Truth Through Scrutiny - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Old Test Forums
  Truth Through Scrutiny

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Truth Through Scrutiny

Saint Randerolf posted 11-08-98 12:30 AM ET
To anyone that can help:
At my school, they are teaching that creationism is the correct theory, America was based on the Bible, and capitalism is the correct way.
Please help me scrutinize and rebut the one sided education that I am receiving. I believe all these things, but truth will prevail through scrutiny.

thank you for your help
~Saint Randerolf

Yo_Yo_Yo_Hey posted 11-08-98 01:45 AM ET
They are?? I thought the one-sided thing was evolution. You goto a catholic school right?? So of course they'll teach creationism(even though IMO its wrong!). Does it make any sense for the Earth to be only 6,000 years old, they've found rocks millions of years old. Dinosaur samples are proven to be 65 million years old.
Give me one of thier creationism arguments, Im sure I can contradict it.
Slowly turning atheist,
YYYH
Heckler posted 11-08-98 11:32 AM ET
Heh ok I have my quote I just think this is a good place to unveil it.
Heckler
"The truth is found by taking the lies told by both sides, and not believing any of it."
ME
P.S. The above comes from the principle that any two people viewing the same event will remember two different versions of it (unless one is sophie then you get 4 ) by comparing the differences between these you can generally glean what actually happened from the horsedung.
Apocalypse posted 11-08-98 02:34 PM ET
Catholic schools don't teach creationism...well atleast Roman Catholic schools...I don't know about Eastern Orthodox Catholic schools though.
DJ RRebel posted 11-08-98 02:41 PM ET
Religion should only be taught in history classes ... I feel really sorry for you .. I hope you get a more openminded education when you're a little older !!!
Religion shouldn't be imposed on anyone in schools !!!
DJ RRebel posted 11-08-98 02:41 PM ET
It's simply another form of brainwashing !!!
DJ RRebel posted 11-08-98 02:43 PM ET
Speaking of truth ... it's out there tonight for the season premiere!!!
Saint Randerolf posted 11-08-98 11:01 PM ET
Oh, no. I go to a Baptist school. It's called Trinity Christian Academy. I only took my Spanish home this weekend (pray for me! and if your and atheist do whatever you do) so I'll take home my Biology textbook home and stuff.
Actually, I enjoy reading alternative thoughts and ideas. The school feeds me super right wing thoughts and the Internet feeds me left wing extremity.
It's not brain washing to me. They hold my beliefs, but if my faith is so weak that I can not subject them to scrutiny, how am I to know the truth.
Before I leave for school tomorrow, I'll leave you with this.
The Bible has never been proven wrong. Any question that may arise can be worked out with some common sense. As a French adviser to his leader put it, some thing like: The Bible is an anvil that was worn out many a hammers that have tried to defeat it.
Moon Rat posted 11-08-98 11:43 PM ET
Please understand that the Christian religion requires that you have faith in God and faith in the bible as God's word. I think it is a big mistake to have faith in any one person's interpretation of the bible. The bible contains history, allegory, poetry, moral instruction, and mistakes in translation. You must reason out which is the best interpretation for each part, and realize that if you discover that your particular version of creationism is wrong, your faith is not challenged, only your reason.
Saint Randerolf posted 11-15-98 01:54 AM ET
I promise I'll give you some stuff to rebut tomorrow. I've been busy.
its midnight. good night
Tapiolan poika posted 12-18-98 07:54 AM ET
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I had better do neither, since I might find it hard to stop, after reading this thread.
If you scrutinize ( ) S:t Randerolf's initial post, you'll find that he poses three (3) subjects he wishes us to scrutinize and rebut.
Apart from an offhand mention by DHE_X2 (my compliments!), everyone's been discussing creationism, the Bible, and subjects tangent to these.
No _one_ has seriously even _considered_ the possibility that capitalism may not be the panacea for all things bad in human society relating to economy, justice, equality, etc.
Why? Are the attitudes of posters here so entrenched noone feels it serves a purpose to discuss this subject, or do you feel capitalism IS the correct way, and this is so obvious it needn't be discussed? Maybe you can't handle more than one belief system at a time? (Yes, economic theory is more a matter of belief than science.)
I'm just curious...
DHE_X2 posted 11-15-98 02:01 AM ET
America wasn't based Entirely on the Bible, though I sure can see some similarities.
