Kirk Cameron, YOU FAIL

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
443

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

BTW, I happen to agree with you, but it’s a lot trickier of a subject than you seem to be admitting to.

Such as

Don’t understand what you’re asking. I mentioned in the post that you quoted that there are numerous sects, and that each one proclaims that theirs is the “true” Christianity. So, trying to define “true” Christianity is a tricky thing to do.

Sorry. What am I not admitting to? If you mean that I’m dismissing the scientific evidence, then yeah i freely admit I am not very well versed on alot of the science stuff. However common sense leads me to alot of my beliefs…i know that makes intellectual people nauseas to hear but thats where i am at.
[/quote]

Common sense is a good thing. But in most cases what we think is common sense is very heavily influenced by the values and social norms that we were raised with/around. This is of course true on both sides of the argument.

And if all the evidence supports a different conclusion, then either side must either deny reality, or admit that perhaps their common sense was flawed.

Also, nothing wrong with not being very versed in scientific stuff, I wouldn’t consider myself to be either. But at least you have seemed willing to look/listen to some of the scientific evidence and haven’t completely closed off your mind to other possibilities. Just as I’d agree that scientists shouldn’t completely close off their minds to the possibilities that religion purposes.

Well, that’s not exactly intellectual dishonesty on the scientists side, as God has never been objectively captured revealing himself to have created the world and everything in it. Personal experience is great and all, but it’s not a very reliable source of information. For instance we have people who are Schizophrenic who see things which are not actually there, or people on hallucinogenic drugs. So, clearly just because someone experiences something doesn’t meant that it actually happened.

If God objectively revealed himself to have created the world, then that would definitely change the scientific landscape though. And many people (scientists included) would have to change their perceptions of the world.

In many cases on the other side, it’s more so a matter of having been falsely informed IMO. Most Christians that I’ve met aren’t stupid people by any means, including the ones who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. But they listen to “authorities” who do their best to falsely inform them and trick them into thinking that things like evolution and God are mutually exclusive. The TV evangelists would be good examples of people who seek to do these types of things.

[quote]
And Im sorry but these nerdy scientists really piss me off. They are just so damned condescending and dismissive of anything other than science. Forgive me Lord.[/quote]

Yeah, intellectuals can be pretty annoying. But, you’ve gotta admit that some of the preachers on the other side are just as condescending and dismissive of anything other than their religion. Like you said, both sides can be guilty of such offenses.

444

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:

Skip ahead to 6:43 to see a pie graph showing the percentage of Christians compared to other world religions from 2005, and a bar graph representing the number of Christian evolutionists vs Christian creationists. Sorry, but I didn’t want to spend hours searching for the original graph on the site that it was originally posted on…

Sorry but a five second snip of a YouTube video showing a pie chart of dubious origin and value aint gonna cut it.[/quote]

The chart was from www.adherents.com

Feel free to try to find it yourself. I think you’ll find that it’s a pretty nonbiased and reliable site.

446

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
…the majority of evolutionary scientists today also believe in God…

Cite references, please.

Keep in mind that Catholicism is the largest Christian denomination by far.

I ask you to cite references of evolutionary scientists today that believe in God and you give me an article about the Pope believing in evolution? And then remind me about Catholicism being a rather large religion? Are you serious?

Yes, I’m serious. Catholicism is the largest sect of Christianity, and several Popes now have given their endorsements of evolution. Therefore, Catholicism accepts evolution. And since most Christians are Catholics, Christianity is one of the largest religions on this planet, and since the majority of the population claims to believe in a higher power/God, it’s not really an outrageous conclusion.

Sorry my friend, but atheism is the minority population, even among scientists.

Here are several quick (and yes somewhat questionable, yet also fairly consistent) sources that say the majority of the world’s population believe in God:

http://www.chacha.com/question/what-percent-of-the-world's-population-believes-in-god

scroll down to Distribution

If you disagree, let’s see some sources that site conflicting statistics.

Popes are not evolutionary scientists. Sento, you’re smarter than this. I’ve read your posts for years. I asked for specific evidence about scientists and you give me stuff about popes and Catholicism in general.[/quote]

Scientists are people though, aren’t they? And since about 85% of all people are religious, and only about 5% are atheist, then I don’t see how you can’t make the logical conclusion that most scientists believe in God.

Also, I named several big name evolutionary scientists in an earlier post.

447

Here are a few other big name scientists (among them some biologists, Darwin himself, physicists, mathematicians, etc…) who believed in God:

448

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

BTW, I happen to agree with you, but it’s a lot trickier of a subject than you seem to be admitting to.

Such as

Don’t understand what you’re asking. I mentioned in the post that you quoted that there are numerous sects, and that each one proclaims that theirs is the “true” Christianity. So, trying to define “true” Christianity is a tricky thing to do.

