Is the debate between Creationism and Evolution serious in America?

[NeckStabber]

If you are realy into this debate,you MUST see this classical black and white movie(im sry i don't know its name)from MGM:a biology teacher in the biblebashing town of 'Youallburnshire' talks to his class about the theory of evolution and is made public enemy number 1 and charged by the town,thus a famous lawyer from out of state is called in to defend him and the trial basicaly is Evolution vs Creation,it's amazing,im so sry i cant tell you it's name.

If anyone knows what im talking about reply with its name thanks

 

[Pingieking]

Anyone participating in the creationism vs. evolution debate is stupid for not acknowledging that the two can easily co-exist.

/end thread

I partially disagree. They can co-exist within society, but they cannot co-exist within science. Having those two co-existing in science is like having the ether theory and general relativity co-existing; they contradict each other scientifically.
However, you can treat creationism as more of a philosophy rather than a science; then they co-exist peacefully.

 

[Pingieking]

If you are realy into this debate,you MUST see this classical black and white movie(im sry i don't know its name)from MGM:a biology teacher in the biblebashing town of 'Youallburnshire' talks to his class about the theory of evolution and is made public enemy number 1 and charged by the town,thus a famous lawyer from out of state is called in to defend him and the trial basicaly is Evolution vs Creation,it's amazing,im so sry i cant tell you it's name.

If anyone knows what im talking about reply with its name thanks

There's a play about that called "Inherit the Wind" (I think it's called that ). Not sure if the movie shares the name.

 

[giles]

Creationists can do whatever they want, but they should stop spreading random disinformation just so they can sell their myths and believes.
Everyone is entitled to firmly believe in God and take the Bible literally. However, if your faith is shaken by mere biology, then you have to ask yourself what that says about your belief in God.
While reading this thread all I see is repeated, wrong and intentionally misleading arguments from religious fanatics. Why do you rather believe people who have no academic credibility and have evidently spread false information to the public than the scientists who dedicate their lives to increasing the knowledge of mankind? Check out what "confirmation bias" is and you will understand why.
Religion and science answer different questions in life. Religion tells you why and science tells you how. Outside of America most christians understand this and have no objections to evolution whatsoever. Religion should offer people spiritual guidance, compassion and serious empathy rather than literal reading of the Bible and fairy tale stories; show them how to lead a proud life that makes them and everyone else happy and people will respect you for it. Stop discussing theories that you didn't even take the time to understand in the first place and you will not alienate those who are willing to think outside of your little world. Stop blackmailing people with hell (a concept that according to Bible scholars has evidently been a mistranslation and copy of greek mythology).
Best wishes.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Or is it just an internet thing or the 'wedge' strategy where no one in the scientific community is seriously discussing it but just misinformation spread to the public that it is?

Are there really scientists having debates against Creationists?

I have this idea that creationists hold large debates and invite scientists to debate which one is right (kinda defeats the scientific method though). And that a large number of the population support creationism.

Alternatively, lets say Creationism succeeds in proving Evolution wrong, they 'win'. What does that mean? Do they even have an existing scientific theory or is their entire method based on proving something wrong? Does this mean we can start learning magic and casting fireballs?

Sadly, yes they are.

Of course, the scientists are simply trying to explain how evolution works and the actual definition of "THEORY" (for the last fucking time, "theory" DOES NOT mean "guess"), while the creationists keep shouting at the top of their lungs about "moral upbringing" and "god's will". Occasionally, the creationists will attempt to disguise their ridiculous arguments with science so soft that not even comic book writers would use it. At this point the scientists usually wait patiently when the creationists blather on about their "evidence", and then scientists will say "well, where is it?", then the creationists will either A) shout their idiocy at the top of their lungs as fast as they can, or B) just shuffle away sheepishly (B doesn't happen often, but it has happened).

 

[Klarinette]

I bothers me when Creationists tell Evolutionists that they're wrong and stupid for thinking that Evolution is correct, and vice versa. Overall, who cares what everyone else thinks? It would be fine if no one judged anyone else for this kind of thing. It just seems like such a silly thing to get your panties in a bunch about.

Let's fight about something equally as trivial: mayo or ketchup on fries. Mayo?? What are you, gross?

 

[anNIALLator]

If you are realy into this debate,you MUST see this classical black and white movie(im sry i don't know its name)from MGM:a biology teacher in the biblebashing town of 'Youallburnshire' talks to his class about the theory of evolution and is made public enemy number 1 and charged by the town,thus a famous lawyer from out of state is called in to defend him and the trial basicaly is Evolution vs Creation,it's amazing,im so sry i cant tell you it's name.

If anyone knows what im talking about reply with its name thanks

"Inherit the Wind", was the name.

 

[Del-Toro]

I don't understand why Creationists keep thinking up new and increasingly silly stories to justify themselves, (I did love the "look at the banana argumet" for Intelligent Design though.) Charles Darwin gave a perfectly plausable theory that incorporate Creationism when he wrote "Origin". Darwin didn't even say that God didn't exist or anything, he simply stated that God could have, (instead of creating everything as they are today as Creationist theory dictates,) created things in their simplest unevolved form and then created a rule - Natural Selection - to govern them so they would turn out as He intended. Kind of like someone creating a macro to get some mindlessly repeditive task done quicker on a computer.

That's what I've been saying, I'm agnostic, so I don't know if that's what happened, but I do think that evolution could just as easily be the answer to "how" and not "why". Even then, who's to say it's the christian god, there are alot of different gods out there.

