Lets face it, you're going to defend the wrong side of this argument all day even after you know damn well you're wrong.
The definition of the word literally is as I said. The commonly accepted definition of the word is like I said. If you can't accept the world isn't going to change just to make you right, then you deserve to call yourself a creationist.
it's not my definition... it's the literal definition that is commonly accepted.
Why do you insist your definition for the word "Duck" means a bird that quacks (simplification, but you get my point)
Lets start calling abortion "Rainbows"... BAN RAINBOWS!... makes no sense right? Words are tied to meanings, don't muddy the water by putting a reasonable idea next to a moronic one
creationist doesn't literally mean "God created us", it means believes creation follows the bible literally. Yes, there are non-christian creationists... all of the religions that stemmed from these faiths (Islamic, Jewish, ect)... and I'm sure there are people outside of that... my point is they are using the term wrong.
Only for Young Earth Creationists. Old Earth Creationists, as their label implies, believe (or at least keep the option open that) the Earth is quite a bit older.
OEC's aren't creationists then. They're saying the bible isn't literally correct, and as such need to get a new word to avoid this nonsense.
That's how the word is defined, that's what it means... inproper use of the word is starting to blur it's meaning, I'll admit... but a person not understanding the words they are saying in my opinion doesn't dismiss them from being lumped together as just another idiot untill they realise what they're doing wrong.
the first dictionary entry you cite starts with a non-Bible literalist aception of the term
You ever read a dictionary entry before? Or just stop when you find something to bitch about? Read the second entry.
the Wikipedia article you cite explicitly contradicts your point.
ffs... since you can't read I'll copy it for you. The term creationism is generally used to describe the belief that creation occurred literally as described in the Book of Genesis (for both Jews and Christians) or the Qur'an (for Muslims)[12] The terms creationism and creationist have become particularly associated with beliefs about the time frame of creation, conflicting with scientific understanding of natural history, particularly evolution.
Creationism = The literal bible. More and more the creationist rats have been skittering away while science is turning on the lights, but that's not how a definition works. Find a new word. This whole "Old Earth Creationist" nonsense kills the meaning of it. How can you both believe the world is old and the bible is literally true? Or even worse how can you believe in evolution and still think the bible is literally true.
This doesn't matter, as I said before, if a person is worshipping god and what he created, instead of worshipping a book. If the book is your god, then you can't admit the world is old... and if god is your god, then who gives a damn about that book... bask in the glory of the universe around you and seek to understand every tiny speck of it. If god created everything, why the hell would you ignore the universe and only look at a single book anyway?
You're supporting this claim with two dictionary definitions and a Wikipedia article
What are you supporting your side with exactly? How many sources do you want? What voice would you accept as an authority on the meaning of a word if not the dictionary TWICE and the Wiki (which is a collective voice of people). The word means believes the bible literally.
If you believe god was the cause of abiogenesis (but think science is right about the rest), that's a whole different thing and perfectly reasonable. There's no label for it beyond "God did Abiogenesis".
However, if you think the bible is a factual account of the formation of the world and history, then you're a creationist.
The only reason this pisses me off is because a relativly intelligent person who ISN'T a creationist claiming to be a creationist is just more of a protective blanket for a group that rightly deserves to be told they are wrong. The whole "God did Abiogenesis" group, I'm fine with them. However, "Teach children that humans lived with dinosaurs 6000 years ago" is an insult to the intelligence of this country, and detrimental to the health of our nation.
Been discussed on every thread we have about the rovers:)
They planned for them to last 3 months, the last 5 years have been amazing, but they didn't expect them to still be kicking at this point. I'm sure the next ones will have some method of removing dust.
Look, I respect people who are at least smart enough to realise "hey, the world is more then 6000 years old"... well about as much as I respect anyone who doesn't believe in orbital teapots... however calling yourself a creationist is:
A: Inaccurate
B: Providing a protectionary blanket to idiots
C: A lack of knowledge on the term
Creationists believe the bible literally... 6k years. If they believe otherwise, they're not a creationist. Same for ID, fundamentalist, or whatever other group of people who have decided to worship a fake book instead of understanding the world around them.
