1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Is this stuff really taught in churches?

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by F8L, Nov 24, 2007.

Page 1 of 6
  1. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,080
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    I ran across this page from BibleLife.org while I was searching for images of the BBC Horizon: The Missing Link video.

    The whole page is filled with inaccuracies and does not once cite a journal or scientific source to support the claims made within. I found it worrisome that many people will actually read this garbage and not even think to look for supporting information. What is wrong with people?

    Scientific Facts Proving Charles Darwin's
    Theory of Evolution is Wrong, False and Impossible

    News You can Use
    The Latest Examples in the News of Evolution Brainwashing

    The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory, instead of a law.

    The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. The DNA in plants and animals allows selective breeding to achieve desired results. Dogs are a good example of selective breeding. The DNA in all dogs has many regressive traits. A desired trait can be produced in dogs by selecting dogs with a particular trait to produce offspring with that trait. This specialized selective breeding can continue for generation after generation until a breed of dog is developed. This is the same as the "survival of the fittest" theory of the evolutionists. Many different types of dogs can be developed this way, but they can never develop a cat by selectively breeding dogs. Natural selection can never extend outside of the DNA limit. DNA cannot be changed into a new species by natural selection. Diamond back rattle snakes cannot be selectively bred until you have one with wings that jumps in the air and flies away. Evolution is impossible.

    Source: http://www.biblelife.org/evolution.htm
     
    #1 F8L, Nov 24, 2007
  2. hyo silver

    hyo silver Awaaaaay

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    15,232
    1,562
    0
    Location:
    off into the sunset
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    uhhh...I'm confused...which was the brainwashing again?

    If evolution were impossible, we wouldn't be here. Somehow, the facts of life must be taught to people before this utter insanity is allowed to fester.
     
    #2 hyo silver, Nov 24, 2007
  3. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    465
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    "regressive" [sic] traits... i'd say i just read a "regressive trait" myself! [​IMG]

    i felt equally violated when the "Atlas of Creation" showed up in the middle of our last lab meeting. we all peeked at it in curiosity afterward, and were stunned at the audacious claims they made.

    yeah, THERE's a relevant citation. :rolleyes: thank Capital G for that.

    and oh god... it gets worse...

    AHH! the universal answer! might as well just submit, guys, we're all wrong. there IS a designer. <_<

    ooh! [raises hand] is this a newly proven "fact?"
    ah, it's about sex, it's not worth knowing anyway.

    [cough] CANCER [cough] transposable elements [cough] p53 mutations [cough] high energy radiation [cough] double strand breaks [cough] chromosomal arm breakage [cough] to name a few

    polydactyly. who knows, maybe more than 5 fingers per hand would make us all more useful! some days i feel like i could use another 2 arms!

    awful convenient that they left out "... in an isolated system." we didn't need to know that anyway. i mean, gee, it would suck pretty bad if our neurons couldn't rectify the membrane potential by using energy to relocate different ions, which is what this theory also contends. then we would be too dead to consider any of this.

    omg! so down's syndrome people are... what?
    and... oops! plants! d'oh!

    after that they go into things outside my area of specialty... but they've proven what a joke they are anyway. i was feeling game for this... too many days off work i guess.
     
    #3 galaxee, Nov 24, 2007
  4. burritos

    burritos Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    4,946
    252
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    If you showed an extinct dried river bed to a creationist, would they believe that a river once ran through it?
     
    #4 burritos, Nov 25, 2007
  5. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    The purpose of this sort of garbage is not to provide any actual logical argument. Its purpose is to make believers more comfortable in their beliefs. That's why most scientists will not debate creationists: The creationists follow no rules of logical debate. They say whatever will make their followers feel comfortable, and that can include circular reasoning, appeals to the Bible as an authority, appeals to emotion, and outright lies, especially lies about what it is that science claims and about the actual available evidence.

    In short, it does not matter to the creationists that they are spouting the most idiotic lies imaginable because they are not speaking to anyone with the slightest spark of intelligence. They are speaking to idiots exclusively.
     
