[sassyT]

[QUOTE]

Sassy, biologists view creationism as a religious argument, since there is no known scientific basis for creationism. Even the conservative Republican judge in the Dover case concluded that creationism and intelligent design were, at heart, religious arguments. That's the view of people who accept modern biological thought on evolution.

You can say Creation is religion if you want to that is your opionion and I will not argue with that... As I have said before Creation is not Science niether is the Theory of evolution. The essence of the scientific method is measurement, observation and repeatability. Neither Creation nor Evolution are scientific in this sense. Neither one can be tested, for the simple reason that we cannot repeat history. The origin of the universe, life and mankind all took place in the past and cannot be studied or repeated in the laboratory. No one, in all human history has ever observed macro evolution taking place anywhere not even in the fossil record.
Therefore belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation.. both are concepts which believers "know" to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of conclusive irrefutable proof.
So if you say Creation is religion then I will also say Macro Evolution is religion since there is no known scientific basis MACRO evolution.

I have no problem with your viewing your belief in creationism as separate from your personal religious beliefs, but I think a lot of the confusion may arise from people assuming that your attacks on evolution are religious dogma, which leads to religious arguments. I don't think anyone enjoys those much.

It is frustrating for some of us to have to defend something that we view as proved (evolution) from someone like yourself who knows "just enough to be dangerous." That is, I feel macroevolution has been proved and I have presented some of the evidence in other threads.

I find it irrational that all the Darwinists like yourself continue to claim Macro evolution is a fact and yet all of you have failed to provide the irrefutable evidence for it. All the so called evidence you have given me supports MICRO evolution. Yes a dog and wolg share a common ancestor (micro) but I am yet to see evidence to the leap of faith made by darwinists that the dog and the wolf also share a common ancestor with carots, bees, palm trees etc.
So please I urge you to stop making empty claims. There is irrefutable evidence for Micro evolution.. we all know that occurs. It is observed in nature and in laboratories.. however there is zero evidence of a promordial soup where an amoeba crawls out and is supposedly the mother of all living things. These are BELIEFS not facts.

You have said you are not personally satisfied with any evidence for evolution--although I have to say that biology for the last 100 years IS satisfied, so this lack of satisfaction with the evidence is particular to you and other people who are mostly not practicing biologists. I have asked you what sort of evidence could satisfy you as to the truth of evolution, but if you answered, I didn't see it. I feel that a serious conversation about evolution would have to start with that, because I can't keep guessing what evidence might satisfy you. If your discussion of evolution is in fact a scientific discussion (and not religious), then it's incumbent on you to state your terms--that is, what would it take to prove that new species can form?

I will address this in a diffent post...

[asking]

In all fairness, if anyone should get off this thread it's probably me, I'm not a Christian, nor am I an atheist, I am what I am and believe what I believe and I'm never met anyone with the same beliefs I have.

Well, I hope you don't! Your posts are great. :)

I feel like I have my own beliefs and values, too; they just don't include a deity. Yours apparently do, which is fine with me. How could it be otherwise? I don't think anyone can object to what's in someone else's mind or heart. My take is that we can only legitimately object to what people do, and even then only when it affects others, not what people think or feel...

[sassyT]

[

QUOTE=michealb]The problem is that Sassyt's views are religious dogma and no physical evidence will satisfy her.

Niether is there any physical evidence for Macro Evolution. So why you continue to claim it is a fact is beyond me.

[asking]

I have been puzzling over Cred's seeming assertion that he has no beliefs at all, in the sense of faith based ideas accepted without any evidence. I have been wondering if it's possible for humans to only think and not have beliefs. If I have beliefs, what are they? I don't regard my attitudes towards science as faith based, since I think there is ample evidence that science is a productive process that leads to increases in knowledge over time. My acceptance of evolution is based on evidence, though ultimately one has to accept some amount of authority for any fact one accepts. A scientific article has been vetted by reviewers and a journal editor and I accept them as limited authorities, if not for the conclusions of the paper, at least for its authenticity as real science. Usually, that's a safe assumption.

But, anyway, perhaps I believe in other things in the same way that others believe in God. I'm not sure what those things are though...

[Alty]

Well, I hope you don't! Your posts are great. :)

I feel like I have my own beliefs and values, too; they just don't include a deity. Yours apparently do, which is fine with me. How could it be otherwise? I don't think anyone can object to what's in someone else's mind or heart. My take is that we can only legitimately object to what people do, and even then only when it affects others, not what people think or feel...

Thanks asking, I feel the same way about your posts. :)

My belief is based on the way I was raised and the things I have gone through in my life, as well as the things my parents went through. I don't expect others to believe what I believe.

You are right, you cannot object to what's in someone else's mind or heart. A bad person is a bad person, whether they are Christian or atheist, it's not their beliefs that make them bad, or good. So, if you are a good person, a reasonable person, then I really don't care if you don't have the same beliefs I do, I will respect you for who and what you are, not for what you believe. :)

Unfortunately not all people can accept people with differing views or beliefs, they feel the need to force you to see their point of view, to believe what they believe, those are the people I usually end up fighting with. I'd love to be able to walk away from that, but I can't, I'm a stubborn person, I'll be the first to admit that. ;)

[Alty]

I have been puzzling over Cred's seeming assertion that he has no beliefs at all, in the sense of faith based ideas accepted without any evidence.

I'm sure he believes in himself, and there's no evidence to support that. :p

[sassyT]

Sassy, I have been on this site much longer than you, and I have fought with certain people about religion before you even came on this site, so no, I did not come into the game later, I've been here all along, and I know what happens on these threads.