 

[Pingieking]

I bothers me when Creationists tell Evolutionists that they're wrong and stupid for thinking that Evolution is correct, and vice versa. Overall, who cares what everyone else thinks? It would be fine if no one judged anyone else for this kind of thing. It just seems like such a silly thing to get your panties in a bunch about.

Let's fight about something equally as trivial: mayo or ketchup on fries. Mayo?? What are you, gross?

A bit of a bad argument there. Your mayo vs ketchup argument is an argument of opinion, but the argument of creationism vs evolution is an argument of fact. Nobody should really care what other people believe, but there exists a domain of public knowledge based on facts. The argument here is to remove creationism from that domain, not to change anyone's mind. Anyone is free to belive that creationism is true, it's just that public policies are not going to be made with any creationist influence.

*edit spelling*

 

[Akai Shizuku]

Anyone participating in the creationism vs. evolution debate is stupid for not acknowledging that the two can easily co-exist.

/end thread

I partially disagree. They can co-exist within society, but they cannot co-exist within science. Having those two co-existing in science is like having the ether theory and general relativity co-existing; they contradict each other scientifically.
However, you can treat creationism as more of a philosophy rather than a science; then they co-exist peacefully.

Here's what I'm thinking: God creates life. Life evolves. What the problem is?

 

[k-ossuburb]

Where is all this evolution stuff coming from? I've been seeing it around a lot recently (take the so-called "controversial" film Creation about the life of Charles Darwin for example) is it because this is the 150th anniversary of Darwin's Origin Of Species?

On the original topic at hand, I don't think anyone is seriously debating it scientists have better things to do than argue an extremely widely excepted theory (although I've heard it said that evolution was fact because of recent experiments involving genetics). I'd expect they would argue it if they've had a few-too-many drinks and want the nerd-rush we all get from winning an argument with scientifically proven logic, though.

Oh and before I forget:

Well:

(SNIP)

And so on (there are a lot more episodes on these on youtube, check them out if you want to)

Now if scientists aren't engaging in a serious debate with the creationists, I think I can sympathize with them. Mainly because if they tried the scientists wouldn't be able to give a proper response to anything that the crationists say, because they would be constantly out of breath due to laughing hysterically at the ignorance and stupidity of pretty much all of the creationists arguments...

Thanks for introducing me to these, they were very entertaining and insightful.

 

[Pingieking]

Anyone participating in the creationism vs. evolution debate is stupid for not acknowledging that the two can easily co-exist.

/end thread

I partially disagree. They can co-exist within society, but they cannot co-exist within science. Having those two co-existing in science is like having the ether theory and general relativity co-existing; they contradict each other scientifically.
However, you can treat creationism as more of a philosophy rather than a science; then they co-exist peacefully.

Here's what I'm thinking: God creates life. Life evolves. What the problem is?

There is no problem, and you just proved my point.
You didn't take creationism as a scientific theory
Since you didn't take creationism as a scientific theory, then everything is just fine. I wish you a happy life sir/madam.

 

[TheMatt]

snip

Thank you.... These are awesome...

and, anyone who knows me knows my opinions... Baptist Evangelical whatever the frick Christians from ANYWHERE are nuts. But mostly americans...

 

[Skeleon]

Here's what I'm thinking: God creates life. Life evolves. What the problem is?

Might become a problem if we don't question that premise later on.
You know, when we have the means to discover the true origins.
If it turns out there is a superhuman being that is responsible, good. If it's something different, good also.
But if we just accept this idea without asking and researching, we'll never know for sure.
This is my biggest gripe with religion interfering with science: It prevents us from asking questions if we take it too seriously. That's what happened during the Dark Ages (with the added bonus of murder and torture).

 

[Cavouku]

As a God believer, I wish they'd just accept that there was evolution already and let us open some more reasonable debates about something.

 

[DaedalusIcarus]

Ah, USA. The rest of the world holds its breath during your election, covering for fear of death by nuclear holocaust as we nervously watch whether you elect the super-crazy-christian guy you would like to have a beer with, or the slightly-less-but-still-kinda-super-christian dude you would like to have a glass of wine with.
Less discussion about where we came from, and more focus on solving _real_ problems, would you kindly?

/ (semi) agreed

It always scares the shit out of my that the country with the biggest military and enough nukes to send us all to hell is ruled so strongly by blind, dumb faith.

That said, I'd much prefer the US stopped thinking of itself as capable enough to meddle with everyone's business. They should have learned from how much pain and grief Europe has brought to other parts of the world with our colonies and such. Instead they're arrogant enough to believe that they can succeed where we failed - and decide what's right for other parts of the world.

IMHO, please vote for the first party/person to promise a return to the isolationist foreign policies.

 

[Cavouku]

Here's what I'm thinking: God creates life. Life evolves. What the problem is?

Might become a problem if we don't question that premise later on.
You know, when we have the means to discover the true origins.
If it turns out there is a superhuman being that is responsible, good. If it's something different, good also.
But if we just accept this idea without asking and researching, we'll never know for sure.
This is my biggest gripe with religion interfering with science: It prevents us from asking questions if we take it too seriously. That's what happened during the Dark Ages (with the added bonus of murder and torture).

Agreed. Believe what you want, but leave it open for what comes to be true.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Thanks for introducing me to these, they were very entertaining and insightful.

You're welcome.

Just remember to not antagonize religious people with them. All religious people aren't creationists. Luckily there are some religious folk who have realized the importance of keeping religion and science separate.