Evolution & Creationism are both Faith & Supernatural based

[sooda]

And people wonder why I am concerned about the future of science and education in this country.

I know.. We have fallen behind and are still losing ground. You know this is shameful???


"The institute, which spent months in court fighting the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board for the right to dispense master's degrees in creationism, has been trying to raise funds to build the 30,900-square foot museum for years. There's a concept proposal floating around that dates back to 2011.

In the September issue of its magazine Acts & Facts, its chief executive officer, Henry Morris III, says he finally got enough money to move ahead with the project.

"For several years, I’ve been hesitant to move forward with our hope to build a museum and planetarium in the Dallas/Fort Worth area -- in spite of the desperate need -- because the funding seemed out of reach," he wrote. "No longer. Just this week, out of the resources of the Lord’s people (unknown to us) came a two-million-dollar gift that provides the 'go for it' signal to begin looking for the rest of the millions needed.

"Many of you who read this article have given faithfully of your 'talents' and 'minas' to share with ICR as we try to 'enlarge' the 'tent.' ICR’s operational needs will only increase as the reality of the future museum and planetarium comes into existence. The funds to develop and produce the DVD episodes, construct the buildings, stage the exhibits, and continue to research must come from extra gifts."

Messages have been left for Morris.

Beck Group, responsible for everything from the Crescent to the Duke University football stadium redo, designed the new campus.

"It'll be a really nice facility," says Blacker. "It'll be an interesting building with a little park."

 

[sooda]

Institute for Creation Research - Wikipedia

I am so sorry this is happening.. Its like hurtling toward the Dark Ages.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I threw this together a little while ago as a personal exercise and for fun. If you have time, look it over. I would be interested in valid criticism so that I can improve it. I do not expect any creationist to give it any thought or learn something from it.

An excellent synopsis, and I think you make your point eloquently. There isn't time, during baker's dozen years of K12 education, or the 4 years to a Bachelor's that follow, to adequately cover all the various chains of thought that lead to any well-accepted theory, not to follow each and every chain of dissent, leading essentially nowhere, that follow.

Personally, I can't answer @Patriottechsan 's posts because, well, frankly, because he's not using any recognizable science at all. And unfortunately, the only response to unreasoned nonsense is not reason, to which he can't listen, but to say, "nonsense."

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You dismiss scientific theories with more and better science - not with religious shenannigans.

Yessir!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Regarding proof, you've probably already been told that proof of a scientific theory is neither possible nor necessary. Empirical adequacy, or the ability of an idea to be useful for predicting the outcomes of various events and processes, is sufficient.

The theory of evolution is a system of ideas that unifies mountains of data from a multitude of sources, accurately makes predictions about what can and cannot be found in nature, provides a rational mechanism for evolution consistent with the known actions of nature, accounts for both the commonality of all life as well as biodiversity, and has had practical applications that have improved the human condition in areas like medicine and agriculture.

Those are the credentials of correct ideas. Creationism can do none of that, and has been sterile to date, offering no ideas that can be used in any legitimate way - the credentials of an incorrect idea.

We cannot prove that the theory is correct if it is, but as I indicated, we don't need to. We're going to keep the theory and continue using it because it works. Why on earth would we throw out an idea that works so well for one that doesn't work at all? Because certain people with religious beliefs object to it for contradicting their faith-based teaching?

I had to highlight these four paragraphs from an excellent post, because they are so bloody good!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

More Than 1,000 Scientists Dissent From Darwinism

Wow! More than a thousand! Well, now I ought to be convinced!

Except, wait, how many scientists are there working in the world (not forgetting that some of the names on that list are now retired, or dead)? Well, when I started checking, I basically quit after learning that there are more than 70,000 in Australia alone, and 40,000 in Canada who work for the government...meaning that there are many, many more who don't. These numbers turn your "more than 1,000" into a piddling, trivial aberration!

And even more to the point, ask how many of those 1,000 actually work in any of the relevant sciences? Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking are (and were) brilliant scientists, but when I needed spine surgery, trust me, I wouldn't let either of them near me with anything sharper than my wit.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

And people wonder why I am concerned about the future of science and education in this country.

