What creationism does is pretend we've always had the answer to where we came from. It casts aside genuine evidential analysis of our environment in favor of keeping our old ideas.
I agree, this is a stereotypical personality trait to creationism, but I am not here to debate the validity of the two theories creationism and evolution, I am just saying that because evolution holds the same lack of evidence as creationism then it too could be considered as viable.

Teaching creationism does not at all prevent schools from learning, if a class taught creationism with science I dont see how it would have stopped us from making the scientific discoveries we have made, it is not because of evolutionary thinking we have discovered so much, it is because of revolutionary thinking outside of the realms of religious doctrines.

And you are using the same explanation for reality as you were at age 5.
Who is that then?

What amazingly profound theory do you carry?

Evolution from rocks?

This is one of the most basic assumptions of science. Science never claims to have proven anything, and encourages inspection into every theory as such. Creationism seems to take this type of inspection as an insult.
No, this is wrong you are viewing creationism from the stereotypical judea christian perspective of the theory.

I suggest you read a book called "Science and Islam" and then tell me that creationism refuses inspection and use of science to disprove it.

Islam is actually the religion considered by millions accross the western world to be a religion which conforms with scientific theory.

One example of how creationism CAN work with science.

YouTube - Qur'an & Modern Science - Conflict Or Conciliation (15/24)

:thumbsup:

Evolution is not an absolute, it's an idea to explain what we have observed with scientific inquiry. Creationism, on the other hand, is absolute and says that it can never change. Evolutionary theory has undergone a lot of changes since it was developed.
Firstly...

In what ways has the theory of evolution changed, can you give me any examples?

Because to my knowledge evolution has and always will be about evolving.

Your statement is wrong clearly, evolution teaches that we EVOLVED, creationism teaches that we were CREATED.

How do you go about changing evolution without taking away the element of evolving?

Same with creationism, how do you go about changing creationism without changing the possibility of us being created?

You can alter the theories, but this can be done with evolution as well as with creationism, im only to mention the number of different Gods people have made up such as Zeus, Brahma, Wotan, Thaw, and the great spaghetti monster to name but a few.

And you claim evolutionary theories can and have been adapted so I wont waste my time typing examples.

But the theories remain concrete in their concepts, if they did not then you cannot call them what they are.

Take evolving from evolution and you dont have evolution LOL

Take creating from creationism and you dont have creationism LOL

They are both absolutes.

:thumbsup:

What evolution has is what any good scientific claim has--evidence, and lots of it. Evolution is supported by a wide range of observations throughout the fields of genetics, anatomy, ecology, animal behavior, paleontology, and others.
This is wrong! Do you have even the slightest understanding of evolution? The evolution you are rambling on about has always been mentioned by me! I said a few posts back that evolution is good at the smaller scale however how can you prove it on our scale?

YOU CANT

This is the last time im going to say this! I wont repeat this again because im just sick of it, im sick of the ignorance and the monotonous "search for a debate" you people are obssessed with!

All I am saying and all I ever did say was that due to the lack of evidence with regards to evolution IN OUR STORY then the same credit you atheists give to evolution about being valid we could give to creationism otherwise you would reside in a paradox!

We should also give creationism a viable explanation as to how we came about, you cant prove evolution is right so why should we have that theory as the figurehead of truth in our educational system?

If you wish to challenge the theory of evolution, you must address that evidence
Im not challenging the theory of evolution, it is common fact to anyone with 2 brain cells that there is no proof for evolution which is why we call it a theory, a monkey could work this out!

I feel like your being ignorant on purpose to annoy me!

We don't teach Eugenics in school as far as I'm aware
LOL are you serious?

LOL a "school of thought" is not literally a classroom full of kids learning the alphabet with a teacher.

Its a figure of speach!!!

Evolution is a "school of thought". Doesnt mean you go to a school called evolution lmao.

Morality has fuck all to do with evolution
LOL...

So what you are saying is, you feel that evolution is flawed, and since they are teaching flawed science, it should be ok to teach another flawed theory?
WRONG. I did not once say evolution is flawed.

I do not feel it is flawed, im sorry that you just cannot understand english but what is so hard about this?

ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT CREATIONISM SHOULD BE AS VIABLE AS EVOLUTION BECAUSE THEY ARE ON PARR WHEN YOU TAKE IT IN TERMS OF EVIDENCE, EVOLUTION IS NO GREATER A TRUTH IN TERMS OF EVIDENCE THAN CREATIONISM.

YOU CANT ARGUE THIS, ITS FACT, NOBODY CAN PROVE EVOLUTION, AND IM NOT SAYING ITS NOT TRUE! IM JUST SAYING THAT CREATIONISM SHOULD BE GIVEN IN EDUCATION AS A VIABLE REASON AS TO HOW WE CAME ABOUT.

If creationism can provide more evidence, and more to say for their theory then, "god did it", then sure, teach it. But you cant really teach something that says, if you dont understand it, then god did it.
But what more evidence do you see for phrases such as "we evolved from rocks?"

Can you answer this?

I understand that creationism is lacking evidence.

I also understand evolution is lacking evidence.

BUT WHY SHOULD ONE BE PUT ABOVE THE OTHER IN TERMS OF "BEING THE CORRECT THEORY TO FOLLOW?"

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?

Not to mention, seperation of church and state. If these religious groups want to promote teaching of their beliefs, then they can provide money for it themselves. The Government should not be providing them money to spread their beliefs unless they are providing equal money to every other religion and their belief on the creation of the world and everything else entailed.
Why must creationism always be linked to the politics of religion or even religion itself?

We dont need to fund Pastors to tell children creationism is another viable reason as to how we were created.

LOL

Can you not be a creationist without being a christian?

And what you are talking of is just "another" belief which just happens to appeal to you (evolution).

Your in a complete paradox.

Your theory has as much lacking evidence as your opposing theory creationism yet you believe for some reason that yours is true? The same can go for the religious person, their theory is based upon no fact or evidence but they believe it is true.

What is the difference between the two people and their beliefs?

NOTHING

SO WHY SHOULD ONE BE PUT ABOVE THE OTHER?

PROVE EVOLUTION AND/OR CREATIONISM TO BE ABSOLOUTE TRUTH AND THEN YOU ARE AT LIBERTY TO PUT ONE ABOVE THE OTHER, UNTIL THEN WE SHOULD GIVE CHILDREN CREATIONISM AS A VERY GOOD REASON AS TO HOW WE CAME ABOUT.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?

So until the government starts providing equal funds for all religious beliefs in regards to this subject, it should not be providing any funds to any of them. The state should not be promoting a "state religion", because that is discriminating against all other beliefs.
Firstly I am not saying evolution is not correct, im just saying it should be given as a viable option (because it is!) along with evolution!

This does not mean we must wipe out all evolutionists and this type of thinking, why would we need to do this? This is stupid, we just need to offer it as a viable option (creationism).

I seriously think you guys are blowing this out of proportion, like I said I personally do not have a problem with evolution, some people have, I am very open minded, open minded enough to question my own beliefs, even the ones which form after I have left the former.

I will keep questioning them, I will question evolution, creationism and the great spaghetti monster, I think this is what you call learning, by all means evolution could be true, it is founded upon no evidence YET however so lets atleast provide creationism as a viable option to the children.

Let me explain this to you all.

I know this is not a very nice analogy to use so please forgive me.

If you see a piece of shit on the floor, you may think it is a disgusting piece of matter, yet why not look at the positives? Its relieved someone... Its biodegradable and will probably feed some species of the ecological system.

We must take the positives and negatives of EVERY theory we look at into consideration, this is all I am saying, there is no need to debate with me in regards to evolution being true!

I hope this explains to you exactly what I mean now.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
Fallen_Icarus Reviewed by Fallen_Icarus on . Some front line views of the war against God. After reading some here I felt this fitting, not so much as a reply but as a dedicated thread. There is a real spiritual war out there against God, and the forces involved know that the "Family", "The Mind", and "Journalism/education" is major spiritual high ground to take. EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed If you have a question about his intellegence and view please note this in His Bio Link below: "He graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics and as Rating: 5