propaganda to students, all of whom aren't Christian?

You're talking about putting this sh*t in school in defense of your beliefs being attacked, yet this sh*t will attack others' beliefs, and it doesn't have any evidence to support it like science does.

Since the majority of people are non-Christian and/or believe in evolution, you will offend a majority in order to placate a minority.

And on top of all of that, it is against the f*cking law.

Did you know that it is a sin to bear false witness?
 
2008-02-10 02:13:36 AM
BooRabideau: snopes disagreed to what degree, the second link i posted showed them discussing islam in california schools . . . so they still studied about religion in public schools (the only argument is to what degree)

Snopes completely and thoroughly debunked your claims to teaching islam in California public schools by forcing students to dress up and memorize the Qur'an.

The first link you provided was about teaching islam in PRIVATE schools.

Your claims about 'islam in public schools' are (listen closely now) COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED AND UNPROVEN. Please stop pretending that they are accurate.
 
2008-02-10 02:13:38 AM
I find it amusing that in my 13 years of Catholic schooling all I ever was taught when it came to biology was evolutionary theory. No creationism or anything like ID in science class. And in religion class? Yeah, Genesis is just allegory and filled with metaphors, not to be taken as literal.
 
2008-02-10 02:15:01 AM
http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/legal/pdf/quarterly_reports/2006_julsep.pdf
 
2008-02-10 02:15:16 AM
BooRabideau: i'll agree to not being counted as a fulfillment of science requirement, no doubt.

i'll agree to never call it science.

i'll buy that . . . give 'em an option if they want it.

sold, in agreement!

i'm out.


You're leaving now, without reading my post about taking a woodworking class. FAN F*CKING TASTIC. See you in the next thread, where you'll doubtless make the EXACT same claims about 'islam in a public school' that you did in this thread. YOU SUCK.
 
2008-02-10 02:16:27 AM
sorry you thought me a tease . .. good luck with the next round of boys
 
2008-02-10 02:16:44 AM
BooRabideau: i'll agree to not being counted as a fulfillment of science requirement, no doubt.

i'll agree to never call it science.

i'll buy that . . . give 'em an option if they want it.

sold, in agreement!

i'm out.


Denied.

Separation of Church and State.
 
2008-02-10 02:18:40 AM
BooRabideau

Not only is ID not science, it would not be constitutional to teach it in a public school. To clarify, it would be unconstitutional if it was taught as fact. ID is religious. It is nothing other than creationism in disguise.

I believe that most of us (I can't speak for everyone) have nothing against it being taught in a philosophy class alongside every other creationist story.
 
2008-02-10 02:22:05 AM
BooRabideau: http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/legal/pdf/quarterly_reports/2006_julsep.pdf

Thanks for linking the same thing you did 15 minutes ago. I read that. THAT IS INDIANA, NOT CALIFORNIA. Also, the claims you're making are NOT EVEN CLOSE to what is reviewed in that document.
Your claims about islam in california schools are unsubstantiated. I tire of your dishonesty/ignorance, whichever.
 
2008-02-10 02:24:29 AM
SleepyMcGee: philosophy class alongside every other creationist story.

I don't understand where this idea comes from. In what kind of philosophy class would you teach intelligent design? Certainly not any analytic class that I can think of.
 
2008-02-10 02:27:43 AM
BooRabideau: where they teach religion to some degree in those very same public schools

Having just recently graduated the Californian public school system, I believe I have some inkling of what you are talking about, so let me try to explain.

In world history, there is a portion of class time which is spent studying the middle east. Specifically, the historical origins of the three largest western religions and their historical figures. Students may learn about particular tenants of each faith, such as the Hajj, or the Holy Trinity. These are historical facts.

At no point is Islamic, Judaic or Christian dogma a part of the curriculum. No teacher states that Mohammed is the voice of god, or that Jesus is The Word or that Mary was truly a virgin who conceived Jesus immaculately. These are tenants of faith and as such are (supposed to be) kept out of schools. I add the qualifer supposed to be because teachers have their own biases and even though they should remain quiet on their particular belief system, not all do. (Which is true with science teachers and all humans)
My textbook also had a chapter devoted to the Mormon religion and how it's believers were persecuted and driven to Utah, where they could practice freely. I didn't get up in arms about them "teaching mormonism in school!" because they weren't. It's a historical fact.

