Technically science can't be proved either, nothing can be proved, our existance can't be proved etc etc.

Though I do agree creationism does not belong in a Biology lesson.

I get very mad when someone says "nothing can be proven, we might not even exist!" to try and steer the conversation towards their side. My ex would do it EVERY TIME I tried to have a reasonable intelligent debate with him. Argh, I have to go punch something......

True, but that was never the point of science. Scientific theories can never prove anything, at most they can only strongly suggest. However, they can disprove things, and be disproved themselves should new evidence or methods of testing come about.

Creationism is infallible. There is nothing in nature that can be observed, no test that can be devised to verify whether or not the universe was created by the supernatural. All that the Christians seem to need is that some Hebrew (allegedly Moses) wrote down a few thousand years ago that God created the universe in seven days.

I think there's value to learning about creation myths, as they grant insight into society and the human psyche. But the drive to teach creationism, or "intelligent design," in public schools is by masquerading it as science, which it clearly isn't.

I've been hesitant to weigh in on this because I don't think there's anything I can say that doesn't echo what every other sensible member has already said.

:D hehe, it is irritating isn't it. Although unfortunately true.

Viscus, I agree with virtually all of that, except I'd put a 'some' in front of the 'Christians seem to need is that some Hebrew '. I personally don't believe God literally took 7 days; since God is timeless, I just think it's an allegory.

Just because it's true that humankind can ignore knowledge and put no value to it doesn't stop the universe from being what it is.
By the way, God himself was also an allegory.

Hmm? How come?

I'm not christian. I've never been religious, i don't need god in my life to feel complete and make it seem like i have a purpose. Not only do I NOT believe that jesus was the son of god, I don't even believe he existed at all. all of that is bull shit. and i'm sick of people assuming that just because a person believes the idea of creationism or intelligent design is possible automatically makes them a religious nut.

evolutionists claim religion is too narrow-minded, but refuse to see how narrow-minded they're being themselves, by not allowing even the possibility of some form of creationism to have taken place, because there's no evidence. You're doing exactly the same thing creationists are doing. Think outside the fucking box for a change.

Evolution is a viable concept, and for the most part it makes sense. But at this point in the modern world we still don't have all the facts. There is no proof that we are directly descended from homo erectus. there are still too many holes in the concept of evolution to accept it as the only possible way that modern man came to be. so until those links are found, there's still room for the possibility of other means. just because science hasn't proven it doesn't mean it isn't possible.

and if you think that humans are the most intelligent form of life, that no one else could ever possibly have come before us, then you live a very sad, lonely existence full of arrogance and foolishness.

Man, stop speaking bullshit!!
"I think evolutionists are narrow-minded because they don't accept as scientific my belief that we're just ingredients of a giant stellar hot dog just because there's no evidence of it."
I just did. Now accept as scientific my hot dog theory or be a hypocrite.

ok you've yet to say one intelligent thing through this entire thread. so its obvious i'm speaking to a child here.

when you're capable of presenting a real debate let me know.

I'm pretty certain the existence of JC has been verified, by historians, and it is probable that he was crucified. The open to dispute part is just him being the son of God 'n all.

The stupid is strong with this one.

Oh, goody, an ad hominem attack.
Listen to me clearly, idiot, because I shouldn't even be wasting my time with someone that does not understand science.

There's this concept called falsifiability. Ever heard of it? In today's times anyone above the age of seventeen ought to know it already. Falsifiability means that a concept is only scientific if there are hypothetical situations that could conflict with a certain theory, rendering it useless.
Evolution is falsifiable: if an archaeologist were to find a modern-day mammal in the triassic layer, then it would be proven that evolution has a huge flaw in it.
THAT MAKES IT SCIENCE!
Creationism just says that a god made everything. Any reasoning a scientist would give to disprove creationism (like the countless arguments that have been given) are just brushed away, making people just like you believe that creationism has scientific value, when literally no scientist believes creationism could be right without being fueled by religious zeal.
Tell me one single scientist that gives some credit to creationism without him being a Christian and we'll all shut up.
Creationism in unfalsifiable because creationists take that their view of the beginning of the universe is a priori and all evidence must fit into it or is wrong, which is exactly the opposite of Science!

There you have it. Is that intelligent enough for you or were you just trying to insult me because that's all you got?

Sorry, but at the risk of sounding like a broken record how is God an allegory, I'm genuinely curious?

Friend, you're still missing the point. There is no problem with belief. You can believe anything you want, so long as it isn't causing you to commit violence towards non-believers. You want to believe evolution was directed by some supernatural force? Fine, but you have to let bygones be bygones and accept what is science, and what is not. Anyone's idea of creationism is the latter.

A little off topic and late, but what the hell has being a child got to do with intelligence?? Children can be prodigies, and adults can be dumb as pig shit.

The number of years you walk the planet doesn't directly correlate with brain capacity.

As made apparent by this article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle2844677.ece

In the same way the stories of the bible (e.g. Genesis) are allegories.
If the stories in the bible are metaphors to appeal to a sense of morality, then why would the source of morality not be also an allegory to explain the reason to being moral?
It is entirely arbitrary to say that the settings and actions are fictional but the description of the source is not.

You have green hair... and i'm the one that's stupid? I just think that's humorous.

zeitgeist the movie dott com - watch it online. its free. read the references. or just go outside and witness it for yourself at the next winter solstice.

As for evolution, I stand by my argument. Call me an idiot if that's what makes you feel good. Call me whatever you want. Regardless, evolution has not been substantially proven. Period. If it makes you feel more content to pretend that it has been proven, then by all means go for it. Believe what you want. I believe that creationism is possible, in regards to human evolution that is. I do not think the universe was created by any one being or group of beings. Its just modern man and some toying with dna. And until it's proven otherwise I'll continue to believe that. It has nothing to do with religion, in my opinion.

Wait..you call someone stupid for having green hair...And then you post the zeitgeist? Are you trying to look dense?

ah, so that's wrong too.
i'm beginning to see a pattern here.

Let me see how many things were wrong in your last posts:

First, you seem to have a problem with people having green hair. Not only was it a personal attack which makes it stupid, but it's the worst personal attack I've seen in a while.

You used the idiotic movie Zeitgeist as an argument! Please tell me that's not seriously where you get your information.

You say creationism is right, only that it is the superevolved species called humans who in the past 'toyed with DNA' so that the human species could evolve so that five million years later we had the intelligence we had back then?

You don't seem to grasp that the theory of evolution and the theory of gravity have the same validity (which prompted my first retort to you) so you accept some nonsense, I believe, not because it has value, but because it's another loudmouthed excuse for an alternative. Seriously, you were offended by my sarcasm, but I bet you if a lot of people did believe that gravity is false because we're pushed down, not pulled, you'd swallow that too.

why is everything an argument and personal attack with you? you seem offended that i don't agree with what you believe and have suddenly gotten defensive over it, from the first post. Instead of entering a rational, mature debate over the topic, you immediately called me an idiot for stating what i believe is possible, without ever once asking why I believe it, or what lead me to believe what i do. So who exactly has been throwing personal attacks from the get-go here?

and where the fuck did you draw that conclusion, from anything I said? Do you actually think about what you're reading, even for a second, before you attack it?

I used to think you were almost cool and didn't really see why others had a problem with you. Now It's becoming pretty clear why you weren't wanted around. There is life outside the computer. you should try taking part in it sometime.

You do know what a personal attack is, right?
"so its obvious i'm speaking to a child here."
"You have green hair... and i'm the one that's stupid?"
Those were personal attacks, i.e. attacks that have nothing to do with an argument and merely attack a person

Just because you say that's what happened doesn't mean it's true. In fact, you were the one that instead of argumenting felt offended and started saying that I exemplify the human arrogance and went off on a tangent that had nothing to do with science and everything to do with your beliefs and contradictions.

Yes, they were attacks, in retaliation to you and others attacking me. So its okay for you guys to attack me but I can't attack back? Where's the logic there?

"Just because you say that's what happened doesn't mean it's true." Uhm, yes it does. Read the posts. It's all right there and they aren't that old. And my statement regarding human arrogance was not a personal attack. Its simply an observation. Further, the original post didn't mention a single word about science. The thread is about creationism. Science was only brought up a few posts later, and I agreed then that creationism shouldn't be taught in a science class.

Its obvious you're not capable of intelligent, mature debate, unless it falls in line with what you believe. Instead you use attacks and sarcasm to belittle your opponent instead of trying to be open-minded enough to hear what someone else has to say and possibly learn something from it. Whatever. you're impossible.

Oh my, I have to admire you. Despite three years of being here, in which everyone thinks they know my personality, you are the one that finally cracked me: I'm not smart.
Forget all my philosophical, scientific, and political comments. No. Those were just decoys. I'm actually a dumbshit.

Seriously, you brought up Zeitgeist as an argument and believe creationism is valid because it can't be proven wrong.
I, however, understand the concept of falsifiability and know all the stupid arguments in favor of creationism and how to disprove them, and let's not forget the countless other posts where I have cited Chomsky and Dawkins and Bakunin.
Who is the one that can't have a mature debate unless we agree with you?