• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Answers In Genesis on Facebook

SkepticThinker

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
But if creationism is true or even a reasonable answer to evolution then why shouldn't all students be able to hear about it. They are not forced to believe any one religion but a reasonable explanation of how life began. Actually there are a lot more than one religion that believes God created life.
Click to expand...
Which version of creationism? All of them? Where will they find the time to teach actual science?
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Of course. I presume that "actual science" is what is taught in school. And schools teach that life came from non-living material, like pond scum. But science has never been able to produce life from non-living material. So there is no "proof" that it happened. Why can't students also hear the idea that life was created by a "god"? They will not be required to believe it or to believe any one religion. The more information and choices they have, the better they will be able to decide for themselves. But the atheists and evolutionists do not want students to hear about God so they only let students hear one side of the story. Science classes should be required to state that the ideas of the origin of life have never been proven and that there are other ideas out there. This would be fair and even approach to the subject. But schools and atheists are so afraid of the idea of god that they do not even want it mentioned.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
lostwanderingsoul said:
Of course. I presume that "actual science" is what is taught in school. And schools teach that life came from non-living material, like pond scum. But science has never been able to produce life from non-living material. So there is no "proof" that it happened. Why can't students also hear the idea that life was created by a "god"? They will not be required to believe it or to believe any one religion. The more information and choices they have, the better they will be able to decide for themselves. But the atheists and evolutionists do not want students to hear about God so they only let students hear one side of the story. Science classes should be required to state that the ideas of the origin of life have never been proven and that there are other ideas out there. This would be fair and even approach to the subject. But schools and atheists are so afraid of the idea of god that they do not even want it mentioned.
Click to expand...
So you're not going to reply to anyone, are you? Just here to preach.
 
SkepticThinker

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
Of course. I presume that "actual science" is what is taught in school. And schools teach that life came from non-living material, like pond scum. But science has never been able to produce life from non-living material. So there is no "proof" that it happened. Why can't students also hear the idea that life was created by a "god"? They will not be required to believe it or to believe any one religion. The more information and choices they have, the better they will be able to decide for themselves. But the atheists and evolutionists do not want students to hear about God so they only let students hear one side of the story. Science classes should be required to state that the ideas of the origin of life have never been proven and that there are other ideas out there. This would be fair and even approach to the subject. But schools and atheists are so afraid of the idea of god that they do not even want it mentioned.
Click to expand...
A bunch of people have already responded to you. No need to repeat the same things again.

How about we just teach science in science classrooms and you teach kids your creation story at your home and/or place of worship.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
At least if kids are taught the possibility that they came from a tree, then they came from something that was already alive. All they hear in "science" is that they came from non living pond scum. Why shouldn't they have the opportunity to hear many ideas? Answer - because no one wants to talk about "GOD". any "god" no matter what name you give him/her/it. It might make atheists angry. But what if not hearing about other possibilities makes religious people angry. Oh, that's OK. They don't have any say so in what is taught.
 
O

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
The Ragin Pagan said:
No, I think you're just going to join the few and the shamed who I put on ignore, omega. You've never brought anything of worth to any "discussion" (a generous word) that we've had, you too quickly resort to childish tactics such as insult, active ignorance, and double standards (e.g. you accuse Skeptic Thinker of intellectual dishonesty yet you haven't provided a shred of data to back up your claims.) Buh-bye.
Click to expand...

You and none of your evo cohorts, including you, have cut and pasted any evidence to support your myth. Well one did post some pictures of fossils. It is sad to think anyone thinks pictures are scientific evidence.
 
O

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
SkepticThinker said:
Keep repeating that to every person you come across, it seems to be working for you so far. o_O I'm sure you're right about every other person on this thread not recognizing evidence. Apparently, only you are able to recognize evidence when you see it. :rolleyes: What a laugh. Enough with arguing on internet forums with little peons around you who can't seem to figure out what evidence is. Get on with it and submit your paper that falsifies the TOE for peer review, and get back to us when you're vindicated.

I've provided evidence many times in the past for you actually, as have numerous people on this thread and others. I already know you will dismiss it without even looking at it. I've been around the block with you on this one before and I'm no longer willing to waste my time providing evidence to someone who doesn't actually care to see it anyway. That is what has convinced me that you are a POE.

I will rephrase ... nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. Biology doesn't not refute evolution at all. Such a statement doesn't even make sense to me.




Hmm, well you've been insulting people since practically the start of the thread so ....
Click to expand...

Not only do you not understand science, you don't understand insulting. Hint--disagreeing is not insulting. If you will post any insult I have made, I will apopgoze
 
O

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
Jose Fly said:
Yes it did. I specifically copied that part into the post.

Tell me.....what exactly do you think the paper describes? Give your personal summary.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what it describes. That is what use to be called a "snow job." Putting a lot of unrelated, irrelevant info, you think makes your point.

For one thing that much verbage is not need to show how an offspring can receive a characteristic not in the gene pool of its parents, and none of what you posted showed that.
 
SkepticThinker

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
At least if kids are taught the possibility that they came from a tree, then they came from something that was already alive. All they hear in "science" is that they came from non living pond scum. Why shouldn't they have the opportunity to hear many ideas? Answer - because no one wants to talk about "GOD". any "god" no matter what name you give him/her/it. It might make atheists angry. But what if not hearing about other possibilities makes religious people angry. Oh, that's OK. They don't have any say so in what is taught.
Click to expand...
Repeating it again doesn't make it true.

When you figure out a way to demonstrate the existence of the god you believe in, please get back to the scientific community with it, and then it can be taught in a SCIENCE classroom. That's how it works. Until then, they can learn the many creation stories in the appropriate setting - which is not a science classroom.
 
McBell

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
omega2xx said:
I am convinced you do not understand evidence. I know for certain you can't cut and paste any scientific evidence or you would have done so. I find it intellectually dishonest for someone to say there is scientific evidence to support the TOE, but is not willing to post it. To say Biology does not work without evolution is absurd. Biology was working long before the TOE was thought of. Actually when biology is understood it refutes evolution.

When someone doesn't have the intellect to discuss a subject, thee resort to insults. Thank you for what you are convinced of.
Click to expand...
See, the problem here is that you are convinced you are right and no amount of fact, truth, reason, etc. is going to change your mind.
You have become a real legend in your own mind.

Now since you are not interested in truth, facts, reason, etc., as you have so clearly and thoroughly demonstrated during your short time on RF, there is no reason for any one to continue spoon feeding you the evidence.

Now I understand that in your mind what I have put in this post will be twisted into me allegedly "insulting" you, and that is fine. You do what you have to in order to convince yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top