And so you should be, because without it, it won't be long before America no longer leads the free world, but becomes a quaint backwater.

 

[Patriottechsan]

.So as a complete Naturalist you have to either believe there was something that was 1) Eternally Existent then you have to explain how that came to be and or what it was and what role did it play in our origins. But if atheist then you don't have that option. So you are left to explain how from nothing came all that exits from nothing by using only naturalism which doesn't allow for Faith or supernatural.as atheist. Faith involves eternal existences and supernatural and then start explaining origins from whichever choice you make. So that is like my original question. Do you believe in eternal existence. That is key in which way we have to start for talking about origins.
If believe in eternal existence then that uses faith and supernatural but as theist it explains the obvious need for ID which is needed to explain all the complexity needed to explain Functional Design and DNA and RNA etc.

If Atheist then you have to explain where or how things that exist came into existence which will absolutely require and inordinate amount of faith and supernatural when you don't believe in eternal existence or a possible ID. So you have to explain existence of everything that exist being able to create itself by itself from itself without using faith or supernatural when we know nothing can be created from nothing and if it did that takes faith and supernatural because it can't be done in any type science experiment to prove it can happen.

Regardless you have to choose which faith or supernatural you will start with.

But make it easy on yourself for now. Just deal with my scientist dissent list and what they say. It isn't me it is a great group of scientist with great credentials and doing as I explained risking careers due to gestapo tactics of evolutionary community which doesn't look good for honest academic research and teaching.

You guys amaze me at how you dodge everything to avoid what you can't handle.

 

[Woberts]

It isn't me it is a great group of scientist with great credentials and doing as I explained risking careers due to gestapo tactics of evolutionary community which doesn't look good for honest academic research and teaching.

Gestapo tactics? I know all the religious folk are dull, but this takes it to a new level.

 

[Patriottechsan]

You still refuse to acknowledge the obvious. To get to mankind by " Evolution" which isn't proven since its still a theory & numerous theories within it. So a fact can't have theories within & around it & be a Fact. A fact is proven truth & nowhere is it theory. Our origins which starts in textbooks from Big Bang forward is theory not fact. You have to start at the beginning. You can't ignore the beginning & start anywhere you want to. Then click claim the Theory of evolution & Big Bang etc is Fact when it says Theory. Theories aren't fact. Never will be. Pythagorean theorem is a fact. It's not Pythagorean theory. I could go on but not necessary.

One doesn't say theory of Photosynthesis because it's proven fact with each step in order & described. The problem evolution has is you have to describe how photosynthesis came to evolve & exist by random trial & error by only naturalism creating itself by itself without that complex Functional Process ( design ) occurring w/o any Intelligence behind it.

Same with every science process. Same with RNA/DNA & how first chemicals arose from inanimate objects. How those chemicals somehow formed life. Evolution uses theories not fact because you can't produce it & see it happen in a lab like photosynthesis etc. You still can't explain the steps etc it took for photosynthesis to occur. It's important because so much plant life & other lives that depend on plant life depend on it. Those life forms couldn't wait millions of yrs for photosynthesis to occur by random trial & error before they could come into existence.

Then how did plants turn into animals & stages. I could keep going.

There are so many holes evolution has. That's why the quotes are so accurate. You have to explain it by Just so stories w/o actual science demonstration & filter out all the problems.

Why evolution uses Gestapo tactics to keep people in line by threatening careers, grants & refuse to publish any paper that exposes the fraud & huge cover up.
Then evolution uses their tactics as propaganda as reasons to promote & discredit good science as Dr Singham admitted in his article.

Read the explanation of why they started that list in the first place. Then their credentials. When I first became aware of the list it was only around 200. It's now 1000.

See the more sophisticated science becomes the more complexity of the function they find & just can't ignore that you MUST HAVE ID.

Everything in our life with functional design proves it takes ID.