I agree with his "Lumping of all creationists" in this matter because it's accurate. Just like you could lump all bipeds together because they walk on two legs. It's in the definition.
Congradulations, you're not a creationist. As such we welcome you back to the sane majority of the planet (Or minority if you're in America). Glad to have you back.
I'm really looking forward to the day when the sane faithful rise up against the ignorance of those who have chosen to worship a book opposed to understanding the world their god created.
I can spare the karma to say something honestly here;
The first 5 posts I read ranged from "This is why we can't have free speech" to "Of course they were in the tank for him"
What the hell is wrong with you people?
Restrict the media? You've sure as hell gotten used to handing over your rights at the first sign of a problem. Good job America, land of the terrified and overreacting. What happened to the America of "I don't agree with what you're saying, but I'll fight to the death to defend your right to say it"
From TFSummery:
From June 4 to Election Day, the tally was Obama, 626 stories, and McCain, 584.
A difference of 42 storys. The damn sky is falling. What, a 6% difference? Obama won by a margin of 364 to 174. The damn thing is over and with good reason. People are sick of this very stupidity we're seeing here. The petty need to divide it up into camps. The unending assumption that everyone in the damn country is out to steal your money and bomb your home.
Can't we fix the god damn country now, and go back to being petty backstabing sons-a-bitches later?
There are times/. is a decent place, but shit like this makes me wonder why I bother anymore. Most of you are reasonably intelligent people, you fucking know better then this. Grow up.
12+ hours a day here. I've been online for more then 6 hours just doing homework today, so screw their definition of addiction.
If the world gives me a good reason to use a different medium for my entertainment or education I'll listen, however the internet is both my work and my play. And I'm quite happy that way.
#1 - Science
Science is the study of the natural world, and by definition is not in any way capable or concerned with understanding the supernatural (If there is such a thing). Philosophy is a bigger risk to the idea of supernatural things then science is.
#2 - The God Partical
This isn't "God" or his tiny fingers... this is the Higgs-Boson. The stupid nickname came from the fact that finding the thing is a pain in the ass. Scientists looked for it for a long time, and it's an elusive little bastard. Due to this, they started simply refering to it as "That god damn partical". Later when a book was written on the subject, it was refered to as the God Particle... obviously not forseeing the rampant hyper-religious nonsense which would follow
#3 - Evidence of God
If you are religious, you'd better hope like hell they don't prove it anyway... read your bible. With evidence, there is no faith, without faith it is impossible to please god, without a happy god you're going to burn.
If you're not religious, then what do you care about this sillyness? History is blanketed in people claiming to prove god exsists, or that certain things we don't understand are the work of god... and as the flashlight of knowledge keeps pushing into the shadows, we're proven right again and again. From proving thunderstorms aren't gods at war, to proving our own evolution. It's enough to be right, no need to drag them through the mud about it.
#4 - Focus
People are losing focus of what we are actually acheiving with the LHC with this nonsense. Stop and take it in, we've created this massive machine which is capable of pushing a partical up to the light barrier and shoving it harder still. We can force nature's hand converting speed to mass. I mean hell, just making a vacume that is miles around is increadible! Don't seek to belittle the efforts of many of our best minds by dragging this pathetic 'athiest vs thiesm' bullshit into their work.
As our economy continues to tank we are getting fewer and fewer immigrents anyway.
I think everyone who is against immigration should thank Mr. Bush for his brilliant tactics in stopping immigration to our country by making it not worth the hassle
Or perhaps, oooooh I don't know... spending that time/effort/money in tracking down the sick bastards who are making it in the first damn place?
Banning some horrible images is going to hide the evidence, not prevent the act... and I'm a hell of a lot more worried about the children being molested then I am some fat kid in his basement downloading porn.
Did they market that they were scientifically accurate dipictions of those events? Because this one did... that's the difference you and every other person posting this same redunant message seem to be missing.
#1, I've lived in Kansas and know many people there. 90% of the plains area are backwards rednecks who deny evolution. I had to work for years to overcome prejudices I learned growing up there... and I'm embarassed every time it slips through. I thank my wife for getting me the hell out of that state before the damage was even more perminant. A lot of them are nice people (if you're straight, white, and faithful), however, they are backwards rednecks who deny evolution.
