[Vampyromaniac]

Originally posted by JavaFox
. . . I happen to think that God of the Bible was responsible for setting our world in motion . . .

Doh! I totally missed you mentioning that before (or implying or hinting or whatever, crap I can't think of words right now ). Heh, OK then. Carry on

[kinetic]

Whatever your beliefs I think you'll all agree that the Universe is a beautiful place http://heritage.stsci.edu/gallery/galindex.html

If God made all this he deserves a pat on the back!

[reno]

Solar flares have mass.

That theory Xploited wrote, if I'm not mistaken, is the theorem of relativity of objects in MOTION with p being the momentum of the object. If p were to equal 0, then the equation would reduce down to E=mc^2. So it's rest energy (E=mc^2) really wouldn't be that exceptionally high...because with 0 mass, energy would be 0.

I don't know where you derived solar flares have no mass either...

[reno]

Again, the Unified Universal Theorem of Correctitute rings true once again as JavaFox and Reno agree.

Science is diefied now, just like God. It's really sad to, because really...we'll NEVER EVER NEVER know anything TRULY for certain. How the HELL can we observe the origin of life...or the universe's birth...or "strings" in life...or quarks...or blackholes (which due to their definition, can never be "seen" by humans)....we can have REALLY good guesses, but we'll NEVER know for certain.

I guess science must just give people who want to believe in something more sense of purpose or accomplishment. It's not cool to claim God created the universe...but if it's some infinitely dense, 0 mass explosion that created it, doesn't that sound better?

Until I've been shown proof to the contrary...God created the universe SOMEHOW...and penises are the greatest gift God could give to complement vaginas.

[DallasStar]

Originally posted by JavaFox
The point of all of that was not to say that evolution cannot have existed, but only to maintain that evolution simply cannot be considered scientific fact. Evolution cannot be observed. Natural selection? Certainly. Specialization? Yeah. Survival of the fittest? Of course. But do you see one species becoming another? No. And until we SEE that happen, again and again and again, it is dishonest and misleading to call evolution more than a theory. That said, you guys have some very excellent responses to the things I've said, and you certainly defend evolution well. Let me again reiterate that I am not defending creationary theory, nor am I attempting to disprove evolutionary theory. I am merely stating that we cannot prove evolution occured to a scientific certainty.

Regarding your statement, Dallas, you said something very interesting. You cite the mutations of today as proof of an ever changing (genetically) population. And I think what you said kind of makes a point for me: if evolution indeed depends of millions and millions of mutations, why is it that far from being useful, every mutation --almost invariably-- we can now observe is detrimental --if not fatal-- to the organism?

Now, regarding the eye, Darwin had said the following: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." The more you learn about the eye, the more you will see that the notion that such an organ was formed by mere chance is somewhat like monkeys hitting random keys on a keyboard and eventually typing out Othello.

With all due respect and consideration, Toshiro, I happen to think that God of the Bible was responsible for setting our world in motion, and if that offends you, well -- you need to learn to be less apt to being offended. I do not, for the most part, adhere to political correctness.

i wasn't actually trying to defend the theory of evolution in any way. i was just commenting on what you said about entropy.

one more thing:

i also believe that God created everything etc, but I am keeping an open mind on how God created all these things. ofcourse it's entirely possible that God said "be" and everything became, but its just as possible that God said "be" and created the big chunk or rock that was the big bang which blew up and created everything and eventually led to the formation of small microorganisms and then multicellular organisms etc.

[reno]

but its just as possible that God said "be" and created the big chunk or rock that was the big bang which blew up and created everything and eventually led to the formation of small microorganisms and then multicellular organisms etc.

which also happens to be the position of the Roman Catholic Church....interesting eh?

[Vampyromaniac]

Originally posted by reno
we'll NEVER EVER NEVER know anything TRULY for certain.

yeh the only thing I know is that I exist . . .

[Xploited Titan]

Reno, solar flares are just giant bursts of energy, they have no mass at all, the p stands for the energy of these energy particles,
this is one reason why NASA is trying to create ultralight sheets of a golden alloy to propulse satelites (PS: this sheet has several hundred m² area)....

The energy would bounce on the sheet and gives the push satelites may need (and because these particles continuously bounce against the sheet the satelite will gain in speed with time)...

I can assure you I'm not mistaken......

