A few 'scientific' polls to compare OOT to the rest of the US

[bwana devil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


ID and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Most Christians believe in both.

[/ QUOTE ]

really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Christians believe in micro-evolution, they dont believe that Man came from monkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you come up with this [censored]? or am I being leveled?

[/ QUOTE ]

i thought this was true?

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


ID and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Most Christians believe in both.

[/ QUOTE ]

really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Christians believe in micro-evolution, they dont believe that Man came from monkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you come up with this [censored]? or am I being leveled?

[/ QUOTE ]

i thought this was true?

[/ QUOTE ]


I was never taught this, and Ive been through about 13 years of catholic school. What was taught to us is that the bible was written by man, and not to be taken literally. There are FUNDAMENTALIST christians that believe it, but thats a fairly small group of people. We I got out of my schooling is that, we evolved, teh science as far as that goes is undeniable, but at some point where science fails to explain where everything came from, there is something higher that created it (ie the begining of the universe or whatever), and thats where faith comes in.


edit: I am under the imression that most christians do not actually believe that we were made from adam and eve

[bwana devil]

[ QUOTE ]
I was never taught this, and Ive been through about 13 years of catholic school. What was taught to us is that the bible was written by man, and not to be taken literally. There are FUNDAMENTALIST christians that believe it, but thats a fairly small group of people. We I got out of my schooling is that, we evolved, teh science as far as that goes is undeniable, but at some point where science fails to explain where everything came from, there is something higher that created it (ie the begining of the universe or whatever), and thats where faith comes in.

[/ QUOTE ]

gotcha i think. so you would say that most christians believe in micro and macro evolution? (i dont have a lot of exposure to the christian faith)

edit: i see your edit so i think this is now self explanatory

[BPA234]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The information you seek can be found in any public library or by using any decent search engine. You can easily access the information (3-5 minutes), if you really want to learn the facts. I don't know if it will matter, you seem to have your mind made-up.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a valid debate tactic.

"You go look it up, you idiot" doesn't do any good. Why don't you take 3 minutes to find some verifiable information and prove him wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't call him an idiot. I simply responded that the "proof" he wanted was easily accessible. But, there is really no point, because he believes what he wants to believe. Nothing I could offer him would change that. I only pointed out the obvious, so that others reading the posting wouldn't think his argument had merit, when it has already long since been discredited.

Finally, I only debate with people who are open-minded, searching for the truth, and willing to accept the truth based on the value of the preponderance of the evidence; even at the expense of their existing beliefs.

Religious and political zealots do not fit my criteria.

[Max Raker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It's been discovered that the universe is constantly expanding, which strongly supports the big bang theory. There's no such evidence for god.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are very few self-respecting scientists who still believe in the Big Bang.

There are also 11 instances in the bible where God is said to have "stretched" out the heavens. Some claim it to be a coincidence, but in my opinion that is a pretty significant statement. When I think of something being "stretched" I certainly get a visual sense of expansion.


The big question for your big bang theory would simply be: What the hell exploded?

The problem is, if you answer that question, you open yourself up to SO many new questions that all lead back to a creator of some kind.

Then you have the law of angular momentum which would have applied to that mythical spinning ball containing all the matter in the universe. Sadly for Big Bangers, that law is broken all over the place. Hell, even several of our neighboring planets aren't obeying that law. Entire galaxies are spinning backwards!


The Big Bang Theory is dead as an explanation for universal genesis.

You can find a VERY extensive article debunking the Big Bang theory here.

[/ QUOTE ]


Do you really think that scientists don't believe in the big bang? That is simply dead wrong. We think we have a pretty accurate description of the universe even a few micro seconds after the big bang, before that most likely requires physics which dosen't exist yet.

