One more vote for the egg :thumbsup

http://www.valleyskeptic.com/fuck_creationist.html

Dl the song ...and feel for the creationists:1orglaugh

fact.

The questions "Who Created Existence" and "Why of the Universe" are ancient, mind-subverting gimmicks of positing invalid, intellectually untenable questions that have no basis in reality. That false-question maneuver has been used by theologians and other mystics for centuries. The gimmick works by taking an invalid or meaningless idea and then cloaking the idea with specious but profound-sounding phraseology. That phraseology is then used as an "intellectual" prop to advance false, irrational concepts or doctrines. Consider, for example, the "Who Created Existence" and the "Why of the Universe" questions so often used by poets and theologians to advance the God or higher-power concept. On closer examination, one realizes that invalid questions such as "who made the universe" are meaningless and unprofound. For that type of infinite-regression question (of who created the creator and so on back) answers nothing and is anti-intellectual. Such a question cannot or need not be answered once one realizes that existence exists.

On realizing that by nature existence simply exists, one then realizes that the "Who Created Existence" and "Why of the Universe" questions cannot or need never be answered because no causal explanations are needed for existence or the universe. Existence is axiomatic. It just exists; it always has and always will exist. Nothing created it and no causal explanation is needed or valid. For, what is the alternative? No alternative is possible or needed, unless one accepts the contradiction that existence does not exist!

Burp!

http://www.neo-tech.com/advantages/advantage28.html

Not quite.

Evolution - only a theory, but with strong evidence to suggest it is fact.
Creationism - only a theory, but with no evidence to suggest it is fact.

evolution

(god)
In the very beginning there was a single speck of conscious being, it was self aware, and it wanted to experience itself as being all that "IS"...

(big bang)
So it exploded in every direction, spreading itself outward and creating the universe.

(creation)
Each tiny individuation of it became all that "IS" matter, life, etc.

(evolution)
Each tiny individuation is imbued with the spirit and consciousness of all that is, this is the soul. The soul learns and grows as its energy is transferred through matter, and thus evolution occurs.

(reality)
The creation of this divine dichotomy is a venue for us, the individuations of god (budhha, jesus, mohammed, binky the clown, satan, it matters little), to experience ourselves and eachother. In this way god experiences itself.

(the lowdown)
We are godself among godself, the question is only...who remembers who's who.

There is no right or wrong. Only in the presence of its opposite does something exist. Heaven and Hell are created and experienced only in the mind. Your perception IS your reality. There is nothing you have to do...

WE ARE ALL ONE.

Believe what you want it matters little.
Yet thru aligning yourself with this train of thought you see thru the illusion of life, and all things become possible.

Listen you your sould and you shall here yourself speaking the truth of the universe.





:2 cents:

evolution is the key!

We are part of a universe and have a universe within.

We could easly be thought of as a virus to this planet.

No shit!

Get over it.

Then where is the "science" behind evolution? Evolution follows NO law of thermodynamics. It takes much more faith to believe in evolution than it does creationism. It always amazes me how evolutionist people debate this topic by saying "religion sucks". Religion is nothing but a cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor. Believing in evoltion is a religion.

Lets talk science.

- A fossil is created by organic material being replaced by sediment. This must happen extremely fast and with tons and tons of sedimentary pressure. This is why you never see a fossil of pet Rover in the back yard. How can millions of animals in every part of the earth (even fossilized whales have been found in the mountains of California) be fossilized? The ONLY logical explanation is a great disaster which covered the WHOLE earth in a short period of time (i.e. the flood).

- There have never been any transitionary fossils found. Fossils that show the path of evolution are non-existent. Considering the millions of fossils found, that statement alone is quite a stumbling block.

- The majority of earths stratification is different all over the world. The supposed "layers" of history are never the same from one area to the next.

- Sceintists have consistantly made wrong assumptions based on the fossil record. The example of the blunders concerning the fictitious brontasaurus and Peking man are but some of the more obvious fuck ups.

