The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KellyG View Post
    I am a former Christian, now atheist.....and a HUGE fan of science and the scientific method :-)
    Just want to remind y'all that the structure of Evolution By Natural Selection-- Chuckie D's proposed process itself-- doesn't lend itself particularly well to the kind of "crucial experiment proves it! QED, done!" kind of science people think about.

    Sigh. I can't believe yet one more of these debates is happening. There have been several rounds in my adult lifetime-- they crop up about once per decade. The same has been true for the 19th- and earlier 20th centuries, too. Isn't anyone bored yet?
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan. 13, 2013
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    Just want to remind y'all that the structure of Evolution By Natural Selection-- Chuckie D's proposed process itself-- doesn't lend itself particularly well to the kind of "crucial experiment proves it! QED, done!" kind of science people think about.

    Sigh. I can't believe yet one more of these debates is happening. There have been several rounds in my adult lifetime-- they crop up about once per decade. The same has been true for the 19th- and earlier 20th centuries, too. Isn't anyone bored yet?
    He was a great start :-D



  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2005
    Location
    Where the prairie ends and the mountains begin
    Posts
    2,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    Isn't anyone bored yet?
    I may have been living under a rock, but no I did not find it boring. This was the first face to face debate I have seen between the two sides. Maybe it's because, all religion aside, I seriously cannot even fathom how there are still people who truly and wholeheartedly believe that a book with so many different variations, written by men (and maybe a few women) thousands of years ago, and translated into the English/King James version so popular today can be taken literally, as fact and the end all/be all.

    This is why I found the debate interesting. I honestly didn't realize such a large group of those folks still existed. I do now. But, to each his own. The debate didn't change my beliefs.
    Dreaming in Color


    5 members found this post helpful.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan. 10, 2002
    Location
    Area VIII, Region 2, Zone 5.
    Posts
    6,676

    Default

    Why is this topic considered debatable?
    Quote Originally Posted by Linny View Post
    Those martingales were so taut, you could play Ode to Joy on them with a comb


    10 members found this post helpful.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan. 10, 2002
    Location
    Area VIII, Region 2, Zone 5.
    Posts
    6,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drmgncolor View Post
    But, to each his own. The debate didn't change my beliefs.
    "To each his own" is fine, until they start teaching creationism in publicly funded schools. Oh, wait, they're already doing that.
    http://www.slate.com/articles/health...ernatives.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Linny View Post
    Those martingales were so taut, you could play Ode to Joy on them with a comb


    6 members found this post helpful.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct. 8, 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    9,543

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillyHorse View Post
    Why is this topic considered debatable?
    I think from Nye's perspective, it wasn't so much about "debate" but about him trying to reach kids and expose them to actual science. And I agree that this is a bigger problem than it might look like at first - with all the efforts to get creationism into schools, the fact that huge swaths of the US population don't "believe" in evolution, and the fact that these are the people who are trying to write laws and drive our society - maybe it needs to be challenged. I still haven't made my mind up, I think if anything this was a huge publicity win for the creation museum people, and that's what they were really after.

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/0...onist-ken-ham/
    "smile a lot can let us ride happy,it is good thing"

    My CANTER blog.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun. 17, 2001
    Location
    down the road from bar.ka
    Posts
    31,582

    Default

    I am surprised anybody physically went into the teeth of a really nasty, well predicted heavy snow to ice storm to sit in on this.

    Their website is in your face with you are all wrong, we are right. The other museum in the area takes the position the scientific method is theory, some theories change over time as we learn more and scientific theory does not conflict with belief systems. They just say wrong wrong wrong. We are right, you are going to hell.

    Nice neighbors
    When opportunity knocks it's wearing overalls and looks like work.

    The horse world. Two people. Three opinions.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2005
    Location
    Where the prairie ends and the mountains begin
    Posts
    2,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillyHorse View Post
    "To each his own" is fine, until they start teaching creationism in publicly funded schools. [/URL]
    Valid Point. I don't have kids so I am not up on curriculums and what is being taught in public schools. Thanks for the link... very interesting information.
    Dreaming in Color



  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,262

    Default

    I don't know who Dan Arel (the author of this article on the Richard Dawkins Foundation website) is, or what his credentials are.

    But he gets a couple of things wrong.

    1. "Irreducible complexity" and "half a wing" are short-hand for some legitimate and long-debated problems with evolutionary theory. To some pretty credible evolutionists, they remain problems to consider.