#2, Yes, everyone knows that not every religious person belives in young earth... however nearly half do acording to studys. Just because these religions have split to the point where commenting on their stupidy is akin to playing whack-a-mole doesn't change the fact that you are defined by the company kept by the majority of a group. If you don't want called stupid for being part of the group don't bitch at the people calling you stupid, bitch at the people making you look stupid.
Did you read on HOW they got that tax break? The history leading to them having the break? Corrput as hell, and not all countrys are falling for it... just greed and influance based policys.
Regardless though, yes it is my place to rain on their parade... the same way I'd rain on the parade of the hail-bop crazys if I'd have known it was going to happen. It's a cult.
If you start allowing people like this to insult the idea of religion, to use people as so many wallets, and hide behind the protections given to religion... doesn't that kill the social meaning of religion as a whole?
Scientology isn't a religion. Start, middle, and end of story.
IF you honestly consiter them a religion, then guess what, I'm a religion and my house is my church. Now it's just two religions arguing with eachother.
Please read up on scientology before accepting them as a real religion, because you're insulting honest religions around the world by letting a company claim this.
so as long as it's something you haven't done some night, then it's bad... but if it's something someone else was dumb one night and did... it's bad.
I really wish I could make you understand how how sound, but you'll just get pissed off and snap back that you're right. I'll let you get the last word in, I'm done.
I really don't understand how this type of thing continues to be modded up.
How f-king arrogent is it to cheer the response of this or any other person on this forum who after glancing at the idea... an idea which many of the best minds in science have dedicated years of their life, working together with the best possible tools with specialized testing equipment and computer simulations...
...to think that the initial opinion of someone who glanced at a 3rd person report of the end result (and really just watch a movie), has anything to hold to that? I know it's 'just slashdot', but god damnit is this the respect we have for science today? To encurage that? It's a free internet, and he can say whatever he wants, but it'd have expected better from people modding. More people will likely read this nonsense then will actually GO to the sight.
Find out WHY they chose this design if you want to learn something... what research was it that made this the best choice. What restriction, what limitation, what pushed this to the front.
But to sit at your computer with a hand in your pants and a finger up your nose and pass pathetic judgement on people who have done more for human understanding then you ever will... it shouldn't be encuraged.
(PS; not directed only at you OP, half the thread are worse examples of this which pissed me off, wasn't yours specifically. Yours was just the first 'wrong' response on the list with +5)
(PSS; I'll take the karma hit, so tired of seeing them get plus modded for this)
Slashdot Mirror
Lets face it, you're going to defend the wrong side of this argument all day even after you know damn well you're wrong.
The definition of the word literally is as I said. The commonly accepted definition of the word is like I said. If you can't accept the world isn't going to change just to make you right, then you deserve to call yourself a creationist.
Good day sir, talk to yourself from here on.
it's not my definition... it's the literal definition that is commonly accepted.
Why do you insist your definition for the word "Duck" means a bird that quacks (simplification, but you get my point)
Lets start calling abortion "Rainbows"... BAN RAINBOWS!... makes no sense right? Words are tied to meanings, don't muddy the water by putting a reasonable idea next to a moronic one
you could tag their legal team and see where they go... brilliant!
OEC's aren't creationists then. They're saying the bible isn't literally correct, and as such need to get a new word to avoid this nonsense.
That's how the word is defined, that's what it means... inproper use of the word is starting to blur it's meaning, I'll admit... but a person not understanding the words they are saying in my opinion doesn't dismiss them from being lumped together as just another idiot untill they realise what they're doing wrong.
You ever read a dictionary entry before? Or just stop when you find something to bitch about? Read the second entry.
ffs... since you can't read I'll copy it for you.
The term creationism is generally used to describe the belief that creation occurred literally as described in the Book of Genesis (for both Jews and Christians) or the Qur'an (for Muslims)[12] The terms creationism and creationist have become particularly associated with beliefs about the time frame of creation, conflicting with scientific understanding of natural history, particularly evolution.
