Creation Or Evolution? Vote!

[Haz 35]

This is very simple, the THEORY OF EVOLUTION is only a theory because of all the "scientists" out there that don't realize it's factuality and are more concerned with proving their belief. Only a moron (like Paul Brown on the Science Committee, U.S. , and all the other stupid, stubborn creationists out there) can't understand Evolution is a proven scientific fact, take a look at early homosapiens and the REST of the overwhelming amount of proof out there that shows Evolution is sound. Seriously, all this bickering is stopping ACTUAL scientific progress to occur, everyone argues about creationism and Evolution (when they truly know Evolution is very much proved), that no one is able to make ANY scientific progress. The same with Gay Marriage in the US, protesters against gay marriage are just stubborn and foolish being too idiotic to even understand ANYTHING, just like fundamentalist creationists. THERE, that's all that needs to be said. EVOLUTION IS PROVEN, stop whining about it, and go do something that's actually productive!

 

Paul Brown's Stupid, yet very pathetic speech: 

 

TheAmazingAtheist's video on stupid Gay Marriage protesters (as stupid as stupid Evolution protesters): 

You realize that simply insulting people because of their beliefs makes you no more than what you accuse them to be yourself.

The Theory of Evolution cannot be proven to be something that has happened.

Religious beliefs that indicate towards some form of divinity cannot be proven to be true.

 

I hope you come to realize how much a complete plonker you are simply for suggesting that either-which-way can be proven.

 

Im just saying its a side effect... if we are just smart animals, then we should be able to get away with anything, because, hey! there is no punishment after death! Before evolution Christianity was the norm. People had morals. After evolution, people could get away with anything...

Why do people have no morals now?

Where do you get the idea that 200 years ago people had far better morality? Are you pulling this from your deepest and darkest crevice?

You realize that the amount of bloodshed in the last 200 years is far-out exceeded by the bloodshed before. A larger span of time, I admit - but the atrocities that have occurred in the name of religion have been far worse than any that aren't in the name of religion. How can you even remotely suggest religion is a source of morality? The human mind itself and its belief mechanism (excl. religion for a moment) is enough to construct a solid moral compass.

I am not religious in any sense of the word. I am genetically predisposed to tendencies akin to that of a sociopath, and not to mention the urges to harm people emotionally, mentally and physically. Does that mean I lack morality? Quite the opposite. Despite these predispositions my morality which is not derivative from my belief of religion has allowed me to maintain a steady life with no killing involved.

If anything, religion encourages selfishness. You become religious because you are selfish, because you want something out of it for yourself, not because it is in the benefit of man.

For example:

"Oh, death... I should behave so I can get to heaven!"

[Uniquename111 52]

Why do people have no morals now?

Where do you get the idea that 200 years ago people had far better morality? Are you pulling this from your deepest and darkest crevice?

You realize that the amount of bloodshed in the last 200 years is far-out exceeded by the bloodshed before. A larger span of time, I admit - but the atrocities that have occurred in the name of religion have been far worse than any that aren't in the name of religion. How can you even remotely suggest religion is a source of morality? The human mind itself and its belief mechanism (excl. religion for a moment) is enough to construct a solid moral compass.

I am not religious in any sense of the word. I am genetically predisposed to tendencies akin to that of a sociopath, and not to mention the urges to harm people emotionally, mentally and physically. Does that mean I lack morality? Quite the opposite. Despite these predispositions my morality which is not derivative from my belief of religion has allowed me to maintain a steady life with no killing involved.

If anything, religion encourages selfishness. You become religious because you are selfish, because you want something out of it for yourself, not because it is in the benefit of man.

For example:

"Oh, death... I should behave so I can get to heaven!"

Agreed, how the Holocaust was an unnecessary bloodshed to Jews, and those who shared different beliefs and were thought to be not equal. 

 

hammer01, on 16 May 2013 - 10:34, said:

Im just saying its a side effect... if we are just smart animals, then we should be able to get away with anything, because, hey! there is no punishment after death! Before evolution Christianity was the norm. People had morals. After evolution, people could get away with anything...

 

Seriously? No offense, seriously, but Christianity and Christians have orchestrated the most bloodshed and Conflict over their religion. The crusaders slaughtered. During the Spanish Inquisition, Christian "babysitters" were told to convert Jewish babies they cared for to Christianity. They did, then took those babies from their parents, which in my opinion is NOT OKAY.

[The Best Basileus 97]

Right, Lago, I know what your problem is. You have already decide that what I have to say is ridiculous, so you're naturally inclined to construe it as such. If you'd just keep an open mind and consider that what I'm saying could have merit, and judge it based on only what I say, and no pre-conceived notions of what you think Creationism is, then I'm sure we'll have a much more educated discussion. Starting off then.