- We are bombarded with cosmic dust every day from meteorites and space debris. If the earth was millions of years old we would be standing close to the moon on a big ball of meteorite dust.

There are a million issues I can bring up but I know that I hate to read these long ass posts myself and this one is WAAAAY too long as it is.

In conlusion:
I think that to NOT look at other THEORIES of existence is ridiculous. To teach people, children especially, that evolution is FACT is the most absurd thing that the scientific community can do.

The lack of transitional fossils is a popular arguement against evolution. I was handed a brochure by some religous nut on campus the other day that used the same ignorant arguement. The lack of transitional fossils can be explained in a few different arguements.

"First, some transitional forms may have been soft-bodied organisms that were never fossilized.

Second, transitional forms may not have been preserved because of geographic accidents: some organisms lived in actively eroding, instead of depositing areas, or they were destroyed in an orogeny (or major erosional event).

Third, transitional forms may not have been found yet. Prior to the early 1980?s no transitional forms were known to connect whales with their most closely related fossil relatives, the mesonychids. Since then, an impressive succession of intermediate forms has been found clearly documenting their evolution. Science progresses by finding new data.

Fourth, transitional forms may have existed for such a short duration of geologic time that they were not preserved, resulting in evolution by punctuated equilibrium. Fifth, transitional forms may have lived elsewhere and the organisms subsequently migrated to other locales. "

Hopefully that sheds some light on the fossil arguement.

"The infall of dust is one hundred times less than these Creationists say it is. This has been known since about 1963. The argument has been kept alive by not quoting from scientific articles written after 1960. "

I believe in 'creation', but as for discussion...I have no opinion on this matter, as when it comes time for me to leave this earth and my 'soul' (however you want to describe it) will be enlighten about 'who created what' and 'where everything came from'..

Until then, I'm going to live it up! whether I live to be 50-70-or even 100yrs old...

and monkeys MAY HAVE flown out my butt and elvolved/created this whole damn mess. To base beliefs on a bunch of "may have"s is much more ignorant than any argument by a religious nut. To call my arguments ignorant is quite amusing. I believe in science and truth. I have no choice.

How can anyone believe whole heartedly that evolution is reality when the facts just are not there? It is like believing in aliens because "there are just so many stars out there that there has to be other forms of life". A person can believe the sky is plaid if they want but it does not make it so.

There are enough holes in the theory of evolution to give pause to anyone seeking factual information as to the cause of life.

When push comes to shove, and fucking religion aside, creationism has a better scientific standing model than evolution.

and the "scientific article" that this quote references is...

obviously biased

How could you live on a planet that is so full of life and think any diffrent?

Elaborate please.... This ought to be funny.

And I don't want to hear any rubbish about the second law of thermodynamics or lies about the fossil record.

Creationism can't even be tested, which forms the basis for a scientific theory. But go ahead anyway...

Because I live by fact and science. No matter how hard that I WANT to believe that there is life on other planets, I cannot believe it because there is no evidence. Theories, conjecture, and wishful thinking do not make something so.

Speaking of funny...
how is thermodynamics rubbish? Why are the fossil records lies? and why is it that creationism is crap because it cannot be tested but evolution cannot be tested either, yet is held as truth?

Now that is some funny shit.

Attack me if you wish but remember...religion can suck my dick. I am not biased in any sense other than truth and science.

:thumbsup

There are no "other" worthwhile theories to teach children. Creationism is a myth, just like the stories of Zues, etc. There is no evidence, absolutely none. I challenge anyone to find one shred of scientific evidence pointing in the direction of creationism.

If you want to teach kids something, teach them that blind faith is a piss poor way to think. Take a look at facts, gather evidence, then formulate a theory based upon those facts, like evolution has done.

Ahem.... Bullshit.

Archaeopteryx - transitional form between reptiles and birds.

Ichthyornis dispar - transitional forn bewteen reptiles and birds.

Ambiortus dementjevi - transitional form between reptiles and birds.