[BWX]

one more thing:

i also believe that God created everything etc, but I am keeping an open mind on how God created all these things. ofcourse it's entirely possible that God said "be" and everything became, but its just as possible that God said "be" and created the big chunk or rock that was the big bang which blew up and created everything and eventually led to the formation of small microorganisms and then multicellular organisms etc. [/B]

I am probably one of the few people that think the same way you do on this subject. I believe God created everything too, but I believe he did it in a way that compliments the 'laws' of physics. Evolution is a crock, well the word evolution isn't- things evolve, no question about that, but to say that everything we can see (including life itself) is like it is because of chance mutations is absolutely absurd. So let me get this straight, DNA evolved from a puddle of goo hit by lightning? Reproduce that little theory. Anyway, anyone interested should go buy a book titled Darwin's Enigma, in it, Darwin discounts most of his early theories as ridiculous (they don't teach that part in high school). Evolution should not be taught in schools as fact like it is, there is just no proof. If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here and the 'missing link' and all evidence of it completely gone? We share allot of DNA with a banana too, does this mean we evolved from a banana somehow? There are thousands of examples why the current theory of creation by evolution doesn't cut it.

[LowLevelOwl]

There is no proof that we evolved and there is also no proof that God created all this. And please don't tell me that the bible is proof because the bible was written by humans and seeing as how humans are imperfect and have a tendancy to lie and imbelish stories, for me that isn't proof.

I don't think we will ever know how we came about. How about we stop worrying where we came from and start worrying about where we are going!

[BWX]

You are right, there is no PROOF either way, that is why I think its ridiculous that the theory of evolution is being taught as fact in our public schools. I say believe whatever you want, but don't try to shove your beliefs down helpless children's throats as fact.

There is quite a bit more things scientists DON'T know about than they DO know about currently. So all the data from all the scientisrs in the world won't convince me they know any more about the origin of life then I do.

[ToshiroOC]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-meritt.html Though I think that Uberlord's sig says it all...

[Vampyromaniac]

Well, since some of you are saying it's not cool with you how some things are presented in school's, I'd offer that parents can probably pull their kids out of the offending lessons for religious reasons. There's a lot you can do, for religious reasons.

But then some may point out that the parents would be in effect forcing their opinions on their children. How about the parents just discuss these topics with their children, and letting the kids decide for themselves when they grow up? I doubt most parents would be able simply discuss, in an unbiased open-minded manner, though.

Also, I don't think churches present their information as "theories" either.

[ToshiroOC]

I think that one of my friends has the right idea - he's a generic universalist. Universalists basically just say, "well, there is a god somewhere, and its hard to say who is right about Him" - and so he said that he is going to study every religion he can, then decide as objectively as he can at some later point in life. While I know he isn't going to include atheism or agnosticism in his search for truth, I still think that that is one of the best ways to find religion - by yourself, without too many external influences...

[JavaFox]

Originally posted by Vampyromaniac
Also, I don't think churches present their information as "theories" either.

I had no idea churches received almost $50 billion dollars in 2002 from the US federal government! And why am I going to college when everybody knows that employers don't look at education; they look at how long you've been an active member of a church!

Whether or not churches are one-sided isn't an issue at all. Americans don't pay taxes for churches, they pay taxes for public education.

[Vampyromaniac]

Originally posted by JavaFox
I had no idea churches received almost $50 billion dollars in 2002 from the US federal government! And why am I going to college when everybody knows that employers don't look at education; they look at how long you've been an active member of a church!

Whether or not churches are one-sided isn't an issue at all. Americans don't pay taxes for churches, they pay taxes for public education.

Oh, you didn't mention taxes at all in the beginning. But now all of a sudden, that's the issue?
I saw you say "evolution is a theory, just like creationism is a theory, and neither of them should be taught as fact," and only complaining about academia, not churches . . . which of course is natural for a religious guy.
So your real gripe is about who gets tax money? Lol, ok then

I'll change my solution then: let the parents pull their kids out of their classes for a day whenever stuff is being taught that they don't want to pay taxes for.
I just dunno if they'd accept that reason, so let them just say it's for religious reasons.

But . . . if what you think is something like
"If you get tax-money, you must teach 100% facts
If you get other money, you may then teach 0% fact" . . .
well, I dunno if a lot of people would agree with that

Oh, hehe, what if the employer you're applying to is a church? They might care about your church history more than your education.

[reno]

Xploited...THINK. If there is no mass, there is no ENERGY, it is the theory of relativity! E is energy...M is mass...C is the speed of light....with 0 for m...which is mass....E (which is energy) is ZERO.


All matter has mass, all energy has mass, no matter how minute. Solar flares, while being giant bursts of energy, have a minute amount of mass. Ultra thin gold sheets would need to be bombarded by particles to move anywhere in space, be it a photon or or proton, it has mass. LIGHT even has mass, okay?


