Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The TRUE reason for the EvC controversy, and why it can not be resolved.
compmage
Member (Idle past 5152 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 286 of 302 (299285)
03-29-2006 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by nator
03-29-2006 7:27 AM


Agnostics and Atheists has never experienced the spirit world like Satanists have. Ex-Satanists know that the spirit world is very real, and the only way to free them of that hellish existance, is to draw them to Christ. You will not convert a Satanist to Agnostisism or Atheism, or any other religion for that matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by nator, posted 03-29-2006 7:27 AM nator has not replied

compmage
Member (Idle past 5152 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 287 of 302 (299289)
03-29-2006 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by ringo
03-29-2006 7:35 AM


quote:
You don't need to prevent others from finding it out for themselves either. You don't need to help the creationists condemn our children to ignorance.
I never said that evolution material should be censored. I simply believe in free speach.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by ringo, posted 03-29-2006 7:35 AM ringo has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 288 of 302 (299295)
03-29-2006 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 285 by compmage
03-29-2006 10:08 AM


Hi Christian,
I don't have any problem with you believing there was a "gradual decline" that affected lifespans, language, Nephalim and physical laws that can all be attributed to the fall. The point isn't whether your interprestion is right or wrong, but whether it has anything particularly compelling about it that would lead to its adoption by others. Faith, the person most similar to you in viewpoint, doesn't buy it, I don't buy it, and nobody else buys it.
This has no bearing on whether you're right or wrong. Perhaps you're right, but you can't proceed on to argue your conclusions until at least some of the people in this thread accept your premise.
In addition, you've been unable to support your position that what happened before the fall and during the transition period after the fall through the flood period is not open to scientific analysis and study, in effect pleading nolo contendere. Events that occurred under different physical laws would leave behind different evidence. You can't just *say* they're not open to study, you have to explain *why*. If I understand your position, for you this is actually a faith-based position, which is fine, but in that case you cannot argue that your position has any scientific standing.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 10:08 AM compmage has not replied

compmage
Member (Idle past 5152 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 289 of 302 (299296)
03-29-2006 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Percy
03-29-2006 9:18 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
quote:
Creationists lobby state legislatures, textbook publishers and state and local schools boards for increased representation of creationism and reduced representation of evolution in textbooks and public school classrooms. It would be off-topic to get into detail, but if you're interested then open a new topic.
No one really cares what evangelical Christians believe. If they would stay in their churches and celebrate their beliefs I'm sure that would be fine with just about everybody. But they don't. They go to great lengths to try to force their views into public schools, and this cannot be ignored. It is why this site exists, to provide a relatively neutral site where people can discover through discussion why evolution is science and creationism is religion.
That creationism is religion is something you seem to understand. You are correct that the philosophical views of science and evangelical Christianity have no likely resolution, but that creationism is not legitimate science is very clear.
Fighting creationism will not make it go away.
I suggest that you should concider a voucher system instead of a public school system. This way, the government issues vouchers to the parents, and they can use it to place their children in a school of their choice. This way, the creationist can go to a creationist school, and the evolutionist to an evolusionist school, all with the same public money. As long as there is a winner takes all aproach to public schooling, this scenario will persist. In South Africa, we have much bigger problems in our educational system than evolution/creationism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Percy, posted 03-29-2006 9:18 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Percy, posted 03-29-2006 10:55 AM compmage has not replied

compmage
Member (Idle past 5152 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 290 of 302 (299300)
03-29-2006 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 280 by Faith
03-29-2006 9:47 AM


Re: No progress
quote:
But really, I think I'm missing the point of what you are trying to get said here, so I don't think you need to answer this and I will drop out of the conversation at this point.
I'm saying that the rules of practicing "evolutionary science" and the rules for practicing "creation science" differ. In order to have a meaningful debate, one must at least share the same rules.
I'm not saying that it is wrong to practice creation science, but I do think that it is no use to use "creation science" for warfare against evolution. Creation science should just do what they do, and let it stand on its own. Maybe I'm naive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 9:47 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Chiroptera, posted 03-29-2006 11:00 AM compmage has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 291 of 302 (299304)
03-29-2006 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by compmage
03-29-2006 10:34 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
GFC writes:
Fighting creationism will not make it go away.
While it would be nice if creationism went away, and perhaps we could consider that a long-term, though idealistic, goal, the goal in the near-term is more reasonably just the protection of public education from religious interference.
I suggest that you should concider a voucher system instead of a public school system.
Thanks for the suggestion, but the requirement of separation of church and state would not allow public moneys, not in voucher form or any other form, to be used for religious purposes.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 10:34 AM compmage has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 11:41 AM Percy has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 292 of 302 (299306)
03-29-2006 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by compmage
03-29-2006 10:46 AM


Re: No progress
quote:
I'm saying that the rules of practicing "evolutionary science" and the rules for practicing "creation science" differ.
This is true. The rules for evolutionary science, like any other science, is to examine the data and go where the evidence leads.
The rules you are proposing for "creation science" is to assume that the Genesis account is literally true a priori and to think up excuses why the evidence doesn't support it.

"Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure."
-- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 10:46 AM compmage has not replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 293 of 302 (299309)
03-29-2006 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by compmage
03-29-2006 8:37 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
What I fail to understant is why evolutionists give credibility to this war by participating in it, rather than to just ignore it?
Several reasons spring to mind:
1) Did you ever see what happened when NASA ignored the Moon Landing Hoaxists? The movement gained in strength and NASAs silence was taken as strong evidence for the hoax.
2) Pride: Evolutionists don't like people calling them stupid/fraudsters/liars etc. They don't like a good science being trashed by snake oil salesman and they want to defend their integrity.
3) Caring about the subject: If people talk crap about my pet subject, I feel obligated to correct misunderstandings or falsehoods, even if I don't feel the person listening will take note - but it means that people who witness the exchange don't go away with the wrong impression
4) Dislike of propaganda: I really don't like propaganda, it sickens me. I really don't like people who don't know better being 'educated' that evolution isn't real science etc. I want people to have the information they need to make their own mind up, rather than listening to one obviously biased side, not hearing anything contrary and so believing it to be true.
5) Enjoyment of debate. I enjoy debating in a wide range of topics. I find that I learn things during debate, and on some major issues have found that I have gained enough information to change my mind on a subject (War in Iraq, Fox Hunting, gun ownership are some examples of my mind being changed through the process of debate). A lot of people on this forum also like debating other subjects (As can be attested by the Coffee House).
6) Some other reasons that haven't sprung to mind.
People gravitate towards creationism, primarily because of religious reasons, not because of its scientific arguements.
This is mostly true, but its those on the fence that we debate for the benefit of. Also - some people are anti-evolution and not religious. We try and convince those through reason. Finally there are those that are young that were taught by parents/pastors etc. They have a right to be given accurate information about the actual science so that they realise the caricature that has been presented is erroneous.
I believe someone on this board called it 'intellectual child abuse' or some such thing. I think it important to combat it. Hopefully a Christian as yourself who adamantly believes in YEC but rejects the attempt to bamboozle others should help fight the hokey 'science' that gets put forward.
PS. While I believe Creationism is not science, I do believe that ID is a valid scientific hypothesis, as there are no references made to religious sources.
Unfortunately for ID, not directly mentioning religious sources doesn't help it become science, it keeps it from being religion but still means it is a seperate philosophy from science (teleology is the name of the philosophy and it is contrasted to philosophical naturalism). Until there is some explained mechanism for how the hypothetical designs are implemented in nature, and evidence/falsification tests are designed it remains seperate from science and its methodology for explaining world around us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 8:37 AM compmage has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 294 of 302 (299318)
03-29-2006 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Percy
03-29-2006 10:55 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
Thanks for the suggestion, but the requirement of separation of church and state would not allow public moneys, not in voucher form or any other form, to be used for religious purposes.
Wow, what a typical PC violation of the Constitution. Do you think that at least we should be spared paying taxes for the public schools if we finance our own schools or are you going to bleed us from every pore?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Percy, posted 03-29-2006 10:55 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by crashfrog, posted 03-29-2006 12:23 PM Faith has replied
 Message 297 by Percy, posted 03-29-2006 12:38 PM Faith has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 295 of 302 (299338)
03-29-2006 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by Faith
03-29-2006 11:41 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
Do you think that at least we should be spared paying taxes for the public schools if we finance our own schools or are you going to bleed us from every pore?
Good public schools in your neighborhood improve the value of your property regardless of whether or not you actually have children enrolled. Do you really believe that paying for that benefit is wrong? Or are you simply so short-sighted that you see yourself benefiting from public schools only if you have children enrolled?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 11:41 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 12:26 PM crashfrog has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 296 of 302 (299339)
03-29-2006 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by crashfrog
03-29-2006 12:23 PM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
It's simply a matter of financial practicality, crash. Nobody can afford to support two school systems. But if that is demanded of us, God will provide.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by crashfrog, posted 03-29-2006 12:23 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by crashfrog, posted 03-29-2006 2:40 PM Faith has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 297 of 302 (299345)
03-29-2006 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by Faith
03-29-2006 11:41 AM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
Faith writes:
Percy writes:
Thanks for the suggestion, but the requirement of separation of church and state would not allow public moneys, not in voucher form or any other form, to be used for religious purposes.
Wow, what a typical PC violation of the Constitution. Do you think that at least we should be spared paying taxes for the public schools if we finance our own schools or are you going to bleed us from every pore?
I was only trying to echo the position of the US courts on this issue. If you believe I'm wrong and that the US courts actually have a different position and that GFC's proposal has a chance of passing muster, then that would be an interesting side-issue that probably belongs in a different thread.
But if you're instead saying you disagree with the position of the US courts on this issue, we already knew that.
Under the present system, there is no public funding of private schools, with the exception of some that provide special services. In the United States, anyone who sends their child to a private school, whether religious or otherwise, ends up paying twice for education.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 11:41 AM Faith has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 298 of 302 (299351)
03-29-2006 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by compmage
03-29-2006 5:06 AM