I'll give you a true to life example from Isaac Newton. He had a friend that was a very committed atheist. Newton could never convince him otherwise. So one day he goes to a master woodland. He has him make to a scale the model of our solar system & planets. When it's finished he picks it up & sets it in the middle of his house. Newton's friend comes over & notices the fine piece of art work displaying our solar system. So he asks Newton who made it. To which Newton replied, "No one!, It just appeared just like that out of nowhere just like that!"
His friend keeps asking & Newton keeps giving him the same answer. Finally the friend starts getting really mad. So Newton explains, " I had so & so make it to illustrate something to you. You keep trying to tell me our solar system etc was created out of nothing by itself". "Yet you won't believe the same type thing on just this model of our solar system & you want me to believe what you do about our solar system. Now do you get my point?"

Here is a quote from Darwin's original book you need to grasp. "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, succesive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."

Yet we have so many complex systems like muscular, nervous, cardiovascular etc that are essential for life & won't work unless complete. If incomplete natural selection kills it. So must start over & keep going w/o knowing the end game & what was wrong & needs fixing like engineer with ID does.

So if you refuse to acknowledge the obvious like Newton's friend did for awhile.

Go ahead. I can't help you see what you refuse to see. If you can't acknowledge that having to use Gestapo tactics to keep the fraud going doesn't make you at least question what are so afraid of about truth in science that they have to use those tactics. If you can't see how all of that shows the direct link to quotes I've given.

Then sadly, you've decided to remain intellectually uninformed & stay dishonest & have no interest in learning the whole truth & why are they so scared of that truth forcing them to act that way to suppress it.

I find that incredibly sad from people that claim but really aren't interested in total informed truth. College educated (brainwashed per Dr Singham)To claim you have truth but after being exposed to some of this side doesn't make you question the truth of what you've been taught & not have a desire to actually learn more. Then I'm really sorry.

Why I do research differently. So I will get both sides. Regardless of your attacks.

BTW I dealt with long ago majority of belief doesn't determine truth.

Majority used to believe earth was flat
Majority used to believe everything orbited the earth
Majority used to believe the simple cell was simple glob of protoplasm.

Actually a cell itself works like a organized city with a city manager

I could go on but not necessary as point is made. So don't waste time with that again.

I know you'll claim victory for no reason. Like fake news applauding themselves for doing a good job when it's all fake.

Man do I hate this rainy damp weather & what it does to my pain level.

Take care.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I know.. We have fallen behind and are still losing ground. You know this is shameful???


"The institute, which spent months in court fighting the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board for the right to dispense master's degrees in creationism, has been trying to raise funds to build the 30,900-square foot museum for years. There's a concept proposal floating around that dates back to 2011.

In the September issue of its magazine Acts & Facts, its chief executive officer, Henry Morris III, says he finally got enough money to move ahead with the project.

"For several years, I’ve been hesitant to move forward with our hope to build a museum and planetarium in the Dallas/Fort Worth area -- in spite of the desperate need -- because the funding seemed out of reach," he wrote. "No longer. Just this week, out of the resources of the Lord’s people (unknown to us) came a two-million-dollar gift that provides the 'go for it' signal to begin looking for the rest of the millions needed.

"Many of you who read this article have given faithfully of your 'talents' and 'minas' to share with ICR as we try to 'enlarge' the 'tent.' ICR’s operational needs will only increase as the reality of the future museum and planetarium comes into existence. The funds to develop and produce the DVD episodes, construct the buildings, stage the exhibits, and continue to research must come from extra gifts."

Messages have been left for Morris.

Beck Group, responsible for everything from the Crescent to the Duke University football stadium redo, designed the new campus.

"It'll be a really nice facility," says Blacker. "It'll be an interesting building with a little park."

I often wonder how these people think they are going to achieve anything with their made up versions of science and denial of evidence that can be seen with their own eyes.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Gestapo tactics? I know all the religious folk are dull, but this takes it to a new level.

