Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bubba · 09-29-2002, 05:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by frostymama:
In a way I feel sorry for people like that. I was duped into believing in Creationism when my (public) high school Biology teacher taught it to us. I know it isn't much, but I was actually the co-captain of our Science academic team and I still fell for it. I can imagine that it would be very easy to fool the average believer who has no science background.

Thankfully I saw that Creationism was nothing more than religious propaganda by my first semester in college. I still feel really stupid for falling for it.

I feel the same way about a similar experience.

Bubba
<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

tgamble · 09-29-2002, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wyz_sub10:
I've always wondered what the hell an "evolutionist" is? (Yes, I understand the definition in the context it is used)

What I mean is, the term implies the notion that evolution is somehown central to a way of thinking or a career dedication. It is neither.

But when have cretinists ever let truth get in the way of their arguments? They want to argue that evolution is some kind of religion or philosphy. That's why they're always babbling about how evolution is responsible for every evil and bad thing on the planet. They have no real evidence.

Tom Sawyer · 09-29-2002, 07:44 AM

I was watching one of those Sunday morning political programs this morning (don't ask me why) and the "debate" the people were having there reminds me a lot of the debate between the evolutionary and creationist camps.

One side started talking about an issue (not important what it is, I've seen the same thing with other issues on both sides of the political spectrum) and then the other side, instead of answering the questions that were raised, took one minor point and brought the discussion around the semantics of one sentence of it. Instead of talking about the issue, they ended up in a useless argument about semantic distinctions that had nothing to do with it.

Oh ya, and at the end, it was of course brought up that the whole thing was Clinton's fault. I'm sure his blowjob was responsible for evilution, too.

Grumpy · 09-29-2002, 07:54 AM

"If scientists are so sure they're right, why do they fear a little competition?" Them's fightin' words.

The main problem, which should be obvious, is that in cases like Cobb County, GA it won't be scientists doing the fightin'; it will be school kids. Intelligent Design is a theory (a speculation?) which has not yet done rigorous combat with Natural Selection. Or some will say it has and has lost. Yet it is supposed to compete in schools??

<a href="http://members.aol.com/garypos2/Hoagland.html" target="_blank">Richard Hoagland</a> must be itching to have his alternate theories of astronomy and planet formation (and what-have-you) taught in schools. After all, what do scientists have to fear?

Bubba · 09-29-2002, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by peteyh:

Oh ya, and at the end, it was of course brought up that the whole thing was Clinton's fault. I'm sure his blowjob was responsible for evilution, too.

Maybe if he gave rather than recieved the middle east problems would go away.

Bubba

Bubba · 09-29-2002, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tgamble:


But when have cretinists ever let truth get in the way of their arguments? They want to argue that evolution is some kind of religion or philosphy. That's why they're always babbling about how evolution is responsible for every evil and bad thing on the planet. They have no real evidence.

So, A question for Tgamble. Since when has an absolute lack of evidence EVER bothered any of these morons?

Bubba <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

beoba · 09-29-2002, 11:54 AM

I think the use of the term "evolutionist" is an "-ism", where the labelers use the term in order to think of evolution as some kind of belief system.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-29-2002, 07:44 AM	#13
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	I was watching one of those Sunday morning political programs this morning (don't ask me why) and the "debate" the people were having there reminds me a lot of the debate between the evolutionary and creationist camps. One side started talking about an issue (not important what it is, I've seen the same thing with other issues on both sides of the political spectrum) and then the other side, instead of answering the questions that were raised, took one minor point and brought the discussion around the semantics of one sentence of it. Instead of talking about the issue, they ended up in a useless argument about semantic distinctions that had nothing to do with it. Oh ya, and at the end, it was of course brought up that the whole thing was Clinton's fault. I'm sure his blowjob was responsible for evilution, too.

09-29-2002, 07:54 AM	#14
Grumpy Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Alaska, USA Posts: 1,535	"If scientists are so sure they're right, why do they fear a little competition?" Them's fightin' words. The main problem, which should be obvious, is that in cases like Cobb County, GA it won't be scientists doing the fightin'; it will be school kids. Intelligent Design is a theory (a speculation?) which has not yet done rigorous combat with Natural Selection. Or some will say it has and has lost. Yet it is supposed to compete in schools?? <a href="http://members.aol.com/garypos2/Hoagland.html" target="_blank">Richard Hoagland</a> must be itching to have his alternate theories of astronomy and planet formation (and what-have-you) taught in schools. After all, what do scientists have to fear?

09-29-2002, 11:54 AM	#17
beoba Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Boston Posts: 699	I think the use of the term "evolutionist" is an "-ism", where the labelers use the term in order to think of evolution as some kind of belief system.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.