Neither Creationism, nor Evolution imho, are correct in their pure form. A combination of both, if you ask me.
Capitalism is the right way, even though it relies on greed, which, of course, is not good if left to run rampant.
DHE_X2 posted 12-18-98 01:53 PM ET
huh, I forgot I even posted in here...
Damn memory!!!
I'm gueesing, Tap, that most people posting in here went for the "juicier" topic of evolution.
Utrecht posted 12-18-98 08:58 PM ET
A note on Carbon dating. It has been know to be exceptionaly unreliable for geologically recent (under 10,000 years) usually with about a 20% varience. As the carbon decay advances, the accuracy of the test increased dramatically.
One of the biggest problems with this debazte is the fact that one side (creationism) say take it on faith. Evolutionism will provide a 80% solution and state QED for the rest.
I myself am a scientific agnostic. I.e there is a higher power that stated the big-bang. His (or her) ten commandments are the laus of nature. I.E. Maxwel, Faraday, the univeral constants etc. The rest simply "evolved" from it.
dushan posted 11-15-98 03:33 AM ET
From casual observation, I'd say that America is based quite heavily on bible (or religion).
Don't you have 'In god we trust' on your bank notes?
Don't you swear on bible in the court? (What about people of other religions? Or is this just a myth?)
I'm pretty sure that the last sentence of the swearing-in ceremony (or whatever it's called when you're becomming US citizen ;-) ) contains 'so help me god'.
Generally, the whole western world is heavily affected by christian ideology - not all bad :-)
-many of us celebrate xmas
-many of us get married (and the institution of marriage as seen by christians is heavily rooted in the law)
-the state funds churches (or does it? I think it does here in uk. damn it, we pay christians for their churches ;-) )
-when something bad happens we say 'oh god' or 'bloody hell' :-)
Please bear in mind that this is very poorly researched, i'm probably wrong 99% :-)
As to religion in schools - I'm not happy about that. I'm also not happy about people ridiculing religion or ignoring it completely as I think children are entitled to a full story. But this would lead to a long rant and I want to go to sleep :-)
Dushan
Spoe posted 12-18-98 10:03 PM ET
There is a wealth of evidence in support of evolution. One of the best is a series of fossils from India that describe the evolution of whales from a wolf-like creature in a shallow sea formed as India approached Asia.
On the matter of hoaxed "missing links", yes, science has been fooled on occasion. But one of the things that keeps science rooted in reality is peer review and a critical eye to the evidence. This allowed these hoaxes to be caught. Without this, these hoaxes might still be used as evidence.
I've looked at creation "science" and what it claims to be the process of science is actually a perversion thereof. Science is taking observations and making a hypothesis(and later, as supporting evidence grows, a theory) that fits the data. Creation "science" starts with the theory(the Bible is absolutely and literally correct) and attempts to make the data fit. Some of their theories at the very least border on the ludicrous(and that's being generous). Their "scientific" explanation for the flood is the collapse of a shell of water that used to surround the Earth -- in violation of known orbital mechanics.
All creationist literature I have read contains many misstatements(whether by intention or ignorance) about current scientific theory. This leads me to be extremely skeptical about their claims.
Oh, and guess what? IIRC, leg and other muscles are attached to the full tails on other animals as well. Perhaps that is why we still have a vestigal tail -- the minimum tail need to attach our muscles?
Steel_Dragon posted 11-15-98 03:55 AM ET
We sorta fund church, there a great tax shelter, but there is no officail funding that I'am aware of. "So help me God" was added by Washington, God bless him for not running for a third term and setting up an american monarchy, in the first Anderation(Forget that, swearing into office) and the mainstream has not revolted from that failure of seperation of church and state (one of our ideals). Which in fact was only put into the bill of Rights to prevent civil war between the Catholics of Maryland(I think) and the Protasants(sp) of Massachuats. Or any other state agianst State in congress
Octopus posted 11-15-98 04:09 AM ET
I think Steel_Dragon is thinking of the presidential oath of office, which doesn't have a "so help me God" in it (but it is customary for every president to add this on his own). I believe that a variety of other oaths do indeed have a "so help me God" in them, but I'm not sure.
I believe that witnesses are allowed to "affirm" rather than swear that they are telling the truth. Perjury would apply equally.
There is no government funding of religious institutions. From the second amendment to the US constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The Supreme Court has ruled in a variety of cases that the government cannot directly fund religious activities (although it might be able to if the funding is for some secular purpose -- for example, bussing children to parochial schools. I'm not sure if that's constitutional or not). Funding of religious activities is seen as a violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment.
America is certainly not "based on the bible". America was founded based on the ideas of the natural rights philosphers of the 18th century, like Locke. The "founding fathers" were mostly religious people, but they founded a political institution, not a religion.
Zan Thrax posted 12-19-98 01:50 AM ET
What happened? Why are there two threads of this now?
Octopus posted 11-15-98 04:11 AM ET
D'oh! Obviously that should be the first amendment. The second amendment is just what keeps the first amendment around
Octopus posted 12-19-98 01:58 AM ET
This thread is duplicated. If you want to continue the discussion, may I suggest starting a new thread (one that isn't messed up)? As it is now, threads will alternate between showing up in the middle and showing up at the end. It makes reading the thread difficult.
Saint Randerolf posted 11-15-98 11:34 PM ET
Any anti-creationist facts or rebuttals?
Here's some statements going around in my biology class.
From homo habilis to cro-magnon man, profe of an evolving ape to man creature is non existent. Most were pranks on scientist digging for fossils or men or apes that exist today.
The Coccyx is not a vestigial tail. Its serves as a place of attachment for leg and lower back muscles.
1. Evolution (chance)
2. Progressive evolution
3. Theistic evolution
All "conclusively" prove each other wrong.
Using the potassium- argon method of dating, volcanic material in Hawaii that was less than 2000 years old, tested at between 160 million and 3 billion years old.
A shell from a living mollusk was tested for carbon-14 and was found to be DEAD for 3,000 years.

Refute them if you can.
The seeker, Saint Randerolf

Roland posted 11-16-98 05:33 AM ET
This is fun. I don't know too much about the things you mention "going around". Just on C-14, as every method, if poorly applied, the results will be wrong. It's rather complex as you need to take care of the changing levels of c-14 over time. I just remember that in one example, that made a difference of about 1000 years for an item about 5000 years old.
How do you know that that piece of lava is actually 2000 years old ? Has it a date on it ?
Finally: Got any evidence for creationism ?
Tolls posted 11-16-98 09:53 AM ET
If that lava dating thing is the one I think it is, they weren't dating the lava, they were dating some other thing held in the lava. I would get a link, but that discussion has long since wandered off the board I saw it in.
There is a complete set of transitions from Homo Habilis to us...indeed there are from the Australopithecines. I know of one prank and one misidentification which are frequently put around creation circles as proof...there's Piltdown Man, which was disproved in the 50s, and Nebraska Man, a misidentified pig tooth which was quickly reclassified. I don't know of any others.
Not sure about the mollusk...rings a bell, though.
Oh, and evolution is not "chance".
And what is Progressive Evolution?
MikeH II posted 11-17-98 09:53 AM ET
At school I was taught Creationism, Evolution and Spontaneous creation. An old theory that said life was created spontaneously in certain conditions.
eg. leave an open sack of wheat in a drafty shed and mice 'spontaneously' appear out of nowhere. Still makes me laugh that one.
We then concentrated on evolution as the 'most widely accepted' scientific theory.
Personally I think it is dangerous to mix religion with education. It can cloud rational judgements about facts. If you can I would suggest you pick up a popular science book on evolution (your local library should have one), read it then see what you think. In fact you can probably find some good info on the internet. There are problems with evolution and there are problems with creationism. Neither are complete theories.
I can't comment about the theories in detail but if the material came out of a volcano 2,000 years ago (Roland has a good point how can you tell?) then it could still be that old. Maybe it's just been inside the volcano for a long time. Have a look at some geological work as well if you can specifically plate destruction and creation at plate boundaries. It can explain how old rock can be taken under then ejected elsewhere which would explain the age thing. An alternative explanation at least. (I don't know the details so that is just a guess)
Pranks on scientists? Any proof? Testimony from a specific prankster about the pranks he left? Very impressive if it's true. Just saying it doesn't prove it though.
Keep thinking about what you are told and question whether it is a sensible conclusion.
MikeH II posted 11-17-98 09:56 AM ET
Don't know how I missed Tolls' point about pranks. Oh well.
Tolls posted 11-17-98 10:08 AM ET
The other point about the Hawaian lava seems to be that they were also trying to show that K-Ar dating doesn't work with that kind of rock...something to do with it being low in potassium.
There are a number of different dating methods, of which there are probably none which can be used in every situation.
(I've been listening to geologists again...)
MikeH II posted 11-17-98 10:14 AM ET
I'll leave the geology to you.
Tapiolan poika posted 12-18-98 07:55 AM ET
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I had better do neither, since I might find it hard to stop, after reading this thread.
If you scrutinize ( ) S:t Randerolf's initial post, you'll find that he poses three (3) subjects he wishes us to scrutinize and rebut.
Apart from an offhand mention by DHE_X2 (my compliments!), everyone's been discussing creationism, the Bible, and subjects tangent to these.
No _one_ has seriously even _considered_ the possibility that capitalism may not be the panacea for all things bad in human society relating to economy, justice, equality, etc.
Why? Are the attitudes of posters here so entrenched noone feels it serves a purpose to discuss this subject, or do you feel capitalism IS the correct way, and this is so obvious it needn't be discussed? Maybe you can't handle more than one belief system at a time? (Yes, economic theory is more a matter of belief than science.)
I'm just curious...
>>Another repost... Sorry.<<
Zan Thrax posted 12-18-98 07:41 PM ET
Well, I'm not up for an anti-capatilism rant right now, but I've got a question for those of you who point to the bible. How do you know which parts are metaphor, which are allegory, and which are literal statements?
Hothram Upravda posted 12-18-98 09:22 PM ET
Saint Randerolf: Take a Anthro class in Collage. It would just take to much time to explain evolution. Needless to say there is a huge amount of evidence to prove evolution. Just wait till y'll get to collage, you will get the facts there....
Actualy i am shocked that this is going on in America. Always thought this whole "creationism" was a joke and that no one (except fanatics) ever took it as anything remotly resembulting fact..

Hothram Upravda
Anthro Major.
TB
Spoe posted 12-18-98 10:05 PM ET
Argh. My post went up to the middle. Look for it in the posts for 11-15-98.
Zan Thrax posted 12-19-98 01:52 AM ET
What the hell? My question that I posted in the other thread showed up in the middle of this one.
Octopus posted 12-19-98 01:59 AM ET
This thread is duplicated. If you want to continue the discussion, may I suggest starting a new thread (one that isn't messed up)? As it is now, posts will alternate between showing up in the middle and showing up at the end. It makes reading the thread difficult.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Truth Through Scrutiny
Saint Randerolf	posted 11-08-98 12:30 AM ET To anyone that can help: At my school, they are teaching that creationism is the correct theory, America was based on the Bible, and capitalism is the correct way. Please help me scrutinize and rebut the one sided education that I am receiving. I believe all these things, but truth will prevail through scrutiny. thank you for your help ~Saint Randerolf
Yo_Yo_Yo_Hey	posted 11-08-98 01:45 AM ET They are?? I thought the one-sided thing was evolution. You goto a catholic school right?? So of course they'll teach creationism(even though IMO its wrong!). Does it make any sense for the Earth to be only 6,000 years old, they've found rocks millions of years old. Dinosaur samples are proven to be 65 million years old. Give me one of thier creationism arguments, Im sure I can contradict it. Slowly turning atheist, YYYH
Heckler	posted 11-08-98 11:32 AM ET Heh ok I have my quote I just think this is a good place to unveil it. Heckler "The truth is found by taking the lies told by both sides, and not believing any of it." ME P.S. The above comes from the principle that any two people viewing the same event will remember two different versions of it (unless one is sophie then you get 4 ) by comparing the differences between these you can generally glean what actually happened from the horsedung.
Apocalypse	posted 11-08-98 02:34 PM ET Catholic schools don't teach creationism...well atleast Roman Catholic schools...I don't know about Eastern Orthodox Catholic schools though.
DJ RRebel	posted 11-08-98 02:41 PM ET Religion should only be taught in history classes ... I feel really sorry for you .. I hope you get a more openminded education when you're a little older !!! Religion shouldn't be imposed on anyone in schools !!!
DJ RRebel	posted 11-08-98 02:41 PM ET It's simply another form of brainwashing !!!
DJ RRebel	posted 11-08-98 02:43 PM ET Speaking of truth ... it's out there tonight for the season premiere!!!
Saint Randerolf	posted 11-08-98 11:01 PM ET Oh, no. I go to a Baptist school. It's called Trinity Christian Academy. I only took my Spanish home this weekend (pray for me! and if your and atheist do whatever you do) so I'll take home my Biology textbook home and stuff. Actually, I enjoy reading alternative thoughts and ideas. The school feeds me super right wing thoughts and the Internet feeds me left wing extremity. It's not brain washing to me. They hold my beliefs, but if my faith is so weak that I can not subject them to scrutiny, how am I to know the truth. Before I leave for school tomorrow, I'll leave you with this. The Bible has never been proven wrong. Any question that may arise can be worked out with some common sense. As a French adviser to his leader put it, some thing like: The Bible is an anvil that was worn out many a hammers that have tried to defeat it.
Moon Rat	posted 11-08-98 11:43 PM ET Please understand that the Christian religion requires that you have faith in God and faith in the bible as God's word. I think it is a big mistake to have faith in any one person's interpretation of the bible. The bible contains history, allegory, poetry, moral instruction, and mistakes in translation. You must reason out which is the best interpretation for each part, and realize that if you discover that your particular version of creationism is wrong, your faith is not challenged, only your reason.
Saint Randerolf	posted 11-15-98 01:54 AM ET I promise I'll give you some stuff to rebut tomorrow. I've been busy. its midnight. good night
Tapiolan poika	posted 12-18-98 07:54 AM ET I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I had better do neither, since I might find it hard to stop, after reading this thread. If you scrutinize ( ) S:t Randerolf's initial post, you'll find that he poses three (3) subjects he wishes us to scrutinize and rebut. Apart from an offhand mention by DHE_X2 (my compliments!), everyone's been discussing creationism, the Bible, and subjects tangent to these. No _one_ has seriously even _considered_ the possibility that capitalism may not be the panacea for all things bad in human society relating to economy, justice, equality, etc. Why? Are the attitudes of posters here so entrenched noone feels it serves a purpose to discuss this subject, or do you feel capitalism IS the correct way, and this is so obvious it needn't be discussed? Maybe you can't handle more than one belief system at a time? (Yes, economic theory is more a matter of belief than science.) I'm just curious...
DHE_X2	posted 11-15-98 02:01 AM ET America wasn't based Entirely on the Bible, though I sure can see some similarities. Neither Creationism, nor Evolution imho, are correct in their pure form. A combination of both, if you ask me. Capitalism is the right way, even though it relies on greed, which, of course, is not good if left to run rampant.
DHE_X2	posted 12-18-98 01:53 PM ET huh, I forgot I even posted in here... Damn memory!!! I'm gueesing, Tap, that most people posting in here went for the "juicier" topic of evolution.
Utrecht	posted 12-18-98 08:58 PM ET A note on Carbon dating. It has been know to be exceptionaly unreliable for geologically recent (under 10,000 years) usually with about a 20% varience. As the carbon decay advances, the accuracy of the test increased dramatically. One of the biggest problems with this debazte is the fact that one side (creationism) say take it on faith. Evolutionism will provide a 80% solution and state QED for the rest. I myself am a scientific agnostic. I.e there is a higher power that stated the big-bang. His (or her) ten commandments are the laus of nature. I.E. Maxwel, Faraday, the univeral constants etc. The rest simply "evolved" from it.
dushan	posted 11-15-98 03:33 AM ET From casual observation, I'd say that America is based quite heavily on bible (or religion). Don't you have 'In god we trust' on your bank notes? Don't you swear on bible in the court? (What about people of other religions? Or is this just a myth?) I'm pretty sure that the last sentence of the swearing-in ceremony (or whatever it's called when you're becomming US citizen ;-) ) contains 'so help me god'. Generally, the whole western world is heavily affected by christian ideology - not all bad :-) -many of us celebrate xmas -many of us get married (and the institution of marriage as seen by christians is heavily rooted in the law) -the state funds churches (or does it? I think it does here in uk. damn it, we pay christians for their churches ;-) ) -when something bad happens we say 'oh god' or 'bloody hell' :-) Please bear in mind that this is very poorly researched, i'm probably wrong 99% :-) As to religion in schools - I'm not happy about that. I'm also not happy about people ridiculing religion or ignoring it completely as I think children are entitled to a full story. But this would lead to a long rant and I want to go to sleep :-) Dushan
Spoe	posted 12-18-98 10:03 PM ET There is a wealth of evidence in support of evolution. One of the best is a series of fossils from India that describe the evolution of whales from a wolf-like creature in a shallow sea formed as India approached Asia. On the matter of hoaxed "missing links", yes, science has been fooled on occasion. But one of the things that keeps science rooted in reality is peer review and a critical eye to the evidence. This allowed these hoaxes to be caught. Without this, these hoaxes might still be used as evidence. I've looked at creation "science" and what it claims to be the process of science is actually a perversion thereof. Science is taking observations and making a hypothesis(and later, as supporting evidence grows, a theory) that fits the data. Creation "science" starts with the theory(the Bible is absolutely and literally correct) and attempts to make the data fit. Some of their theories at the very least border on the ludicrous(and that's being generous). Their "scientific" explanation for the flood is the collapse of a shell of water that used to surround the Earth -- in violation of known orbital mechanics. All creationist literature I have read contains many misstatements(whether by intention or ignorance) about current scientific theory. This leads me to be extremely skeptical about their claims. Oh, and guess what? IIRC, leg and other muscles are attached to the full tails on other animals as well. Perhaps that is why we still have a vestigal tail -- the minimum tail need to attach our muscles?
Steel_Dragon	posted 11-15-98 03:55 AM ET We sorta fund church, there a great tax shelter, but there is no officail funding that I'am aware of. "So help me God" was added by Washington, God bless him for not running for a third term and setting up an american monarchy, in the first Anderation(Forget that, swearing into office) and the mainstream has not revolted from that failure of seperation of church and state (one of our ideals). Which in fact was only put into the bill of Rights to prevent civil war between the Catholics of Maryland(I think) and the Protasants(sp) of Massachuats. Or any other state agianst State in congress
Octopus	posted 11-15-98 04:09 AM ET I think Steel_Dragon is thinking of the presidential oath of office, which doesn't have a "so help me God" in it (but it is customary for every president to add this on his own). I believe that a variety of other oaths do indeed have a "so help me God" in them, but I'm not sure. I believe that witnesses are allowed to "affirm" rather than swear that they are telling the truth. Perjury would apply equally. There is no government funding of religious institutions. From the second amendment to the US constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The Supreme Court has ruled in a variety of cases that the government cannot directly fund religious activities (although it might be able to if the funding is for some secular purpose -- for example, bussing children to parochial schools. I'm not sure if that's constitutional or not). Funding of religious activities is seen as a violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment. America is certainly not "based on the bible". America was founded based on the ideas of the natural rights philosphers of the 18th century, like Locke. The "founding fathers" were mostly religious people, but they founded a political institution, not a religion.
Zan Thrax	posted 12-19-98 01:50 AM ET What happened? Why are there two threads of this now?
Octopus	posted 11-15-98 04:11 AM ET D'oh! Obviously that should be the first amendment. The second amendment is just what keeps the first amendment around
Octopus	posted 12-19-98 01:58 AM ET This thread is duplicated. If you want to continue the discussion, may I suggest starting a new thread (one that isn't messed up)? As it is now, threads will alternate between showing up in the middle and showing up at the end. It makes reading the thread difficult.
Saint Randerolf	posted 11-15-98 11:34 PM ET Any anti-creationist facts or rebuttals? Here's some statements going around in my biology class. From homo habilis to cro-magnon man, profe of an evolving ape to man creature is non existent. Most were pranks on scientist digging for fossils or men or apes that exist today. The Coccyx is not a vestigial tail. Its serves as a place of attachment for leg and lower back muscles. 1. Evolution (chance) 2. Progressive evolution 3. Theistic evolution All "conclusively" prove each other wrong. Using the potassium- argon method of dating, volcanic material in Hawaii that was less than 2000 years old, tested at between 160 million and 3 billion years old. A shell from a living mollusk was tested for carbon-14 and was found to be DEAD for 3,000 years. Refute them if you can. The seeker, Saint Randerolf
Roland	posted 11-16-98 05:33 AM ET This is fun. I don't know too much about the things you mention "going around". Just on C-14, as every method, if poorly applied, the results will be wrong. It's rather complex as you need to take care of the changing levels of c-14 over time. I just remember that in one example, that made a difference of about 1000 years for an item about 5000 years old. How do you know that that piece of lava is actually 2000 years old ? Has it a date on it ? Finally: Got any evidence for creationism ?
Tolls	posted 11-16-98 09:53 AM ET If that lava dating thing is the one I think it is, they weren't dating the lava, they were dating some other thing held in the lava. I would get a link, but that discussion has long since wandered off the board I saw it in. There is a complete set of transitions from Homo Habilis to us...indeed there are from the Australopithecines. I know of one prank and one misidentification which are frequently put around creation circles as proof...there's Piltdown Man, which was disproved in the 50s, and Nebraska Man, a misidentified pig tooth which was quickly reclassified. I don't know of any others. Not sure about the mollusk...rings a bell, though. Oh, and evolution is not "chance". And what is Progressive Evolution?
MikeH II	posted 11-17-98 09:53 AM ET At school I was taught Creationism, Evolution and Spontaneous creation. An old theory that said life was created spontaneously in certain conditions. eg. leave an open sack of wheat in a drafty shed and mice 'spontaneously' appear out of nowhere. Still makes me laugh that one. We then concentrated on evolution as the 'most widely accepted' scientific theory. Personally I think it is dangerous to mix religion with education. It can cloud rational judgements about facts. If you can I would suggest you pick up a popular science book on evolution (your local library should have one), read it then see what you think. In fact you can probably find some good info on the internet. There are problems with evolution and there are problems with creationism. Neither are complete theories. I can't comment about the theories in detail but if the material came out of a volcano 2,000 years ago (Roland has a good point how can you tell?) then it could still be that old. Maybe it's just been inside the volcano for a long time. Have a look at some geological work as well if you can specifically plate destruction and creation at plate boundaries. It can explain how old rock can be taken under then ejected elsewhere which would explain the age thing. An alternative explanation at least. (I don't know the details so that is just a guess) Pranks on scientists? Any proof? Testimony from a specific prankster about the pranks he left? Very impressive if it's true. Just saying it doesn't prove it though. Keep thinking about what you are told and question whether it is a sensible conclusion.
MikeH II	posted 11-17-98 09:56 AM ET Don't know how I missed Tolls' point about pranks. Oh well.
Tolls	posted 11-17-98 10:08 AM ET The other point about the Hawaian lava seems to be that they were also trying to show that K-Ar dating doesn't work with that kind of rock...something to do with it being low in potassium. There are a number of different dating methods, of which there are probably none which can be used in every situation. (I've been listening to geologists again...)
MikeH II	posted 11-17-98 10:14 AM ET I'll leave the geology to you.
Tapiolan poika	posted 12-18-98 07:55 AM ET I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I had better do neither, since I might find it hard to stop, after reading this thread. If you scrutinize ( ) S:t Randerolf's initial post, you'll find that he poses three (3) subjects he wishes us to scrutinize and rebut. Apart from an offhand mention by DHE_X2 (my compliments!), everyone's been discussing creationism, the Bible, and subjects tangent to these. No _one_ has seriously even _considered_ the possibility that capitalism may not be the panacea for all things bad in human society relating to economy, justice, equality, etc. Why? Are the attitudes of posters here so entrenched noone feels it serves a purpose to discuss this subject, or do you feel capitalism IS the correct way, and this is so obvious it needn't be discussed? Maybe you can't handle more than one belief system at a time? (Yes, economic theory is more a matter of belief than science.) I'm just curious... >>Another repost... Sorry.<<
Zan Thrax	posted 12-18-98 07:41 PM ET Well, I'm not up for an anti-capatilism rant right now, but I've got a question for those of you who point to the bible. How do you know which parts are metaphor, which are allegory, and which are literal statements?
Hothram Upravda	posted 12-18-98 09:22 PM ET Saint Randerolf: Take a Anthro class in Collage. It would just take to much time to explain evolution. Needless to say there is a huge amount of evidence to prove evolution. Just wait till y'll get to collage, you will get the facts there.... Actualy i am shocked that this is going on in America. Always thought this whole "creationism" was a joke and that no one (except fanatics) ever took it as anything remotly resembulting fact.. Hothram Upravda Anthro Major. TB
Spoe	posted 12-18-98 10:05 PM ET Argh. My post went up to the middle. Look for it in the posts for 11-15-98.
Zan Thrax	posted 12-19-98 01:52 AM ET What the hell? My question that I posted in the other thread showed up in the middle of this one.
Octopus	posted 12-19-98 01:59 AM ET This thread is duplicated. If you want to continue the discussion, may I suggest starting a new thread (one that isn't messed up)? As it is now, posts will alternate between showing up in the middle and showing up at the end. It makes reading the thread difficult.