As for the "law of angular momentum" (i assume you mean conservation, otherwise I have no idea what you are talking about) this argument makes no sense to me. The big bang was not an explosion like a bomb, it is space time expanding. Even if something explodes, conservation of angular momentum requires things to rotate in oposite directions so the total will be zero. Also their is gravity acting on the planets and galaxies which can change the angular momentum of individual planets/galaxies.
If you ment something else let me know as this argument is so bad i can't really imagine its what you ment.


Nevermind, i read your other posts in this thread and it looks like you would make an argument that bad.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


ID and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Most Christians believe in both.

[/ QUOTE ]

really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Christians believe in micro-evolution, they dont believe that Man came from monkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you come up with this [censored]? or am I being leveled?

[/ QUOTE ]

i thought this was true?

[/ QUOTE ]


I was never taught this, and Ive been through about 13 years of catholic school. What was taught to us is that the bible was written by man, and not to be taken literally. There are FUNDAMENTALIST christians that believe it, but thats a fairly small group of people. We I got out of my schooling is that, we evolved, teh science as far as that goes is undeniable, but at some point where science fails to explain where everything came from, there is something higher that created it (ie the begining of the universe or whatever), and thats where faith comes in.


edit: I am under the imression that most christians do not actually believe that we were made from adam and eve

[/ QUOTE ]

This is interesting to me. I can't tell what's really being said here, and think that it's one of 2 options.

1. There are holes in the current understanding, and you should have faith that God did it.

2. There are holes in the current understanding, and to avoid making your brain explode just accept that it happened somehow and have faith that it's not some magic.

[The.Accountant]

Sorry to re-hijack this thread away from the nonsensical ID debate, but I wanted to see if anyone has heard this.

I read on another forum where a professional gambler estimated that ~95% of his colleagues were agnostic/atheist, so maybe this explains the results of this pole.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ID is the proposition that certain features of the universe and of living things can be better explained by an intelligent cause rather than natural processes such as natural selection.[1]

Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is the commonly accepted understanding of ID. I realize it is linguistically possible to reconcile the two, but it seems like quite a reach to say you accept evolution/natural selection and ID. I think religion/belief in god and evolution/natural selection are quite compatible, but ID is essentially (in any instance of it) an attempt to offer an account for a biological organ or process contrary to the currently held scientific view.

[/ QUOTE ]

That does not reconcile the two. The quoted definition is directly in opposition to the theory of evolution, and you most certainly cannot believe that that definition is correct AND the ToE is correct. Guids is very wrong here.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: And chemical evolution is also a bunch of hooey unless they can come up with some better theories.

You simply cannot fuse past Iron, so where did the rest of the periodic table come from?


That's the problem with evolutionists today. All of their "examples" are merely micro evolution, but they try to pass off cosmic/chemical/macro evolution in the text books by citing the fact that a vast majority of scientists belive in evolution. But in most cases, those scientists are referring to micro evolution.


Just admit that Macro Evolution is no less a religion than creationism, and I'm fine with it all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please stop by SMP sometime and we will disabuse you of all these silly notions and misconceptions you seem to have. Better yet would be visiting TalkOrigins, since they are generally smarter and more experienced than the SMPers, but I'm confident we are up to the task.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was referring to the Theory of Evolution, not ID.

There's no way in hell the public schools would get away with teaching ID in any capacity. The ACLU would have protesters on their doorstep within the hour and half a dozen lawsuits threatened shortly thereafter.

[/ QUOTE ]

My mistake.

And as for your comments earlier in the thread about evolution being the explanation of the origin of life being taught in public schools as fact, I didn't really experience that. The general scientific ideas of evolution were taught, but I don't recall reading a text that authoritatively stated that evolution is single-handedly responsible for the origin of life.

Furthermore, concepts of ID and creationism were taught in my schools, and rightfully so in my opinion. There are a significant number of physicists and astronomers who believe in design principles for the universe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will guarantee you that you never had a textbook that claimed evolution was responsible for the origin of life, nor even a textbook that so much as insinuated it. This is standard creationist tactics, however.