Sorry. What am I not admitting to? If you mean that I’m dismissing the scientific evidence, then yeah i freely admit I am not very well versed on alot of the science stuff. However common sense leads me to alot of my beliefs…i know that makes intellectual people nauseas to hear but thats where i am at.

Common sense is a good thing. But in most cases what we think is common sense is very heavily influenced by the values and social norms that we were raised with/around. This is of course true on both sides of the argument.

And if all the evidence supports a different conclusion, then either side must either deny reality, or admit that perhaps their common sense was flawed.

Also, nothing wrong with not being very versed in scientific stuff, I wouldn’t consider myself to be either. But at least you have seemed willing to look/listen to some of the scientific evidence and haven’t completely closed off your mind to other possibilities. Just as I’d agree that scientists shouldn’t completely close off their minds to the possibilities that religion purposes.

It seems to me that there is intellectual dishonesty on both sides of the debate. The scientists would have their worlds crushed if somehow God revealed himself to them and said “Yes I created the World and everything in it”. He has, but that’s another debate. And some on the other side want to bury their heads in the sand.

Well, that’s not exactly intellectual dishonesty on the scientists side, as God has never been objectively captured revealing himself to have created the world and everything in it. Personal experience is great and all, but it’s not a very reliable source of information. For instance we have people who are Schizophrenic who see things which are not actually there, or people on hallucinogenic drugs. So, clearly just because someone experiences something doesn’t meant that it actually happened.

If God objectively revealed himself to have created the world, then that would definitely change the scientific landscape though. And many people (scientists included) would have to change their perceptions of the world.

In many cases on the other side, it’s more so a matter of having been falsely informed IMO. Most Christians that I’ve met aren’t stupid people by any means, including the ones who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. But they listen to “authorities” who do their best to falsely inform them and trick them into thinking that things like evolution and God are mutually exclusive. The TV evangelists would be good examples of people who seek to do these types of things.

And Im sorry but these nerdy scientists really piss me off. They are just so damned condescending and dismissive of anything other than science. Forgive me Lord.

Yeah, intellectuals can be pretty annoying. But, you’ve gotta admit that some of the preachers on the other side are just as condescending and dismissive of anything other than their religion. Like you said, both sides can be guilty of such offenses.[/quote]

Good input. Yes personal experience or how one is raised is a huge factor in one’s world view. I for one was raised with divorced parents, on the one side strict baptist and the other pretty liberal views. But I find myself now in the best of both worlds, knowing the love of Jesus Christ through his Grace that he has liberally bestowed upon me. All the church with none of the religious non-sense and law.

449

And here:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion.html

Also, according to several poles anywhere from 95-99,9% of scientists support evolution.

scroll down to “1997 Gallup Poll comparing scientists with the general population”

scroll down to “can scientists believe in God”.

But, I do want to correct myself, as I said “the majority of evolutionary scientists believe in God”, when I should have said “the majority of scientists who believe in evolution, also believe in God”. So, my mistake there.

450

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

BTW, I happen to agree with you, but it’s a lot trickier of a subject than you seem to be admitting to.

Such as

Don’t understand what you’re asking. I mentioned in the post that you quoted that there are numerous sects, and that each one proclaims that theirs is the “true” Christianity. So, trying to define “true” Christianity is a tricky thing to do.

Sorry. What am I not admitting to? If you mean that I’m dismissing the scientific evidence, then yeah i freely admit I am not very well versed on alot of the science stuff. However common sense leads me to alot of my beliefs…i know that makes intellectual people nauseas to hear but thats where i am at.

Common sense is a good thing. But in most cases what we think is common sense is very heavily influenced by the values and social norms that we were raised with/around. This is of course true on both sides of the argument.

And if all the evidence supports a different conclusion, then either side must either deny reality, or admit that perhaps their common sense was flawed.

Also, nothing wrong with not being very versed in scientific stuff, I wouldn’t consider myself to be either. But at least you have seemed willing to look/listen to some of the scientific evidence and haven’t completely closed off your mind to other possibilities. Just as I’d agree that scientists shouldn’t completely close off their minds to the possibilities that religion purposes.

It seems to me that there is intellectual dishonesty on both sides of the debate. The scientists would have their worlds crushed if somehow God revealed himself to them and said “Yes I created the World and everything in it”. He has, but that’s another debate. And some on the other side want to bury their heads in the sand.

Well, that’s not exactly intellectual dishonesty on the scientists side, as God has never been objectively captured revealing himself to have created the world and everything in it. Personal experience is great and all, but it’s not a very reliable source of information. For instance we have people who are Schizophrenic who see things which are not actually there, or people on hallucinogenic drugs. So, clearly just because someone experiences something doesn’t meant that it actually happened.