Probainognathus jenseni - transitional form between mammals and reptiles

Diarthrognathus broomi - transitional form between reptiles and mammals

Oligokyphus major - transitional form between reptiles and mammals

Eozostrodon parvus - transitional form between reptiles and mammals

Australopithecus afarensis - transitional form between primates and humans

Australopithecus africanus - transitional form between primates and humans

Australopithecus robustus - transitional form between primates and humans

Homo habilis - trasitional form between primates and humans.

You know, you might actually try reading a book on evolution written by a reputable scientist. You may learn something.

I assume you are really referring to the second law of thermodynamics. The one that states that entropy (disorder) increases with time, thus invalidating the theory of evolution which obviously requires increasing order.

Well if you had even a basic understanding of thermodynamics you would know that the second law is only applicable in a closed system. The earth, however, is an open system and we recieve energy - primarily from the sun in the form of light and heat. The universe, as a whole, can be assumed to be a closed system and over time (lots of it) all life will die out.

This old argument was put to bed eons ago and I'm surprised that you dragged it out. Perhaps you can tell us where your information comes from.

Excuse me. I was not aware that I had never read a book on evolution. Have YOU ever read anything on creationism? Other than a pile of biased crap created to show that any other theory than evolution is bunk? Obviously, I am "preaching" religion or some shit to the highly educated. Thanks for enlightening me.

A bird fossil with teeth is hardly considered a tranisitional fossil unless you really, really want it too. A transitional fossil is catorgarized by being inter-species. There are many weird fossils in the fossil record: Birds with no feathers, mammals that layed eggs (hey, maybe the palatapus is evolving!), reptiles with hair. However, all of these animals were COMPLETE. Unless evolution happened overnight (which is becoming a more popular theory) then a large part of the fossil record would contain animals in an incomplete stage of development. This is not so.

Once again I am getting my assed kick by someone who obviously is so much superiour in intelligence than me that he has to point out that my understanding of thermodynamics (and this subject at hand) is below average. I would like to thank you for pointing that out. I will work on my knowledge.

Earth is not a closed system, however, the solar system is. Is the evidence that the solar system is evolving or dying? Am I correct in assuming that the sun is getting smaller and dying? Our solar system is dying not evolving. Because it is in a closed system. There is no help coming from Alpha Centari.

It was my pleasure to enlighten you, you certainly needed to be enlightened. Yes, I have read some books on creationism by the usual idiots Duana Gish and Henry Morris - both hard core Bible bashers - and they anything but scientific.

More to the point, what books have you read on evolution? I'd also like to know what books on creationism you have, who wrote them and what their scientific qualifications are.

I would recommend you read "Science on Trial" by Douglas J. Futuyama.
His credentials:
Bachelor of Science from Cornell University
M.A. and Ph D from University of Michigan
Author of "Evolutionary Biology" a widely used college textbook on evolution
Editor of "Evolution", international journal of evolutionary research
John Simon Memorial Fellow
President of American society of Naturalists
Professor in the Dept. of Ecology and Evolution at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

I understand your view. Blind faith is utterly ridiculous. I do not propose the theory of creationism because of blind faith. Far from it. I did however, take it into my own hands and studied both theories quite extensively. It was quite difficult because the information for evolution is everywhere while the information for creationism is few and far between. Also, creationism is somehow assigned the stigmata of "spirtualism" which makes the facts harder to see.

I do not feel that it is fair to argue a point if a person has not studied both sides in a non-biased way. I can argue the theory of evolution as good as the theory of creation. To say that one side is totally ridiculous without knowing its foundation and structure is not my idea of knowledge.

This paragraph proves you are a moron. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Now I wonder why that would would be????

Hmmmm.... Maybe because there is no "creationist" research, only pitiful and deeply flawed rebuttals of over a hundred years of research by the worlds most renowned scientists.

You sound like a high school student. How old are you?

I am soooooo grateful that you have entered my life. I have been saved! Halelluah!!

