People do not Understand Science, yeah I'm talking to you Creationist so bring it!

[Beefbisquit]

...I see what you're saying, but how is it holding anything back if cern exists and functions. It's the 'apparent' leading edge of technology. It is an attempt at proving mass to complete the theory, correct? If not, science must accept a different reality - the one behind it. They are teaching toward this science in classrooms now, wouldn't you say? I mean, this is just my experience so far, this is what I've been able to make of it.

Cern is run by some of the fore-most experts in their fields. These are people who have already accepted that science is correct in most areas it delves into (with varying degrees of course) and have chosen to make it their life's work. Creationism is an affront on people who are still developing the faculties to make an honest, and accurate decision. No CERN physicist is suddenly going to say "Oh shit, everything I ever studied is wrong and the world is really 6000 years old etc, etc, etc, etc..."

To learn about many fields of science you have to take the appropriate courses in school, a lot of them you have to actively select to enrol in. Creationism is being taught at an exceedingly early age, and can severely impede a persons ability to make rational decisions based on available evidence.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Cern is run by some of the fore-most experts in their fields. These are people who have already accepted that science is correct in most areas it delves into (with varying degrees of course) and have chosen to make it their life's work. Creationism is an affront on people who are still developing the faculties to make an honest, and accurate decision. No CERN physicist is suddenly going to say "Oh shit, everything I ever studied is wrong and the world is really 6000 years old etc, etc, etc, etc..."

To learn about most science you have to take the courses in school, a lot of them you have to actively select to enrol in. Creationism is being taught at an exceedingly early age, and can severely impede a persons ability to make rational decisions based on available evidence.

...I wouldn't expect a cern physicist would say that. There are ages within the ages, as evidenced by the two calendars, or gears, of the maya calendar. Don't take this down the 'maya' road. It's not what I mean. Time is a whole other discussion

The point of my post was to say that the more we look into things, the more 'nothing' we see that ends up needing justification with potentialities. I'm cool with that. I'm just not going to think that it's 'all'.

I just thought of something funny. Some people say 'mother earth' and 'science' but don't look to understand that earth is a feminine or negative aspect, and thought is a positive or masculine aspect. One 'penetrates' the other. And maybe we could say that the earth (thanks Jim) has in fact been ravaged and plundered and ripped and bit. For what? Comfort we can see and feel?

"What have they done to the earth?
What have they done to our fair sister?
Ravaged and plundered and ripped her and bit her
Stuck her with knives in the side of the dawn
And tied her with fences and dragged her down"

...the world has been run by the brain for how long now? And, where are we headed? Anywhere different than in the dark ages? I don't think so. But man, stuff looks fckn awesome when it's getting blown to sht. That's the western mentality and it is more science based through television than is it faith based.

My .02 - Hope that wasn't too much of a rant

 

[Heisenberg]

wow, so you got some marxism in you, typical of atheists to think in a selfish manner. What is science? what is your understanding like that makes it better then mine or someone else's?

your frustrations are ill spent bro, get a life.

creationism in a class is not just about God, but about other cultures and how they practice and what they preach. If your mind is TOO small to understand and play like an adult, then that is all on your small brain. From what you are posting, it seems that you think your own understanding is supreme... As stated previously, get a life bro!

No one cares if creationism has it's own class, just keep it out of science class. Typical oly, always eager to play the victim while having not the faintest understanding of the issue.

LOL thats all i can say to the OP. Apparently he is going to edumucate us about how religion is not science. really, you don't say?

wow thank you soooooooo much for this life changing revelation, now take you bigotry elsewhere if you please.



honestly i was actually expecting more when click on the topic, i thought we were going to have a nice debate about the scientific method of making good choices in cannabis growing. Turns out its just another anti religious fanatic trying to start up a fight.

You thought a thread which explains in it's title that it pertains to creationists was about MJ growing and that's somehow the OP's fault?

 

[olylifter420]

No one cares if creationism has it's own class, just keep it out of science class. Typical oly, always eager to play the victim while having not the faintest understanding of the issue.

typical heis, trying to get back at me for calling you out on some stuff...

hey man, if thats how you are, all the power to you man...

good luck.............




You thought a thread which explains in it's title that it pertains to creationists was about MJ growing and that's somehow the OP's fault?

..................

 

[ThE sAtIvA hIgH]

hey oliver is back ..........................with his fountain of knowledge

 

[ClaytonBigsby]

Seriously?!?!?!?!? How needy are you to feel superior for even discussing this here? It is the same old arguments. Science vs creationists. Scientists believe they are the elite thinkers because creationists "don't have scientific proof" and expect someone HERE to provide some. REALLY?!?!?!?! HERE?!?!?!?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Why the fuck do you scientist wanna bes care what others think? You are not going to change their mind any more than they are going to change yours. You are not elite. Science has evolved and continually proven past science wrong when those "scientists" knew they were right and had nothing but contempt for anyone who opposed them because they had "science" on their side.

