Science against evolution

[Aseptic Skeptic]

(16-01-2013 11:11 AM)AtheismExposed Wrote:  The Evolutionary worldview is built on some very shaky ground. All of its core assumptions have been challenged and yet ivory tower Darwinists refuse to meet the challenge.

The force maintaining Evolutionism's unwarranted position in the scientific establishment is the enforced orthodoxy of the scientific establishment.

Dare to draw a different conclusion from their data and you are SHUNNED and driven out, it's a tight-knit cabal determined to suppress dissent.

You refer to things like "evolutionary worldview" and "evolutionism" and "scientific orthodoxy" and "scientific establishment" and "Darwinist". All of which is nonsense. These terms don't exist, except in the mind of whoever you learned them from who was no doubt trying to poison your mind and prevent you from rationally learning about science (or parroting someone else's attempt to poison them).

"Evolutionary worldview" simply means science. There is no worldview, there is only practicing scientific observation and experimentation and figuring out how the world actually works.

"Evolutionism" is not even a word. There is no "ism". It's not a belief or a religion or a social club. Evolution is a natural process that is testable and verifiable and provable. Science is a means of testing and verifying things, including evolution. People who know about evolution and talk about it, support it, teach it, share it with others, they are possibly scientists, biologists, or just average guys like me who are interested in the subject. None of them are "evolutionists" because there is no such thing. Sure, you can find it on wikipedia, but that was written by some ordinary person who heard what you heard, believes what you believe. You're both wrong. Try to find one class on "evolutionism" in any university in the world - they don't exist. There is no such thing. It's not even a word. People who want to attack science, undermine it, and poison your mind to keep you from learning and investigating and educating yourself, they're the ones who made up this word and use it as negatively as they can.

"Darwinist". See "evolutionism" above. Same thing. Not a word.

"Scientific orthodoxy" is pure nonsense. There is no such thing as "orthodoxy" in science. Everything, EVERYTHING in the world of science is fully open to be challenged, debated, attacked, criticized, and overturned if you can provide enough reproducible evidence to justify overturning it. If you can conduct a scientific experiment that proves that germs don't cause illness, that gravity doesn't hold us to the earth, that fire isn't hot, that water isn't wet, or whatever, if you can scientifically prove it, then every other scientist on the planet will accept your proof and change their knowledge accordingly. This is the opposite of the concept of "orthodoxy". Religions have "orthodoxy" - they get an idea in their scripture and never allow it to be challenged or investigated, they never change that idea, it lasts for as long as the religion exists. Science does the opposite, challenges everything, all the time.

"Scientific establishment" is nonsense for the same reason as "scientific orthodoxy". There is no establishment in science. There are laws, theories, hypotheses, etc. Some scientists may have different hypotheses than other scientists. They may argue with each other, dispute their hypotheses, try to convince the other guy, whatever. At the end of the day, that's how science works. Sure, there are a lot of scientists who understand evolution and support it very strongly because they have learned, tested, experimented, researched, and fully understand the concept. If several such scientists work together and share this knowledge and understanding, they may look to an outsider as some kind of "establishment", but every one of those scientists would drop everything the minute anyone can provide scientific evidence that evolution is wrong. Yes, to be sure, they would test and experiment with the new theory that replaces evolution, but they wouldn't cling to an invalid theory once they have proof that it's invalid.

So all of your words are non-words. They don't make any sense and they don't have any meaning. As I mentioned, people who want to pollute your mind and keep you from learning and investigating science have invented these words and use them as negatively as possible. You've learned these words from them.

If you actually care about any of this, evolution, creation, etc., you would do well to learn the real words and better yet, the real science, so that you know what you're talking about. Stop using "hate words" to describe people who are simply exploring the real world. Explore it yourself and decide for yourself with knowledge instead of simply repeating someone else's mantras.

You might be surprised to find out just how wrong you are, and just how you have been deliberately deceived by religious/creationist people who really want to poison your mind and keep you from thinking for yourself.

[DLJ]

Vosur and I are on Skype, pissing ourselves over his youtube vid.

Vos has called Poe.

[AtheismExposed]

(16-01-2013 12:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  The stupid burns as bright as a star in the sky. Good thing this fire will not last as long.

In another thread on this forum you Atheists were bemoaning the lack of theists who post here. If your only response to dialogue is to immediately begin flinging insults...are you then surprised no theist wishes to converse with you?

Is it that you have no response to my words?

[Free Thought]

(16-01-2013 12:32 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Vosur and I are on Skype, pissing ourselves over his youtube vid.

Vos has called Poe.

And you didn't invite me?

For shame, dudes.

[Aseptic Skeptic]

(16-01-2013 12:33 PM)AtheismExposed Wrote:  

(16-01-2013 12:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  The stupid burns as bright as a star in the sky. Good thing this fire will not last as long.

In another thread on this forum you Atheists were bemoaning the lack of theists who post here. If your only response to dialogue is to immediately begin flinging insults...are you then surprised no theist wishes to converse with you?

Is it that you have no response to my words?

I was one of the posters on that thread bemoaning the scarcity of theists here.

I responded to this thread. No name calling, no insult flinging. I'm more than willing to converse. But there are lots of different people here and lots of different attitudes, some of which are less polite, more aggressive, even insulting. I regret that. But we're not all like that, so please feel free to ignore the ones you want and reply to those who wish to converse.

[DLJ]

(16-01-2013 12:38 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  

(16-01-2013 12:33 PM)AtheismExposed Wrote:  In another thread on this forum you Atheists were bemoaning the lack of theists who post here. If your only response to dialogue is to immediately begin flinging insults...are you then surprised no theist wishes to converse with you?

