Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (135048)	9/8/2008 8:38:17 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

The primary flaw in your complaint appeared early on. Then you bolster it with qualifications by some 'radicals' or 'forms' of creationism. You are concerned that the theory of a Created Universe would be introduced into the curriculum but you chose 'radical creationists' as your target. Radical anything is going to fall outside the parameters of your argument not as proof of its validity. Radical creationists are not driving mainstream views on creationism and don't define common agreement, any more than radical science theories are taught in the fifth grade as substantiated fact. "There is overwhelming support that species 'evolve' over time... Good point but your presumption is false. Educated people who are creationists, recognize the science of evolution through adaptation (evolving over time). They just don't go to the extreme and say it answers the question of origin in and of itself. In addition, their children whether attending homeschool, private school, or public school are generally high achievers on the national norms so their view point is not based on ignorance of science. Adaptation of species is not anti-creationism, that is your strawman "falsification for basic beliefs of creationism in some of the forms bandied about". You justify your falsification based on the fact that you are able to find some extremists that will argue the point. We can also find plenty of extremist materialists who deny any thing is real that is not observable ... However even at the most basic level we begin with the unobservable; awareness for example is real and not observable. "But parents need to get educated and attend school board meetings then so they can coach their kids when they come home if they want." ahhh. The issue here is that you are a true believer who is not educated about the alternative... not the other way around. Religious people in this country represent a far higher level on average than do non-believers as I pointed out above. You are presenting a tired argument that has been debunked many times and I think you know that. It only works when you get an ignorant religious zealot to represent one side and a theologically retarded scientist to mock him on the otherside. Although there are some available, the people you are attacking, like Palin, don't qualify. Would you be willing to examine the question from the following, as a thought experiment? Imagine a teacher who said, "scientific discovery helps to reveal the acts and consequences of God." If, that is IF I can prove to you it is just as valid or more valid than your argument for an uncreated universe, what would you say? Is it worth an honest inquiry into the issue, or are you too afraid of the lab-cloak clerics you bow before, who threaten to lop off your title for such blasphemy?