Jump to content


Photo

Isis Bans Teaching Of Evolution


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 driewerf

driewerf

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Age: 43
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 27 June 2016 - 09:07 AM

The mass murderers, mass rapists,slavers of ISIS have banned the teaching of evolution in their self proclaimed caliphate.

 

http://www.dailytech...rticle36569.htm

http://europe.newswe...ms-271096?rm=eu

 

Evolution-teaching countries like the UK, USA, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, germany, Russia are fighting ISIS.



#2 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 27 June 2016 - 12:00 PM

And what does this mean exactly? I would also be against ISIS as a Christian-creationist. So if I think evolution should be banned does that connect me with ISIS?

 

ISIS soldiers also eat food and wear socks. Does that mean I must go naked from now on so as to avoid being associated with ISIS?

 

It's obvious that such groups are radicalized extremists, so their reasons for rejecting evolution will be the same reasons they reject many things. But the reasons we reject evolution are good reasons, one rather big reason being that it is false. Lol

 

Sure, you can ban evolution just out of religious zeal, or because you think "monkeys are still here". Fine. You can also conclude that humans have bones because they form from rocks in your gut. Nevertheless, you can still believe that humans have bones and evolution is false, for correct reasons, despite this.

 

You need to avoid the Ad Hitlerum fallacy here. It goes something like this; "Hitler approved of chocolate cake. Therefore we must disapprove of chocolate cake because Hitler approved of it."

 

I would ban evolution because it is brainwashing people into thinking it is factual. I don't mind if it is taught as long as the correct objective disclaimers are also made in the classroom (BUT THEY AREN'T), and the scientific fact of ID is taught alongside it. After all, it is not up for debate that an eyeball is constructed to give sight, and every part of that eyeball is aimed at that goal. Just like a car is constructed to drive, and every part is directed at that goal. There is literally no physical difference to the fact that specified complexity is present.


  • Mike Summers likes this

#3 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 27 June 2016 - 05:34 PM

Isis Banning the teaching of evolution is a ruse. It's striaght out of Satan's playbook--the father of lies. No one gorges themselves more on the tree of good and evil than someone that feels they need to control others.

The scripture says, He that rules himself is greater than he that take a city! I haven't blamed anyone for making me angry, upset, mad etc in 35 years. I asked the Lord many years ago if I could learn as Paul learned in whatever state he found himsself to be content. God explained how I was doing it to mysellf by taking to myelf the knowledge of good and evil by eating from Satan's tree (a mixture of good and evil). Since then I try to eat only from God's tree! There is no bad fruit on God's tree! It's a great feeling to love everyone and not to be angry, anxious and frustrated!!

All I want is for my poor deceived brothers who have been dceived by the father of lies to control themselves and be an example instead of thinking they have to force others to do what they think is so very important.

They cover their women up because they blame her for what thy do in their twisted sick minds. Note how it's always something external just like

Adam blamed Eve. Eve blamed Satan. and atan blamed God. What kind of weak snibblng god needs anyone to anything for him? One that Satan trys to pawn off as a god that is not a god!

I hope we realize the difference between the God of the Bble who died for our sins and their god who the have to die for. That's a big difference--the real God, Jesus washed His disciples feet and called us His bothers! Wow. That's amazing!



#4 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 28 June 2016 - 03:02 AM

Good points Mike. I see the, "should" all of the time, but those who want to remain deceived, don't see their, "shoulds" anymore.

 

"The west shouldn't teach evo as it goes against Allah, they should die because our belief is as puney gods, that Allah wants us to murder if they don't comply. They should do X, Y and Z otherwise they're going to get it! Why aren't they doing what they should be doing?"

 

I guess people just don't see self-righteousness, Mike. I went to an evo-forum and an evo was telling creationists off for all the things they shouldn't do. Lol. "why won't they do as they should and see the fossil record as evidence for long ages and evo?" That was the real basis of his argument, which was just whining. 



#5 Fjuri

Fjuri

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 28 June 2016 - 07:27 AM

The mass murderers, mass rapists,slavers of ISIS have banned the teaching of evolution in their self proclaimed caliphate.

 

http://www.dailytech...rticle36569.htm

http://europe.newswe...ms-271096?rm=eu

 

Evolution-teaching countries like the UK, USA, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, germany, Russia are fighting ISIS.

I'm not sure what's your point.

