Intelligent design

[tinyTURTLE]

dude, that's what college is for.
public school is basic knowledge.
some math, a little history, some basic econ.,
basic life sciences, some basic shop skills.
perhaps a language.
you want to change things in the curriculum?
join the friggin PTA. Make your ass heard.

 

[cream8]

Bunghole ...

There is NO overwhelming fossil evidence. If you have the evidence, show it.

To others ...

Is this the Ben Stein movie? If so, Ben Stein makes the Evolutionists look like a bunch of freaking, brain washed fools.

Good movie, by the way.

Vi

that movie was total garbage. actually i was offended by it. what a waste. bn stein is a total douche. awful ewww

 

[medicineman]

As far as evolution of man from primordial goo, to some form of primate and then to man, when did man evolve into a spiritual being? One with the power of choice. The evolutionists are all a twitter over this 6 million year old monkey they've discovered that they are sure is the missing link. Since the intelligence in intelligent design didn't arrive here untill millions of years later, Maybe those evolutionists are just the monkeys they claim to be. I believe in evolution of species, or adaption to environment, But please, I'm no fucking monkey. Man has a spirit, a certain awareness that no animal but man possesses. If you aint got one, well too bad for you, you animal.

 

[hom36rown]

Well the answer to that is pretty simple, there is not such a thing as a spirit. It seems to me at one point you believed in evolution, and then I asked you this very same question, at what point did we gain souls. So med, you do not believe that any of the hominid fossils we have found are related to us at all, they are just some random species that came to be out of nowehere and then just went extinct? If not, did homo habilis have a soul, what about homo erectus, or homo georgicus?

 

[CrackerJax]

Besides, evolution never said we come from a monkey. Evolution indicates that we both have the same common ancestor. Heck, even if we derived from apes, big deal....so what.... just how insecure are you?

 

[PadawanBater]

　

I'm not debating which curriculum is best. I'm stating it's wrong to use government force to insist a person participate and pay for a system that their belief system rejects.

I don't believe 'the people of Montana" march in lockstep as to whether calculus is relevant. If I had to guess I'd say most probably think calculus is relevant and should be free to study it at a school of their choice...those that don't should be free to pick their ass if that's what they want to do. YOU should not fund their ass picking, THEY should not fund your calculus. If somebody can pick their ass while doing calculus...and they pay for it, cool. Who knows, maybe they can accomplish a dual major or become dental floss tycoons ?

I agree with many people that have posted here that science over superstition makes the most sense, it's what I want for MY kids. Do you agree that using force to make people believe the same things as you and I do is acceptable? I don't.

I guess it comes down to this, if I disagree with a person, I can "know" they are wrong, but if they are not harming me what gives me the right to force them to do anything or pay for my idea of which is the best system for them?

Public schools are force funded at the point of a gun, they do not offer an opt
out, in my belief system that is wrong. People should pay for what they use, do what makes sense to them and harm nobody. Public schools do not follow that philosophy, nor do they enlighten children from whence or how the funding is derived. That is dishonest.

I would completely agree with this in any other context if it wasn't science. Science isn't based on what we think is best, so it doesn't matter what we want taught to our kids, if what we want disagrees with science, it shouldn't be taught to our kids by way of publicly funded education. I think it's the governments responsibility to provide it's citizens with top quality public education, the only way you can do that is make sure the right stuff is being taught in school. ID, creationism, voodoo, go for it, teach it at home where I'm not paying for it, but if the majority of science agrees with something based on the evidence then I don't have a problem funding that.

As far as evolution of man from primordial goo, to some form of primate and then to man, when did man evolve into a spiritual being? One with the power of choice. The evolutionists are all a twitter over this 6 million year old monkey they've discovered that they are sure is the missing link. Since the intelligence in intelligent design didn't arrive here untill millions of years later, Maybe those evolutionists are just the monkeys they claim to be. I believe in evolution of species, or adaption to environment, But please, I'm no fucking monkey. Man has a spirit, a certain awareness that no animal but man possesses. If you aint got one, well too bad for you, you animal.