What the fuck ever. I do not believe that you have read Gish and Morris or you would not have said they are idiots. I guess anyone who opposses your viewpoint is an idiot. Gish and Morris are both VERY scientific and propose some good food for thought. An unbiased person would ponder some of the theories. Unless you are so vehmently AGAINST something (which it appears you are) you would pause and put down your bible of evolution for one second and realize that...

IT IS NOT TRUTH
EVOLUTION IS A THEORY
NOT FACT

I see here a fanatasism equal to religious ferver.

Yes, and it's yours. I have done nothing but attempt to correct your obvious misunderstandings of evolution.

You also misunderstand the scientific use of the word "theory"
No, evolution is not "fact", it is a theory. But then, gravity is also not a "fact". It too is a theory. But you won't see me jumping off a twenty story building.

Creationism however, is rubbish.:1orglaugh

Now that is some science for you! Hey, lets ditch the topic and switch to name calling. That is cool. I am game.

Your a fucking cock sucking asswipe with no common sense. How 'bout if I fuck with your obvious reference to sucking cock name?

Your religious zeal towards evolution is showing, Blowing Joe. Now why don't you go back to playing with your lego's and get off dad's computer [obvious slander towards age and maturity]

I can dream can't I :321GFY

Now I understand why your handle is drunkmonkey. You obviously have a lot of evolving to do.

your the one from the monkey, remember? Hell, your proud of the FACT that your great grandaddy was a monkey. Shit, you probably carry a picture of BJ and the Bear in your plastic batman wallet wishing for the good ole days.

oh shit! I just saw in your sig that you push Clickcash! Damn, you do come from monkey's! No, no, wait, you must come from snakes to affiliate with them skimming mofo's.

and thus, we discover the REAL reason for the objection to evolution. Not scientific... but ego. I'm still waiting for that list of books on evolution you've read. hahahahahahahaaha

But I won't hold my breath. I suspect you've never set eyes on one.

Evolution cant not be called a theory, it's part of our daily life, it's reality. As environement gradually changes, some genes that code for certain behavior of physical traits get deleted or mutated to suite the new environment. Evolution is very gradual, takes generations before some new traits are intoduced, but without it the life on Earth would not survive.

It's very distressing to have your arguments demolished isn't it? When you grow up and learn to read I can suggest some other books on evolution for you.

who also at one time believed the world was flat,
the moon was made of cheese,
the sun circled the earth,
and so forth and so on

don't be so closed minded, ass. And don't persecute those who are not.

the only thing you demolished is belief that there is intellegent life on your end of the internet

and, hey, can you suggest some good affiliates too while your at it :1orglaugh

I doubt you can spell your name. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Nero? We have a new one? Or the old one got tired of gardening?

Your shitting me, right? I could show you a snapshot of my fucking library. But, hell, what is the point to list all of the books I've read. Shit, you have read Gish and Morris and consider them ludicrous. Do you honestly think that if I listed another author then it would matter?

Of course they are ludicrous. They are both fundamentalist Christians who have no real scientific qualifications to speak of.

I guess that a PhD in biochemistry from Berkeley and a Ph.D. in Hydraulic Engineering is pretty damn ludicrous. Man, those fucking Christians are an ignorant lot.

Lets get back to the flaming. It was much more enlightening.

And tell me, how does that make them qualified in biology or palentology?

And where was Morris' degree in Hydraulic Engineering from? Come on, tell us?

Neither of them are qualified in the appropriate fields which was my point. And they are fundamentalist Christians who believe in the literal truth of the old Testament so their agenda is quite clear.

So are you a Christian?

hey guys.. closed system or not entropy isn't a uniform occurrance while the overall entropy of a closed system cannot decrease, local areas can decrease at the expense of an increase elsewhere..

and no.. the solarsystem is not a closed system.. from the mere fact that we can observe the light that has travelled here from other systems that should be obvious

this does not have to degrade into name calling..