Slashdot Mirror

Only a few.

You also have to ask yourself: what would you expect an evolution-dominated textbook to say? "We're presenting six hundred pages on evolution here, but we don't think it's important?"

Repeated assertion is not proof.

Evolution is a theory (perhaps I should say Theory) which attempts to explain Linnaeus' organisation. That it succeeds is what's in question here. The Creationists explain the same things which evolutionary principle has had kingship of claimed for it, many of them far more plausibly. They claim, with this as justification, that creation is the central organising principle of biology.

You assert that "creation science has yet to generate a single testable, falsifiable, hypothesis, which is the first step to becoming a theory", but you do so speciously. Creation science sites are awash in hypotheses and you simply haven't noticed. Fixed speciation is one such hypothesis, and it matches reality exactly. The absence of interspecies fossils is another prediction of Creartion, and so far they've won the day on that one pretty convincingly (the closest to a refutation we've come is that glorified hoatzin called archaeopteryx).

Early Creationists (at least in Europe) got too carried away with this and insisted that not just species but individual subspecies of animal were immutable. This in the face of cross-breeding programs. Mind you, this was back in the day when Spontaneous Generation was accepted as the scientifically valid opposition to this concept, so I'm inclined to cut both sides some slack here.

Go and actually read some Creationist sites -- know thy enemy and all that. They've got reasonable-sounding hypotheses on geology, astronomy, all manner of stuff. If you're going into a battle of wits, do remember to go in armed! Read some of the refutations of DDI (and DCD's errata) as well. Have an argument, not a shouting match! (-:

Meanwhile, there are many evolutionary biologists who would cheerfully donate a limb to the cause if they thought they'd get a naturalistic self-organising principle out of it. That alone should be a big hint that there's something major still missing from the panacea called evolution.

Dunno about getting you mod status quickly but after a little while that recipe will get you mod points at least weekly, usually every day or two. That happened to me essentially by accident, since I don't give a flying fandango how ignorami react to what I post and it turned out that a lot of people like it.

Then if you stray into a forbidden topic, post anything that sounds like it's from the wrong political party, casts to much doubt onto the Holy Creed of Evolutionism, could be construed as racist, gender-biassed et al if you squinched up your eyes just right (I have friends from all cultures, races etc), something which mocks conventional cosmologies, or pick any one of a dozen or so categories that I regularly trespass in, and sooner or later somebody will gather his furry little mates together and declare a jihad against you. Your posts will be moderated into the ground left and right, regardless of their value or topic (it's actually worse if they're good posts, because then they got modded up and down a lot, the nett effect being that you lose more points than if you started at 2 or 3 and simply lost them), and your buffer of 50 karma points will dry up like polystyrene before a blowtorch. Within hours, your account will be blocked from posting, and will remain that way for a random number of weeks. The administrators will refuse to do anything about that, despite your karma having been jammed against the stops since about six months after SlashDot opened their doors (I was up over 280 points when they put the karma cap on). You will be treated worse than a convicted sex offender (in fact, same would probably get modded up for sharing his "interesting" experiences).

It will take about a month after your account is unlocked again to first get mod points, then business as usual.

here's a good reason why from the Creationist point of view things must be "static"

the bible says NOTHING that a wiseman goat-herder would/could have known 2,000 years ago

nothing about biology, germs

maybe you haven't noticed, but the account of creation in the bible LITERALLY/UNEQUIVOCALLY does NOT expound on any long time-scale,

This is Slashdot. Therefore any correct, true, and Biblical account of what really happened cannot be allowed to be said... Even if every major culture on Earth believes one happened.

*sigh*

He says, Grinning, ducking, running.

A friend of mine who works for ADRA was relaying first-hand reports to me from there. 100% of what you donate to them goes to the front lines, no matter what your religion, or the religion(s) of the disaster victims.

I don't know of any Atheistic organisation which can come close to that. Christian donors just seem to be more generous. Moderate Islam ain't so bad, either, but tends to fatalism.

Madalyn and her grand-daughter (nice girl, used to chat with her on FIDO and our last conversation went unfinished because of that) were murdered by their manager over a matter of a few tens of thousands of $. If that's the leaders, even the "television evilangelists" aren't so bad. I guess it helps to have a future focus.

As an Atheist, you're either responsible for just yourself, or for everybody depending upon your viewpoint. I'm very glad to hear that you're shooting for "everybody" because in practice very few do.

The only logical ground I can see for being an Atheist, as I once was, was if evolution actually worked. But it doesn't and it can't. Reknowned ex-Atheist Antony Flew hasn't quite gone so far as top profess anything resembling Christianity, but to his credit he is following observations to their logical conclusion.

OK, I guess we can let the flamewar rage, now. It's been months since I was modded anything but up anyway. (-:

...your tagline ("The scientific view of religion is not atheism") is precisely correct.