He is looking to win the Pigeon Chess Championship. He has all the classic moves down pat. Denial of science. Straw man versions of science. Huge amounts of projection. A PhD from Dunning Kruger University. Probably two PhD's. Assertions galore. Misinterpretation of science. He has it all going on. I suspect that we are starting to see the flight back to the roost to praise his victory.

 

[sooda]

I often wonder how these people think they are going to achieve anything with their made up versions of science and denial of evidence that can be seen with their own eyes.

Its not what I call Christian to force ignorance on your children. They can teach futurism and Armageddon all day, but science is a threat.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

An excellent synopsis, and I think you make your point eloquently. There isn't time, during baker's dozen years of K12 education, or the 4 years to a Bachelor's that follow, to adequately cover all the various chains of thought that lead to any well-accepted theory, not to follow each and every chain of dissent, leading essentially nowhere, that follow.

Personally, I can't answer @Patriottechsan 's posts because, well, frankly, because he's not using any recognizable science at all. And unfortunately, the only response to unreasoned nonsense is not reason, to which he can't listen, but to say, "nonsense."

Thank you. I think it is terrible to see a useful and intelligent contribution like Dr. Singham's essay, twisted and perverted for use in the denial of science.

I agree. I can find nothing valid in his meandering either.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Its not what I call Christian to force ignorance on your children. They can teach futurism and Armageddon all day, but science is a threat.

I have no problem or issue with what people choose to believe personally. It is a protected right here, to believe as you choose. I support that right as I think most reasonable people do. The problem is that some are not satisfied with that and want to turn their favorite brand of belief into everyone's brand. If they have to lie to themselves and everyone else, despite that being a prohibition of the very faith they claim, is not a barrier. When they start asserting their personal beliefs as facts and twisting actual facts, I think we have an obligation to prevent them by using logic, reason, evidence and science.

 

[sooda]

You still refuse to acknowledge the obvious. To get to mankind by " Evolution" which isn't proven since its still a theory & numerous theories within it. So a fact can't have theories within & around it & be a Fact. A fact is proven truth & nowhere is it theory. Our origins which starts in textbooks from Big Bang forward is theory not fact. You have to start at the beginning. You can't ignore the beginning & start anywhere you want to. Then click claim the Theory of evolution & Big Bang etc is Fact when it says Theory. Theories aren't fact. Never will be. Pythagorean theorem is a fact. It's not Pythagorean theory. I could go on but not necessary.

One doesn't say theory of Photosynthesis because it's proven fact with each step in order & described. The problem evolution has is you have to describe how photosynthesis came to evolve & exist by random trial & error by only naturalism creating itself by itself without that complex Functional Process ( design ) occurring w/o any Intelligence behind it.

Same with every science process. Same with RNA/DNA & how first chemicals arose from inanimate objects. How those chemicals somehow formed life. Evolution uses theories not fact because you can't produce it & see it happen in a lab like photosynthesis etc. You still can't explain the steps etc it took for photosynthesis to occur. It's important because so much plant life & other lives that depend on plant life depend on it. Those life forms couldn't wait millions of yrs for photosynthesis to occur by random trial & error before they could come into existence.

Then how did plants turn into animals & stages. I could keep going.

There are so many holes evolution has. That's why the quotes are so accurate. You have to explain it by Just so stories w/o actual science demonstration & filter out all the problems.

Why evolution uses Gestapo tactics to keep people in line by threatening careers, grants & refuse to publish any paper that exposes the fraud & huge cover up.
Then evolution uses their tactics as propaganda as reasons to promote & discredit good science as Dr Singham admitted in his article.

Read the explanation of why they started that list in the first place. Then their credentials. When I first became aware of the list it was only around 200. It's now 1000.

See the more sophisticated science becomes the more complexity of the function they find & just can't ignore that you MUST HAVE ID.

Everything in our life with functional design proves it takes ID.

