By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - What is your take on creationism/creationists?

Nirvana_Nut85; there's a vast majority that doesn't believe in the theory of evolution? I think you've got something mixed up there and made it go topsy turvy because that's just not true, not by a long shot. In fact; justa about the only sizeable grouping that openly and vehemently opposes evolution as a whole are creationists and they hardly make up the better part (neither in number nor conviction) of the world.

Edit; Also, a theory is as far as it goes in the scientific circles. The theory of gravity is still only a theory but you'll feel it on your ass if you jump off the roof and you can't run around shouting "Its only a theory!" without anything falsifiable to oppose or substitute them. The reason theories remain theories is because of the relentless and thorough principles of the scientific method and the fact that future science might shed more detailed light over them. If you made some discovery in molecular science decades ago, for instance, you'd probably reason that in the future we will be able to see things at even more detailed cellular levels and even if your theory gets published and widely aknowledged by your peers, everyone realizes that in the future (or, hell, next week) someone might develop the thought further and advance your thesis.

Yes, there are things science cannot explain yet but modern science is still in its infancy and one simply cannot attribute everything it does not yet fully encompass or fully delve into as the work of God simply because it is unknown. That's like the irrational fear of the dark, lending unlikely value to something unseen is an archtypical human trait and a highly flawed one at that. In the stone age, everything from lightning to lava and the moon were gods and deserving of devotion and doting but as science and discovery has made leeway through the ages, so has God's power diminished. A curious thing really, every time we make a leap in a field of science, God's miracles are null and void. So please, keep your faith, I know it makes a lot of people happy but do not mix science and religion, they're intellectual water and oil.



Around the Network
headshot91 said:
TX109 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:

Well considering that scientific data is about as manipulated by the Elite as religions today I dont see how any of you can justify your answers when both are propagated. Look what they did with man made global warming for example. It came out in the media last year that the University that the U.N had hired had been manipulating the data they were providing to make it appear as if the Earth was getting warmer when in fact temperatures had been cooling in the past 10 years.  http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ (There's alot more sites to look into if you google "climate Gate")


Lol, you do realise that article is over 6months old? Heres the follow up "investigation" released in april this year:

The report of the independent Science Assessment Panel was published on 14 April 2010 and concluded that the panel had seen "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit." It found that the CRU's work had been "carried out with integrity" and had used "fair and satisfactory" methods.

 

Also while admitedly scientific data can be manipulated, in the vast majority it is unbiased fact.

Lmao and you do understand that the head of the so called propagated "independant research" was headed by Lord Oxburgh   who has direct ties with carbon trading companies as well as being the chairman for alternative energy companies, who would benefit from having the review state there was no evidence. Thats why no one took the review seriously :)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7071751.ece

This is why we can't always trust scientific data because it can be manipulated instead of being non-biased

lmao. Apart from this having NOTHING to do with creationism, you do realise even if it was true and lord oxburgh had a conflict of interests that directly affected his judgement, there are 6 other people in the review panel?

Ive know idea why this was brought up, the topic ws creationism, unless youre saying evolution facts can be "manipulated"? LOL

Actually it was true, there was quite the controversy over it because the review lacked "credibility" also you do realise that it was not an independant organization that did the review, the U.N hand picked the scientists to be on the panel so what kind of outcome do you think was going to happen,lol. The public is starting to wake up and not buy everything that the media or the elite spoon feed them.

Secondly, evolution, though widely believed to be fact is still a theory because it is not 100% proven, though that was not what my argument, my argument was that scientific data can be manipulated, as the elite fund most of the scientific research. So it's rather ridiculous for a bunch of people in the forum to call people who believe in god, creationism,ect brainwashed, or believing in fairytales, when"a good majority of them"  blindly follow literally anything
they are fed through the upper echelon of the scientific community.

UN hand picked the scientists. Yes you are right. And if you look at their credentionals, you'll see they were picked for their outstanding contributions to thei field...