Is it that you have no response to my words?

I was one of the posters on that thread bemoaning the scarcity of theists here.

I responded to this thread. No name calling, no insult flinging. I'm more than willing to converse. But there are lots of different people here and lots of different attitudes, some of which are less polite, more aggressive, even insulting. I regret that. But we're not all like that, so please feel free to ignore the ones you want and reply to those who wish to converse.

I'm with you, chief.

But you gotta see his youtube vid. It's a scream.

[Free Thought]

(16-01-2013 12:20 PM)Vosur Wrote:  

(16-01-2013 12:16 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  I can tell, this is going to be a very humorous thread to watch.

You should take a look at his YouTube videos and comments as well. They are a comedy gold mine.

Please tell me that is a doctored image, and that's not a serious attempt at upholding geocentricism.

[AtheismExposed]

(16-01-2013 12:31 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  

(16-01-2013 11:11 AM)AtheismExposed Wrote:  The Evolutionary worldview is built on some very shaky ground. All of its core assumptions have been challenged and yet ivory tower Darwinists refuse to meet the challenge.

The force maintaining Evolutionism's unwarranted position in the scientific establishment is the enforced orthodoxy of the scientific establishment.

Dare to draw a different conclusion from their data and you are SHUNNED and driven out, it's a tight-knit cabal determined to suppress dissent.

You refer to things like "evolutionary worldview" and "evolutionism" and "scientific orthodoxy" and "scientific establishment" and "Darwinist". All of which is nonsense. These terms don't exist, except in the mind of whoever you learned them from who was no doubt trying to poison your mind and prevent you from rationally learning about science (or parroting someone else's attempt to poison them).

"Evolutionary worldview" simply means science. There is no worldview, there is only practicing scientific observation and experimentation and figuring out how the world actually works.

"Evolutionism" is not even a word. There is no "ism". It's not a belief or a religion or a social club. Evolution is a natural process that is testable and verifiable and provable. Science is a means of testing and verifying things, including evolution. People who know about evolution and talk about it, support it, teach it, share it with others, they are possibly scientists, biologists, or just average guys like me who are interested in the subject. None of them are "evolutionists" because there is no such thing. Sure, you can find it on wikipedia, but that was written by some ordinary person who heard what you heard, believes what you believe. You're both wrong. Try to find one class on "evolutionism" in any university in the world - they don't exist. There is no such thing. It's not even a word. People who want to attack science, undermine it, and poison your mind to keep you from learning and investigating and educating yourself, they're the ones who made up this word and use it as negatively as they can.

"Darwinist". See "evolutionism" above. Same thing. Not a word.

"Scientific orthodoxy" is pure nonsense. There is no such thing as "orthodoxy" in science. Everything, EVERYTHING in the world of science is fully open to be challenged, debated, attacked, criticized, and overturned if you can provide enough reproducible evidence to justify overturning it. If you can conduct a scientific experiment that proves that germs don't cause illness, that gravity doesn't hold us to the earth, that fire isn't hot, that water isn't wet, or whatever, if you can scientifically prove it, then every other scientist on the planet will accept your proof and change their knowledge accordingly. This is the opposite of the concept of "orthodoxy". Religions have "orthodoxy" - they get an idea in their scripture and never allow it to be challenged or investigated, they never change that idea, it lasts for as long as the religion exists. Science does the opposite, challenges everything, all the time.

"Scientific establishment" is nonsense for the same reason as "scientific orthodoxy". There is no establishment in science. There are laws, theories, hypotheses, etc. Some scientists may have different hypotheses than other scientists. They may argue with each other, dispute their hypotheses, try to convince the other guy, whatever. At the end of the day, that's how science works. Sure, there are a lot of scientists who understand evolution and support it very strongly because they have learned, tested, experimented, researched, and fully understand the concept. If several such scientists work together and share this knowledge and understanding, they may look to an outsider as some kind of "establishment", but every one of those scientists would drop everything the minute anyone can provide scientific evidence that evolution is wrong. Yes, to be sure, they would test and experiment with the new theory that replaces evolution, but they wouldn't cling to an invalid theory once they have proof that it's invalid.

So all of your words are non-words. They don't make any sense and they don't have any meaning. As I mentioned, people who want to pollute your mind and keep you from learning and investigating science have invented these words and use them as negatively as possible. You've learned these words from them.

If you actually care about any of this, evolution, creation, etc., you would do well to learn the real words and better yet, the real science, so that you know what you're talking about. Stop using "hate words" to describe people who are simply exploring the real world. Explore it yourself and decide for yourself with knowledge instead of simply repeating someone else's mantras.

You might be surprised to find out just how wrong you are, and just how you have been deliberately deceived by religious/creationist people who really want to poison your mind and keep you from thinking for yourself.

There IS an evolutionary worldview, it involves everything from Big Bangism through to the idea that everything in the universe revolves round the sun in some totally counterintuitive astrological configuration then some mixture of lifeless water and stone magically spawned life which eventually turned into everything we see today including people over HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

The whole thing is so outlandish it's almost funny.

As for scientific "orthodoxy", that too is unfortunately the case. A great many creation science organisations including AiG and ICR have tried to publish in Atheist journals but they just get rejected flat out. Refusing to allow opposition to be heard is how evolutionism has survived this long.

[Vosur]

(16-01-2013 12:41 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Please tell me that is a doctored image, and that's not a serious attempt at upholding geocentricism.

Watch them for yourself. The comments in the image can be found below these videos.

[kingschosen]

AtheismExposed, why do you believe evolution is contradictory to Christianity?