I am not a holy roller or believer in a god the way the bible claims. I also do not believe science knows everything.

I am sure you will come back and say that this is a philosophical discussion for the advancement of one idea over the other, but it is not. It's some jerkass twits who need to feel superior for whatever reason and use "science" as their weapon because they know creationists do not have solid evidence (in a scientific model) to argue from, thus making you superior in intellect. What IF you are wrong?

"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." Sir Isaac Newton

 

[heyYousGuys]

You religions people cause war, cause hate, cause divide.

Even without religion, there will be war. There will be war over money, territory, power, opinions, trade. Religion is just an iota of a fraction of why countries go to war. Don't get it twisted. There is a war for every subject. Religion is but one, not ALL.

 

[mindphuk]

Even without religion, there will be war. There will be war over money, territory, power, opinions, trade. Religion is just an iota of a fraction of why countries go to war. Don't get it twisted. There is a war for every subject. Religion is but one, not ALL.

As I said in another thread -- even without cancer there would other diseases. Should we stop trying to eliminate cancer just because malaria is killing people? That seems to be the essence of your argument. Not very convincing IMO.

 

[Zaehet Strife]

Religion = Disease

 

[olylifter420]

malaria would not have happened if evolution had not existed!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!///sarcasm

As I said in another thread -- even without cancer there would other diseases. Should we stop trying to eliminate cancer just because malaria is killing people? That seems to be the essence of your argument. Not very convincing IMO.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Religion = Disease

Religion = Union

Disease = Separation

 

[heyYousGuys]

As I said in another thread -- even without cancer there would other diseases. Should we stop trying to eliminate cancer just because malaria is killing people? That seems to be the essence of your argument. Not very convincing IMO.

You will never eradicate religion. See, it's people like you that persecute and have zero tolerance. It's people like you that support genocide. Because let's be honest, you want religion gone. And in order to do that you have to execute a few billion people. Are you saying you support worldwide genocide? The act of murder because you are annoyed with a large collective of the population?

Is it ok if were to murder you because I disagree with your non-belief? Is that alright?

I never even said I was religious or not......but from an objective point of view.......you are the weak one. You have no tolerance.

 

[Catchin22]

Because let's be honest, you want religion gone. And in order to do that you have to execute a few billion people.

You spelled Educate wrong.

 

[Brick Top]

if you turn back the clock, it appears that everything at one time was 'squished into a tiny point. things like rocks and atoms werent even formed yet. the particles that make up the atom had to be created from energy first, then coalesce together to form atoms, using the forces that also appeared.

Just for the sake of argument, let's say the above is true, 100% correct, spot on.

Where did the 'stuff' that was needed to start out that sequence all originally come from?

Could the existing conditions of the time created them from absolute nothingness, because they had to be created in some way at some time prior to all that then followed (going with the assumption that the above is accurate)?

That is unless sciences position about all the 'stuff' is basically the same as the Christian belief in God, that he has always existed and always will, that he is without beginning and without end.

If science's position is that the 'stuff' was just always there, along with the void to then fill with all the 'stuff' in it's new forms, then it is a leap of faith on the part of science. It is an accepted belief without any scientific evidence to support it, and that is not really different than believing in an all powerful entity that, in one manner or another regardless of what religious writing tell us, created everything.

To me, when someone attempts to explain evolution starting with the Big Bang and then moving until today it is rather like the cartoon below, other than the step where there needs to be a whole lot more clarity is the first, not the second or any others that follow.

​

 

[Heisenberg]

You will never eradicate religion. See, it's people like you that persecute and have zero tolerance. It's people like you that support genocide. Because let's be honest, you want religion gone. And in order to do that you have to execute a few billion people. Are you saying you support worldwide genocide? The act of murder because you are annoyed with a large collective of the population?

Is it ok if were to murder you because I disagree with your non-belief? Is that alright?

I never even said I was religious or not......but from an objective point of view.......you are the weak one. You have no tolerance.

Ever ordered Sea Monkeys from the back of a comic book? They are not monkeys at all, but brine shrimp, tiny creatures whose eggs survive long periods in a nearly-dry state.


I can only hope that you will join with me in my outrage. Brine shrimp eggs are ripped from their natural habitat and shipped to hatch far from family and friends. Many eggs do not survive the arduous trip. The lucky ones that survive do not live free, but are doomed to an unfulfilling aquarium life as the “property” of snot-nosed kids. It is not unlike the early slave trade in the U.S.


If you are tempted to click “Add Comment,” be forewarned. Should you challenge my likening the brine shrimp trade to the slave trade, or question whether brine shrimp are capable of feeling fulfilled or unfulfilled, or ask me to back up the claim that kids are snot-nosed … I have an ace up my sleeve. I shall call you a racist. Nay, even better, I shall accuse you of being pro-slavery.


It’s a nifty, sleight-of-mind trick that lets me get away with begging the question, setting up a straw man and launching an ad hominem attack, all while looking like I’m defending decency. Heck, I may even fool myself.


