View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Post suggestions, ideas and feedback for SCEPCOP and this website. Propose and coordinate projects, plans, articles, site improvements, etc. Requests for new boards can be made here too.

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Edx » 17 Jul 2010, 21:09

ProfWag wrote:
Edx wrote:Im not being immature, im being serious. The fact that this question is apparently so difficult you dont understand it tells me everything I need to know. Its a very serious question as it gets the the heart of fact that Winstons "SCEPCOP" is nothing more than him promoting and defending all the claims he personally wants to believe in and arbitrarily rejecting everything he doesn't under the claim that he is a real skeptic and everyone who doesnt believe his claims are "pseudoskeptics" but cannot explain why he rejectes some claims and not others.

Now why in the hell didn't you just say that to begin with! :-)
I totally agree though and his bias is grossly one-sided. I posted a news article several months about a town that is offering $1 million to anyone who can prove its existance and I was immediately beaten down and made fun of because he said it obviously was a hoax.
In part, his reply was:
"And of course, plenty of people have experienced psychics and psychic phenomena firsthand. Can't say the same for mermaids.
This is all so obvious, so why do you even have to ask? Obviously you lack the ability to connect simple dots, something that is common in pseudo-skeptics. And you have a strong bias against the existence of them."
Here's the link to the thread:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=316&hilit=mermaid


I am not at all surprised at this...

I mean, he even believes in big foot. I would ask if there is any fringe claim he DOESNT believe in but that's really incorrect, he doesn't believe in Mermaids but then still says they could exist even though that would defy evolution... There's lots Winston doesnt believe in but for personal arbitrarily decided reasons known only to himself rejects some but not others. He just really really likes fringe claims. If he had the choice to accept a mainstream view or some random guys views on the internet it seems he will almost always choose the random guy on the internet to back, even if it has no mainstream support from other scientists. You cant debate him because he never replies past maybe 2 responces, or at least that is my experience (as you can see from the 911 threads). I dont know if thats intentional or not but it was the same on the ZGM forums.

I would just love to know whats so different about homeopathy, astrology, crystal healing, dowsing, free energy and so on compared with something like Intelligent Design. Oh well seems like the people who agree with Winston dont want to talk about it or still somehow dont understand what Im asking them.

At least you understand my fellow skeptic :)

PS: I went to see Penn and Teller last night, great stuff! never see them before. I highly reccomend it :)
Edx
 
Posts: 128
Joined: 03 Jul 2010, 03:21






Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby really? » 17 Jul 2010, 22:01

[quote="Edx"][/quote]

I've asked the same question of the Coalition here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1313
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Edx » 17 Jul 2010, 22:46

really? wrote:I've asked the same question of the Coalition here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1313


I think the most important question is WHY they dont and what makes the ones they dont support so different. I just dont get how someone can support free energy, homeopathy, astrology, Richard Gage etc but not support Intelligent Design

And I'd still like to know if Intelligent Design is only thing they agree with Randi about.
Edx
 
Posts: 128
Joined: 03 Jul 2010, 03:21

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Scepcop » 19 Sep 2010, 04:09

This is an interesting documentary about how scientists that believe creationism could be possible are marginalized, blacklisted and ultimately silenced.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Super Trailer)



Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Part 1 of 10)



It looks like the church dogma of the past has now been replaced by darwinistic dogma and you aren't allowed to question it.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Scepcop » 19 Sep 2010, 04:10

Edx wrote:
really? wrote:I've asked the same question of the Coalition here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1313


I think the most important question is WHY they dont and what makes the ones they dont support so different. I just dont get how someone can support free energy, homeopathy, astrology, Richard Gage etc but not support Intelligent Design

And I'd still like to know if Intelligent Design is only thing they agree with Randi about.


Huh? Randi doesn't believe in intelligent design. Show me where he says that.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Edx » 19 Sep 2010, 07:07

Scepcop wrote:
Edx wrote:
really? wrote:I've asked the same question of the Coalition here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1313


I think the most important question is WHY they dont and what makes the ones they dont support so different. I just dont get how someone can support free energy, homeopathy, astrology, Richard Gage etc but not support Intelligent Design

And I'd still like to know if Intelligent Design is only thing they agree with Randi about.


