Creationism's Damage to Christianity
Loading...
Loading...
36,207
Link to this comment:
Share to:
Loading...
- 1:30DonExodus, Thunderfoot, VFX - Magic Sandwich Sh...by DonExodus216,367 views
- 5:36Creationism on Huffington Post. My interview p...by DonExodus211,769 views
- 14:10Creationism on Huffington Post. My interview p...by DonExodus26,358 views
- 14:55Creationism on Huffington Post. My interview p...by DonExodus26,651 views
- 10:0010 stupid creationist questions, 10 intelligent...by RedDevilFFM224,167 views
- 8:40***** 10. Evolution vs. Creationism:History of ...by hoffmanallison22,163 views
- 5:07Creationism debate on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360"by audotorg352,499 views
- 4:31Richard Dawkins Regarding the Idiocy of Creatio...by thewayofgrowingpains93,220 views
- 3:56Creationism by Lewis Blackby 001Deadalus113,712 views
- 3:35We must teach Creationism!by morsec0de53,647 views
- 9:51Evolution vs. Creationism Debate (Part 1/3)by empiricist43537101,778 views
- 9:43Top Myths About Evolution - Iby DonExodus228,791 views
- 10:05Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 26)...by Thunderf00t879,494 views
- 2:55Jesus in my Schoolby ExpelledExposed150,852 views
- 4:51The Big Bang Theory and Christianityby FocusTVnet174 views
- 7:56Top Ten Creationist Argumentsby TheThinkingAtheist751,667 views
- 4:471000 Years of Creationist 'Achievements'by Thunderf00t203,192 views
- 9:301. Evolution vs. Creationism: Listen to the Sci...by hoffmanallison873,613 views
- 10:00The dangers of Evolution (part 1)by KentHovindisCool4,568 views
@RIDDLERonRITALIN Unfortunately I have this weird compulsion to read science all the time so I unfortunately end up as a science nerd for all intensive purposes xP Shunned by the philosophers for not having lady skills, shunned from the scientists for not having measurement skills. WHERE WILL IT END?!
On the pluss side I get the general respect from my scientist buddies who enjoy the fact that I actually understand what they're talking about when they talk about stuff like virtual particles etc.
TheAtheologian 1 week ago
@TheAtheologian Thats funny :)
Yeah in my opinion science and philosophy are alot alike, those who study them don't always get along with the other.
Its like science and pholosophy are relatives who got into an arguement and don't talk to eachother anymore. Except on certain holidays when they get together and attempt to act civil to one another.
Its funny when science nerds laugh at us when we tell them we study philosophy, but we don't care cause we atleast have sex with women.
RIDDLERonRITALIN 1 week ago
@RIDDLERonRITALIN You have no idea how much you described me in descriping yourself...
Philosopher of Science, that's the goal, all the fun of science, none of the annoying measurements :P
TheAtheologian 1 week ago
@TheAtheologian Wow, better spoken than I could say it. I bet you write text books or something.
I must admit, I love science in all its different fields and applications. However I'm more of a Philosophy buff.
Science is often hard for me to practice because my measurement is terrible. Science unlike philosophy requires measurement of observable and tangible evidence. Philosophy is just a complex metamorphic system of competing theories and ideas, which is way easier for me.
RIDDLERonRITALIN 1 week ago
@RIDDLERonRITALIN Oh, I get what you're saying, positivism, the ideal that science is the only source of all certain knowledge, is easily demonstrably false. However most scientists, if not all, understand that all scientific knowledge is conjectural. Thus you avoid the fallacy by postulating knowledge as a whole as an infinite process, where our current induction is our best understanding with the current data. Makes sense to me :P
TheAtheologian 1 week ago
@TheAtheologian OK maybe I had phrased what I said incorrectly and thus messed up my intended meaning.
But have you heard of the theory of induction or the induction fallacy?
Yeah they dont really make any sense but they still seem to work, which was concluded by the concept's creator David Hume.
RIDDLERonRITALIN 1 week ago
@TheAtheologian You are imagining things. There is not even enough time for evolution to occur and there is no mechanism for eovlution to occur.
No, there is no mechanism for the genome to sail against the wind, it is not there.
The genome only reorganizes the directives that it has as best it can and many times it fails to preserve our functions. There is much more corruption and destruction of the genome than anything resembling evolution.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Would you care to explain to me what exactly this mechanism is, as I have explained to you the mechanism in which mutations occur?
There are in fact no such specific directives, the genes determine a veriety of aspects of the dog or cat, many of which are similar for lizards. It is the sum of this genetic information that leads to the cat being a cat, by our definition of a cat.
There might not be, but there is a way to get from simple life to complex life, namely evolution.
TheAtheologian 1 week ago
@TheAtheologian The genome does not need mutations to reorganize variations.
It does have its own mechanism for reorganizing the directives that it has regardless of changes to the genome.
There is direction or directives in the genome, that say either, "dog" or "cat", they do not say "docgat" or "lizadogcatrd".
Your belief that no life forms result in higher life forms has no basis, it is irrational and illogical. There is no way to get here from there.
JungleJargon 1 week ago