"mass murderers", "mass rapists" and "slavers" are already pretty bad things, why should another warrant our attention?



#6 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 28 June 2016 - 08:30 AM

Mike the wiz said:

Good points Mike. I see the, "should" all of the time, but those who want to remain deceived, don't see their, "shoulds" anymore.

Most of the people I see have thought themseles into a geat deal of emotional pain and they selfrighteously believe others and events external to themselves caused it.

I used to wonder why God would allow a "time of trouble" to come on the world but after doing thearapy for 35 years and listening to thousands of inappropriate "should" statements, I realized that the only thing that can often break the back of selfrighteousness is a "significant emotional experience". This is sometimes called bottoming out (tribulaton). After going though a bunch of self inflicted psychological emotional pain people are often broken enough to repent! Look at what God had to do to Job and King Nebuchadnezera? Then there were the plagues on Egypt--until Pharoah chose the final plague himself.
God gave him what he (the Pharoah) wanted for his brothers (Israel). I notice that's how God thinks. If we want somethig bad for someone else that's what we will probably get.

We read in Revelation when God begns to work on men to get them to repent, He says they will seekd death and not find it until they agree to repent (change and give up their should's).

The weird thing about all of this is that God is not a control freak but goes to the trouble of "connvincing" us to use our own volition to do what He asks.

"The west shouldn't teach evo as it goes against Allah, they should die because our belief is as puney gods, that Allah wants us to murder if they don't comply. They should do X, Y and Z otherwise they're going to get it! Why aren't they doing what they should be doing?"

You are right! As God's word says, "There is a way that seems right unto a man but the ends are the ways of death."

I guess people just don't see self-righteousness, Mike. I went to an evo-forum and an evo was telling creationists off for all the things they shouldn't do. Lol. "why won't they do as they should and see the fossil record as evidence for long ages and evo?" That was the real basis of his argument, which was just whining.

Absolutely! But isn't it peaceful not having all those "shoulds" buzzing aroud in our head? LOL I ove peace and not havng to think I have to control anyone but me. If we can understand that people always do what they should and never do what they shouldn't, though it seem counter intuitive, then we know what our Lord was sayaig to his diicples. They complained about John the Baptist, "but what went you out into the wilderness to see (the wilderness is this deceived world--what did you expect)? He continues, "Behold they that wear fine clothing live in Kngs houses (fine cothibbg is the righteousness of the sanits. Paraphased it means, "What do you expect a deceived person to do except act like deceived person?" John of coure was not deceived but Jesus was using their confusion to make a pont. Paraphased in another way, " What did you go to Alaska to see, people walking around in bathing suits? Behlod those that wear bathig suits might be found on beaches in Florida!" That makes sense to me. lol :)


  • mike the wiz likes this

#7 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 28 June 2016 - 09:23 AM

 

 

Mike Summers: Absolutely! But isn't it peaceful not having all those "shoulds" buzzing aroud in our head? LOL

 

Lol! it is peaceful Mike, now we just have to convince the other 6 billion that it is. ;)



#8 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 28 June 2016 - 09:34 AM

I guess the difference with civilised people is that if they say, "I want evo banned" they are happy enough to accept that if other people don't want it banned, that they also have the right to have their opinion. Me and Mike aren't going to create bombs because you are not going to ban evo. LOL. We believe in freewill just as Jesus did. When Jesus disciples saw a town would not repent they asked Jesus to send fire from heaven and destroy the town and Jesus rebuked them. Jesus then said, "I have come to save mens lives not destroy them".

 

If an ISIS says you should do something, they will murder you if you don't do it or will terrorise you and threaten you. This is the crudest fallacy there is Fjuri, it is called the ad baculum fallacy, of the following form;

 

"I am correct, and if you disagree I will physically harm you." OR; "I am correct OR ELSE!

 

If I don't think you should do something and you do it anyway, I will say, "oh well, they've made a silly choice, now they have brainwashed kids instead of critical thinkers, and will have to live with the consequences. We can still preach the message that there is a better explanation of the facts and hope they don't ban that information."

 

But let's not forget, creationism is banned. So aren't evos just as bad as ISIS using Driewerf-logic? 



#9 Fjuri

Fjuri

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 28 June 2016 - 10:03 AM

Creationism is banned because it is brainwashing people into thinking it is factual. I don't mind if it is taught as long as the correct objective disclaimers are also made in the classroom (religion class). 