Where did you get this "solar flares have no mass" thing anyway?

[JavaFox]

Originally posted by Vampyromaniac
Oh, you didn't mention taxes at all in the beginning. But now all of a sudden, that's the issue? [...] If you get tax-money, you must teach 100% facts If you get other money, you may then teach 0% fact

Bah.

That is the issue when it comes to public schooling. I object because evolution is being taught as fact, not as theory. They do not say "some believe in evolution, some believe in creationism." They do not say "some believe in evolution, others believe in other things." They simply say "Evolution is what happened."

And that kind of teaching is wrong. It reeks of an agenda. And because schools receive public monies, it is every citizen's right and duty to demand accountability from them. If you buy a car and it falls apart the next day, wouldn't you complain? But why don't people when the school system --something they pay for-- fails? It is the same thing.

Furthermore, belief in evolution requires a great deal of faith, as my previous points illustrate. It is therefore intellectually irresponsible to dismiss a theory because it involves a god, yet endorse a theory that relies on junk science.

Now, my point about churches is this: whether or not they offer up both (or more) theories for our origins is irrelevant because churches are not charged with public education. They do not receive federal money to teach children. They can therefore teach whatever they want. I happen to think there is more than 0% fact to their claims. But regardless, calling for accountability and even-handedness from the schools yet dismissing criticism of the church is not hypocritical in this regard.

[Vampyromaniac]

Originally posted by JavaFox
Bah.

That is the issue when it comes to public schooling. I object because evolution is being taught as fact, not as theory. They do not say "some believe in evolution, some believe in creationism." They do not say "some believe in evolution, others believe in other things." They simply say "Evolution is what happened."

And that kind of teaching is wrong. It reeks of an agenda. And because schools receive public monies, it is every citizen's right and duty to demand accountability from them. If you buy a car and it falls apart the next day, wouldn't you complain? But why don't people when the school system --something they pay for-- fails? It is the same thing.

I've suggested more than once that those who take issue should remove their kids from class on "evolution day" (or whatever.)
Why don't people complain? Perhaps they disagree with you

Furthermore, belief in evolution requires a great deal of faith, as my previous points illustrate.

Well, that's certainly your opinion.

It is therefore intellectually irresponsible

What do you mean by this, anyway? What is it that we are supposed to be responsible for?

to dismiss a theory because it involves a god, yet endorse a theory that relies on junk science.

And what is "junk science?" Is The Bible's creation story a theory based on "junk mythology?"

Now, my point about churches is this: whether or not they offer up both (or more) theories for our origins is irrelevant because churches are not charged with public education. They do not receive federal money to teach children. They can therefore teach whatever they want. I happen to think there is more than 0% fact to their claims. But regardless, calling for accountability and even-handedness from the schools yet dismissing criticism of the church is not hypocritical in this regard. [/B]

Of course it's not hypocritical, as long as you point out your main issue is which one gets tax money, and which gets personal money; and which one has kids forced to go there by law, and which has kids forced to go there by their parents.

[Xploited Titan]

Well, I was subscribed to some scientific magazines, and there it is that I've read that, but I'm gonna inform myself about how things are going and I'll keep you informed if I'm wrong ........... or right

[JavaFox]

Originally posted by Vampyromaniac
I've suggested more than once that those who take issue should remove their kids from class on "evolution day" (or whatever.)

That is impossible, because the theory of evolution (along with the Big Bang theory, and theory of an old Earth) are so imbedded in nearly every aspect of our schooling that it would be impossible to confine all teachings regarding evolution on one day. How would a college-level biology class go? It couldn't, because the adoption of evolution as fact has so entrenched itself in the study of life that every lesson is a lesson, in part, in evolution! It can't be confined to one day, because evolution is taught almost every day! Or imagine a geology class without the old earth theory? It wouldn't exist! You can't confine these anti-creationary theories to one day because American teachers have adopted them as fact and crafted entire courses around the assumptions of evolutionary theory and its ilk.

Why don't people complain? Perhaps they disagree with you

Plenty of people agree with me, as the responses in this thread demonstrate. Regardless, though, if everybody subscribed to your kind of thought, there would still be slavery in America. Somethings are just wrong, and just because people that speak out against it are in the minority, doesn't mean it's right.

Well, that's certainly your opinion.

My opinion? It's my opinion that the evolutionary theory requires some faith?! I had no idea you've been around for the last few billion years! You've seen evolution take place? Or do you just believe in it? Doesn't that require faith?