If you’d like to try my trick, here are the steps: (1) Make a claim and apply it to a worthy cause. (2) Should people challenge assumptions underlying the claim, accuse them of opposing the cause. (3). Call them names and encourage others to jump on your bandwagon Thus it will make short work of any opponents.


Of course, this doesn’t happen in the real world. Skeptics aren’t so petty as to indulge such tactics, wittingly or unwittingly, much less fall for them. Thank goodness for that. -Steve Cuno

 

[eye exaggerate]

You spelled Educate wrong.

...the word is still the same.

 

[Heisenberg]

Just for the sake of argument, let's say the above is true, 100% correct, spot on.

Where did the 'stuff' that was needed to start out that sequence all originally come from?

Could the existing conditions of the time created them from absolute nothingness, because they had to be created in some way at some time prior to all that then followed (going with the assumption that the above is accurate)?

That is unless sciences position about all the 'stuff' is basically the same as the Christian belief in God, that he has always existed and always will, that he is without beginning and without end.

If science's position is that the 'stuff' was just always there, along with the void to then fill with all the 'stuff' in it's new forms, then it is a leap of faith on the part of science. It is an accepted belief without any scientific evidence to support it, and that is not really different than believing in an all powerful entity that, in one manner or another regardless of what religious writing tell us, created everything.

To me, when someone attempts to explain evolution starting with the Big Bang and then moving until today it is rather like the cartoon below, other than the step where there needs to be a whole lot more clarity is the first, not the second or any others that follow.

​

There is nothing in evolution or the big bang theory that excludes god as an author. The theories are not concerned with such questions. They do not attempt to describe how life/universe began, just what happened after. Origins are still unknown, and unknown does not equal 'god did it' in science. It simply means we do not know.

 

[mindphuk]

You will never eradicate religion. See, it's people like you that persecute and have zero tolerance. It's people like you that support genocide. Because let's be honest, you want religion gone. And in order to do that you have to execute a few billion people. Are you saying you support worldwide genocide? The act of murder because you are annoyed with a large collective of the population?

Is it ok if were to murder you because I disagree with your non-belief? Is that alright?

I never even said I was religious or not......but from an objective point of view.......you are the weak one. You have no tolerance.

You're argument is a non-sequitur sir. Because I dislike the negative aspects of religion and think mankind would be better off without it, does not make me genocidal. Are you disagreeing with my contention that religion has been responsible for many human atrocities?

 

[mindphuk]

Just for the sake of argument, let's say the above is true, 100% correct, spot on.

Where did the 'stuff' that was needed to start out that sequence all originally come from?

Could the existing conditions of the time created them from absolute nothingness, because they had to be created in some way at some time prior to all that then followed (going with the assumption that the above is accurate)?

That is unless sciences position about all the 'stuff' is basically the same as the Christian belief in God, that he has always existed and always will, that he is without beginning and without end.

If science's position is that the 'stuff' was just always there, along with the void to then fill with all the 'stuff' in it's new forms, then it is a leap of faith on the part of science. It is an accepted belief without any scientific evidence to support it, and that is not really different than believing in an all powerful entity that, in one manner or another regardless of what religious writing tell us, created everything.

To me, when someone attempts to explain evolution starting with the Big Bang and then moving until today it is rather like the cartoon below, other than the step where there needs to be a whole lot more clarity is the first, not the second or any others that follow.

The point of the cartoon appears lost on you. It's making light of the fact that such an explanation is special pleading and worthless. Science is interested in finding answers. Adding something that must remain inexplicable doesn't get us closer to an answer, it actually adds unnecessary complexity.

"If the general picture of an expanding universe and a Big Bang is correct, we must then confront still more difficult questions. What were conditions like at the time of the Big Bang? What happened before that? Was there a tiny universe, devoid of all matter, and then the matter suddenly created from nothing? How does that happen? In many cultures it is customary to answer that God created the universe out of nothing. But this is mere temporizing. If we wish courageously to pursue the question, we must, of course ask next where God comes from. And if we decide this to be unanswerable, why not save a step and decide the origin of the universe is an unanswerable question? Or, if we say that God has always existed, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always existed?"
- Dr. Carl Sagan

 

[Catchin22]

Debating with Christians on Religion is going to end in the same outcome, you will understand reality, they will hold to their beliefs.

They will dismiss every other single religion and recognize the ridiculousness of them but still believe in Jesus, Moses, Noah's Ark and every other piece of obvious (and laughable) fiction from the bible.

The truth is the only difference between an Atheist and a Christian is the belief in ONE less religion.

And I am really sick of the "Well Science can't explain it so God did it" Answer. And I am sick of Religion changing it's stance when they can no longer argue against science without looking obviously fake to even their followers. It's full of constant excuses and story changes. Religion is a joke.

If you were a member of 100 people instead of millions you would be considered a CULT, and if you were the only one who believed in that black book of BS you would be considered insane and we would treat you for it with medication, get enough people to fall for that crap and we call it religion. Absurd.