Huh? Randi doesn't believe in intelligent design. Show me where he says that.


*claps*. You managed to interpret the exact opposite of what I said.

And *claps* again! I didnt realise you were also a Creationist, good one. :roll: I guess I gave you too much credit. Maybe then you should go back to the start of this thread and add that Creationism sub-forum so you can push all your Creationist videos and lectures like the one you just did in this thread and rant endlessly about how evolution is an atheist plot to get god out of society like they do.

You are the worst skeptic ever, you exhibit absolutely no quality that defines that of a skeptic. In fact you are the exact opposite of a skeptic. Believing in every fringe belief is not skepticism, sorry to break it to you. Not only do you promote Intelligent Design Creationism, you also think it isn't crazy to suggest there were no planes on 911 at all and that it was actually just CGI and elaborate special effects. I honestly dont know where you would ever draw the line. So long as its not a mainstream view, its right up your street. The less evidence the better! How about the idea that the earth is actually growing! Yes, that is actually what some people actually believe. Would you believe that too? I honestly think you will say yes, but on the offchance that you wont, I do wonder why the draw the line there.

Of course if you do as I expect and actually think its a rational idea and the guy may be on to something I wonder if you would also dabble with the idea that the earth is actually flat after all. Yes there really are still flat earthers believe it or not, well... either that or they are very dedicated satirists, but that's the funny thing, its always so hard to tell when these guys are being serious or not. Ordinarily you would assume that they are all obviously joking, but then some people think the earth is growing, or that you can create quiet yet intense explosives, or that the Nazi's were motivated by atheism and evolution, or that there were no planes on 911, or that diluting a substance that makes you sick to the point where none of it is left in the water anymore can actually cure that illness. They seem quite serious about those beliefs too despite those ideas being absolutely idiotic.
Edx
 
Posts: 128
Joined: 03 Jul 2010, 03:21

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Craig Browning » 19 Sep 2010, 21:43

Randi certain don't believe in ID... but then I can't think of many INTELLIGENT PEOPLE that would. The physical record, and I'm not just talking about geology and anthropology but the FACT that the bible itself has been proven false 1001 times or more; a tome filled with plagiarism, outrageous contradictions as well as noted deletions and additions made by scribes (especially in the New Testament) for Political reasons more than anything else. Then we can top all of that off with the fact that the most read and quoted version of the book (King James) was organized and "complied" by a known gay pedophile (Yes, the King was a Queen... but maybe that's what this whole Randi connection is about???)

For anyone in modern times to believe that the earth is but a few thousand years old vs. the obvious millions... well, I think they need to get out more and have a life away from their "ministers"... give them the opportunity to actually apply FREE WILL in their lives. Most of them can't simply because they were programmed to believe certain things whilst in diapers.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Scepcop » 22 Sep 2010, 06:27

Edx wrote:
*claps*. You managed to interpret the exact opposite of what I said.

And *claps* again! I didnt realise you were also a Creationist, good one. :roll: I guess I gave you too much credit. Maybe then you should go back to the start of this thread and add that Creationism sub-forum so you can push all your Creationist videos and lectures like the one you just did in this thread and rant endlessly about how evolution is an atheist plot to get god out of society like they do.

You are the worst skeptic ever, you exhibit absolutely no quality that defines that of a skeptic. In fact you are the exact opposite of a skeptic. Believing in every fringe belief is not skepticism, sorry to break it to you. Not only do you promote Intelligent Design Creationism, you also think it isn't crazy to suggest there were no planes on 911 at all and that it was actually just CGI and elaborate special effects. I honestly dont know where you would ever draw the line. So long as its not a mainstream view, its right up your street. The less evidence the better! How about the idea that the earth is actually growing! Yes, that is actually what some people actually believe. Would you believe that too? I honestly think you will say yes, but on the offchance that you wont, I do wonder why the draw the line there.