    #5 daniel, Nov 25, 2007
  6. burritos

    burritos Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    4,946
    252
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Nov 25 2007, 12:25 AM) [snapback]543852[/snapback]</div>
    Are you implying that believers of creationism are idiots? Or are you just saying it?
     
    #6 burritos, Nov 25, 2007
  7. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    How do they explain left-handedness? (Or is it still the hand of the devil?)

    Can they explain why there are more left-handers being born now than 100 years ago?
     
    #7 Godiva, Nov 25, 2007
  8. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Nov 24 2007, 09:30 PM) [snapback]543855[/snapback]</div>
    G.W.B. is a creationist. Yep. Idiots. Every last blinking one of them. It is not possible to believe that stuff if you have a functioning brain.
     
    #8 daniel, Nov 25, 2007
  9. patrickindallas

    patrickindallas Shire rat

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    676
    36
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Hey Fate,

    I found your missing link. :lol:

    The vid's are on youtube too.

    Enjoy.

    [attachmentid=12614]
     

    Attached Files:

    • 08.jpg
      08.jpg
      File size:
      38.9 KB
      Views:
      326
    #9 patrickindallas, Nov 25, 2007
  10. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Nov 25 2007, 12:30 AM) [snapback]543855[/snapback]</div>

    I'll say it. Yes, creationists are idiots. (Not meant to insult any actual idiots out there.)
     
    #10 Godiva, Nov 25, 2007
  11. rudiger

    rudiger Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    696
    45
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2013 Prius
    Model:
    Two
    <blockquote>[Religion] is the opium of the people.

    - Karl Marx</blockquote>
     
    #11 rudiger, Nov 25, 2007
  12. Alric

    Alric New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    1,526
    87
    0
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    #12 Alric, Nov 25, 2007
  13. richard schumacher

    richard schumacher shortbus driver

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    7,663
    1,038
    0
    Location:
    United States
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Nov 25 2007, 01:30 AM) [snapback]543855[/snapback]</div>
    Yes: either idiots or willfully ignorant, if we can include under "idiots" those whose emotions overpower their intellect.
     
    #13 richard schumacher, Nov 25, 2007
  14. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rudiger @ Nov 25 2007, 09:20 AM) [snapback]543957[/snapback]</div>
    Karl Marx believed that religion was a very good thing. He hated organized churches as instruments by which the rich oppress the poor. But the above is one more example of how by truncating a quote, and taking it out of context, you can make the person quoted seem to have said the opposite of what he actually said:

    Context:

    In Marx's time, opium was not generally understood to be a bad thing. It was an emotional and physical pain-killer. The full reality of its destructive qualities was not understood until later.

    The full quote:

    "Religion is the opiate of the masses: The heart of a heartless world."

    In my opinion, Marx must have been on opium when he called religion "the heart of a heartless world," but the fact remains that Karl Marx was NOT opposed to religion. He was only opposed to churches that exploit and oppress people and teach them to accept their oppression rather than struggle against it.

    But of course, anti-communists have been repeating the truncated quote for so long that most Americans believe that's what Marx said.
     
    #14 daniel, Nov 25, 2007
  15. burritos

    burritos Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    4,946
    252
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Nov 25 2007, 08:25 PM) [snapback]544043[/snapback]</div>
    Nonetheless, it is the opiate of the masses, and opium is illegal in the U.S.
     
    #15 burritos, Nov 25, 2007
  16. lefat1

    lefat1 Fat Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    1,476
    47
    0
    Location:
    Sunny S. Florida
    Vehicle:
    2008 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Nov 25 2007, 12:46 PM) [snapback]543965[/snapback]</div>
    were you saving it for your seven hundred seventy seventh post or was that just co-incidence, wonder what i'll put in as my 666 post



    btw, does anyone know about bill maher's anti religion movie and when its coming out?
     