Re: amazing coincidences
quote:
Is this assumption any bigger than the assumption of an omnipotent God?
Yes, it is. At least the assumption of an omnipotent god does not contradict evidence that we can see with our own eyes.
-
quote:
My assumptions is only inadequately for the evolutionist....
Your assumptions are inadequate for anyone trying to understand anything. Your methodology, which is basically coming up with an ad hoc reason why the evidence does not support your preferred beliefs, can be used to justify any belief whatsoever. With your ideas, I can decide that if the evidence does not support my beliefs I can simply invoke a change in physical laws. Basically, we can know nothing and anything at all can be true.
-
quote:
Everybody has a world view, therefore no one is unbiased.
So what? It is possible to rise above one's biases and examine data critically and draw the appropriate conclusions from them. If this were not possible, then the first people to examine the earth scientifically, acting under their initial creationist biases, would not have been able to determine that the evidence did not support the creationist beliefs.
I also initially had a bias toward creationism. But I was able to rise above these biases and eventually reject creationism.
-
quote:
That is precisely why I say this debate is a clash of world views, and that the debate is therefore unresolvable.
The reason that this debate is unresolvable is that some people have a belief in a literal reading of Genesis and nothing is going to make them believe otherwise. These people are going to come up with all sorts of reasons to explain away the data that does not support their beliefs. You seem to be an example of this. Your initial belief is that the Genesis story is literal history. You at least seem to be acknowledging that the evidence contradicts this set of beliefs; therefore you are attempting to explain it away. This idea of the physical laws changing is simply your way of reconciling your beliefs in the Genesis account with the fact that there is no evidence to support it.
You can talk about biases and "world views" all you want. But people do examine data critically, people do examine ideas fairly, and people do change their opinions and "world views" when the evidence warrants it. You, on the other hand, are an example of someone who is cannot or will not rise above your biases to acknowledge that your beliefs are incorrect. So strong are your biases that you have to invent reasons, without any basis for your assumptions, that explains why your beliefs are inconsistent with the real world.
Very few people reject out of hand the idea that the physical laws may have changed. The physical laws are only descriptions of what we observe, and it is always entirely possible that under different conditions the universe may behave differently. However, until evidence that the physical laws have changed is presented, evidence that shows precisely in what way the physical laws have changed, this idea remains a merely interesting idea.

"Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure."
-- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 5:06 AM compmage has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 299 of 302 (299379)
03-29-2006 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by Faith
03-29-2006 12:26 PM


Re: Evolution vs Creation goes beyond philosophy
Nobody can afford to support two school systems.
Hrm, I guess you're right. That must be why there are no private schools whatsoever, anywhere in the United States. Oh, wait.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 12:26 PM Faith has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 300 of 302 (299392)
03-29-2006 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by compmage
03-29-2006 9:45 AM


Re: Rationality, Irrationality, Non-rationality
Yes. I don't want us to go the path of doublethink, and the book 1984 is a clear reason as to why not. However, if you can realize that there is no objective/subjective mentality there is no problem. In your subjective analysis, evolution has one too many theological conflicts. What about the heliocentric solar system. Does that not also conflict with what you believe. Do you accept the heliocentric solar system, or do you try to force it into your beliefs? If you do not, and it has all though ramifications that evolution does, then why throw out evolution. If you have a problem with science that contradicts your views, then you have to do what I said earlier, and the sooner people realize that these are the only choices for resolving the crisis, the sooner it will be over.
Failing that, grow a thick skin and nothing can hurt you (hey, that's evolution!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by compmage, posted 03-29-2006 9:45 AM compmage has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by robinrohan, posted 03-29-2006 3:58 PM kuresu has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024