#10 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 28 June 2016 - 11:31 AM

Attached File  fjuri2.jpg   5.19KB   0 downloads



#11 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 28 June 2016 - 12:21 PM

Mike,
 

 


Fjuri: Creationism is banned because it is brainwashing people into thinking it is factual. I don't mind if it is taught as long as the correct objective .disclaimers are also made in the classroom (religion class).

What a bigoted claim ! Just as you would ecpect from a control freak religious belief called atheism.. Fjuri automatically assumes he is right bcause he believe his own PR.

This is example of evo philosophy in action. Notice that Fjuri personifies "it" as if "it" (the Bible call this idolatry) has the ability to do something to us. Just substitute being naked for "it" and you have the same lie the father of lies sold our parents. Adam and Eve swallowed this lie in the Garden of Eden.
Adam & Ever were naked at the end of Gen. 2: "Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame." So, 'it" (nakedness) didn't do anything to them!
Only after eating from Satan's tree is there something wrong with being naked. Get it. Remember the ABC"s I taught you?

Sorry Fjuri, God gave us dominion over the environment not "it" dominion over us. Creationism is a process that all intelligent beings use. If you want something that does not exist remember evo does not take special orders. They upset "it".

"It" can't do anything to you because you control "it" not "it" you! Creating it allows you to make it the way you want!

​So, have it your way!





 



#12 Fjuri

Fjuri

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 28 June 2016 - 01:27 PM

What a bigoted claim ! Just as you would ecpect from a control freak religious belief called atheism.. Fjuri automatically assumes he is right bcause he believe his own PR.

 

Funny :)

 

I just used Mike the Wiz's words:

I would ban evolution because it is brainwashing people into thinking it is factual. I don't mind if it is taught as long as the correct objective disclaimers are also made in the classroom (BUT THEY AREN'T), and the scientific fact of ID is taught alongside it. 

A post you liked none-the-less...



#13 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 28 June 2016 - 04:44 PM

Fjuri

You seem to forget I and the others on here know you by your attitide so our mnd also knows where you are comming from. Even though you may say the same words our mnd will automatically add your attitude behind it. That's what I did. You did not attribute the quote to Mike, so I believed you made it.

I have tried to explain to you about informaton not being stored in code. I think you said you didn't believe that because you don't believe information
is non physical. And yet you have to ever give me the physics of a thought.
How much does it weigh? How wide is it? How tall is it? What color is it? Etc.

Here is an exapmple of a sentence which your mind will automatically supply the subject to even though there is no code to give a clue: "Pease give me a glass of water?"
Note that there is no subject in the sentence and "you" suppled it. Pun intended. LOL

Here is is another example of our elaborate error corecting system which you may not be able to process as English is your second language. But native English lurkers will figure it out.

"O" sai kan u sea bi thu downs Earl Lee lite."

(You) See, even though this code is severly mutated our error trapping function automatically detects correct meaning. Here is a correct version: "Oh say can you see by the dawns early light."

Now, here are two sentences.
One was spoken at a large family cook out by the head cook (th pit mater) . The other was spoken in a "chicken yard" at a farm by a father to his son letting hisson know it was time to feed the chickns. Which sentenc is which? 1 or two?

1. The chickens are ready to eat!
2. The chickens are ready to eat!

Which sentence was spoken at which place? LOL

Yes, I have a double standard or can't you figure out these two exactly the same sentences could have entirely different manings dpending who and where they were spoken?

I know Mike's attitude. So I know what he meant. I know your attitue is entirely different from Mike's. Mike's my friend and I am his. I am your friend but don't think you are mine! So you are in the adversary box. LOL As Jesus said by their fruit you will know them. :)


  • mike the wiz likes this

#14 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,242 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 28 June 2016 - 06:47 PM

The mass murderers, mass rapists,slavers of ISIS have banned the teaching of evolution in their self proclaimed caliphate.

 

http://www.dailytech...rticle36569.htm

http://europe.newswe...ms-271096?rm=eu

 

Evolution-teaching countries like the UK, USA, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, germany, Russia are fighting ISIS.

 

What are you trying to do? Virtually nobody on this forum is in favor of banning teaching of evolution. 

 

Being in favor of ALLOWING the critique of Evolution is a completely different matter. And essentially several countries you mentioned themselves do ban certain teachings. Not always straight forward, but more sneaky, the outcome remains actually the same. 