Of course if you do as I expect and actually think its a rational idea and the guy may be on to something I wonder if you would also dabble with the idea that the earth is actually flat after all. Yes there really are still flat earthers believe it or not, well... either that or they are very dedicated satirists, but that's the funny thing, its always so hard to tell when these guys are being serious or not. Ordinarily you would assume that they are all obviously joking, but then some people think the earth is growing, or that you can create quiet yet intense explosives, or that the Nazi's were motivated by atheism and evolution, or that there were no planes on 911, or that diluting a substance that makes you sick to the point where none of it is left in the water anymore can actually cure that illness. They seem quite serious about those beliefs too despite those ideas being absolutely idiotic.


I never said all those things. They are straw mans you put into my mouth. I do not support every fringe theory and never said that I did. I can't be certain of some of them one way or another. Just because something sounds crazy doesn't mean it's not true.

A true skeptic asks questions on both sides. You guys don't do that.

You guys are the ones who act like it is religious anathema to question Darwinism.

Sheesh.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Arouet » 22 Sep 2010, 08:54

Scepcop wrote:
I never said all those things. They are straw mans you put into my mouth. I do not support every fringe theory and never said that I did. I can't be certain of some of them one way or another. Just because something sounds crazy doesn't mean it's not true.

A true skeptic asks questions on both sides. You guys don't do that.

You guys are the ones who act like it is religious anathema to question Darwinism.

Sheesh.


Scientists question Darwinism all the time and evolutionary theory has evolved substantially since then. There is a mountain of evidence supporting natural selection as well as some offshoots. Questioning it is great, and should be encouraged. But if you want to put forward a credible alternative, you need to bring your own mountain of evidence!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Craig Browning » 22 Sep 2010, 11:09

I have to side with the skeptics on this, especially when it comes to the creationist "need" to embrace a mythos that's not even exclusive to the bible and even if it were we need to ask ourselves which of the two separate creation tales in Genesis is the "true" or "valid" version of things... and yes, there are two different accounts of creation in there, so take a gander.

My biggest question centers on how to be "fair" when it comes to actually incorporating a Creationism curriculum that does not bias student perspective. In other words, how do we give students an even-handed and balanced overview of the various creation legends from around the world and the many different world cultures over the past 5,000 or so years? I'm certain that you'd agree that it wouldn't be right or just, to simply give them a semester of nothing but the Judeo-Christian perspective to things, right? :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Arouet » 22 Sep 2010, 11:57

Craig Browning wrote:
My biggest question centers on how to be "fair" when it comes to actually incorporating a Creationism curriculum that does not bias student perspective. In other words, how do we give students an even-handed and balanced overview of the various creation legends from around the world and the many different world cultures over the past 5,000 or so years? I'm certain that you'd agree that it wouldn't be right or just, to simply give them a semester of nothing but the Judeo-Christian perspective to things, right? :roll:


Simple: have a course called "comparative religions" that explores the various primary religions in the world. One segment can be creation myths.

And you don't call it science.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby really? » 22 Sep 2010, 21:07

Craig Browning wrote:I have to side with the skeptics on this, especially when it comes to the creationist "need" to embrace a mythos that's not even exclusive to the bible and even if it were we need to ask ourselves which of the two separate creation tales in Genesis is the "true" or "valid" version of things... and yes, there are two different accounts of creation in there, so take a gander.

My biggest question centers on how to be "fair" when it comes to actually incorporating a Creationism curriculum that does not bias student perspective. In other words, how do we give students an even-handed and balanced overview of the various creation legends from around the world and the many different world cultures over the past 5,000 or so years? I'm certain that you'd agree that it wouldn't be right or just, to simply give them a semester of nothing but the Judeo-Christian perspective to things, right? :roll:



Its been a long time since high school so i have no idea if such a course as 'comparative religions is taught. It is part of the elective curriculum in higher learning.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Craig Browning » 22 Sep 2010, 22:06

I knew that colleges offered such a course but in my mind the course shouldn't have the "R" word attached but be more item specific such as "Creation Mythos of the World' or some such and it should be a requisite course vs. elective... but then, I'm biased with reason.

In my decade as Mr. Mom the kids were exposed to a wide variety of world views, cultures, sub-cultures, etc. this includes encouragement to take the time to learn about the many religions or aspects thereof. The result has been one boy that sees himself as a Buddhist, one that went back to the Mormon church and a step-daughter that's wiccan... they each came to their own conclusions and choices and that's the point -- actual freedom of choice.