    #16 lefat1, Nov 25, 2007
  17. rudiger

    rudiger Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    696
    45
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2013 Prius
    Model:
    Two
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Nov 25 2007, 08:25 PM) [snapback]544043[/snapback]</div>
    I believe the actual quote is:

    <blockquote>"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."</blockquote>But the rest of the post is accurate.
     
    #17 rudiger, Nov 25, 2007
  18. traydragen

    traydragen New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    31
    0
    0
    Location:
    Columbia, SC
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Nov 25 2007, 12:17 PM) [snapback]543938[/snapback]</div>
    I'll disagree, I don't believe all evolutionists are idiots, I actually know some brilliant creationists and evolutionists alike. I think to put a blanket statement like that on creationists ( as I am) is quite naive. Because I can't begin to explain my belief of how God breathed life into me (which I think part of creation is that we don't understand it) and created the ocean, sun, etc. etc. does not mean I'm an idiot, I guess that's where faith comes in (I'm waiting on a witty reply to this). Also, the more and more I read about science and how insane and mind-blowing it is (I'm in grad. school for guidance counseling so I don't even pretend to understand this stuff) the more I realize there has to be someone behind this madness; of course I seem like the minority in this group : )

    PS: We all bought or have interest in the same car on this forum so I can't be a total idiot can I??
     
    #18 traydragen, Nov 25, 2007
  19. Alric

    Alric New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    1,526
    87
    0
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(traydragen @ Nov 25 2007, 11:16 PM) [snapback]544111[/snapback]</div>
    This is exactly where most creationists feed their delusion. Because "I" can't understand... What you have to understand is that other people can, and so could you if you take the time to learn without religious preconceptions.

    It seems you are using faith as an excuse to not understand and disagree. The witty remark is on the cartoon I posted previously in this thread.
     
    #19 Alric, Nov 25, 2007
  20. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,080
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(traydragen @ Nov 25 2007, 08:16 PM) [snapback]544111[/snapback]</div>
    I think it's great you put yourself out there like this. :)

    I think that once you study the various sucjects of science you are indeed overwhelmed with it's "mind-blowing" complexity. SOme stop there and assume that there is no way possible that this all happened by "chance" and that there had to be some creator behind the curtain. If you continue in these studies you will find that while life is indeed complex, it is also very simple. It is built on simple structures of chemistry that are repeated over and over. You Explore other disciplines and you find that each discipline backs the other, chemistry and biology or physics and astronomy, or geology. While there are tons of areas where scientists will disagree, these tend areas tend to be specific in nature and are not usually based on fundamental scientific laws or most theories. e.g. The Permian Extinction was caused by volcanic activity or by a huge methane clathrate release. The scientists are not arguing whether the event happened or not, they all agree the data states it did, yet they do argue over the likely cause of the event.

    The main point here is this: Creationists have yet to come up with a scientific piece of evidence that they claim to be true that can debunk existing scientific theory. They come up with many half-cooked ideas and present them as hard evidence but they do not hold up to peer-review. They contain just enough science jargon to confuse 80% of the population (our nation is lacking in scientific knowledge) and that is all they need to win over the masses who still want to believe in the bibles story. The most famous example of this type of work is perpetuated by Kent Hovind (before he was arrested). I've watched his videos at the request of a girlfriend and I could not believe the amount of scienctific errors expressed in the series. The level of arrogance was amazing in itself but the icing on the cake was that he was presenting himself as a Doctorate holder in the Sciences when he graduated from a non-accredited college of theology. Even his thesis is under intense debate.

    Can you understand why the scientific community is so fed up with the claims presented by ID and creationists? I know this will come across as arrogant but it comes across like nothing more than a 9yr old child making up a string of excuses why his opinion on String Theory is correct. He is insistant he is right and will grasp at anything he can to prove his point regardless of it's validity. Unlike the 9yr old boy, I have no problem accapeting being wrong but you must show me the data to prove your point and it must be peer-reviewed and hold up to scrutiny. :)
     
    #20 F8L, Nov 25, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 6