 

"Wrong. Rewind the universe by current theories and you get to an infinitely dense point. That is not nothing."

 

The infinitely dense point gave birth to the universe. By definition, the universe is everything (we now know, however, that the universe is not an explanation for itself, so I use the term "everything" loosely). This infinitely dense point really is what the universe is made of, according to your theory, and if it is the universe, it has to obey the same laws that govern it's future self. Your only two options at this point are that the universe is eternal (due to the point being eternal), or that the point had an origin at some point in time. The first is false based on scientific logic (again I recall the laws of thermodynamics), and the second, yet again, implies an extra-universal cause. My saying that what humanity has for millennia called "God" was what I would call this Creative Force doesn't mean that I discount the other explanations, I merely said that those explanations really aren't any different from God.

 

"Wrong, or rather, backwards. Pale skin adapted in order to absorb sufficient vitamin D from sunlight in poorly sunlit areas of the world. Humans originiated from the warm climates and thus the first humans were dark-skinned.. White people have the recessive traits."

 

This is actually based on the Evolutionary hypothesis, which goes against the rules of debate. You cannot base your argument on your conclusion, or else it is invalid. Your point is irrelevant anyway, as the micro-evolution of pale skin still illustrates my point. The fact that you, later in your post, implied that my mind is stuck in a pattern of racism, so I could not escape saying blacks had recessive traits is just mean, flaming, and actually, pretty disappointing (y'know, 'cause I like you a lot Lago <3). It is entirely unnecessary and unrelated to this discussion. You have no right telling me what I believe.

 

"Irrelevant."

 

Actually, it's not. Arguing on morality (or lack thereof) is perfectly fine. I don't mean to say that YOU have no morals, if that's what you're offended about; I was merely stating the effects that Evolutionary thought has on humanity. It really questions whether Evolution SHOULD be believed in, whether it is true or not. It, therefore, is totally relevant to the discussion.

 

"The idea of human eugenics was far more widespread than Nazi Germany. It pervaded the world until the horror of the Holocaust mostly eradicated all public tolerance of it."

 

That's a true statement. It doesn't refute my arguments at all.

 

"You'll have to elaborate there. Communism fell while capitalism endured because communism relies on human morality (something communist leaders always fail to do) while capitalism relies on humans acting in their own interests, which is, sadly, far more reliable."

 

Communism, as a system, puts the State at the forefront in the name of the collective. In Communist countries throughout the world religions were persecuted heavily because they promoted an authority that took precedence to the collective, and most importantly, the State. Communists hated religion for this, and they tried to promote atheism in its place. That is how I can say that Communism as an ideology denies God. The obvious superiority of capitalism has nothing to do with my point.

 

"The death toll in religious wars is huge. Religion thus, by the same logic, denies God."

 

If you read my above post carefully, then you will have noticed that death toll isn't what determines what denies God. I merely mention that in denying God, the Communists were provided with an excuse to commit the worst mass-extermination (dalek) in history.

 

"Guns kill people. Thus, guns do not exist."

 

My point in this section was not to disprove Evolution, but rather to question whether it should be believed, despite what the evidence says (although the evidence does support Creation). By the way, your analogy is terribly flawed. Send me a link to the gun debate thread, and I'll blow that statement out of the water.

 

"You're a panda made of hydrogen. I am being artfully descriptive and thus my statement contains no scientific inaccuracies."

 

That would be fine if it were artful and had any bearing on the culture of our day. Pandas made of hydrogen are nothing like the Biblical dragons and such that it mentions to describe evil. In fact, I don't think pandas made of hydrogen have ever been culturally significant...

 

"It's not an argument, it's a bunch of barely connected, poorly thought out American hysterics chained together with some clever English. You neither back up your points nor even connect them. If I condense your post, this is what we get:"

 

Before I go through your list, I'd just like to make a few comments. I could post a very applicable meme on America hating, but I will refrain. Just because my way of thinking is born out of an American culture doesn't necessarily mean my logic is wrong, any more than it would if I were British, Chinese, African, or Indonesian. Second, thanks for the compliment on my writing skills. Finally, I'd very much like to disagree. My argument was divided into three very clear sections: one on why Evolution is impossible, one on the cultural effects of belief in Evolution, and one on why the Bible and Christianity is perfectly accurate and how impossible that is for so many writers over such a long time writing so many books to not contradict each other, and to never make a mistake. The argument has clear structure and a clear transition between each part. I hope you'll see that if you re-read it.

 

Now for your monster list :)

 

Very first thing you post is wrong. What I said made perfect sense, and here is how: If there is an infinite amount of something, no number can be assigned to it. Thus fluctuations in the amount of something are really impossible, considering how no difference can be taken other than 0. What I said, then, was that energy must be finite, despite how large that finiteness  may be, based on the first law of thermodynamics.