It goes back to my big question pertaining to the "Christian" idea; if they are the one true way, why are they so afraid of letting people learn about other philosophies, ideas, or asking them questions about things that "don't seem to fit"? Why do they "need" to use all these covert modes of brain washing youngster into thinking "their" way?

Sorry, but that's not just a cult-mind mentality, it's a very paranoid and corrupted cult-mind attitude that can (and has) proved rather dangerous to ALL.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby Scepcop » 28 Sep 2010, 17:00

Scepcop wrote:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Part 1 of 10)




Hi all,
I just finished watching "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". It was very good and engaging. And it was successful in proving that there IS in fact suppression of freethought and dissent in the scientific community, to the point that if you publish one article about intelligent design (not about God or religion), then your career is over and you are blacklisted from rehire. This goes for scientists, professors and journalists as well.

What was revealing was that in the end (part 10) Richard Dawkins admitted that he and no one else knows how life began and how the first cell become self-replicating. He said that no one, including him, had the answer to that. Ben Stein should have then asked "So if no one knows, why can't God be a possibility?" but he didn't.

However, the film lacked in several areas:

1) It did not present the core arguments of Evolution vs. Intelligent Design so it was not educational in that sense. It mostly presented soundbytes on both sides and focused on the suppression of dissension in the science establishment while interviewing those who lost their careers for writing about intelligent design. It should have presented the key arguments on both sides and weighed them.

2) At one point, the film lumped the Darwinists and the Nazi Eugenicists into the same category, as though one leads to the other. That is a big jump and would offend many Darwinists and Atheists. Most Atheists have decent morals and do not advocate murder, eugenics, ethnic cleansing or mass genocide. That would be the equivalent of lumping all intelligent design believers with Bible thumpers and those who want the government to be based on a theocracy.

3) There was too much propaganda about "freedom is what makes America great" as if no other country has freedom but America. That is a pure myth and religious mantra not supported by any evidence or logical reasons. In most countries (not North Korea or the Middle East) as long as you obey the laws and pay your bills, you can do whatever you want or go anywhere you want, which is the same for America. There is no evidence that the US has less laws and regulations than most countries, but in fact probably has more.

Anyway, you should all see the whole film. It was eye opening and worth watching, yet disturbing at the same time when you realize how truth and open discussion is suppressed in America.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Why no CREATIONISM forum?

Postby really? » 28 Sep 2010, 22:04

Scepcop wrote:
Scepcop wrote:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Part 1 of 10)




Hi all,
I just finished watching "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". It was very good and engaging. And it was successful in proving that there IS in fact suppression of freethought and dissent in the scientific community, to the point that if you publish one article about intelligent design (not about God or religion), then your career is over and you are blacklisted from rehire. This goes for scientists, professors and journalists as well.

What was revealing was that in the end (part 10) Richard Dawkins admitted that he and no one else knows how life began and how the first cell become self-replicating. He said that no one, including him, had the answer to that. Ben Stein should have then asked "So if no one knows, why can't God be a possibility?" but he didn't.




Anyway, you should all see the whole film. It was eye opening and worth watching, yet disturbing at the same time when you realize how truth and open discussion is suppressed in America.


First off. If you don't live in America then don't make comments on something you don't know a thing about. there's no suppression. Aren't we talking about it right now and there are many other American based sites doing the same thing.
Secondly. creationism, intelligent design, theistic evolution or whatever you want to call it is exactly the opposite of what you think it is. It is a thinly veiled attempt to put a scientific spin on the infallibility of the Bible and put the christian God back into the classroom. It's not science.
Thirdly. It [creationism] is not suppressed it is well known debate here in this country. The debate first came to a head way back in 1925 and it has continued on and off since then. [see Scopes Monkey trail]
Lastly. The only thing eye opening is how a seemingly intelligent fellow like Ben could peddle such garbage.
For further info on Evolution see
http://www.talkorigins.org

P.S. The Creationists point of view http://www.answersingenesis.org/
Last edited by really? on 29 Sep 2010, 03:29, edited 1 time in total.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

PreviousNext

Return to Suggestions / Feedback

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest