Evolution vs. Creationism. Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham.

[GrandmasterP]

+1

There's some good stuff in there.

That 'Sermon on the Mount' for example.

As fine manifesto for being in the world as ever there was.

It's just a shame about the BS passages that some Xtians seem to major on.

Edited March 23, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[soaring crane]

In the beginning there was nothing. Then it exploded!" :-)

 

There's a theory that it wasn't an explosion but rather a tremendous vacuum that pulled outward simultaneously in all directions, and continues to pull. It called the Big Suck, predictably.

[GrandmasterP]

Vacuum cleaner billboard advertising a vacuum cleaner manufacturer read...

" Nothing sucks better than a Dyson."

 

Some wag's graffito beneath that test declared....

 

" Tanya does!"

[Marblehead]

And on the subject of vacuum cleaners, there was this Buddhist who bought a vacuum cleaner. But no attachemtns.

[soaring crane]

And on the subject of vacuum cleaners, there was this Buddhist who bought a vacuum cleaner. But no attachemtns.

 

That was an email joke two weeks ago. haha.

[Marblehead]

That was an email joke two weeks ago. haha.

It's actually a whole lot older than that. First time I heard it was about five years ago. And yes, via e-mail.

[ralis]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/25/louisiana-senators-vote-to-keep-unconstitutional-creationism-law-on-the-books/

 

 

Louisiana senators vote to keep unconstitutional creationism law on the books

 

 

Edited March 26, 2014 by ralis

[Marblehead]

That immediately reminded me of Alley Oop:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alley_Oop

[thelerner]

My good friend who visited this morning is a good Christian and I make it a point to occasionally remind him that most of the stories in the Bible are to be taken figuratively, not literally.

Thats where Judaism has an advantage. In an orthodox yeshiva (religious school) I was taught that up until Abraham we could take all the stories as parables. Holy parables, but not necessarily literal truth. Though both options were considered fine.

[KenBrace]

He's an argument that I commonly here from creationists: "Evolutionists claim that micro and macorevolution are exactly the same thing just on a smaller or larger scale. However this is wrong. Microevolution only occurs within the genetic gene pool that already exists within a species. Macroevolution on the other hand requires new genetic information which microevolution doesn't. Therefore the two do not happen by the exactly the same processes. Apes will not evolve into humans because this would require new genetic information." How much validity is there to this argument? I've been able to find decent rebuttles but nothing solid with experiemental data to back it up.

[Marblehead]

Thats where Judaism has an advantage. In an orthodox yeshiva (religious school) I was taught that up until Abraham we could take all the stories as parables. Holy parables, but not necessarily literal truth. Though both options were considered fine.

I am in a discussion with someone not on this forum regarding Jewish Atheists.

 

Their creed:

 

There is no God

We are his chosen people.

[Marblehead]

He's an argument that I commonly here from creationists: "Evolutionists claim that micro and macorevolution are exactly the same thing just on a smaller or larger scale. However this is wrong. Microevolution only occurs within the genetic gene pool that already exists within a species. Macroevolution on the other hand requires new genetic information which microevolution doesn't. Therefore the two do not happen by the exactly the same processes. Apes will not evolve into humans because this would require new genetic information." How much validity is there to this argument? I've been able to find decent rebuttles but nothing solid with experiemental data to back it up.

Neil Tyson spoke very well to this in Episode 2 of "Cosmos".