 

Next up is the idea that the universe originated from nothing. Now, if you'll consider the actual definition of the universe, not what you THINK the universe is, but what it actually is, you will realize that basically, it's everything in existence (like I said earlier, this is only bounded by the fact that the universe cannot scientifically explain itself.). If we look at a point in time when the universe didn't exist (and we scientists know there was one), you would have to conclude that the "everything" of the universe didn't exist. This is why I say the universe came from "nothing." Nothing doesn't mean literally nothing, it just means the lack of everything, understand?

 

Next. You say I assume as fact that God is the best explanation for the origin of the universe. This is far from correct, as I merely said that semantically, all the explanations are, in plain human language that's been around since we could communicate, the very same thing as the word "God." Again, don't think of what you THINK God is, I only ask that you consider the facts that have been presented. A multiverse could be the function of a sentient God. What we might think of as aliens would be us misunderstanding God. That is why I say that we may safely call this extra-universal creative force "God."

 

Next you state that God must be sentient to have "influenced" the universe. A machine doesn't do something unless turned on. In the same way, God couldn't have done anything unless he meant to. His infinite power would be the machine which he would have had to chosen to "turn on" by using.

 

"Evidence cited is "evolution of dark skin". (This is backwards. The assumption that the white man came first is born of racism, not research)" This was entirely inappropriate. You have no right to accuse me of this. As I said before, it makes no difference either way.

 

I only brought up the black and white moths because it is a popular narrative among proponents of Evolution. I was merely clarifying the meaning of the event. It also helps draw a clear distinction between micro-evolution (adaptation, or natural selection within a species) and macro-evolution (the basic principle operative in Darwinian Evolution).

 

The next thing you say is what is really confusing to me. Everything I just wrote showed that Evolution cannot coexist with the rest of science! It, therefore, has been scientifically disproven by me. If you have a problem with the fact that a random dude just disproved evolution using basic debating principles and logic, then I suppose you'll have to deal with that, because that's just how weak this hypothesis (evolution) is.

 

That was the end of the first part!

 

Next up: Nazis. The Holocaust was permitted because of the acceptance of Darwinism by the people of Germany. If they hadn't had a basic agreement with Darwinism, Hitler would never have pulled his genocide off. For more detailed explanation, see above post.

 

Communists are atheists. It's true. They think that religion is but a tool of the proletariat to keep the working classes in line. Look to the above post for more clarification, if you don't mind. Don't want to retype it all XP

 

The amount of people murdered in the twentieth century because of the results of Darwinism are around 350 million people. There wasn't a single century ever before where as many people were killed because of one belief. That's a massive amount of people! If you add up all the genocides done in the past (bar the muslim ones, because those add some ridiculous numbers. Not even the Teutonic Order can compare to that :() you won't even come close to 350 million people.

 

Next off! Morality. The widespread belief that people are animals and are made to keep the species alive does encourage reproduction quite a bit, but not reproduction so much as sex. That takes a lot of money and death to maintain, and it encourages the spread of sexually transmitted and regular diseases. Darwinism influences those that make our media, and they that make our media portray women as mere objects much of the time. I think it's pretty clear that Evolution does have a quite large negative influence not only on sexual morality, but on morality over all.

 

That random statement was connected to the rest, because of the fact that we are only animals, and have the right to fulfill our urges. Pornography literally changes the way a man's mind works. It causes crime. It's just the truth.

 

That was the end of the second part!

 

Finishing off with the third part, I thought it necessary and sensible to explain which God humanity has experienced seems to have the most evidence behind it. I made a clear argument about the awesomeness of the Bible, and how impossible it is in that it has scientific statements that are far ahead of its time, an absolute lack of historical falsehood, and a ridiculous identical-ness with very old manuscripts (dead sea scrolls and such). If anybody wishes to bring up specific verses with inconsistencies, I'll willingly explain it to them.

 

End of the third part, and the entire argument.

During the argument I argued three things:

1. Is evolution scientifically possible

2. Should evolution be believed (mentioning the moral side of things)

3. If evolution is wrong, what is right

 

I think those are three points that I argued rather concisely. Like I said at the top, keep an open mind, and try to not assume I'm a vapid American vomiting up filth! :)

[Haz 35]

Are you an elaborate and intricate troll?

I was very much almost rused, kudos to you. Your part on morality especially tickled my funny bones.

 

This thread should be locked already, it's a joke.

[cj_scout 305]

Agreed, how the Holocaust was an unnecessary bloodshed to Jews, and those who shared different beliefs and were thought to be not equal. 