Explain the devlopment of the eye, which Darwin could not. Explain why Darwin repudiated evolution on his deathbed. Explain why every other system in the universe exhibits entropy while evolution does not. Explain why we have yet to find a real Missing Link.

If it feels like you're being rail-roaded, you are. Basically, if you are a clear thinker, those things must instill doubt on some level. And if you can't answer those questions, it merely shows how evolution doesn't have everything figured out. Belief in a system that is imperfect and theoretical always involves faith.

What do you mean by this, anyway? What is it that we are supposed to be responsible for?

Intellectual responsibility is an ethical thing. It means striving to learn the truth, even if that truth upsets you, or even if that truth contradicts your beliefs. Everybody that wants to be taken seriously --with respect-- on any level should strive to be intellectually responsible.

[BWX]

JavaFox, you are right, there are MILLIONS of people - even in the US, that think the theory of Evolution is NOT fact and that it should not be taught in schools. I am one of those people and know hundreds who feel the same. At this point I think it is just out of control, too many people regard evolution as fact and getting people to change is difficult if not impossible. Pretty soon things like saying the word "Christmas" will be illegal thanks to groups run amuck like the ACLU. The truth is we are in the minority, and in this country the majority rules, unless of course the minority has lots of money to throw at corrupt politicians, which is a whole different problem. All this still doesn't make evolution fact and never will.

[radTube]

I've been taught evolution theory in school just like most of you. I think it's a fine theory. I've also been taught christian religion, including creationism at school and at home. I actually found both of them interesting.

Think about it BWX232, JavaFox and kindred spirits. Have you really suffered because of these lessons? Does the fact that you don't "believe" in a theory automatically make it so obviously wrong and harmful? Aren't you exaggerating just a teeny bit? I don't know about american schools, but I never had a teacher who force-fed his/her opinions on me. On the other hand, I still wouldn't dare argue with a priest.

My point is, why do you try to ban something that doesn't really do much harm? Maybe you should find one of the million other defects in the US culture/system to fight. You claim to support a religion that teaches us to love each other unconditionally, yet you seem to be the ones with the most strict opinions on a lot of things. And then JavaFox even calls himself intellectually responsible.

I believe in God myself, but I don't feel the need to defend my religion against science. I don't even feel the need to defend it against other religions. Does that make me a bad christian?

Yeah I know this was so off topic... I hope I made at least some sense as my thermometer says 38,3'c and the fever just won't let me be. Being sick sucks...

EDIT: Forgot to mention this, but anyone interested in science, who don't mind a fresh angle of approach, go get 'The Science of Discworld' by Terry Pratchett. It's quite a feat for a book to deal with everything from evolution to quantum physics and still manage to make you laugh. A lot.

[Vampyromaniac]

Originally posted by JavaFox
That is impossible, because the theory of evolution (along with the Big Bang theory, and theory of an old Earth) are so imbedded in nearly every aspect of our schooling that it would be impossible to confine all teachings regarding evolution on one day. How would a college-level biology class go? It couldn't, because the adoption of evolution as fact has so entrenched itself in the study of life that every lesson is a lesson, in part, in evolution! It can't be confined to one day, because evolution is taught almost every day! Or imagine a geology class without the old earth theory? It wouldn't exist! You can't confine these anti-creationary theories to one day because American teachers have adopted them as fact and crafted entire courses around the assumptions of evolutionary theory and its ilk.

OK, I think you're getting more carried away than usual You think those tiny hints of evolution in all those classes that aren't directly referring to it are harmful? Wow. I think you're a little paranoid. Almost like McCarthy searching for hints of communism eveywhere
You mentioned the Big Bang . . . I've had several science classes, and it has always been referred to as a Theory (as in "The Big Bang Theory" )
Theory of old Earth . . . what do you mean by "old"? How old? If you mean a billion years, I dunno. If you mean 10,000 years, well I think there's plenty of evidence for the Earth being older than that. But you might say "How do you know? You weren't there."
And as for evolution, I think you need to clarify whether your gripe is with the theory for the origin of life, or with any evolution at all. Because origin-of-life evolution is surely not as widespread in so many classes as you would make it seem. That's the evolution that I was talking about, and what I thought we were all talking about . . . .

Plenty of people agree with me, as the responses in this thread demonstrate. Regardless, though, if everybody subscribed to your kind of thought, there would still be slavery in America. Somethings are just wrong, and just because people that speak out against it are in the minority, doesn't mean it's right.