Define what you mean by "spiritual being". Personally, I think the 'spirit' or 'soul' or anything like that is nonsense. Something humans came up with to explain how we're supposed to be different than the rest of the animals. Can you think of anything else that would seperate us from another animal species? Language...no, plenty of animals have languages... conscious thought? No, there's atleast 5 different species of animals that pass the mirror test, proving conscious thought and vision of oneself is there... So what is it exactly that seperates human beings from the rest of the animal kingdom? Remember, you have to show proof or evidence to support whatever you say, so saying something like the soul wont work as there is no evidence to show any kind of spirit or soul.

There is no such thing as ''the missing link'' in evolution. Creationists bring that up all the time... this is the problem, I'll try to illustrate it best I can with text; .....A........B.........C..........D.........E.......... OK, imagine all these letters represent different species, we found them all and they're lying in museums somewhere... Seems linear right, a.b.c.d.e... OK... but what happens if we find something new that looks a little bit like C, but has a lot of similar features and shares a lot of the same characteristics with D? The chart then becomes something like .......A.......B........C....(c).....D........E...... - Check it out, do you see what happened? In the first example there were 4 'gaps' between species, now, in this new example, with the discovery of the new transitional species there are 5 'gaps'.... This 'gap' problem people always seem to bring up, in their mind gets stronger with the discovery of a new transitional species.... does that make sense??

Intelligence is completely subjective. Are you going to tell me a dog is not intelligent? Are you going to tell me that a plant that secretes oil to trap insects isn't intelligence? "Intelligence" can be seen in almost anything.

You and I are not monkeys. We share a common anscestor with the APE. APE and MONKEY are not the same thing. We did not come from monkeys, we descended from APE's. You are infact a more evolved ape.
　
　
　
　

 

[slipperyP]

dude, that's what college is for.
public school is basic knowledge.
some math, a little history, some basic econ.,
basic life sciences, some basic shop skills.
perhaps a language.
you want to change things in the curriculum?
join the friggin PTA. Make your ass heard.

Public schools are for brain washing purposes. Both ID and Evolution need to be taught in my opinion evenly, and let children decide for themselves. It starts with the first books we read telling dinosaurs are millions and billions of years old. And them moving to we came from apes.

I believe if anything the fossil record only shows diversity of life shinking not growing. Animals that have become extinct...there not comming back. They aren't going to re-evolve.

This new discovery is just a new monkey that has gone extinct. There was a giant flood that burried the precious fossile record. Because of decay and enzymes soft tissue animals don't fossilize that well.

The dating systems we have created use circular logic in there science. How do we know if a rock is 65 million years old? Because they find a marker spicies such as a trilobite. So you ask how do we know how old the trilobite is? well the answer is 65 million years old because...everyone KNOWS when animal X(fill in the blank) went extince 65 million years ago.

And before anyone gets into the mysteries of carbon dating...Take into acount that the carbon levels in the atomospere arent at equalibrium yet.

Anyway....All the fossilized leamer they found proves is ounce there were leamers alive that looked like this.

plus...monkeys have 4 hands correct? That is funny, i have feet? I wonder how that could happen.

Also...Evolutionist want you to believe things evolve so slow that you cant see it, then at the same exact time want you to believe that in the past it went so fast that a chicken layed an egg and a lizard ran out. Not just one but breeding pairs.

It's called some bullshit like puncuated equilibria...To make a veiw of evolutuion it take a whole new spectrum of thinking...first you have to account for millions and billions of years, solar evolution(big bang...lol another untesteable unprovable prediciton from our evolutionalry guru's....How about every element in the world comming from one element...

If you can bring yourself to accept all the unprovable science to even get to the evolution of people. Then yeah you can look at a monkey and say it looks like a person minus the extra hands and all. From a certian point of view and earthworm and a snake seem to have a common ansestor also....

The bottom line...Neither ID or Evolution cant be tested and verified in a lab...thus shouldn't be funded in and taught as fact.

Strong points of Intelligent Design
1. Chicken and the Egg which is first senarios throught nature.

2. Symbiotic relationships with other spiecies of animals. Ones where one needs the other for survival.

3. The fact that there is a DNA code to be found...points to the fact everything is coded. And only inteligence creates codes.
This post is enough...but really, this will never end. Big corporate intrests have jumped on the evolutionary band wagon. People with god given RIGHTS will die to defend them. Not what the new world order of corporate overlords have in mind. They want slavery like they had in the past slaves owning slaves.

