Comments on: Dinosaur Dung Worth Big Bucks At Auction

Fossilized Feces From Jurassic Era Fetches Nearly $1,000

[rational_1]

Aaaaaah...I see....I see...but it''''s perfectly fine for you on the secular left to subject Christians in public schools to your Darwinian theories and survival of the fittest laws correct?
Double standard city!
Posted by libagenda at 05:24 PM : May 02, 2008

I don''t believe I''ve ever seen a picket line of science teachers outside a church protesting the teachings going on inside. Who exactly is stopping you from teaching this stuff to your kids, either at home or in church?

Science should be taught in science classes. Religion should be taught in religious studies classes. Since creationism fails miserably as science (and the Bible as a science textbook), it doesn''t belong in a science classroom. What''s so hard to understand about this?

[jimfinster]

Yeah jim, I can, and it''''s happening in classrooms throughout America every day, through the theory of Darwinian evolution.

Posted by libagenda


Evolution is simply an explanation of biologic change through time. It was developed as the explanation that best fits the facts, not as an attack on your beliefs.

It is still the best explanation, and I understand how frustrating that must be for you.

[jimfinster]

LOL. Kind of like how the agenda of the secular left is to force their Darwinian beliefs on everyone in the classroom right?

Posted by libagenda


Rick, that is just your perception. Why are you so fearful of science? Because it threatens your belief system?

[jimfinster]

Rick,

I can cite many example of Christians trying to force their beliefs on others.

Can you cite examples of atheists doing the same? I think not!

[rational_1]

Just as there are millions of Bible believing Christians (including scientists) on this planet with the same credentials. But I already know...you''''re going to next attack the credibility of the universities that the Christians attend. This is a common tactic among atheists. I see it all the time.
Why can''''t you understand that you have a right to believe in what you want to believe in, and we Christians have a right to believe in what we believe in?
You can''''t handle freedom, evidently.
Posted by libagenda at 05:16 PM : May 02, 2008

Hey I don''t have any problem with you saying what you do - knock yourself out. But, if we''re having an argument, isn''t it the point to try to prove you''re right and the other guy is wrong?

What millions of Bible-believing Christians, with at best a rudimentary understanding of biology, believe in evolution means as much to me as what my plumber thinks of relativity - he doesn''t have much of worth to contribute to the conversation. What tens of thousands of professional biologists have to say about the subject of evolution carries considerably more weight.

[jimfinster]

jim, if you don''''t want to believe in Jesus, that''''s not my problem. It''''s yours. You have a right to believe in whatever you''''d like, just as I do.

You can''''t handle this though can you?

Posted by libagenda



Rick, see my previous post. You can believe whatever you want, just don''t try to subject me to it through new laws and the classroom!!!!

[jimfinster]

Why can''''t you understand that you have a right to believe in what you want to believe in, and we Christians have a right to believe in what we believe in?

Posted by libagenda


Yes, that would be fine if you stopped there. But of course the agenda of the Christian Right is to force their beliefs on others through laws and dogma like ID.

That is why you see a backlash now.

[jimfinster]

I undestand why people "want" to believe in Darwinian evolution and Secular Humanism (a religion), I just don''''t understand why they do (well actually I do...since it all boils down to them not wanting to be held accountable to their Creator)

Posted by libagenda

Well Rick, there is your problem! You equate your faith (belief in things that can''t be proven) with science (things that can be quantified through the scientific method). Rick, they are not the same thing.

[rational_1]

Aah, but I did answer your question (remember metamorphosis?),
posted by rational_1
All you did was explain the hormones involved, which doesn''''t prove evolution at all.
Posted by libagenda at 05:14 PM : May 02, 2008

No, you must have missed that post - I sent you a link to a web page that nicely describes that exact point. Here it is again

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/10/991001064049.htm

[rational_1]

I already know you think that the only way one can be "highly bright and well trained" is if they believe in Darwin.
Posted by libagenda at 05:00 PM : May 02, 2008

I think it''s pretty evident they are well trained by how long they''ve been studying to get doctorates (usually 5-7 years past a B.S. degree) and I think most people would agree that scientists, just by the nature of their work, are above average in intelligence and probably significantly above average (well certainly compared to creationists - LOL).

