Final-Fan said:
Replies in bold
Joe practically every sentence you say is a cringeworthy regurgitation of completely false creationist talking points. But I'll try to answer some of the most egregiously wrong stuff here.
|
Creationism is a science based theology just like Evolution. Infact some creationist theories even include Macro Evolution and many include Micro Evolution things we are taught in school. Its highly ignorant to judge all theories but Darwinian evolution as un-scientific.
Plus right in your post you say that theology has no place in school, then why should the theory of Macro Evolution , Big Bang, Abiogenesis? None of those three theories are anymore scientific then the many Creationist theories. None of the three are scientific fact, all of them and infact all the methods of creation I was taught in school all of them were theories.
|
This is so wrong I have trouble figuring out where to start. I suppose I could just take them in order of appearance.
--Creationism is not scientific, it is not science, and those involved in it are not scientists while so engaged, though they may be scientists in other areas of their lives. One important reason for this is that creationism does not produce testable hypotheses that would prove creationism flawed or wrong if the hypothesis was incorrect.
What and you think we can test Macro Evolution? Why is it that their is no missing link if Macro Evolution truly occurs in nature? Some said Lucy was but the skeleton was barely 1/3rd there and it wasn't collected in one peice it was scattered about. Infact no fossil's can be found that show any species evolving even gradually into another species. We can see similarities between dinasuars and birds, but is their any fossils showing Dinasuars gradually evolving into birds?
Also you prove my point yet again you stereo type Creationist theology.Infact some Christian theologians believe in Intelligent designed Darwinian Evolution. Infact they believe exactly like Athiests in every single belief except that they believe God created modern life through Evolution. Now how is that any less scientific then Darwinian Evolution? It is Darwinian Evolution in every shape and form.
Why is a biology proffesor who believes in God not a scientist, while a biology proffesor that does not is? Infact a leading proffesor and employee of the Smithsonian came forward and stated that God existed and backed some Creationist theories with facts. They terminated him for disagreeing with their theology. Now was he any less of a scientist then any of the others? Are you saying someone in a Government position of science in the Smithsonian one if not the most world renowned museums was somehow less of a scientist because he believed differently then his collegues?
I have personally met graduates of several biology programs from the states. They believe in creationism, I have met paleontologists both Creationist and Evolutionist your telling me that two people with the same educational background in the same scientific field, that one is less of a scientist because he believes differently then the other based on scientific evidences?
--The scientific body of theories popularly referred to as "evolutionary theory" is in no way theology or theological. If there is a theology called Evolution (or Evilution), it is a strawman created, probably by creationists, for the religious to fight against.
Umm even my science texts stated that Macro Evolution was a theory. While the text said it was a theory based on science it was still called a theory. The many theories are in no way anymore scientific then the Creationist theories. Darwin was a very intelligent theologian and scientist. But his theories while some turned out to be smack on like Micro Evolution and survival of the fittest others were false. People seem to think of Darwin as infaulable and everything he says is fact because some of his theories were right.
--It is far from ignorant to judge something unscientific if that judgment is based on a serious evaluation of its nature, methods, claims, etc., either done personally or by someone both trusted and knowledgeable. http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-creationists.html
Now this is funny, you qoute a website created by Athiest scientists to try and disprove Creationism as a science. Thats credable...... lol Thats like the ancient days when the Catholic church thought the world was flat. THe scientist came forward and says it is round and you qoute the church as a reliable source that the world was flat.
Of course an Athiest is going to say he is right, just like I could quote tons of Creationist scientists who say that Macro Evolution isn't science.
Infact the only reliable source would be from someone who does not believe he knows how life came about. Someone unbiased. I hate these debates because they usually go on for days with me quoting creationists and the Evolutionist quoting evolutionists. It gets no where because neither of us can prove each other wrong, If you have new evidence that proves their was no involvement of intelligent design be my guest and present this ground breaking evidence. But such evidence doesn't exist because Evolutionary theology is exactly that "Theology" it is not proven fact in any sense of the word. It is just as scientific as Creationist theology, sure some creationist theories aren't based on science but some of the Evolution theories don't hold scientific water either.
--On the contrary, they are scientific, as you would know if you understood what a scientific theory was. And I do not say that insultingly or dismissively, or in passing: it is abundantly clear that you do not know, or do not acknowledge, what science is and what it is to be a theory. I seriously doubt that anything you were taught that denied what you call "macroevolution" was ever a scientific theory.