From the evidence you have given, and taking your words at their face value I have to conclude that you probably grew up in a highly religious household and felt berated because your childhood rearing conflicted with the scientific evidence being presented in school. This is cognitive dissonance(Psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes) at it's most painful. I honestly belief, though I have little evidence of it, that this sort of indoctrination is a form of child abuse. You obviously felt berated by your teachers and I'm willing to wager a lot of that discomfort stems not from any attacks on you, but on your mind attempting to resolve to entirely separate views on our world.

Now obviously, I don't know you or your history, beyond what little information you have provided, so I may be entirely off. But this fight to keep ID out of schools is a fight to keep that same sort of abuse from affecting our future generations.

If parents which to instill in their children their belief systems they are welcome to do so at home, or in church, or in a school specially created, much like the Islamic people created a private school for their children in the SFGate article you linked above.

But stay the hell away from my kids and especially don't make me pay for that abuse with my tax dollars.

lisarenee3505 Thats an excellent list of reading, especially the Beginners Physics guide; the more I read about this stuff the more I wish I had a better grounding in math than watching Brian Greene's Elegant Universe and reading Wikipedia.
Thank you (you too Zeph')
 
2008-02-10 02:28:10 AM
zeph`: SleepyMcGee: philosophy class alongside every other creationist story.

I don't understand where this idea comes from. In what kind of philosophy class would you teach intelligent design? Certainly not any analytic class that I can think of.


In a class called something like "Religious Beliefs on the Creation of the Universe" or something like that? It really has no less validity than any other creation story. No more either, granted...
 
2008-02-10 02:28:57 AM
CaptainJuan: BooRabideau: http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/legal/pdf/quarterly_reports/2006_julsep.pdf

Thanks for linking the same thing you did 15 minutes ago. I read that. THAT IS INDIANA, NOT CALIFORNIA. Also, the claims you're making are NOT EVEN CLOSE to what is reviewed in that document.
Your claims about islam in california schools are unsubstantiated. I tire of your dishonesty/ignorance, whichever.


you didn't read it then . . . it's from indiana, yes, and it discusses california and north carolina . . .

way to go continuing to focus on all the wrong things--let me help you, i'm going leave "cat" as my last word, and you can go on and on with that while i go to bed

goodnight

cat
 
2008-02-10 02:30:23 AM
zeph`: SleepyMcGee: philosophy class alongside every other creationist story.

I don't understand where this idea comes from. In what kind of philosophy class would you teach intelligent design? Certainly not any analytic class that I can think of.


Well, philosophy classes still present the teleological argument all the time. ID is supposed to support this idea. Paley's watch analogy is essentially the same argument ID is making. ID just says "designer" where Paley says god.
 
2008-02-10 02:31:54 AM
ninjakirby: Thank you (you too Zeph')

Bwahahaha. THE RECOGNITION I SO CRAVE IS FINALLY MINE. Wait a second.. Who is this Zeph` fellow? My name has no capital Z! I'VE BEEN FOILED! NOOOOOOOO!

CaptainJuan: In a class called something like "Religious Beliefs on the Creation of the Universe" or something like that? It really has no less validity than any other creation story. No more either, granted...

Heh. Good luck selling any kind of legitimate post-secondary institution on that one.
 
2008-02-10 02:34:00 AM
SleepyMcGee: Well, philosophy classes still present the teleological argument all the time.

I guess so, but there's a huge leap from the teleological argument, which is essentially logical in character (and thus fit to be taught in some kind of analytical philosophy class - most likely intro or Philosophy of Religion), to intelligent design - which I don't believe has any logical content to be analyzed.
 
2008-02-10 02:34:21 AM
BooRabideau: CaptainJuan: BooRabideau: http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/legal/pdf/quarterly_reports/2006_julsep.pdf

Thanks for linking the same thing you did 15 minutes ago. I read that. THAT IS INDIANA, NOT CALIFORNIA. Also, the claims you're making are NOT EVEN CLOSE to what is reviewed in that document.
Your claims about islam in california schools are unsubstantiated. I tire of your dishonesty/ignorance, whichever.

you didn't read it then . . . it's from indiana, yes, and it discusses california and north carolina . . .

way to go continuing to focus on all the wrong things--let me help you, i'm going leave "cat" as my last word, and you can go on and on with that while i go to bed

goodnight

cat


After reading the article more thoroughly: Yes, it does discuss the teaching done in california. However, it also states that the court ruled that no reasonable student would interpret the model used in their education as being an 'endorsement of islam'. It's playing pretend, nothing more. Didn't you ever play pretend as a child? Did it make you believe, for the rest of your life, that you were a superhero? No, because you understood/understand 'playing pretend'.