#15 Fjuri

Fjuri

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 29 June 2016 - 12:46 AM

You seem to forget I and the others on here know you by your attitide so our mnd also knows where you are comming from. Even though you may say the same words our mnd will automatically add your attitude behind it. That's what I did. You did not attribute the quote to Mike, so I believed you made it.

And ironically, that's bigoted behavior (claiming that when I use the same words as you they mean something different).



#16 driewerf

driewerf

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Age: 43
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 29 June 2016 - 10:08 AM

What are you trying to do? Virtually nobody on this forum is in favor of banning teaching of evolution.

The world is bigger than this forum. And in this world there are people who try to ban evolution. The Texas board of education, for staters.
 

Being in favor of ALLOWING the critique of Evolution is a completely different matter.

 

And that critiques allowed in all the countries I mentioned. And if you have real scientific data to substantiate your critique, the cientific community might even listen.

 

And essentially several countries you mentioned themselves do ban certain teachings. Not always straight forward, but more sneaky, the outcome remains actually the same.

 

In the state sponsored education? Of course. There the best science needs to be given (adapted for the students' age). 



#17 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 29 June 2016 - 12:00 PM

 

 

Driewerf: And that critiques allowed in all the countries I mentioned. And if you have real scientific data to substantiate your critique, the cientific community might even listen.

 

We do, and they don't listen, because they have preconceived notions that semantics means that ID is religion, and anyone that speaks against evolution is taking part in a religious motive, even though many evolution-dissenters are not religious. Amusingly evolutionary writers of one nature article called ID, "religion" and that it argues the god-of-the-gaps.

 

That is funny because many agnostics accept ID and don't believe God is the intelligent designer. I have spoken to some of them. If you believe the scientific community are all objective scientific robots that will accept a trashing of their most treasured theory, you are not living in reality. If evolution was false, science, and the objective of science which is to explain everything scientifically, would unravel like a mice's guts in a cat's claw.

 

So thanks for the "main PR" that the scientific-community gives, Driewerf, but I'm afraid that's all it is - their official "line", on the matter. Their GLOSS, they cover it over with, a pretence that they have scientific truth at the heart of all their motives.

 

PR! Nothing more. 



#18 driewerf

driewerf

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Age: 43
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 29 June 2016 - 12:53 PM

That is funny because many agnostics accept ID and don't believe God is the intelligent designer. I have spoken to some of them. If you believe the scientific community are all objective scientific robots that will accept a trashing of their most treasured theory, you are not living in reality. If evolution was false, science, and the objective of science which is to explain everything scientifically, would unravel like a mice's guts in a cat's claw.

 

You mean like the cdesign proponentsists...

 

http://rationalwiki...._proponentsists



#19 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 29 June 2016 - 01:37 PM

No Driewerf, I mean that when I say that every part in an eyeball is constructed towards the goal of sight, and every part is the correct material, be it the transparent lens or the light-receptors or the correct fluids such as rhodopsin, then like a car which is constructed in every part to drive, having all of the correct materials such as windows and tyres, that it is special pleading fallacy to argue that the construction of an eyeball is religious but the construction of a car is not. An eyeball simply is designed to see, specifically, otherwise you could create your own eyeball (camera) and conclude it was not specifically made to be a camera. This breaks the law of non-contradiction. If something qualifies as designed, it simply is designed, there is no argument that counts against facts.

 

The syllogism I have argued for my argument of intelligent design, does not include God or any religious notion.

 

Technically speaking, you have committed the hasty-generalisation fallacy, by arguing that because one type of design-argument is religious, that "ID" is, "religious".

 

Not so. Like I have said, there are agnostics that accept intelligent design and they can accept it because the correct syllogism does not contain any reference to supernature.

 

Here is the syllogism I have argued for many years now:

 

Every element of design makes something designed. (contingency planning, specified complexity, correct materials, ETC)(Law of Identity, X = X) (please note the law-of-identity is NOT circular reasoning, as we can show by replacing design with "humans")

X has every element of design

Therefore X is designed.

 

EXAMPLE of analogous equivalent:

 

Every element of a human makes someone a human

Bob has every element

Therefore Bob is a human.

 

Those elements being human DNA, human anatomy, a human mind/heart/blood, etc...


  • Mike Summers likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users