[rational_1]

Christian. It''''s that simple. If you saw things from the Christian perspective you would clearly understand that John was using symbolism to describe futuristic events and kingdoms that were to come in the last days of the earth.
Again though, it''''s not worth trying to explain it to you. It will just be another round about ending right back where we started anyhow.
Posted by libagenda at 05:02 PM : May 02, 2008

So the Bible is full of symbolism (even I knew that) and people may vary in terms of how they interpret that symbolism - a valid conclusion. Now tell me how this book full of symbolism is going to be at all useful in teaching high school students about biology. If you''re going to be teaching high school kids about creationism in science class, this is going to be your textbook?

[rational_1]

So typical. You failed to answer any of the questions posed earlier, so your only method of rebuttal is to post baseless, downright childish false accusations about a person you don''''t know, and have never met.
Posted by libagenda at 04:53 PM : May 02, 2008

Aah, but I did answer your question (remember metamorphosis?), it''s you who don''t answer questions. (again, remember metamorphosis?). You also got shot down with your proof of a negative question argument and never disproved the existence of Santa Claus. Ignored that one as well.

It''s you my friend who live in a fantasy world, reading things into the Bible that aren''t there. Dragons are dinosaurs, there were dinos on the Ark, incest was fine at first in the time of Adam & Eve then God decided it was bad, etc., etc. Talk about reading between the lines.

[fibonacci_]

Rick is a complete idiot. Little tiny teensie-weensie Christian brain. It is almost interesting to "debate" with someone who is so stupid. "Christ-boy".

[rational_1]

Having fun bringing up Bible verses? I thought I was the one bringing up the Bible? :)
By the way, you fail to see the symobolism of the book of Revelations.
Posted by libagenda at 04:50 PM : May 02, 2008

I decided to look at things from your perspective, which is what a scientist should do. You believe that creationism should be taught in science classrooms and that the Bible is the ultimate source of knowledge, so I wondered just how useful it would be as a biology textbook. It''s perhaps a bit of an understatement to say that I came away unimpressed.

I wonder how inclusive creationists would be if scientists started sitting in on their religious services and prayer meetings and demanding equal time to present their points of view.

[rational_1]

There are 30,000 or so nationally accredited scientists in this country; about 300 believe in creationism. "Big Science" seems to be in the vast majority.
Posted by DVSDen

Sorry to upset your status quo.Posted by libagenda at 04:45 PM : May 02, 2008

How did you upset his status quo? The vast, vast majority of scientists, for example those working at accredited universities, are of the belief that evolutionary theory explains the myriad observations that have been made in the fields of biochemistry, physiology, paleontology and molecular biology. That''s the status quo, not what some philosophy professor at Oral Roberts Univ. or some guy working at the Creation Research (snicker) Institute thinks. You can try to spin things any way you want, but you''ve never come up with any explanation for why so many bright and highly-trained people could all be so deluded.

[fibonacci_]

Just read some of Darwin''s Origin of Species...incredible genius. I fully understand why many scientists place his importance for science even above Einstein. He truly came and said...this is how we came to be what we are.

[fibonacci_]

They are just stupid, in my opinion. The evidence is so everwhelming - real evidence, in great abundane - and they still say "God did it". Ricky is a little idiotic Christian brain.

[dvsden]

As usual, another science article ruined by the whole Evolution/ID debate. Would the 2 ID''rs on this board please explain the following simple observations.

Astrophysicists, who landed a man on a moon and sent out probes to other planets, are totally incorrect when calcuating the distance to stars and galaxies, as well as the age of the universe.

Carbon dating is a total myth.

The sames biologists who cracked the DNA code and created other scientific breakthroughs are all wrong re: the origin of species.

There are 30,000 or so nationally accredited scientists in this country; about 300 believe in creationism. "Big Science" seems to be in the vast majority.

[fibonacci_]

I agree rational_1 it is like he lacks any conditional statements in his programming.

[rational_1]

I really dont get it guys. I really want to try to understand how people can think so illogically, but I do not seem to make much progress.
Posted by fibonacci_ at 03:20 PM : May 02, 2008

Programming. You think those women in that polygamist compound in Texas think it''s okay for old men to be raping their 14 year-old daughters? Of course they do, it''s what they''ve grown up with all their lives. I think it''s the same with Rick - he''s probably been exposed to Biblical literalism since he was a little tyke playing with rattlesnakes. It''s programming - he just doesn''t have an "IF... THEN.... ELSE" in his code.