I must be misreading your statement. Macro Evolution is the theory, theories are not proven facts. Any Hypothesis or idealogy that cannot be proven right or wrong are theories. Infact some that have been proven wrong are still taught in Science 10 as theories. Having gone to Public Highschool I was taught evolution theology.
A scientific theory as you mention is an idea of how something did or did not come about, how something does or does not work. Any idea about something based on scientific fact. Macro Evolution is a perfect example, because Micro Evolution occurs naturely within a species over the course of dozens to hundreds to thousands of years obviously it could occur in larger scales that could go as far as creating new species. This makes it a Scientific theory, why because their is no direct evidence to show that species evolve into entirely different species, but inter species evolution occurs which leads some to believe it could occur on a larger scale though it remains unproven. It is not scientific fact, it is scientific theory.
Just like the theory that a God created life on Earth over billions of years. The fossil record clearly shows species appearing out of nowhere over millions to billions of years. No record of species evolving into one another, similarities yes but no missing link has ever been found. So who was creating these new species? When the asteroid destroyed the Dinasuars who created the new species? A few species that just showed up, where did they come from? Did reptiles (Cold Blooded creatures) evolve into Mammals (Warm Blooded creatures). Evidence shows these species suddenly showing up out of nowhere. Suggesting that these species were created not evolved.
I could go on talking about what makes Creationist Scientific theories scientific, what makes Evolution theories not scientific but to be honest Its stupid to debate with people who are so set in their beliefs that they won't listen to you no matter how much evidence you thow at them.
I once debated an Athiest for like 3-months, hundreds of replies back and fourth on FaceBook. Untill finally he said "You know what, I don't know how we were created and neither do you so lets just let it go" From then on he called himself agnostic.
Fact is I am not going to change what I believe based on some unproven theories. Just like you won't change your beliefs based on my unproven theories. What I am saying is that all of our scientific theories are still theology, they are theories not scientific fact.
If an idea is not testable, repeatable, observable, and falsifiable then it is not scientific fact. If it is not scientific fact, a theory to be considered scientific theory must be based on scientific fact. Since neither Evolution theology or Creationist theology is scientific fact then both of them are theories. Theories are theology anyway you look at it, whether you like it or not they are all theories.
| So no one can explain creation, we can make educated guesses like creationists and evolutionists do all the time. But we can never prove one is right and one is wrong. |
I could argue that creationists' guesses are considerably less educated than they might be, but more importantly, the theories of "evolutionists" are way beyond any stage that could be called a guess. A hypothesis is advanced, tested, tested again, refined, retested, and if no one in the scientific community can manage to show that it inadequately explains the world around us compared to existing theories, then after years of trying, it too starts to be considered a theory.
So a proffesor who worked for the Smithsonian is less educated then you? A science major with over 20 years in the field is less educated then you? A paleontologist who now teaches science in school, yah you and your other science teachers are so much more educated then them.
Just face the facts that your theories aren't anymore factual then their theories. Instead of allowing yourself to be brainwashed into the belief that everyone who disagrees with you is uneducated nut job. Maybe you should realize your just as much of an uneducated nutjob, no pun intended.
| If schools want to teach theology they should make it abundantly clear to students "These are scientific theories not scientific facts" taught in a theology class to drive home that fact for students. |
Scientific theories are not theology, and I'm not even sure what you think makes a fact scientific instead of regular.
Hate to break it to you, but theories until proven as fact are theology. The Earth being round was a theory until proven factual, just like the Earth being flat was a theory until being proven false. Gravity while being a scientific theory was theology until proven factual just like the earths gravitational pole.
In the same way Creationist theories will continue to be theology just like Evolutionist theories until either of them can be proven fact. Do you even know the definition of Theology?
Now I also do know that most people limit theology to just religious beliefs and faith based belief system so some do not consider Evolution to be theology. So lets open that can of worms Evolution is a faith based if not religious belief system. Evolutionists believe in something that cannot be proven right or wrong, can not be seen and is illogical in the eyes of those who don't believe in it. It is infact a religious beliefs system just as much as Buddhism is or Christianity.
It takes far more faith to believe a single celled organism evolved into man over billions of years. Then to believe an intelligent being created our biological make up.
Plus their are now churches of Darwin. So their are church's their are texts which base the athiests religious belief system and they believe in an unseen force creating life as we know it based soully on faith then any actual facts.
If Athiesm is not a religion then neither is the majority if all religions. Now the common argument is Athiests don't believe in a God so they aren't a religion. Well hate to break it to you but every Athiest believes in a creator whether intelligent or not they all do. Whether it be a big bang or an alien or any other creator they all have faith in an unseen unprovable creator.
|
