Dinosaurs lived with man, really!
I’m so excited that real people commented! I enjoy a debate, but I always get frustrated because I feel I’ve got good points to make and am never able to get them out well enough. My thing with the whole evolution versus intelligent design versus Gumby created the universe is that the argument injects too much moralism (Ok, Word is trying to tell me that moralism isn’t a word, but it is to me! So there.) into what is and isn’t science. I understand that there’s a debate about evolution, but based on the other theories, it seems to fit best into what we know. I think religion is a wonderful thing for an individual to have, but it has no place taking over every debate in this country. And masking creationism by renaming it and leaving out any specific reference to “God” (Christian God?) and then calling it a whole new take on the origins of life is crap. The only thing new about it is that it can maybe circumvent the legal system (or at least what has already been litigated in regards to creationism). I mean creationism, when looked at by any rational person, looks ridiculous! The earth is only 6000 years old, dinosaurs lived with man, everything was the way it was….um, ok? Carbon dating is a myth. It’s put out there by people trying to discredit God…...so does that mean all the established rules about radioactivity and half-lives are false? By watering down creationism to turn it into a vague, “maybe so maybe not” theory just so that it can evade established precedent is not something I’m comfortable with (besides the fact that it’s a bunch of bunk).


5 Comments:
Hi! It's one of the real people again! Exciting, isn't it. Anyway, I recommend this reading if you have time:
http://www.tnr.com/user/nregi.mhtml?i=20050822&s=coyne082205
Believe me it is well worth it. It's free with free registration. Here's my opinion on the subject: http://treefiddy.blogspot.com/2005/08/dumb-and-dumber-design.html
I admit, it's a dumbed-down version of the previous article. I can't form my own mind without stealing other people's ideas! :)
Now, if there is one article to end the debate, it is this:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
I love the Onion!
OK, the previous comment doesn't look good on my screen so I'll try to post it using html tags.
Jerry Coyne article:
here
My dumber version of it:
here
and the Onion ends the debate:
here
ah, I am an idiot. I should have checked the links before I posted. anyway, here's a link to Coyne article, free and all:
here, I hope
If this doesn't work, google "Jerry Coyne The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name". The first article that comes up is it. 3 comments in 5 minutes, I just broke my record.
I do not claim to be an expert on the matter, but i too was a skeptic about Intelligent Design until I ran into a guy (actually another person in the Stat Dept. here). He was able to explain his point of view on the subject, and it turns out to be a pretty solid argument.
The problem that i have is the average person is not informed about what Intelligent Design is, and they hide their ignorance in the matter behind a meatball or a noodly appendage, and laugh at the people pointing out the flaws in their own science.
I think in the end both theories will be proven wrong in one degree or another, and neither one of the theories are needed to be believed to obtain salvation.
So what it really should come down to is science.
And hopefully the scientist will stop being all up-ity about it and come discuss the flaws in the evolutionary theory with those that point it out (much like in the article listed above, although I do have a problem with a point or two in the article).
Personally, i'd rather have a bottle in front me than a frontal labotomy. Believers of Intelligent Design prefer the other option. Entirely their perogative.
Post a Comment
<< Home