And OT, its funny that you introduce "rather ridiculous for a bunch of people in the forum to call people who believe in creationism.. brainwashed", well that's because they are. If you believe in God, it's fine. But if you believe in creationism, and reject evolution then you are an idiot, no question.

Well genius, when the organization that is part of the controversy goes and "picks" an apparent independent panel to investigate something, common sense usually delegates to us that it's going to be propaganda, but I mean go ahead and keep drinking the kool-aid.

How are you an idiot, if you reject evolution? Please explain because there's a large majority of people that do. I'm not saying that creationism is a fact, I just find it's rather ignorant to call people idiots when the don't share the same theories.Evolution is still a theory last time I checked :)


that's the point i originally tried to make. im no creationist, but im not entirely sold on the theory of evolution (i believe in adaptation and natural selection, though). the way i see it, this is something so far beyond our comprehension that to call anyone out on their own beliefs or theories is just ignorant.


I'm not sure if you are referring to me as "ignorant", but yes I call people out on creation being said as if its a scientiric theory. The people who say that are ignorant. Oh and @nirvana you just been pwned :)

@headshot 91: yes, anyone who will sit there and criticize someone's system of beliefs, when there own are just as flawed, is ignorant. Also, a half assed statement isnt considered as pwning someone, but we'll let yah go ahead and think that, considering the fact you didnt comment "fully" on my previous statement :)

 

@txt109 : I completely agree, unfortunately people like headshot are not respectful of other people's belief systems. I dont buy into evolution, mainly because I do not trust the elite, but I do not criticize those who believe that it is true.

 

 

 





" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

Mummelmann said:

Nirvana_Nut85; there's a vast majority that doesn't believe in the theory of evolution? I think you've got something mixed up there and made it go topsy turvy because that's just not true, not by a long shot. In fact; justa about the only sizeable grouping that openly and vehemently opposes evolution as a whole are creationists and they hardly make up the better part (neither in number nor conviction) of the world.

Edit; Also, a theory is as far as it goes in the scientific circles. The theory of gravity is still only a theory but you'll feel it on your ass if you jump off the roof and you can't run around shouting "Its only a theory!" without anything falsifiable to oppose or substitute them. The reason theories remain theories is because of the relentless and thorough principles of the scientific method and the fact that future science might shed more detailed light over them. If you made some discovery in molecular science decades ago, for instance, you'd probably reason that in the future we will be able to see things at even more detailed cellular levels and even if your theory gets published and widely aknowledged by your peers, everyone realizes that in the future (or, hell, next week) someone might develop the thought further and advance your thesis.

Yes, there are things science cannot explain yet but modern science is still in its infancy and one simply cannot attribute everything it does not yet fully encompass or fully delve into as the work of God simply because it is unknown. That's like the irrational fear of the dark, lending unlikely value to something unseen is an archtypical human trait and a highly flawed one at that. In the stone age, everything from lightning to lava and the moon were gods and deserving of devotion and doting but as science and discovery has made leeway through the ages, so has God's power diminished. A curious thing really, every time we make a leap in a field of science, God's miracles are null and void. So please, keep your faith, I know it makes a lot of people happy but do not mix science and religion, they're intellectual water and oil.

Actually depending on which country you are in the results vary whereas countries in North America, The Middle East, have the larger majority of people who disagree with evolution, while the majority of people in European countries support it.

It`s not faith that makes me question the theory of evolution and I do not believe fully believe in creationism as well due to the fact that it is the elite who manipulate both communities to better their own will. The bible is more of parables if anything then actual historical facts, though I do believe in god. I just dont fully trust anything man has written and what the powers that be delegate due to what is currently happening in our world today. Alot of leaders use religion to push there political agenda`s just as much as they do with science. I don`t criticize anyone for their beliefs, I just dont think it is appropriate to call people ignorant, or idiots because they dont share the same ideas as other`s, considering we live in an age where it`s hard to trust any form of information that is publicized, due to the global agenda currently going on.





" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

Calling someone an idiot for disagreeing might be tempting but its bad form in any debate, I agree. So you believe in God but you don't fully trust the bible because it was written by men? Then, my friend, you have a lot more sense and healthy skepticism than 99% of the religious people I know. One shouldn't trust and believe everything written by man, whether it be holy texts, a theory or an article on a specific subject (the media is far from neutral and objective in their coverage).

Like I said, I respect that you and many others believe in some form of God and I know it makes some people happy and since you've also managed to hold on to your free mind and reasoning and curiosity its twice as good for you.



P.S for all those commenting on my posts, I never stated that evolution was wrong and creationism was right as in all honesty I really could care less. I just dont support when someone tries to belittle someone else's beliefs, and calls them idiots. I take bits and pieces from both sides of the spectrum because i don't fully believe in both as fact.



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

Around the Network
Mummelmann said:

Calling someone an idiot for disagreeing might be tempting but its bad form in any debate, I agree. So you believe in God but you don't fully trust the bible because it was written by men? Then, my friend, you have a lot more sense and healthy skepticism than 99% of the religious people I know. One shouldn't trust and believe everything written by man, whether it be holy texts, a theory or an article on a specific subject (the media is far from neutral and objective in their coverage).

Like I said, I respect that you and many others believe in some form of God and I know it makes some people happy and since you've also managed to hold on to your free mind and reasoning and curiosity its twice as good for you.

Thanks,lol and btw I was criticizing headshot for calling people who didn't believe in evolution "idiots". I just said that he was ignorant for making that comment.



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

headshot91 said:

Personally I think they are misinformed at the very least!


Why do you go to a forum about videogames asking people what they think of creationism?  Do you want others to join in with you so you feel more secure in your belief they are misinformed, if not downright evil in ignorance?

In regards to the entire issue, if you want to also get into Intelligent Design (which gets lumped in with normal Creationism) is that science is not able to detect with certainty whether or not something in the universe has been engineered (designed) or not.  SETI, for example, tries to use scientific tools, to be able to detect language in the noise of space.  As of now, all science can do is tell what may of caused something, by knowing how something known operates.  It is not able to detect something called "intelligence" as a general attribute.  For all we know, the Internet could be a collective sentient being, and we don't have the tools to be able to tell so.  Or, something else may come along in the Internet, operate intelligently and we can't detect whether or not it is.

Or, would you rather I say that anyone who believes God created the universe or intervened directly in the creation of life is a nutcase and leave it at that?  I have a feeling this short reply would likely be far more acceptable that the longer reply I gave above.



Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
TX109 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
headshot91 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:

Well considering that scientific data is about as manipulated by the Elite as religions today I dont see how any of you can justify your answers when both are propagated. Look what they did with man made global warming for example. It came out in the media last year that the University that the U.N had hired had been manipulating the data they were providing to make it appear as if the Earth was getting warmer when in fact temperatures had been cooling in the past 10 years.  http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ (There's alot more sites to look into if you google "climate Gate")


Lol, you do realise that article is over 6months old? Heres the follow up "investigation" released in april this year:

The report of the independent Science Assessment Panel was published on 14 April 2010 and concluded that the panel had seen "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit." It found that the CRU's work had been "carried out with integrity" and had used "fair and satisfactory" methods.

 

Also while admitedly scientific data can be manipulated, in the vast majority it is unbiased fact.

Lmao and you do understand that the head of the so called propagated "independant research" was headed by Lord Oxburgh   who has direct ties with carbon trading companies as well as being the chairman for alternative energy companies, who would benefit from having the review state there was no evidence. Thats why no one took the review seriously :)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7071751.ece

This is why we can't always trust scientific data because it can be manipulated instead of being non-biased

lmao. Apart from this having NOTHING to do with creationism, you do realise even if it was true and lord oxburgh had a conflict of interests that directly affected his judgement, there are 6 other people in the review panel?