I'm sure there's an allegory here for the evolution of beliefs, but I can't be farked to do it.
 
2008-02-10 02:40:18 AM
zeph`: SleepyMcGee: Well, philosophy classes still present the teleological argument all the time.

I guess so, but there's a huge leap from the teleological argument, which is essentially logical in character (and thus fit to be taught in some kind of analytical philosophy class - most likely intro or Philosophy of Religion), to intelligent design - which I don't believe has any logical content to be analyzed.


Heh. I actually took Philosophy of Religion a couple years ago. It went over the basics. Arguments for existence and their criticisms. The problems of evil, etc. It was interesting as well as a nice tangent to my Computer "Science" classes.

Oh, and come to think of it, I don't recall Paley actually saying "god". He just implied a designer, yet the identity of the designer was still implied through description.
 
2008-02-10 02:41:00 AM
lisarenee3505: I've spent years studying this stuff, mainly to figure out how my parents became so intellectually corrupted and just downright broken by the evangelical movement. It you want truth, REAL truth, then I believe you have to understand that no system, be it religious or secular (scientific) has all the answers unto itself.

Interestingly enough, thats where my interest in the subject really came in to bloom. I posted a rough outline of the events that lead to it at some point in the thread. Since those events since taken what I've read and plan to go into a field of sociology where I hope to study more of how our mind works.
Starting with the basics now though, Pychology, Sociology etc.
 
2008-02-10 02:41:21 AM
CaptainJuan: BooRabideau: snopes disagreed to what degree, the second link i posted showed them discussing islam in california schools . . . so they still studied about religion in public schools (the only argument is to what degree)

Snopes completely and thoroughly debunked your claims to teaching islam in California public schools by forcing students to dress up and memorize the Qur'an.

The first link you provided was about teaching islam in PRIVATE schools.

Your claims about 'islam in public schools' are (listen closely now) COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED AND UNPROVEN. Please stop pretending that they are accurate.


It's not entirely unheard of. A life-long friend of mine teaches at a CA Montesorri school and has seen this. It's not a worry about differences in religion, but apparently some kids (just like us whitey ones when bored, apparently) are starting trouble in the name of their religion. Starting fights with neighbors over whatever their kids said at school....that sort of thing. Not something you start wars over, but the squabbles are present.

And then you get those dogggamed kids to settle down long enough to quit hitting on their teachers.
 
2008-02-10 02:45:22 AM
"I think it's so sad that children should be fobbed off with these second-rate myths,"

I thought fobbing was ilegal!
 
2008-02-10 02:46:05 AM
fanbladesaresharp: It's not entirely unheard of. A life-long friend of mine teaches at a CA Montesorri school and has seen this. It's not a worry about differences in religion, but apparently some kids (just like us whitey ones when bored, apparently) are starting trouble in the name of their religion. Starting fights with neighbors over whatever their kids said at school....that sort of thing. Not something you start wars over, but the squabbles are present.

And then you get those dogggamed kids to settle down long enough to quit hitting on their teachers.


So the problems inherent in the model aren't constitutional in nature, but instead are about intolerant little children.

*sigh*

So... not 'totally unsubstantiated', but he's taking them WAY out of context and trying to use them as an analogue to ID.
 
2008-02-10 02:46:45 AM
BooRabideau:
way to go continuing to focus on all the wrong things--let me help you, i'm going leave "cat" as my last word, and you can go on and on with that while i go to bed

goodnight

cat


$25 says he comes back to check for a response. And I take PayPal.

Dog.
Penis.
Fark.
 
2008-02-10 02:50:02 AM
Link

Well, here is the Wishlist I created to chronicle all the book selections noted in the thread, should any future reader come along and read this entire escapade.
 