Omg, how did you come up with that? I think you're having trouble understanding what I'm saying, or you're just making exaggerated connections for shock-value.
You asked: Why don't people complain when the school system fails?
My response: Maybe they don't agree with you that the school system has failed.
People who don't think something is wrong, don't complain.
Let those plenty of people who agree with you in the thread, let them complain. But ask THEM (the people who agree with you) why they aren't complaining. Other than in this thread, have ANY of you complained anywhere else about this? If not, why not?
Some things are just wrong. And some things are a matter of opinion. And if you're gonna try to force your opinion on other people, go for it! But you haven't won me over yet . . . .



=========================================
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

My opinion? It's my opinion that the evolutionary theory requires some faith?! I had no idea you've been around for the last few billion years! You've seen evolution take place? Or do you just believe in it? Doesn't that require faith?

So is it "some faith", or a "great deal of faith," as you said before.
I agree with you that believing that "life has evolved from some origin" requires faith. But understand that not everyone requires 100% proof to accept something, like you apparently do. Let me say again, though, if everyone did require 100% from everything, what would there be left to believe? You'd have everyone saying "Were you there? Did you see it take place?"
Sure, the theory doesn't have every last detail sorted. But for a lot of people, it does have enough sorted for them to accept it.
And for the holes that we haven't found answers to, just because we haven't found them, doesn't mean they don't exist. The pen example: I own a pen. I searched all through my desk for it, but it isn't there. Does that mean that my pen doesn't exist, or merely that I haven't searched enough yet? I'm not saying that the answers are there, but they sure could be, and we not having found them isn't enough for me to dismiss the theory, because we have not looked everywhere.
You have probably read more about evolution than I have. But that doesn't make you an authority does it? You haven't studied it nearly as much as all the thousands of scientists before you. The evidence they've come up with is enough for them to be pretty sure, and that speaks much louder to me than you trying to force them to fill every hole.
Imagine if the US's legal system was not based on "beyond a reasonable doubt", but rather on 100% proof. For me, and a lot of others, things don't need to be explained 100%. We know the world isn't perfect. Yes, believing the theory requires faith, but for us, it's not such a great leap as it is for you.

Now, of course, one could ask you why you give so much more credence to the Bible than to the scientists, even when you say they are both just theories. But not me. You have your reasons, and that's fine by me. Hey as long as you're a good person, not hurting others and such, I don't care what your personal choices are.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
=========================================

Intellectual responsibility is an ethical thing. It means striving to learn the truth, even if that truth upsets you, or even if that truth contradicts your beliefs. Everybody that wants to be taken seriously --with respect-- on any level should strive to be intellectually responsible.

Heh, i've never heard the word "responsible" used that way before. I thought it meant you have sometihng uder your care, or being accountable for something. Guess I'll have to look it up again sometime


Anyway, I've just been havin a hoot and pokin fun, but I guess you're taking this much more seriously. If I'm hurting your blood pressure, I'll stop


P.S. I like what radTube said

[BWX]

Vampyro-- what is that silver medal thingy under your name?

[ToshiroOC]

We have medals now! I have a special DH dedication award... my only... my precious... precioussssssss... ah, er, I mean.... that silver thingy means that Vampyro has done a good thing and has donated to the site - that's the donation medal. Threads relating to this are HERE, HERE, and HERE...

[BWX]

I donated- and don't have a medal. wtf? I can't even get an avatar. The only reason I say that is because I jave seen others w/ less than 500 posts WITH avatars.


***update****--- No big deal- just wondering--------

[ToshiroOC]

Chill BWX man... Zardon and the admins have been working their asses off to get these medals working - just PM Zardon and remind him that you donated, and he'll fix you up, its not a big deal. Please don't complain about it - I've heard enough people whining about not getting their medals instead of doing something and asking to have their medal... And don't complain about the avatar. 500 posts is the rule - if you want an avatar, then post.

[Vampyromaniac]

Calm down, sir, calm down
Do read the third link ToshiroOC has posted just a bit above, it contains:

Originally posted by Zardon:
sorry ive been really busy tonight with alot of work and other things, ive probably forgotten more people who have donated, so please if I have just PM me, ill get it sorted out. its not intentional.

So just PM, and all will be well


EDIT: Ahh, Toshiro, you mad mad refresher! Beat me by 1 minute, eh?? gotosleep!!

[BWX]

I don't need a medal- really- don't worry about it. BUT, I have seen people w/ fewer than 500 posts with avatars though- that makes me wonder a little.















***********hit refresh!hit refresh!**************

I would rather argue about the origin of life on this great big mudball we call earth anyway.