If God objectively revealed himself to have created the world, then that would definitely change the scientific landscape though. And many people (scientists included) would have to change their perceptions of the world.

In many cases on the other side, it’s more so a matter of having been falsely informed IMO. Most Christians that I’ve met aren’t stupid people by any means, including the ones who believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. But they listen to “authorities” who do their best to falsely inform them and trick them into thinking that things like evolution and God are mutually exclusive. The TV evangelists would be good examples of people who seek to do these types of things.

And Im sorry but these nerdy scientists really piss me off. They are just so damned condescending and dismissive of anything other than science. Forgive me Lord.

Yeah, intellectuals can be pretty annoying. But, you’ve gotta admit that some of the preachers on the other side are just as condescending and dismissive of anything other than their religion. Like you said, both sides can be guilty of such offenses.

Good input. Yes personal experience or how one is raised is a huge factor in one’s world view. I for one was raised with divorced parents, on the one side strict baptist and the other pretty liberal views. But I find myself now in the best of both worlds, knowing the love of Jesus Christ through his Grace that he has liberally bestowed upon me. All the church with none of the religious non-sense and law. [/quote]

Good to hear. :slight_smile:

451

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

Good to hear. :)[/quote]

Yes sir! Now somebody needs to start a new thread Christian bashing, so I can have reason to keep posting.

452

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
Get over myself? Look, as I stated earlier I believe that there is evidence to support evolution within a species…but you have yet to prove that we have evolved form apes or fish or whatever else these scientists believe we evolved from. Please disprove creationism…my mind is wide open.[/quote]

Hahaha oh wow. There is that Texas education at work. It is hard to prove something to someone when they do not even have a basic understanding of what you are trying to prove. Incidentally I find this asymmetry of creationists’ ignorance about the Law of Natural Selection and Evolution rather revealing. If you spent a tenth the amount of time reading that you spent moving heavy objects you would probably not be such an ignoramus.

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
And Im sorry but these nerdy scientists really piss me off. They are just so damned condescending and dismissive of anything other than science. Forgive me Lord.[/quote]

Wow this is too good.

453

[quote]fleeben wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
Get over myself? Look, as I stated earlier I believe that there is evidence to support evolution within a species…but you have yet to prove that we have evolved form apes or fish or whatever else these scientists believe we evolved from. Please disprove creationism…my mind is wide open.

Hahaha oh wow. There is that Texas education at work. It is hard to prove something to someone when they do not even have a basic understanding of what you are trying to prove. Incidentally I find this asymmetry of creationists’ ignorance about the Law of Natural Selection and Evolution rather revealing. If you spent a tenth the amount of time reading that you spent moving heavy objects you would probably not be such an ignoramus.

mattfelts wrote:
And Im sorry but these nerdy scientists really piss me off. They are just so damned condescending and dismissive of anything other than science. Forgive me Lord.

Wow this is too good.

[/quote]

LOL! Ignoramus is a funny word. Yep we’re a bunch hayseeds down here in Texas. Readings for fags…not that there is anything wrong with that…or is there? Oh, and if spending three hours a week lifting weights is what makes me ignorant, then there is no hope for me. Im just lazy. And maybe if you spent a little less time reading then you wouldn’t be the econo sized douche I perceive you to be. I mean that in a good Christian way.

454

[quote]mattfelts wrote:

The only thing this link proves is how ignorant this guy is to true Christianity. He goes off on how ignorant the general population is because they don’t have an understanding of REAL science, but I bet you this guy has never truly studied the bible or know how to interpret it. BTW…true Christians don’t watch tv evangelists because YES they are a scam…worse than the evolution scam. He also goes on to say that we can’t know for sure in the existence of God, and then says that creationism is a scam.[/quote]

True Christianity? Please, there is no true version of a fake ideal. Even assuming that the Bible is accurate, which sub-sect of Christianity is supposedly the “true” one?

The guy is absolutely right in the vid you linked.

455

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
Irreducible complexity is an argument from ignorance. No real scientist would ever say, “this is so complex that it can never be explained by evolution, so I give up.” Instead, a scientist would continue to formulate hypotheses to explain it and then test the hypotheses. Behe suffers from a very unscientific failure of curiosity, creativity, and nerve. Not only does he promote willful ignorance and pseudoscience, he encourages people to repress their intellectual curiosity–a moral lapse for a scientist!

I pulled this from an article of some guy trying to discredit Michael Behe. This is exactly what im talking about when a scientist is faced with such complexity instead of saying wait a minute maybe science does not hold all the answeres…what do they do…they just keep pushing forward and saying no science will reveal the truth. This is why I say that they are the ones who are closed minded. Science is their God [/quote]

So basically, never try. Behe is a quack, and irreducible complexity has always been throughly shat on by science.