    2. Arel is wrong to think that those genuine problems within evolutionary biology are either solved or not stuff the public needs to know about. On the contrary, the public *should* be credited with being able to understand evolution-- warts and all-- or the pro-science side can be accused of being dogmatists along side the religious folks.

    If it's a problem that someone generally smart but not a degree-holding evolutionary biologist like Bill Nye is getting into this, then I find it a problem that some interwebz guy with no credentials listed at all steps up to defend a really poor understanding of the evolutionists' side.



    Thank you!! I thought it might be available...I'm going to watch it today.[/QUOTE]
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan. 13, 2013
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I had some of the same thoughts about the author of that RDFSR article, but some of his points were really valid.

    At first, I was looking forward to the debate - I am interested in how some can justify their beliefs (as opposed to justifying knowledge).

    BUT - after reading the article, I do think there are people better suited to the debate than Nye.

    BUT EVEN FURTHER - I agree....why give beliefs "air time" and put them up there with knowledge - why give them any credibility by engaging them in the first place?

    Beliefs are just that - beliefs. And frequently they are not in any way based in knowledge. Peoples beliefs run long and deep.

    You just can't argue with beliefs.....or willful ignorance. They are often the same.
    Last edited by KellyG; Feb. 5, 2014 at 10:36 PM.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Feb. 23, 2005
    Location
    Spotsylvania, VA
    Posts
    13,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mroades View Post
    I love this, may I make it my sig line????
    Certainly, I would be honored
    I wasn't always a Smurf
    Penmerryl's Sophie RIDSH
    "I ain't as good as I once was but I'm as good once as I ever was"
    The ignore list is my friend. It takes 2 to argue.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan. 28, 2003
    Location
    Hollywood, but not the one where they have the Oscars!
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carolprudm View Post
    Certainly, I would be honored
    Thanks!!
    "You can't really debate with someone who has a prescient invisible friend"
    carolprudm


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    17,783

    Default

    Even Pat Robertson doesn't believe the earth is only 6,000 years old.

    “Let’s face it, there was a bishop [James Ussher] … who added up the dates listed in Genesis and he came up with the world had been around for 6,000 years,” Robertson began. “There ain’t no way that’s possible … To say that it all came about in 6,000 years is just nonsense and I think it’s time we come off of that stuff and say this isn’t possible.”

    “We’ve got to be realistic that the dating of Bishop Ussher just doesn’t comport with anything that’s found in science,” Robertson continued, “and you can’t just totally deny the geological formations that are out there.”

    “Let’s be real,” Robertson begged, “let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”
    http://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/pat_...am_to_shut_up/
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    2 members found this post helpful.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2002
    Location
    Henrico, NC 36 30'50.49" N 77 50'17.47" W
    Posts
    5,808

    Default

    quote:
    "Robertson begged, “let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

    Sorry, too late.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Oct. 26, 2007
    Location
    San Jose, Ca
    Posts
    5,212

    Default This site made my head explode

    The fact that ANY ONE would believe the "facts" and "truths" on this page, shows have very very poor science education is in this country.

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...-and-the-bible (answers by creation museum guy)

    Dinosaurs where on the ark, they are only 4,500 years old, there were probably only 50 different kinds of dinosaurs, scientist do not know how old they are because they didn't see them die with their own eyes, they were buried in layers due to various stages of the "great flood" - on and on. Just mind boggling!!

    I really can't wrap my head around the fact there are people that really believe that EVERY type of animal we see today was at one point "on the ark".

    I can't understand having beliefs that are totally contradictory to logic and reason.

    As you add up all of the dates, and accepting that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to Earth almost 2000 years ago, we come to the conclusion that the creation of the Earth and animals (including the dinosaurs) occurred only thousands of years ago (perhaps only 6000!), not millions of years. Thus, if the Bible is right (and it is!), dinosaurs must have lived within the past thousands of years.

    God sent two of every (seven of some) land animal into the Ark (Genesis 7:2–3; 7:8–9)—there were no exceptions. Therefore, dinosaurs must have been on the Ark. Even though there was ample room in the huge ship for large animals, perhaps God sent young adults into the Ark that still had plenty of room for them to grow.