Ive know idea why this was brought up, the topic ws creationism, unless youre saying evolution facts can be "manipulated"? LOL

Actually it was true, there was quite the controversy over it because the review lacked "credibility" also you do realise that it was not an independant organization that did the review, the U.N hand picked the scientists to be on the panel so what kind of outcome do you think was going to happen,lol. The public is starting to wake up and not buy everything that the media or the elite spoon feed them.

Secondly, evolution, though widely believed to be fact is still a theory because it is not 100% proven, though that was not what my argument, my argument was that scientific data can be manipulated, as the elite fund most of the scientific research. So it's rather ridiculous for a bunch of people in the forum to call people who believe in god, creationism,ect brainwashed, or believing in fairytales, when"a good majority of them"  blindly follow literally anything
they are fed through the upper echelon of the scientific community.

UN hand picked the scientists. Yes you are right. And if you look at their credentionals, you'll see they were picked for their outstanding contributions to thei field...

And OT, its funny that you introduce "rather ridiculous for a bunch of people in the forum to call people who believe in creationism.. brainwashed", well that's because they are. If you believe in God, it's fine. But if you believe in creationism, and reject evolution then you are an idiot, no question.

Well genius, when the organization that is part of the controversy goes and "picks" an apparent independent panel to investigate something, common sense usually delegates to us that it's going to be propaganda, but I mean go ahead and keep drinking the kool-aid.

How are you an idiot, if you reject evolution? Please explain because there's a large majority of people that do. I'm not saying that creationism is a fact, I just find it's rather ignorant to call people idiots when the don't share the same theories.Evolution is still a theory last time I checked :)


that's the point i originally tried to make. im no creationist, but im not entirely sold on the theory of evolution (i believe in adaptation and natural selection, though). the way i see it, this is something so far beyond our comprehension that to call anyone out on their own beliefs or theories is just ignorant.


I'm not sure if you are referring to me as "ignorant", but yes I call people out on creation being said as if its a scientiric theory. The people who say that are ignorant. Oh and @nirvana you just been pwned :)

@headshot 91: yes, anyone who will sit there and criticize someone's system of beliefs, when there own are just as flawed, is ignorant. Also, a half assed statement isnt considered as pwning someone, but we'll let yah go ahead and think that, considering the fact you didnt comment "fully" on my previous statement :)

 

@txt109 : I completely agree, unfortunately people like headshot are not respectful of other people's belief systems. I dont buy into evolution, mainly because I do not trust the elite, but I do not criticize those who believe that it is true.

 

 


Lol actually I wasnt referring to myself pwning you, merely the other 3 people who quoted you! I know that they basically gave the proper answers, so why add more?

Also stop putting words into my mouth. If you recall, i said I am more than happy for people to believe in God etc, but " when they believe in something as demonstrably incorrect as creationism" is just bad. And also, unlike you it seems, i dont believe in evolution because the ""elite" told me to, i read up on it during my biology exams over say 5 years of school and realised it was the only proper scientific theory.



Nirvana_Nut85 said:

P.S for all those commenting on my posts, I never stated that evolution was wrong and creationism was right as in all honesty I really could care less. I just dont support when someone tries to belittle someone else's beliefs, and calls them idiots. I take bits and pieces from both sides of the spectrum because i don't fully believe in both as fact.


Again trying to take the pity route. I don't "belittle" people's beliefs. I merely state that if you believe in something so factually inaccurate as creationism, then you really are not a logical person. I admit that I went too far by calling you an idiot, but I think that by denying evolution as correct you are missing the point entirely and you are being the "ignorant" person.



richardhutnik said:
headshot91 said:

Personally I think they are misinformed at the very least!

Why do you go to a forum about videogames asking people what they think of creationism?  Do you want others to join in with you so you feel more secure in your belief they are misinformed, if not downright evil in ignorance?

^^ it's IS in the off topic discussion part of the forum after all, so there should in fact be talk about things other than video games here