I'll give you a true to life example from Isaac Newton. He had a friend that was a very committed atheist. Newton could never convince him otherwise. So one day he goes to a master woodland. He has him make to a scale the model of our solar system & planets. When it's finished he picks it up & sets it in the middle of his house. Newton's friend comes over & notices the fine piece of art work displaying our solar system. So he asks Newton who made it. To which Newton replied, "No one!, It just appeared just like that out of nowhere just like that!"
His friend keeps asking & Newton keeps giving him the same answer. Finally the friend starts getting really mad. So Newton explains, " I had so & so make it to illustrate something to you. You keep trying to tell me our solar system etc was created out of nothing by itself". "Yet you won't believe the same type thing on just this model of our solar system & you want me to believe what you do about our solar system. Now do you get my point?"

Here is a quote from Darwin's original book you need to grasp. "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, succesive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."

Yet we have so many complex systems like muscular, nervous, cardiovascular etc that are essential for life & won't work unless complete. If incomplete natural selection kills it. So must start over & keep going w/o knowing the end game & what was wrong & needs fixing like engineer with ID does.

So if you refuse to acknowledge the obvious like Newton's friend did for awhile.

Go ahead. I can't help you see what you refuse to see. If you can't acknowledge that having to use Gestapo tactics to keep the fraud going doesn't make you at least question what are so afraid of about truth in science that they have to use those tactics. If you can't see how all of that shows the direct link to quotes I've given.

Then sadly, you've decided to remain intellectually uninformed & stay dishonest & have no interest in learning the whole truth & why are they so scared of that truth forcing them to act that way to suppress it.

I find that incredibly sad from people that claim but really aren't interested in total informed truth. College educated (brainwashed per Dr Singham)To claim you have truth but after being exposed to some of this side doesn't make you question the truth of what you've been taught & not have a desire to actually learn more. Then I'm really sorry.

Why I do research differently. So I will get both sides. Regardless of your attacks.

BTW I dealt with long ago majority of belief doesn't determine truth.

Majority used to believe earth was flat
Majority used to believe everything orbited the earth
Majority used to believe the simple cell was simple glob of protoplasm.

Actually a cell itself works like a organized city with a city manager

I could go on but not necessary as point is made. So don't waste time with that again.

I know you'll claim victory for no reason. Like fake news applauding themselves for doing a good job when it's all fake.

Man do I hate this rainy damp weather & what it does to my pain level.

Take care.

What does this mean?

"Then how did plants turn into animals & stages. I could keep going.
"

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Wow! More than a thousand! Well, now I ought to be convinced!

Except, wait, how many scientists are there working in the world (not forgetting that some of the names on that list are now retired, or dead)? Well, when I started checking, I basically quit after learning that there are more than 70,000 in Australia alone, and 40,000 in Canada who work for the government...meaning that there are many, many more who don't. These numbers turn your "more than 1,000" into a piddling, trivial aberration!

And even more to the point, ask how many of those 1,000 actually work in any of the relevant sciences? Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking are (and were) brilliant scientists, but when I needed spine surgery, trust me, I wouldn't let either of them near me with anything sharper than my wit.

I know that estimates put the number of scientists in the United States at around 7 million, so a 1000 is not remotely significant. According to what I have read, some on the list had questionable credentials, or were from questionable organizations and several were not actually on board with the agenda of the Discovery Institute. What that statement says is that the signers were skeptical. That pretty much describes the way a scientist is supposed to be, but being skeptical is not evidence that what is in doubt is not a fact. The list is old and useless. It only gets waved around these days by the most lost and confused people that have not got a clue.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What does this mean?

"Then how did plants turn into animals & stages. I could keep going.
"

Who knows. It is meaningless. He makes wild, incomprehensible statements and pretends they mean something. Even if he were discussing something I agreed with, I could not have a discussion with him due to the bulk of his posting being comprised of nonsense.

 

[Shad]

Everything does.

For example, to get out of bed in the morning, I need to assume that reality is actually real.

So, is there an axiom in evolution theory that you feel is unwarranted or invalid?

I was just clarifying that science needs axioms as much as religions needs it's own axioms.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I was just clarifying that science needs axioms as much as religions needs it's own axioms.

ok.

Doesn't seem to be relevant to the point I was making though. Being that science doesn't require "faith"