Stop trying to make science into a religion, all the testable evidence stops it being a faith-job.

456

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
The only thing that you can literally conclude from Genesis is that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis is a book that shows man fall from the Grace of God into law, however it’s not Christians who take a literalist’s view of the bible but the non-christian who wants to disprove it.[/quote]

That’s outright bull shit and you know it.

457

[quote]Makavali wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
The only thing that you can literally conclude from Genesis is that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis is a book that shows man fall from the Grace of God into law, however it’s not Christians who take a literalist’s view of the bible but the non-christian who wants to disprove it.

That’s outright bull shit and you know it.[/quote]

How so? I mean your the science and now theology king so tell me how this is bullshit?

458

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
LOL! Ignoramus is a funny word. Yep we’re a bunch hayseeds down here in Texas. Readings for fags…not that there is anything wrong with that…or is there? Oh, and if spending three hours a week lifting weights is what makes me ignorant, then there is no hope for me. Im just lazy. And maybe if you spent a little less time reading then you wouldn’t be the econo sized douche I perceive you to be. I mean that in a good Christian way.[/quote]

Only in amercuh can people be so proudly ignorant and still claim that their opinions matter.

459

[quote]fleeben wrote:
mattfelts wrote:
LOL! Ignoramus is a funny word. Yep we’re a bunch hayseeds down here in Texas. Readings for fags…not that there is anything wrong with that…or is there? Oh, and if spending three hours a week lifting weights is what makes me ignorant, then there is no hope for me. Im just lazy. And maybe if you spent a little less time reading then you wouldn’t be the econo sized douche I perceive you to be. I mean that in a good Christian way.

Only in amercuh can people be so proudly ignorant and still claim that their opinions matter.[/quote]

Amen, brother! Love it or leave it…freedom cost a buck o’ five

460

[quote]Makavali wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

The only thing this link proves is how ignorant this guy is to true Christianity. He goes off on how ignorant the general population is because they don’t have an understanding of REAL science, but I bet you this guy has never truly studied the bible or know how to interpret it. BTW…true Christians don’t watch tv evangelists because YES they are a scam…worse than the evolution scam. He also goes on to say that we can’t know for sure in the existence of God, and then says that creationism is a scam.

True Christianity? Please, there is no true version of a fake ideal. Even assuming that the Bible is accurate, which sub-sect of Christianity is supposedly the “true” one?

The guy is absolutely right in the vid you linked.[/quote]

I already stated what I believe to be true Christianity. And I said sect of Christianity, but there is only one the true one.

461

[quote]mattfelts wrote:
Makavali wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

The only thing this link proves is how ignorant this guy is to true Christianity. He goes off on how ignorant the general population is because they don’t have an understanding of REAL science, but I bet you this guy has never truly studied the bible or know how to interpret it. BTW…true Christians don’t watch tv evangelists because YES they are a scam…worse than the evolution scam. He also goes on to say that we can’t know for sure in the existence of God, and then says that creationism is a scam.

True Christianity? Please, there is no true version of a fake ideal. Even assuming that the Bible is accurate, which sub-sect of Christianity is supposedly the “true” one?

The guy is absolutely right in the vid you linked.

I already stated what I believe to be true Christianity. And I said sect of Christianity, but there is only one the true one.[/quote]

Who are you to declare your faith is the true one?

Are you Jesus?

And you keep harping on about not being well read in science. That’s nothing to be proud of, go pick up a book.

462

[quote]Makavali wrote:
mattfelts wrote:

The only thing this link proves is how ignorant this guy is to true Christianity. He goes off on how ignorant the general population is because they don’t have an understanding of REAL science, but I bet you this guy has never truly studied the bible or know how to interpret it. BTW…true Christians don’t watch tv evangelists because YES they are a scam…worse than the evolution scam. He also goes on to say that we can’t know for sure in the existence of God, and then says that creationism is a scam.

True Christianity? Please, there is no true version of a fake ideal. Even assuming that the Bible is accurate, which sub-sect of Christianity is supposedly the “true” one?

The guy is absolutely right in the vid you linked.[/quote]

Actually the guy is logically incoherent. You cannot acknowledge the possibility of a supernatural creator and say that creationism is disproven.

If you do acknowledge that possibility, in doing so you must also acknowledge that event could have happened at any time.

He says, science canâ??t say anything about god, then he says itâ??s scientifically proven god didnâ??t create the earth in itâ??s present state. WRONG!

He is making the same mistake Iâ??ve been saying over and over again is ridiculously stupid. Itâ??s not any more in agreement with science to say a singularity poofed into existence than the modern earth.

IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THE POSSIBILITY OF A SUPERNATURAL BEING, YOU MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECENT CREATION. PERIOD.

It’s called logic, he should learn it.