    By the way, the Flood of Noah’s day probably occurred just over 4,500 years ago. Creationists believe that this event formed many of the fossil layers around the Earth. (Additional fossil layers were formed by other floods as the Earth settled down after the great Flood.) Thus, the dinosaur fossils which were formed as a result of this Flood were probably formed about 4,500 years ago, not millions of years ago.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Aug. 9, 2007
    Posts
    9,065

    Default

    The main problem is that the zealots have taken the books of Jewish folklore, the Old Testament, and turned it into "fact." If the zealots would realize that the folk legends in the old testament were meant to make the tribes of Israel prosper and multiply, then they might understand that evolution is fact, but that they can still believe in God. Do the zealots mention that in the Bible it was OK for a father to "lay with" his daughters in order to produce a male son? Do they accept that the prohibitions on sodomy were because the acts of sodomy won't produce more children? Nope. The zealots ignore all of the Bible stories that don't fit with the missionary position. And all that about the Phllistines being "smitten in their private parts?" Uh that was VD folks.

    Too bad the zealots did not go to a liberal presbyterian college where the concentric circle theory was taught. I did. I'd been upset as a 3 or 4 yr old kid because I did not believe that 1) all the pairs of every type of animals could have gotten on an ark; except of course the unicorn, what's what that?, and 2} I knew that the lions and tigers would have eaten all the deer, and then old Noah himself, duh. Then I got to my liberal presby college where women were taught to be equal to men, forget that paternalistic attitude in the Bible about men being superior and women being the temptress that caused men to fall from grace, and where we learned about the sex and VD in the Bible being taught to the Jews in order to increase the tribes of Israel and make them stronger. Dr. Petersen was a great professor and he taught us a lot of what was myth and what was actually fact in the Bible stories. Jesus was a prophet, and so was John the Baptist. so people can believe in a God, as do the Jews, but also understand that we evolved from much different organisms.

    Or then, some people prefer to believe they were born superior. But I consider those people not having evolved at all.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Oct. 18, 1999
    Posts
    3,232

    Default

    But y'all... don't you know that dinosaurs were DRAGONS!?!? See, it's that easy to explain.

    Seriously, I just about died at the dragon thing. What kind of crack...


    3 members found this post helpful.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    I only watched the opening statements. The reason is that from the get-go we see that they are not debating "creationism" (which is conveniently undefined) but rather the meaning of "science." Ham want's to divide it into two parts, observational and historic. Nye, IMO, doesn't do nearly enough to snuff that bit of sophistry in the bud.

    There's an old legal saying that goes, "I'll let you write the rules if you let me write the definitions." Once you allow Ham to have is way with the adding adjectives in front of the word "science" you've lost the war. Now he can use his modified concept of "historical science" to promote the literal accuracy of Genesis. If you enter his now renamed "arena" to discuss "science" you'll be playing in his house by his rules.

    Put another way, Ham has successfully converted Genesis from theological literature to factual truth.

    This does not mean that there cannot be "science" with adjectives in front of it. Many of us watch CSI. We know about "forensic" science. The difference is that this adjective does not change the basis of observation but rather requires of it a highly refined and carefully memorialized approach to some physical item or event.

    Should folks like Ham get a shot at being heard in the public square via the mechanism of debate with scientists? The dangers of trying to deny this are worse than the risks we face from permitting it.

    G.
    Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão



  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,854

    Default

    "When you make it idiot proof, they make a better idiot".

    Theories of evolution were very much idiot proof, until they made creationists.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Appsolute View Post
    The fact that ANY ONE would believe the "facts" and "truths" on this page, shows have very very poor science education is in this country.

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...-and-the-bible (answers by creation museum guy)

    Dinosaurs where on the ark, they are only 4,500 years old, there were probably only 50 different kinds of dinosaurs, scientist do not know how old they are because they didn't see them die with their own eyes, they were buried in layers due to various stages of the "great flood" - on and on. Just mind boggling!!

    I really can't wrap my head around the fact there are people that really believe that EVERY type of animal we see today was at one point "on the ark".

    I can't understand having beliefs that are totally contradictory to logic and reason.
    It's all Noah's fault, I tell you:
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	noahsarkandhorse.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	28.9 KB 
ID:	39360  


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Founder question - can high heels cause founder?
    By 4THEHORSES in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Nov. 8, 2013, 08:02 PM
  2. Website creation software
    By rodawn in forum Off Course
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Sep. 30, 2012, 05:14 PM
  3. Job Creation
    By Mike Matson in forum Off Course
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep. 3, 2012, 08:27 PM
  4. My newest creation! Don't laugh too hard!
    By tidy rabbit in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May. 14, 2010, 10:16 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •