The Armor Games website will be down for maintenance on Monday 10/7/2024
starting at 10:00 AM Pacific time. We apologize for the inconvenience.

AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Evolution, creationism and the school cirriculum

697 104874
samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Well to start out i dont beleive in evoltuion so the fact that other things cant be taught really ticks me off but i just want to see what people think and why.

  • 697 Replies
Lynoth
offline
Lynoth
509 posts
Nomad

Most evolutionists have this thought that to be "tolerant" no religions can be involved at all, I would disagree. Recently evolutionists protested the Cincinnati zoo partnering with the creation museum for a dual ticket to go to both. The zoo cut the promotion off and it really seems (to me at least) like every evolutionist is extremely intolerant of all other beliefs.


I have to disagree with you there. I know many evolutionists who are very tolerant of others' beliefs.

But anyway, it seems to me that the reason some may have protested is it seems like the zoo has sided with creation against evolution, and some people might have felt like the zoo was "disagreeing" with evolutionists. I'm sure that if the zoo had partnered with a museum solely interested in the theories of evolution many people would have strongly disagreed.
woody_7007
offline
woody_7007
2,662 posts
Peasant

Actualy it's just what i believe, I believe the bible is true and I take Revelations seriously, so that would be my conclusion, I wasn't trying to use fear tactics, I hate fear tactics lol.


Despite the fact that you do have some valid points, as you have built your argument around this belief then you have weakened it severely. How can you expect to persuad someone to your point of view if your core reasoning is unfounded? It is ok to disagree but not to expect people to be persuaded to your side with such flismy argumentative foundations.
Strop
offline
Strop
10,816 posts
Bard

Samy, I guess I'm (and woody is) most concerned about your lack of consistency here, as the words you say are consistently inconsistent.

Let's compare some sentences from the same paragraph:

Most evolutionists have this thought that to be "tolerant" no religions can be involved at all


And then at the end,

every evolutionist is extremely intolerant of all other beliefs.


Emphases mine.

I believe the first bold word is what is known as a "weasel word". A weasel word is frequently used device when a person isn't really sure or has no official source on their argument, and therefore use something that might cover, such as "most" (how much?), "it is said" (by whom?), "at some point in the past" (when, if at all?) etc.

I frequently use these myself except with the following qualifiers- a) If I really don't know I'll say I really don't know but I'm under the impression b) Otherwise I'm merely too lazy to post a source but I have a number on hand.

Then you strengthened your stance to "all evolutionists", or really "it seems to me that all..." Rhetorical strengthening has weakened your argument because you've not only changed your tune, but you've also strengthened it to the point where you absolutely cannot support it, as all I need to do is provide one counterexample and your case is defeated. And in this case, I've already demonstrated that I'd be that counterexample, therefore you've defeated yourself before you even finished. Rule of thumb here is never to make a generalisation unless it is actually a definition, because there are always exceptions to the rule, it's just a matter of how many.

In this case you've provided an example which is great. However it's very difficult to prove that "most people behave this way" from a single example, unless you can argue successfully that this is part of a trend. If you did not feel the need to argue against evolutionism on political grounds, you would not need to open yourself to such a vulnerability. This is why I made my stance the way I have, and I haven't had to change it at all throughout the course of this discussion.

Finally, if you deny that you're using fear tactics, there's no need to backpedal so violently, just say you weren't using them. If this is the case my implied assertion still stands: I believe discussion of Revelations and endtimes is irrelevant here.
BASHA
offline
BASHA
660 posts
Nomad

well strop, I read your post and it wore me out(your writing makes me think too much) so I will just ask this question to all people who believe in creationism. Yes evolution has alot of missing links in it, but could you give me evidence that creationism is true?

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

well strop, I read your post and it wore me out(your writing makes me think too much) so I will just ask this question to all people who believe in creationism. Yes evolution has alot of missing links in it, but could you give me evidence that creationism is true?


Prove evolution is real...this has been tried before by both sides it doesn't work.
samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Then you strengthened your stance to "all evolutionists", or really "it seems to me that all..." Rhetorical strengthening has weakened your argument because you've not only changed your tune, but you've also strengthened it to the point where you absolutely cannot support it, as all I need to do is provide one counterexample and your case is defeated. And in this case, I've already demonstrated that I'd be that counterexample, therefore you've defeated yourself before you even finished. Rule of thumb here is never to make a generalisation unless it is actually a definition, because there are always exceptions to the rule, it's just a matter of how many.


You didn't see the whole sentence, IT SEEMS TO ME. Honestly i was expecting a counter example lol.

In this case you've provided an example which is great. However it's very difficult to prove that "most people behave this way" from a single example, unless you can argue successfully that this is part of a trend. If you did not feel the need to argue against evolutionism on political grounds, you would not need to open yourself to such a vulnerability. This is why I made my stance the way I have, and I haven't had to change it at all throughout the course of this discussion.


True, but I would say from what I've observed creationists TEND to be more tolerant that evolutionists.

But anyway, it seems to me that the reason some may have protested is it seems like the zoo has sided with creation against evolution, and some people might have felt like the zoo was "disagreeing" with evolutionists. I'm sure that if the zoo had partnered with a museum solely interested in the theories of evolution many people would have strongly disagreed.


Right so in essence they were just being intolerant. Also this was just a promotion so these people were also ignorant, and the majority of museums show only evolution. Also again these are just my opinions I'm very open to counter examples.
Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

True, but I would say from what I've observed creationists TEND to be more tolerant that evolutionists.


http://d.alwaysbroke.com/wswed04.jpg
samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Those people don't deserve to...no, please i hate them, i literaly hate them, theres so many positive things christians do this is reflecting the bad, just like what the zoo did becasue of evolutionists. Then again I have a million times more respect ofr what the evolutionists did. Those people are horrible.

Lynoth
offline
Lynoth
509 posts
Nomad

[quote]But anyway, it seems to me that the reason some may have protested is it seems like the zoo has sided with creation against evolution, and some people might have felt like the zoo was "disagreeing" with evolutionists. I'm sure that if the zoo had partnered with a museum solely interested in the theories of evolution many people would have strongly disagreed.


Right so in essence they were just being intolerant. Also this was just a promotion so these people were also ignorant, and the majority of museums show only evolution. Also again these are just my opinions I'm very open to counter examples.[/quote]

Actually, I don't believe there is currently a museum out there that shows only the theory of evolution and nothing else.
Carlito12
offline
Carlito12
57 posts
Nomad

i think that if there's only one school left wich is teaching creationism like a VALID theory, kids will grow up like ignorants for years and years. Believe me, i'm italian and you all know here's the vatican, is very frustrating to hear creationism in 2008...

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

i think that if there's only one school left wich is teaching creationism like a VALID theory, kids will grow up like ignorants for years and years. Believe me, i'm italian and you all know here's the vatican, is very frustrating to hear creationism in 2008...


Teaching evolution leaves no one less ignorant my friend. Also hearing it in 2008?Come on.

Actually, I don't believe there is currently a museum out there that shows only the theory of evolution and nothing else.


I was more refering to the fact that most museums only have the theory of evolution as the way humans came about.
Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

Those people don't deserve to...no, please i hate them, i literaly hate them, theres so many positive things christians do this is reflecting the bad,


Can you find me a picture of scientists saying that someone should die, simply for playing a role in society?

I was more refering to the fact that most museums only have the theory of evolution as the way humans came about.


Have you ever been to a nationally-regarded museum? I've been into plenty, and most have talked about Christianity as well as evolution. It's still a part of our history, whether we like it or not.


Teaching evolution leaves no one less ignorant my friend.


Ignorance: the lack of knowledge or education


So, if America was to say, suddenly stop teaching evolution, the lack of knowledge wouldn't leave us less ignorant?
BASHA
offline
BASHA
660 posts
Nomad

Prove evolution is real...this has been tried before by both sides it doesn't work.


I know evolution is not technicly &quotroven" but that was not my question I want one, JUST ONE, piece of evidence supporting creationism.
Strop
offline
Strop
10,816 posts
Bard

lol zootsuit, that was a cheap shot.

[quote]Then you strengthened your stance to "all evolutionists", or really "it seems to me that all..."


You didn't see the whole sentence, IT SEEMS TO ME. Honestly i was expecting a counter example lol.[/quote]

Dude, just would like to point out that I definitely saw your whole sentence, at least the part you accused me of not seeing I took the trouble of quoting and rebutting :P

To clarify, though, "It seems to me" is a good way of introducing an uncertain opinion, but nonetheless when coupled with "it seems to me that all", it becomes part of an unsustainable generalisation that only serves to make you look, well...uninformed >:
samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Have you ever been to a nationally-regarded museum? I've been into plenty, and most have talked about Christianity as well as evolution. It's still a part of our history, whether we like it or not.


Count the Smithsonians? I have never seen anything else but the universe IS billions of years old. We DID evolve from apes.

So, if America was to say, suddenly stop teaching evolution, the lack of knowledge wouldn't leave us less ignorant?


No as I have said many times before I would be angry if they stop teaching evolution. Both theories need to be presented and the student needs to decide for them self.

I know evolution is not technicly &quotroven" but that was not my question I want one, JUST ONE, piece of evidence supporting creationism.


Again I'll post a link to a creationist website that includes a peer reviewed journal, and I'm sure i will again be rediculed but oh well.
http://answersingenesis.com

To clarify, though, "It seems to me" is a good way of introducing an uncertain opinion, but nonetheless when coupled with "it seems to me that all", it becomes part of an unsustainable generalisation that only serves to make you look, well...uninformed >:


Seems to me the majority of then.
Showing 406-420 of 697