M.Dancer Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Except perhaps in some very conservative Jewish circles, I know of no Jewish sect that advocates a literal reading of Genesis. Judaism might very well be one of the worst examples you could bring up, as Judaism has long used what Christian Literalists would consider "extra-biblical sources" in interpreting the Bible (ie. the Mishnah). As to Islam, the current strains of Fundamentalism were not the norm throughout much of its history, and in Medieval times Islam produced some rather fine philosophers. Even then, believing in a literal creation is not creationism. Creationism in the West is usually based on creation according to Genesis, and in its broad sense covers a wide range of beliefs and interpretations. Through the 19th century the term most commonly referred to direct creation of individual souls, in contrast to traducianism. However, by 1929 in the United States the term became particularly associated with Christian fundamentalist opposition to human evolution and belief in a young Earth.[2] Several U.S. states passed laws against the teaching of evolution in public schools, as upheld in the Scopes Trial. Evolution was omitted entirely from school textbooks in much of the United States until the 1960s. Since then, renewed efforts to introduce teaching creationism in American public schools in the form of flood geology, creation science, and intelligent design have been consistently held to contravene the constitutional separation of Church and State by a succession of legal judgments.[3] The meaning of the term creationism was contested, but by the 1980s it had been co-opted by proponents of creation science and flood geology.[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Wilber Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 And ? None of that is creationism...those are creation mths....there iisn't a subtle difference, surely you understand that creation myths and creationism are two different things....Or is it politically convient for you to seem dull in this regard? Guess so. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
waldo Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Read the so-called retraction. He said, " We are evolving every year, every decade. that's a fact, whether it is to, as a chiropractor, walking on cement vs. anything else, whether it's running shoes or high heel;s, of course we are evolving to our environment. But that's irrelevant"... Damn straight that's irrelevant. Someone care to show me where he's acknowledging the theory of evolution? I see a creationist 'evolving' into his tap-dancing shoes. newsflash! flip-flopping Science Minister Goodblimp now offers... as fact... we are evolving!!! uhhh... apparently, Goodblimp's understanding of evolution has nothing to do with natural selection acting on individual genetic variations... towards the development of new species. Rather, Goodblimp's evolution is all about changing from Nikes to Jimmy Choos depending on surface particulars. He is a chiropractor... after all! what's worse - a creationist Minister Goodblimp refusing to acknowledge his belief by falsely/mistakenly associating evolution to religion... or an imbecilic creationist Minister Goodblimp refusing to acknowledge his belief by falsely/mistakenly associating evolution to religion while not even understanding what evolution actually is? Quote
Molly Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) A little unscientific, Smallc?!! It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the THEORY OF evolution! He's playing a game of semantics--shockingly badly, I thought, though the G&M and quite a few folks here seem to have bought it whole. It's the difference between... do you believe in the existence of God ? and Do you believe in the existence of 'god'? If I truthfully answer yes to the latter, would it be dishonest of me to let you assume that I was a theist after all? Edited March 18, 2009 by Molly Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
blueblood Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Good job of what? Starving sciences and revealing that he's a Creationist who believes that a major branch of science is a matter of religious opinion?And one more time the lie about this being a matter of Christianity. This is about Creationism. Creationism IS NOT synonymous with Christianity. Why do you keep saying that? You are suggesting he gets canned because he alledgedly believes in something. That's bigotry. As far as his department is concerned, he is doing a good job. In my field, if there is a short change in science and technology I would be extremely pissed. However, science and technology are not being canned. So we can safely say this guy is doing an adequate job in spite of being apparently a religious person. But this is a matter of Christianity, this guy apparently is one, and you are willing to can him because of his beliefs on the subject, hardly a matter of dismissal. If there was a massive exodus of scientists, or our innovation levels are down, then I'd join you in calling for his head. However they are not, case in point stem cell research. Funny how an alledged creationist would allow this type of research to not only take place, but to prosper under his watch. This is why I call people calling for his head tinfoil hatists. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
Smallc Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 A little unscientific, Smallc?!! I was being kind. It seems that he does not believe in the theory of evolution. I return to my original position. Quote
Molly Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 BTW, in the comments on that article someone said something to the effect of " If 'creation science' is to be taught in schools as an alternative theory to evolution , then stork theory should be taught as an alternative to biological reproduction. " Sweet. I liked that. Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
Molly Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 You are suggesting he gets canned because he alledgedly believes in something. That's bigotry. NO, Blueblood. He should not be canned for what he does believe, but for what he does NOT believe. He does NOT believe in the foundations of SCIENCE! (Or truth, apparently.) (Another good comment appended to that article proposed that if a Pope didn't like coffee, he could still be a good Pope, but if he was an atheist? Maybe not. ) Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
capricorn Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Science Minister Goodblimp apparently, Goodblimp's Minister Goodblimp .... Minister Goodblimp waldorf, you should read the forum rules. We've been warned more than once by the mods that we are to use the proper names when referring to third parties. Here, I'll save you the trouble of looking it up. INSULTSInsults are the ammunition of the unintelligent Insults levelled at third-parties (companies, political parties, nationalities) are also forbidden in the forums. Avoid using abbreviated terms such as "Cons" or "Libs" that may be offensive to the group to which they refer. Full names are best and official abbreviations are acceptable. Do not use diminutives or character substitutions in proper names that are not recognized by the original person to whom the reference is being made. For example, Prime Minister Stephen Harper does not identify himself as Stevie therefore, it is unacceptable to identify him as Stevie. Likewise, Paul Martin does not identify himself as Mr. Dithers, therefore, it is unacceptable to identify him as Mr. Dithers. In the discussion forums, such infractions will be considered as third-party insults http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.p...E=01&HID=17 Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Same thing. Two different things Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 NO, Blueblood. He should not be canned for what he does believe, but for what he does NOT believe. He does NOT believe in the foundations of SCIENCE! (Or truth, apparently.) (Another good comment appended to that article proposed that if a Pope didn't like coffee, he could still be a good Pope, but if he was an atheist? Maybe not. ) http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe...ience&meta= googled it, I didn't find the "foundation of science". So I have no idea what you are refering to.....Unles you ment the scientific methode which is"Scientific method refers to bodies of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[1] A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[2]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method I have no recolection on Mr. Goodyear not beleiving in or understanding that..... Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 BTW, in the comments on that article someone said something to the effect of " If 'creation science' is to be taught in schools as an alternative theory to evolution , then stork theory should be taught as an alternative to biological reproduction. "Sweet. I liked that. appearently they are stupid because science has neither proved or disproved how humans came to walk this earth, all it has done is prove that we have changed over time. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
M.Dancer Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 appearently they are stupid because science has neither proved or disproved how humans came to walk this earth, all it has done is prove that we have changed over time. If we accept that it has proved we have changed over time, then iy has proved how we came here...by changing. We did not start as humans... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 If we accept that it has proved we have changed over time, then iy has proved how we came here...by changing. We did not start as humans... what guided he change, the odds of life just appearing because ameno acids and protiens mixing are astronomical. It is something that has never been duplicated. Not to mention we still don't know were we came from, or exactly how it happened. What brought about those changes. what we have is science explaining adaptation, but not how life was created that is still theory. If a god did in fact do it, we don't know how it did it (no proof), if by random chance we still don't know (no proof) as we have not be able to duplicate any of it with the scientific methode. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Slim MacSquinty Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 What a thorough waste of even feeble brain power, left wing flaming and baiting. Here is an interesting link that has a list of countless PhD's, scientists and other intellectuals who seems to have personally resolved this stupid debate and apparently retain(ed) employment in scientific fields: http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm Just because someone professes a faith in religion does not mean they take the Taliban approach to interpretation. Remember, you Liberal flamers, Paul Martin the church attending Catholic? Why did you not take him to task on this issue? What a bunch of disengenious party hacks. Personal religious view are personal, not government policy why is it you can understand this when a Liberal is in power but not otherwise? Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 what guided he change, the odds of life nothing guided the change just appearing because ameno acids and protiens mixing are astronomical. There was an astronomical amount of time It is something that has never been duplicated. Of course it has, 1000s of times. Not to mention we still don't know were we came from, or exactly how it happened. We cane from primitive mammals that evolved from primitive reptiles that evolved from primitive amphibians...and so on and so on..... What brought about those changes. numerous things. what we have is science explaining adaptation, but not how life was created that is still theory. If a god did in fact do it, we don't know how it did it (no proof), if by random chance we still don't know (no proof) as we have not be able to duplicate any of it with the scientific methode. It will happen.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7041353.stm Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Again Mdancer I ask for proof, which we both know does not exist, we have theories. Even Stwphen Hawking changes his mind from time to time on what the Unisverse is doing. At first he thought it was like an elastic band and would expand to a only a certain point then would begin contracting. He then changed his theory. My point is that they are thories yet to be proven. Its not like sailing around the world or taking pictures of the planet from space. We have no hard evidence of what caused these changes in evolution. I would like to know what event changed dinosaurs into chickens and other birds. For all those with an open mind and willing to listen, I wold encourage you to watch ben Stein's expelled, very interesting documentary, even if you don't agree with his stance. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 What a thorough waste of even feeble brain power, left wing flaming and baiting. Here is an interesting link that has a list of countless PhD's, scientists and other intellectuals who seems to have personally resolved this stupid debate and apparently retain(ed) employment in scientific fields:http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm Just because someone professes a faith in religion does not mean they take the Taliban approach to interpretation. Remember, you Liberal flamers, Paul Martin the church attending Catholic? Why did you not take him to task on this issue? What a bunch of disengenious party hacks. Personal religious view are personal, not government policy why is it you can understand this when a Liberal is in power but not otherwise? Very good site thank you slim. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
M.Dancer Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 I would like to know what event changed dinosaurs into chickens and other birds. Rest easy, there was no event. Unless you consider millions of years of random mutations an event. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
jdobbin Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Just because someone professes a faith in religion does not mean they take the Taliban approach to interpretation. Well, when the minister of science says that evolution is a religious question that is kind of at the extreme. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Rest easy, there was no event. Unless you consider millions of years of random mutations an event. Thats a lot of random mutations. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Well, when the minister of science says that evolution is a religious question that is kind of at the extreme. Its only an extreme matter if you are a conservative right....so how does this help the liberals reach out to the churches like the artical in the other thread says you are trying to do. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
jdobbin Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) Its only an extreme matter if you are a conservative right....so how does this help the liberals reach out to the churches like the artical in the other thread says you are trying to do. It leaves social conservatives who believe that the Earth is 6000 years old and was created by God to you and leaves social conservatives who believe in the environment and tolerance to the Liberals. Edited March 18, 2009 by jdobbin Quote
jdobbin Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 Thats a lot of random mutations. That's why it is called evolution. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 That's why it is called evolution. If evolution has nothing to do with god, then what purose would a god have until we became what we are....thats a lot of time to do nothing. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.