I guarentee there not teaching there kids that evolutuion is real...There teaching there kids..Heres how you control the masses kids.

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

Man created God to subject other man to his whims.
Man used God to justify his Freedom
Man destroyed God to justify subjecting other men to his whims

Pretty simple cycle...

Me personally, I don't see how it matters if there is a God or if there isn't a God.

Human Beings, regardless of their origins, are not the same as any other animal, and thus it is completely ludicrous to insist that we must grant animals the same protections that we would grant human beings.

Makes me wonder if at some point some idiotic group like PETA isn't going to demand that all Apes born after such and such year are sent through some kind of Ape School so they can vote in elections. Of course, I can just see the morons at PETA doing something stupid like that, too.

 

[natrone23]

Thats about the dumbest post I have ever seen in my life

 

[natrone23]

Man created God to subject other man to his whims.
Man used God to justify his Freedom
Man destroyed God to justify subjecting other men to his whims

Pretty simple cycle...

Me personally, I don't see how it matters if there is a God or if there isn't a God.

Human Beings, regardless of their origins, are not the same as any other animal, and thus it is completely ludicrous to insist that we must grant animals the same protections that we would grant human beings.

Makes me wonder if at some point some idiotic group like PETA isn't going to demand that all Apes born after such and such year are sent through some kind of Ape School so they can vote in elections. Of course, I can just see the morons at PETA doing something stupid like that, too.

I wasn't talking about your post tbt....................but you wonder about some weird things....."ape school"

 

[medicineman]

If you don't know what spirit or soul is, you probably don't got one, you animal you. I wonder, what do you athiests have to look forward to after death. Fade to black. Do you think in a universe so large there can't be a God or creator? Do you actually believe this is all random shit. I find it impossible to believe in random theory, The goo got hit with lightning and here we are, rediculous. If there is nothing to look forward to after death, what's to stop you from being the worst assholes on the planet, Ohhh, now I get it, you are.

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

I wasn't talking about your post tbt....................but you wonder about some weird things....."ape school"

What, can't you see PETA doing that, they wanted to call fish "SeaKittens"...

 

[sgr42o]

sgr42o - I think you may have misunderstood my post. I am not advocating a public funding of the all the various curriculums, religious schools, garden gnomeology etc.
In an earlier post I said I am opposed to "forced funding" of public schools. The present controversy over what will be taught illustrates my point, ...one person wants this form of education, another wants that.

YOU don't want to pay for something that conflicts with your belief, neither do I, I simply extend that principle to others even those I don't agree with. It's not "obvious" to them that evolution is correct, so why should they be forced to pay for it? Yet that is what public schools do, force you to pay for something you may not want. I'm suggesting that maybe there shouldn't BE public schools or at least those that wish not to participate (garden gnomologists?) have the freedom to put their kids and their money elsewhere. To insist people pay for something that they don't want to participate in or have religious objections to is what? Freedom? I think not.

So you suggest we go back in time by closing public schools? Before we had public schools, the first one was opened in New York in 1848, only the rich could afford an education. This is why the literacy rates back then were so low. Back then kids couldn't even do simple arithmetic.

No offense but I don't think you understand the ramifications of what you're suggesting to happen. Without public funding you would have to pay to go to school which would limit education to a very select few. We realized this back in 1848 and started opening public schools because of it. We didn't abolish private schools however; we simply made it so anyone could get an education; rich and poor. Public schools teach information that's peer reviewed and has become accepted as based on fact, especially in regards to science and math. You still do have the option to put your kids into private religious schools but you'll have to pay for it.

If you don't want to support public schooling I'm afraid you're just going to have to live with it and pay the tax. The state isn't the one forcing you to believe in something directly contradicting reality; your doing so out of your own free will. Therefore, you're going to have to pay a tax on this freedom. Think of it this way, wouldn't Jesus want every kid, poor and rich alike, to have the ability to have an education and succeed in life even if it means teaching some things he may disagree with? I'd like to think so but I guess I'm an evil atheist.

I must admit as an atheist I really couldn't care less about what people believe. However, if you start trying to force this crap on our children expect to have your beliefs questioned and torn apart. Realistically though, we're all atheists. I just so happen to believe in one god less than you.