You question atheists rights to come on religious boards, I'm trying to explain to you that this particular board, The religious Discussions board, was started for atheists (that's what I was told), so that they would have a place to talk about their beliefs. So, having said that, you are posting on their board, not the other way around, understand? If you had posted this on the Christian discussion board then you might have a case, but even then it's doubtful because you specifically asked atheists to answer your thread. Be careful what you ask for, you might get it. ;)

We all have to learn to respect eachother, it's not just the atheists, it's the Christians too, until that happens, there will not be a rational calm discussion about our different beliefs.

Don't judge a whole group on a few people.

I know that you are very passionate about this, but you have to calm down, read everything that is said as a statement, not an attack against you personally. Okay?

I don't think you are being fair in what you are saying... I don't take things personaly but when people make attacks like calling religious people "uneducated" "ignorant" and all the names they have been called be sure that I will say something about it.
So apparently (correct me if I am wrong) you are taking sides with the people who make rude condescending remarks about religion which is fine, but don't say that this is AN ATHEIST forum as if it gives athiests the right to barade religion.
This is a RELIGION forum.. It is for discussing religion..
It is not an Atheist forum where angry athiests can come and give their Hate speech against religious people which is what this forum has turned into.
Unless if you are saying atheism is a religion. :confused:

[NeedKarma]

Unless if you are saying atheism is a religion.

Ok, it is a religion then. I'm OK with that. I don't care what *you* call it.

[sassyT]

Unfortunately not all people can accept people with differing views or beliefs, they feel the need to force you to see their point of view, to believe what they believe, those are the people I usually end up fighting with. I'd love to be able to walk away from that, but I can't, I'm a stubborn person, I'll be the first to admit that. ;)

Yes! That's how I feel when all the Darwinists on this site can't accept that I don't believe in Darwinism. They feel the need to force their point of view on me and when I don't accept it they freak out.

[Alty]

Yes! thats how i feel when all the Darwinists on this site can't accept that i dont believe in Darwinism. They feel the need to force their point of view on me and when i dont accept it they freak out.

Sassy, you don't believe in Darwinism, and you freak out, so do you really expect them to not freak out when you poo poo on their beliefs? You are also trying to force your point of view on them. Don't you see that?

You really have to see that you are doing exactly what you say they are doing. If you cannot listen to someone's point of view without freaking out, then don't discuss that with them.

You started this thread, really, I want to know what you hoped to accomplish.

[Alty]

I dont think you are being fair in what you are saying... I dont take things personaly but when people make attacks like calling religious people "uneducated" "ignorant" and all the names they have been called be sure that i will say something about it.
So apparently (correct me if i am wrong) you are taking sides with the people who make rude condescending remarks about religion which is fine, but dont say that this is AN ATHEIST forum as if it gives athiests the right to barade religion.
This is a RELIGION forum.. It is for discussing religion..
It is not an Atheist forum where angry athiests can come and give their Hate speach against religious people which is what this forum has turned into.
Unless if you are saying atheism is a religion. :confused:

OMG, for the last time, yes, it's called a religious discussion board, but it was started for atheists, that way they don't have to come to the Christian discussion board to discuss their points of view. Do you understand now? Maybe the mods should rename it, would it be clear then?

As for name calling, honey, I've been called a lying b*tch, the intolerance brigade, a dirty liar, and many more, but it's only one person, you can't judge an entire group by one person.

Have you been reading some of the discussions? We are actually doing pretty well talking about our different points of view. You cannot let the past go and have to start a fight, not good. If it's discussion that you want, well that goes two ways, you have to be willing to listen to someone else's point of view without taking it personally.

As for the atheists turning this into a place for hate speech, honey they aren't the only ones.

Great now you're trying to get me to fight you, and I'm falling for it, bad Alty. Sassy, just treat everyone like you would want to be treated, then you'll do fine. Okay?

[asking]

Sassy,. . .You started this thread, really, I want to know what you hoped to accomplish.

Me, too.
Sassy, how were you hoping this would go?

[sassyT]

You have said you are not personally satisfied with any evidence for evolution--although I have to say that biology for the last 100 years IS satisfied, so this lack of satisfaction with the evidence is particular to you and other people who are mostly not practicing biologists. I have asked you what sort of evidence could satisfy you as to the truth of evolution, but if you answered, I didn't see it. I feel that a serious conversation about evolution would have to start with that, because I can't keep guessing what evidence might satisfy you. If your discussion of evolution is in fact a scientific discussion (and not religious), then it's incumbent on you to state your terms--that is, what would it take to prove that new species can form?

Asking you don't need to prove that New species do form because that is an irrefutable FACT.
It is a FACT which constitutes Micro evolution however Macro evolution claims that NEW never seen before GENERA form. That is what I would like evidence for.
Random mutation do occur that may cause a variation; for example a random mutation in Human hair may creat hair of a different color or texture however is there any evidence that a random mutation in human can create feathers or tenticles? The answer to that question is NO. If macro evolution were true.. Scientist would be able to observe mutations that add "new" information to a species like my example; a baby born with feathers or tenticles instead of hair.
So please don't confuse micro with macro. Micro is a fact so new species do form however I am yet to see evidence that new never seen genera do form.(macro)

So my question is where is this so called evidence for MACRO evolution.

[Curlyben]

That's enough.
As this thread has seriously degenerated I am closing it.
If you have a problem with this PM me.

>Thread Closed<