2008-02-10 02:54:34 AM
CaptainJuan: fanbladesaresharp: It's not entirely unheard of. A life-long friend of mine teaches at a CA Montesorri school and has seen this. It's not a worry about differences in religion, but apparently some kids (just like us whitey ones when bored, apparently) are starting trouble in the name of their religion. Starting fights with neighbors over whatever their kids said at school....that sort of thing. Not something you start wars over, but the squabbles are present.

And then you get those dogggamed kids to settle down long enough to quit hitting on their teachers.

So the problems inherent in the model aren't constitutional in nature, but instead are about intolerant little children.

*sigh*

So... not 'totally unsubstantiated', but he's taking them WAY out of context and trying to use them as an analogue to ID.


I'll speak for him in the context of what he's seeing as you just post: intolerant little crotchfruit. When I was 8? I hated everyone. Not because I had developed yet, still hated girls, or had any concept of "higer beliefs". I just didn't like being told "NO" when I'm stuffing a cherry bomb in a mailbox.

This is where my friend is seing it. He's trying to understand where it's coming from at the behest of the usual publically funded superintendents decisions. And he's of Armenian descent, so he already is fighting another farking battle that doesn't involve religion. Well he is, but it's coming from different angles.

And we talk every week. And I'm not an educator, nor is he a scientists. Just trying to separate science from religion at grade 3.
 
2008-02-10 03:01:47 AM
BooRabideau: goodnight

cat


Why have you chosen to ignore me?

Big fat jerk head.
 
2008-02-10 03:08:27 AM
Can I a collective opinion on this page?

AiG is one of the leading creationist sites, but I can't find all the evidence for or against the questions posed in the article.
 
2008-02-10 03:11:39 AM
I'm sure these are the same people that had to sit outside in the hall during sex education classes. They are just pissed that they couldn't see the videos and now they are getting us back.

I cannot believe that this is what we are talking about in 2008. WTF!!
 
2008-02-10 03:12:13 AM
theorellior: LordJiro: Would you have the four humours taught in health class, even though it's wrong?

I'm pushing hard for phlogiston to take its rightful place in our nation's schools.


Thank you very much. Next to the horny, hot school teacher, please.
 
2008-02-10 03:18:58 AM
0Icky0: theorellior: I'm pushing hard for phlogiston to take its rightful place in our nation's schools.

I just coughed some up this morning and have been saving it in case someone needed it.


Thank you very much. Fun for me, too.
 
2008-02-10 03:29:42 AM
TheQuad: Can I a collective opinion on this page?

AiG is one of the leading creationist sites, but I can't find all the evidence for or against the questions posed in the article.


From Article:
1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast.
2. Too few supernova remnants.
Counter: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
3. Comets disintegrate too quickly.
Counter: http://www.nmsr.org/humphrey.htm
(Also note, we really don't know much about Comets at all, which is why NASA missions like Deep Impact are so important)
4. Not enough mud on the sea floor.
5. Not enough sodium in the sea.
6. The earth's magnetic field is decaying too fast.
Counter: http://www.kent-hovind.com/matson/1proofs2.htm
7. Many strata are too tightly bent.
8. Biological material decays too fast.
9. Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic "ages" to a few years.
10. Too much helium in minerals.
11. Too much carbon 14 in deep geologic strata.
12. Not enough Stone Age skeletons.
13. Agriculture is too recent.

I could keep going, but I'm very tired and all I'm doing is googling the title of each point. Feel free to continue, and I'm sure others will be able to actually explain these counters tomorrow or in another thread.

What is important to note is that none of these are actually "Evidence for a Young Earth" but could be more accurately labled as "Evidence against an Old World"
 
2008-02-10 03:40:55 AM
Harry Knutz Quote 2008-02-09 11:30:50 PM
SkinnyHead

What's your game, man? Really? Because your agenda is hard to pin down. Are you anti-evolution (because you appear to put it on par with intelligent design as a valid scientific theory, at least in your opinion) or are you just so libertarian that you feel everyone should be able to make up his or her own mind about anything, in spite of confirmed evidence?



C) Trolling dumbshiat.


Speaking of which, looks like Skinny Head's computer must have had a good day, booting up the Bevets bot so darned fast...
 
2008-02-10 03:42:36 AM
fanbladesaresharp

You didn't read much after the word MASTURBATION did you?
 
Displayed 50 of 764 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report