 

[mindphuk]

Thats about the dumbest post I have ever seen in my life

+1

Rehashing of stupid creationist arguments against evolution will not work slipperyp.
Learn some science then come back here but don't bring us bullshit Hovindisms about radiometric dating is circular or that a species gives birth to a brand new one in a single generation (a chicken lays an egg and lizards come out? ) At least learn what the hypothesis of punctated equilibrium actually says rather than create a strawman to attack.

PadawanBater posted a link just for people like you.

You should also watch some by a few other folks, here's some links -
Thunderf00t, AndromedasWake, EyesOpen11, akg41470,
shanedk, ExtantDodo

After you have watched those educational videos, come back here and debate.

 

[Rob Roy]

So you suggest we go back in time by closing public schools? Before we had public schools, the first one was opened in New York in 1848, only the rich could afford an education. This is why the literacy rates back then were so low. Back then kids couldn't even do simple arithmetic.

No offense but I don't think you understand the ramifications of what you're suggesting to happen. Without public funding you would have to pay to go to school which would limit education to a very select few. We realized this back in 1848 and started opening public schools because of it. We didn't abolish private schools however; we simply made it so anyone could get an education; rich and poor. Public schools teach information that's peer reviewed and has become accepted as based on fact, especially in regards to science and math. You still do have the option to put your kids into private religious schools but you'll have to pay for it.

If you don't want to support public schooling I'm afraid you're just going to have to live with it and pay the tax. The state isn't the one forcing you to believe in something directly contradicting reality; your doing so out of your own free will. Therefore, you're going to have to pay a tax on this freedom. Think of it this way, wouldn't Jesus want every kid, poor and rich alike, to have the ability to have an education and succeed in life even if it means teaching some things he may disagree with? I'd like to think so but I guess I'm an evil atheist.

I must admit as an atheist I really couldn't care less about what people believe. However, if you start trying to force this crap on our children expect to have your beliefs questioned and torn apart. Realistically though, we're all atheists. I just so happen to believe in one god less than you.

I'm not suggesting public schools be closed, I'm stating requiring them to be funded at the point of a gun is immoral and is not consistent with the meaning of the word freedom. You state "If you don't want to support public schools I'm afraid you're just going to have to live with it and pay the tax." I ask what will happen if a person doesn't pay? Will they then see 'freedom" in action via a tax sale, and sheriffs with guns helping to steal their property ?
I'm not sure if the religious references in your post were directed to me but I'm fine if you're an atheist and the rest of it I can't make any sense of because I'm not advocating anyone be made to do anything. Your version of "freedom" apparently does.

 

[sgr42o]

I'm not suggesting public schools be closed, I'm stating requiring them to be funded at the point of a gun is immoral and is not consistent with the meaning of the word freedom. You state "If you don't want to support public schools I'm afraid you're just going to have to live with it and pay the tax." I ask what will happen if a person doesn't pay? Will they then see 'freedom" in action via a tax sale, and sheriffs with guns helping to steal their property ?
I'm not sure if the religious references in your post were directed to me but I'm fine if you're an atheist and the rest of it I can't make any sense of because I'm not advocating anyone be made to do anything. Your version of "freedom" apparently does.

Absolute freedom can't exist for a civilization to thrive. As such, you shouldn't have the freedom to decide which taxes you pay and which you won't simply because your religious beliefs go against it. If you did no one would pay taxes. Instead, our society gives you the freedom to object to what you feel to be unfair taxes, petition against them, and if you gain enough support, have such taxes abolished. You even have the right to sue over them and speak freely to the media about it.

If you choose not to pay taxes you'll have your wages garnished or worse. I honestly don't see anything wrong with that. Ironically, I'm actually for the abolishing of federal income tax. However, I won't stop paying it simply because I disagree. Instead, I'll continue to actively voice my opinion on it in hopes the majority will someday agree with me. I can even respect those who protest by not paying a specific tax because if it's the majority they will win. However, protesting in this way has an obvious risk and I can't respect them if they whine about getting arrested doing so; protesting in this way has its risks. The same should be said regarding funding of public schools; if you disagree with it actively write your politicians and attempt to get it abolished. If you want to take the risk simply stop paying it. (Although good luck gaining public support for it)

As for my personal opinion, I feel taxing people who disagree about funding public schooling because of religious reasons is a great thing. They still have the freedom to choose private schooling and yet they are helping less fortunate children to get an education. While they might not be getting the education you agree 100% with at least they are getting one. If anything, I find not paying for public schools to be immoral.

Lastly, it's hard to define something as moral or not. Morals are based strictly on cultural, religious, or ones environment. While you might see specific taxes as immoral others may not. As of right now public school funding is far from immoral in the majorities eye.

 

[Nocturn3]

The dating systems we have created use circular logic in there science. How do we know if a rock is 65 million years old? Because they find a marker spicies such as a trilobite. So you ask how do we know how old the trilobite is? well the answer is 65 million years old because...everyone KNOWS when animal X(fill in the blank) went extince 65 million years ago.

And before anyone gets into the mysteries of carbon dating...Take into acount that the carbon levels in the atomospere arent at equalibrium yet.

Your argument is flawed, as is your understanding of science. Carbon dating is not used to date anything older than 60,000 years, and is specific to organic samples. Other forms of radiometric dating are used for rocks, including rubidium-strontium, lead-lead, uranium-lead and many more. Several dating methods can be used independently to verify the accuracy of the results, and when combined with other supporting evidence and alternate dating methods, provide a highly accurate method of measuring the age of any given sample.

The only way the combined results could be inaccurate is if the rate of decay (half life) of each of these materials was not constant.

 

[slipperyP]

+1

Rehashing of stupid creationist arguments against evolution will not work slipperyp.
Learn some science then come back here but don't bring us bullshit Hovindisms about radiometric dating is circular or that a species gives birth to a brand new one in a single generation (a chicken lays an egg and lizards come out? ) At least learn what the hypothesis of punctated equilibrium actually says rather than create a strawman to attack.

PadawanBater posted a link just for people like you.

You should also watch some by a few other folks, here's some links -
Thunderf00t, AndromedasWake, EyesOpen11, akg41470,
shanedk, ExtantDodo

After you have watched those educational videos, come back here and debate.

I watched the vids...I appreciate the data...Im waiting to see one that dosen't make me feel dumber then before i watched it. For the record I think hovind is a douche bag. I do like walt brown.

ArronRa stated mostly personal attacks with very little science that had to do with ID or Creation of the earth or anything...just a rant poll after poll isn't science.
this is a good quote from him i did see
"all positve cliams be based on testable evidence" This is what he claims is science, this is not what i have seen from evolution, origin of life, or stellar evolution.

the other point he made that was good is "belief dosen't equal knowledge" This is the reason neither ID or Evolutuion shouldn't get into publicly funded education.

adaptation is testable...animals after their own kind. Turning from an ape to a person...that is what seams like magic.

If you listen close one of the video's says the universe at once was smaller then a proton. I know that isn't testable.

Here is a link to walt brown.
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

 

[Rob Roy]

sgr42o- It's hard to describe morality? Not for me...Mine begins with do not initiate violence. Respect others rights to live their way as long as they don't harm anyone else. Don't make a man pay for something he doesn't use or want. It's pretty simple actually. Tell me how does your morality differ from mine?

I'm having trouble understanding... you state people wouldn't pay taxes if they weren't forced to, then you say a majority wouldn't object to public school funding via taxation. Which is it? I think we know the reason they don't "object" is because of the fear of what will happen if they do. Fear of god, fear of government, same shit different day all meant to control eh?

You state, "Absolute freedom can't exist for a civilization to thrive." Does that mean you are okay with forced taxation at the point of a gun in your version of a "thriving civilization"? You seem enamored of "majority rule"? Does that mean an individual that harms nobody in society must submit to the whims of the majority? You would abolish individuals rights? That would be a rather authoritarian model of a thriving civilization wouldn't it?

Anyhow I'm afraid I've gotten of topic in this thread and apologize to all for that. I'll simply state that nobody whether individual or group (government) has the right to make another person do anything if they are not harming another. If that were universal morality the world would be a better place.

 

[PadawanBater]

What would you have to see in order to accept the theory of evolution as the origin of human beings and all other forms of life we see?

I'm confused as to why the ID crowd thinks it's impossible.