-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ignorance about evolution no longer a valid excuse for creationists
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
McBell
Unbound
You make claims of having an above average IQ yet post after post reveals otherwise.
Looking for an academy award?
Or perhaps you do know just how lacking in substance your posts are and use this distraction hoping no one else will notice?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
If such retort had value...you would be a rich man.
But I see you a pathetic bore.
Your poor technique is showing again.
McBell
Unbound
Whats the matter, you run out of mystic bull **** to spew?
Now you are reduced to sloppy insults and petty name calling?
Poor poor thief.
I pity you more with each one of your posts.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Save your pity for yourself....no one else will.
(saying you are pathetic doesn't mean I care)
Oh yeah...back to topic.
Knowledge of evolution is no excuse to ignore God.
God did it.
Last edited:
That is true as far as it goes.
Of course, it doesn't even touch on the matter if people should even have a concept of God. Which is fine, since those are two essentialy unrelated subject matters.
McBell
Unbound
*yawn*
Still waiting for this self proclaimed above average IQ to start revealing itself...
:biglaugh:
Hard to ignore something that does not exist.
Who is it you are trying to convince?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
If you're bored with my postings...why follow me around the forum?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
What do you mean by "finally"? It is you who keep trying to confuse the matters.
That might well be an important fact if we ever come to discuss something related to it.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
And here you assume your argumentative technique controls the 'facts'.
Now you're just fooling yourself.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Like how you think people can choose what reality is?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Nay....reality is the same for all.
It was made by God....His choice..... not yours or mine.
But don't confuse that with perspective.
You have some control over perspective.
You can...by your spirit...declare what you experience...as you see fit.
But even so....if you stand opposite an event your perspective will be different from mine.
And your linear existence will yield a different person.
Astrid000
Member
I think it is a shame that evolutionists still believe that only the ignorant do not accept evolution at all. You all should know there are many credentialed scientists that do not accept evolution. Although only a minority, these are sufficient to refute the claim that all creationists are ignorant of the claims made by evolutionists.
I actually propose the opposite claim...that perhaps some evolutionists may show some level of ignorance in believing all creationists are ignorant and uneducated.
Although I am agnostic and undecided as to whether or not TOE is factual, I can clearly see that there are very well educated and credentialed scientists that do not accept TOE and they cannot be classified as ignorant. So ignorance was never an excuse for non acceptance of TOE by some creationists. Rather they do not believe what is claimed as support for TOE is actually support at all.
I also say that there are evolutionists that just accept evolution without being educated or well credentialed or able to speak to the evidence at all.
Stereotyping a large group of people, creationists, is in rather bad taste and unscientific, don't you think?
I actually propose the opposite claim...that perhaps some evolutionists may show some level of ignorance in believing all creationists are ignorant and uneducated.
Although I am agnostic and undecided as to whether or not TOE is factual, I can clearly see that there are very well educated and credentialed scientists that do not accept TOE and they cannot be classified as ignorant. So ignorance was never an excuse for non acceptance of TOE by some creationists. Rather they do not believe what is claimed as support for TOE is actually support at all.
I also say that there are evolutionists that just accept evolution without being educated or well credentialed or able to speak to the evidence at all.
Stereotyping a large group of people, creationists, is in rather bad taste and unscientific, don't you think?
Skwim
Veteran Member
I think it is a shame that evolutionists still believe that only the ignorant do not accept evolution at all. You all should know there are many credentialed scientists that do not accept evolution. Although only a minority, these are sufficient to refute the claim that all creationists are ignorant of the claims made by evolutionists.
I actually propose the opposite claim...that perhaps some evolutionists may show some level of ignorance in believing all creationists are ignorant and uneducated.
Although I am agnostic and undecided as to whether or not TOE is factual, I can clearly see that there are very well educated and credentialed scientists that do not accept TOE and they cannot be classified as ignorant. So ignorance was never an excuse for non acceptance of TOE by some creationists. Rather they do not believe what is claimed as support for TOE is actually support at all.
I also say that there are evolutionists that just accept evolution without being educated or well credentialed or able to speak to the evidence at all.
Stereotyping a large group of people, creationists, is in rather bad taste and unscientific, don't you think?
"I think it is a shame that evolutionists still believe that only the ignorant do not accept evolution at all. You all should know there are many credentialed scientists that do not accept evolution."
This is an awfully wide blanket you've thrown here--an unqualified "evolutionists"---. It would be nice if you would furnish examples of some of those who share this belief. Then there's the point that considering how solidly evolution is rooted in science, any scientist worthy of the name who examined the evidence would not dismiss it in favor of religious creationism. So it's no stretch to conclude that those scientists who do dismiss it favor of creationism are almost certainly ignorant of the evidence. As for those scientists and even nonscientists who have looked at the evidence and understand it but reject it, they wouldn't be ignorant but simply foolish. Those nonscientists who haven't looked at the evidence are, by default, ignorant of it, and therefore deserving of the label "ignorant."
So, the appellation "ignorant" isn't at all ill chosen, although as pointed out, in some cases "foolish" would be more fitting.
"Stereotyping a large group of people, creationists, is in rather bad taste and unscientific, don't you think?
You mean like an unqualified "evolutionists" ?
Last edited:
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Although I am agnostic and undecided as to whether or not TOE is factual, I can clearly see that there are very well educated and credentialed scientists that do not accept TOE and they cannot be classified as ignorant.
Really?
Can you name, lets say, ten (10) qualified biologists who deny evolutionary biology?
And if so, can you provide listings of their peer reviewed publications outlining why they would deny biological evolution, and their alternative proposal to the diversity of life?
Astrid000
Member
"I think it is a shame that evolutionists still believe that only the ignorant do not accept evolution at all. You all should know there are many credentialed scientists that do not accept evolution."This is an awfully wide blanket you've thrown here--an unqualified "evolutionists"---. It would be nice if you would furnish examples of some of those who share this belief. Then there's the point that considering how solidly evolution is rooted in science, any scientist worthy of the name who examined the evidence would not dismiss it in favor of religious creationism. So it it's no stretch to conclude that those scientists who do dismiss it favor of creationism are almost certainly ignorant of the evidence. As for those scientists and even nonscientists who have looked at the evidence and understand it but reject it, they wouldn't be ignorant but simply foolish. Those nonscientists who haven't looked at the evidence are, by default, ignorant of it, and therefore deserving of the label "ignorant."
So, the appellation "ignorant" isn't at all ill chosen, although as pointed out, in some cases "foolish" would be more fitting.
"Stereotyping a large group of people, creationists, is in rather bad taste and unscientific, don't you think?You mean like an unqualified "evolutionists" ?
Seriously Squim, are you suggesting that there are absolutely no credentialed researchers at all that discredit evolution?
I am unable to post URL's. I will oblige when I have made sufficient posts. Perhaps Darkness or a creationist can help out. Sarfarti is one.
Of the many scientists named in this list you may be able to discredit some. You may also be able to challenge their background. However surely you are not trying to suggest that there is not one scientist in an evolutionary related field, that discredits evolution. Sarfarti is one and there appears to be many.
My arguments have nothing to do with it. It is the scientific method which reveals the facts.
outhouse
Atheistically
You forget the fact there is no debate in the scientific community about evolution.
ONLY religious fundys that create a controversy where there is none
Evolution has been the prevailing scientific wisdom worldwide for more than 100 years. Every major university from MIT, Yale and Stanford to Oxford and the University of Tokyo teaches it as the sole rational explanation for the development of life on Earth