 

hammer01, on 16 May 2013 - 10:34, said:

Im just saying its a side effect... if we are just smart animals, then we should be able to get away with anything, because, hey! there is no punishment after death! Before evolution Christianity was the norm. People had morals. After evolution, people could get away with anything...

 

Seriously? No offense, seriously, but Christianity and Christians have orchestrated the most bloodshed and Conflict over their religion. The crusaders slaughtered. During the Spanish Inquisition, Christian "babysitters" were told to convert Jewish babies they cared for to Christianity. They did, then took those babies from their parents, which in my opinion is NOT OKAY.

Alright I'm back, because that was the most biased, idiotic thing I've ever read in my life. The crusaders were EXTREMISTS. Christians of the modern day despise the Crusaders. . .take time to actually hear what WE think about something, before you blame it on all of us. Oh, and why focus on Christianity? Why just us? If you're going to give a speech, make it a good one, not a pathetic overhaul of what millions have said already. You say things about the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the babysitters like its ALL CHRISTIANS who do that! Have you ever spoken to a Muslim? Many of them HATE the Taliban and Al Quaeda. Not every muslim is a terrorist, so why say that every Christian is a crusader and slanderer? Why don't you say the GOOD THINGS people have done? YES, some Christians have done bad things, and shame on them! But you say we did horrible things. . .the Holocaust maybe? Hitler using Darwinism as support? Now, I'm not saying every Darwinist is a jew murderer. But by YOUR logic, they are. You are basing your arguments off of STEREOTYPES and SLANDER! You say no offense but insult us almost directly, calling us stupid, pathetic, simple minded.  THINK before you SPEAK. . .and I admit, some have given valid evidence, and I ADMIT, some Christians deny science stupidly. I believe some of the old beliefs are proven wrong, and I believe God means us to find these things in the end. Think before you speak next time, base it off of facts, not stereotypes, supposedly "pathetic" speeches, and your own personal opinion. And don't try to change my opinion. You won't. That's all I have to say. Have a good day, sir.

[Uniquename111 52]

I'm not saying every Darwinist is a jew murderer. But by YOUR logic, they are.

 

Uh... I'm Jewish...

[cj_scout 305]

Uh... I'm Jewish...

Quite my point. You believe in Darwinism, yet you're Jewish. One mass jew murderer believed in Darwinism too. Crusades. A group of Christians slaughtered non Christians, and you claim all Christians cause death and suffering. So all Darwinists are Jew killers by that logic. Riddle me this, if not the group of Darwinists acting badly and accounting for ALL, then what of the Crusaders murdering and supposedly accounting for ALL Christians?

[hammer01 29]

Uh... I'm Jewish...

What he is saying is your logic is faulty...

[Uniquename111 52]

Quite my point. You believe in Darwinism, yet you're Jewish. One mass jew murderer believed in Darwinism too. Crusades. A group of Christians slaughtered non Christians, and you claim all Christians cause death and suffering. So all Darwinists are Jew killers by that logic. Riddle me this, if not the group of Darwinists acting badly and accounting for ALL, then what of the Crusaders murdering and supposedly accounting for ALL Christians?

 

The only reason I responded with that, is hammer01 was saying how when Christianity WAS the norm, there was no conflict. NOT AT ALL true, as I said. I didn't mean Christians act like that today, I mean some do, but now the idea is looked down upon, fortunately. 

[hammer01 29]

The only reason I responded with that, is hammer01 was saying how when Christianity WAS the norm, there was no conflict. NOT AT ALL true, as I said. I didn't mean Christians act like that today, I mean some do, but now the idea is looked down upon, fortunately. 

I didnt say there was no conflict... my point was that back then, people didnt have an excuse for the way they acted. Now, with evolution, they do...

[Uniquename111 52]

Check this out, my thoughts exactly on Evolution vs. Creationism (GO AmazingAthiest!): 

 

(Watch 2:54 on for about 3 minutes or so)

[hammer01 29]

Check this out, my thoughts exactly on Evolution vs. Creationism (GO AmazingAthiest!): 

 

(Watch 2:54 on for about 3 minutes or so)

...absolutely none of this proves creation or evolution and is literally just insulting Christians.

 

EDIT: Question: do you see any Christians calling people names because of what they believe?

[The Fact Core 511]

Facts:

 

- This Conversation will blow up our brain in just 10 minutes, because we think too much.

- There is no proof, that anything is right.

- It is not explainable, why we are here. Deal with it.

[hammer01 29]

I think someone requested the link to the gun control topic... well here it is... but its kinda dead...

[Lord of the Nublets 92]

Check this out, my thoughts exactly on Evolution vs. Creationism (GO AmazingAthiest!): 

 

(Watch 2:54 on for about 3 minutes or so)

 

....

 

This honestly doesn't prove anything... It's just insulting Christians....