Why do people deny evolution?

You're the one who sees ID as the alternative to evolution. What is that if not creationism?

I'll repeat this because I don't think you and I have talked about this stuff so you do have an excuse to not know where I stand. The impression you DO have of me is from what others have said of me rather than hearing it from me.

I guess you haven't gotten familiar with or you are pretending you don't know what baggage there is attached to the term 'Creationist'. If you really don't know I'll tell you. They are the people think the earth is less than 10,000 years old, that every word in the bible is literally true and want it taught along with science in public schools. They refute things like carbon dating as examples of Satanic deceptions. In other words, they refute scientific evidence and methodology when it comes into conflict with their beliefs.

The fact that you don't know that I am not associated with those things in the slightest way, is clear when you asked that question. Again, it's because you have gotten your impression of me concerning this subject from others instead of me.

Same goes for the subject of ID. Farmerman et al does not get to dictate what ID is. The people who study the subject do.

ID = Intelligent Design. That means something with some brains that can perform miracles like create earth and humans is the basis for what we perceive as our reality. Many call him "god."

Most of us who believe in Science understand that this planet and humans are the result of "Evolution."

And CI's statement is the perfect example of what I said.

'Miracles' ! Ha! HaHa! HAaaaaaaa!

and Thanks!

Loved how earth is a result of evolution too . You slay me CI

I believe that Im more informed about ID than most IDers. You, for one, do not even believe that modern ID is a spinoff of "Scientific Creationism> (The US /Canadian and UK and Aussie versions?)

If you just scan a few Creationist sites, you will see littl icons around thir home pags or in thir margins touting INTELLIGENT DESIGN "RESEARCH" or Logos from the Discovery Institute or the Intelligent Design Network.
BTW-- IM NOT the one who is "dictating" what Intelligent Design is, all Im doing is announcing what the IDers show on their own web sites and their "commensal relationships" with all the "creation SCienceNetworks"

GO look it up yourself because your denial just does NOT hold water. As someone who espouses the IDist leanings, you are woefully uninformed about the baggage youve inherited from phil johnson.

you best understand what ID says about this topic too. They agree with CI. I call it geodynamics and historical geology, but evolution as a concept meaning "chqnge through time" its perfectly acceptable. It just has NOTHING to do with origins or "creation" as one of our ESL members , from his incorrect interpretations of literature, insists

Your position on ID puts you at odds with Christians like the Pope and the archbishop of Canterbury. What sort of God do you envisage? it seems like one who lacks the wherewithal to do a good job from the start, that he needs to keep tinkering (designing) here and there because he's done a botched job from the start. You seem to think God cannot just set things up from the off and then kick things into motion with the Big Bang. He has to do that, then sort Earth out separately, and keep changing things here and there because it keeps going wrong. Bit of a shabby, second rate God, compared to one who sets a well oiled universe into motion and doesn't need to keep changing things because he thought things through in the first place.

Pretty funny, leave it to atheists to turn a thread on evolution into one about religion

Attacking the messenger only proves your ad hominem doesn't answer the statement.
Not only that, but if you "are" a christian, your insults proves otherwise.

Doesn't matter, Izzy makes good points. It never gets addressed by Christians unless they deflect and believe they have.

If you read the Bible, god is inept.

Creates two humans with the ability to sin yet gets pissed when they do. Silly.

Later, he wakes up from his nap and sees the world is full of people having fun and gets pissed again. Kills everything except one family and 2??? Of each animal, insect, etc. He never saw this coming that he would need to drown the entire planet, babies included.

Oh then later, gets pissed again after seeing some humans constructing an impossible tower to space. Not sure why you would get pissed at this unless you didn't know the limitations of mud bricks in construction. God didn't understand compression threshold of mud bricks.

And again, gets pissed when he sees two cities enjoying themselves. Decides to nuke both of them. He never saw this coming. Killed babies too because they would have grown up evil?

It seems Izzy is right. God is a terrible creator, always having to **** with something he thought was good in the beginning but fucked up never thinking his sin abled humans would partake of a tree he made easy access to.

There really is no end to this constant failure.

How about Lucifer? Why would an angel who had direct knowledge if a god rebel? Seems odd unless you are a convoluted human who thinks this is perfectly logical.

Maybe these angels realized how lazy and inept god was. Maybe they were the real good angels but since they are no longer on gods team they get branded evil.

Just look at the old testament, it points out dozens of occasions when god is a complete douche. But I guess Jesus was gods attempt to fix his fuckups.

Oh wait, none of this is actually real which is why it's chalked full of convoluted stories and actions of senseless punishment. Like torturing a dog for being a dog. Its all just silly.

Very good summary of god's screw ups. How can god be "all knowing and loving?"

The loving part is a new invention to Christianity because our society progressed to the point that a wicked vengeful god no longer is appealing. So the new age hippy Christians needed to modify it. The only problem is the Bible does not reflect a loving god at all. Its anything but loving. Infact the Bible doesn't even support an all knowing God either.

When putting together a jigsaw puzzle, you don't need every piece in place before you see the overall picture. It's the same with evolution. There are plenty of pieces to point to an end conclusion, so far as the truth that evolution occurs. The question of a god is beside the point. With evolution, it matters not if one exists - or doesn't.

Now the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury are Atheists. Why not go the whole hog and accuse everyone who disagrees with you of witchcraft and have them burned at the stake?

You opened the door by saying (most recently) that you, like DSOug Axe are not affected by religious doctrine in your ID journey. I wasnt familiar with his most recent book (its a yer old so I was busy)/

I corrected that ignorance, and have a comment about Mr Axe's worldview


Id suggest that you read "Undeniable" if you say that hes NOT delivering a religious based argument about ID. Its his entire central argument in the book, cmon. I scanned a copy of it at Barnes and Noble (Then I bought it with a 20% discount coupon I had been sent over the phone). Quite the contrary, his entire ID argument is a bunch of rehash of the Discovery Institute's arguments that were made a lot better by Dr Demski. Axe foregoes a lot of science and defaults to a Christian God who is the designer.

Same **** , different huckster.

Insults? You mean you are ashamed of atheism?
I meant no insult. Sorry you took it that way

Thanks for the suggestion (I have it on order)
Apparently not everyone agrees with your assessment that it's 'religious'.



BTW, I noticed you didn't include a single example to illustrate your charge.

Wait till you read it before you start lecturing me about its worldview.

Also, would you xpect an organization that is based upon a "Wedge Document" fess up that its make-believe evolutionists are not real evolutionary scientists with experience in that craft?

Ill bet youve bought a buncha swamp land in your day.

OK, since you insist on making this a discussion about theism I'll go there for a moment. Just remember I didn't take it here but I do enjoy that topic too so I'll indulge.

What makes you think it's going wrong? I think it's doing exactly what it's intended to do. It is the well oiled machine as you said it ought to be. The blood, pain and misery are all part of the process but the sausage coming out of the meat grinder makes it all worth while.

Sorry for yet another bloody metaphor

For all intents and practical simple-minded purposes, I am an atheist and agree with what you said. So how come you talking bout Theism, eh ? I just call it REASON, ya know, Universal Order...