Creationism = The literal bible. More and more the creationist rats have been skittering away while science is turning on the lights, but that's not how a definition works. Find a new word. This whole "Old Earth Creationist" nonsense kills the meaning of it. How can you both believe the world is old and the bible is literally true? Or even worse how can you believe in evolution and still think the bible is literally true.
This doesn't matter, as I said before, if a person is worshipping god and what he created, instead of worshipping a book. If the book is your god, then you can't admit the world is old... and if god is your god, then who gives a damn about that book... bask in the glory of the universe around you and seek to understand every tiny speck of it. If god created everything, why the hell would you ignore the universe and only look at a single book anyway?
What are you supporting your side with exactly? How many sources do you want? What voice would you accept as an authority on the meaning of a word if not the dictionary TWICE and the Wiki (which is a collective voice of people). The word means believes the bible literally.
If you believe god was the cause of abiogenesis (but think science is right about the rest), that's a whole different thing and perfectly reasonable. There's no label for it beyond "God did Abiogenesis".
However, if you think the bible is a factual account of the formation of the world and history, then you're a creationist.
The only reason this pisses me off is because a relativly intelligent person who ISN'T a creationist claiming to be a creationist is just more of a protective blanket for a group that rightly deserves to be told they are wrong. The whole "God did Abiogenesis" group, I'm fine with them. However, "Teach children that humans lived with dinosaurs 6000 years ago" is an insult to the intelligence of this country, and detrimental to the health of our nation.
Been discussed on every thread we have about the rovers :)
They planned for them to last 3 months, the last 5 years have been amazing, but they didn't expect them to still be kicking at this point. I'm sure the next ones will have some method of removing dust.
Us biologists feel your pain...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/creationist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationist
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/creationism
Look, I respect people who are at least smart enough to realise "hey, the world is more then 6000 years old"... well about as much as I respect anyone who doesn't believe in orbital teapots... however calling yourself a creationist is:
A: Inaccurate
B: Providing a protectionary blanket to idiots
C: A lack of knowledge on the term
Creationists believe the bible literally... 6k years. If they believe otherwise, they're not a creationist. Same for ID, fundamentalist, or whatever other group of people who have decided to worship a fake book instead of understanding the world around them.
I agree with his "Lumping of all creationists" in this matter because it's accurate. Just like you could lump all bipeds together because they walk on two legs. It's in the definition.
Congradulations, you're not a creationist. As such we welcome you back to the sane majority of the planet (Or minority if you're in America). Glad to have you back.
I'm really looking forward to the day when the sane faithful rise up against the ignorance of those who have chosen to worship a book opposed to understanding the world their god created.
The first 5 posts I read ranged from "This is why we can't have free speech" to "Of course they were in the tank for him"
What the hell is wrong with you people?
Restrict the media? You've sure as hell gotten used to handing over your rights at the first sign of a problem. Good job America, land of the terrified and overreacting. What happened to the America of "I don't agree with what you're saying, but I'll fight to the death to defend your right to say it"
From TFSummery:
A difference of 42 storys. The damn sky is falling. What, a 6% difference? Obama won by a margin of 364 to 174. The damn thing is over and with good reason. People are sick of this very stupidity we're seeing here. The petty need to divide it up into camps. The unending assumption that everyone in the damn country is out to steal your money and bomb your home.
/. is a decent place, but shit like this makes me wonder why I bother anymore. Most of you are reasonably intelligent people, you fucking know better then this. Grow up.
Can't we fix the god damn country now, and go back to being petty backstabing sons-a-bitches later?
There are times
12+ hours a day here. I've been online for more then 6 hours just doing homework today, so screw their definition of addiction.
If the world gives me a good reason to use a different medium for my entertainment or education I'll listen, however the internet is both my work and my play. And I'm quite happy that way.
The stupidity is rampant...
#1 - Science
Science is the study of the natural world, and by definition is not in any way capable or concerned with understanding the supernatural (If there is such a thing). Philosophy is a bigger risk to the idea of supernatural things then science is.
#2 - The God Partical
This isn't "God" or his tiny fingers... this is the Higgs-Boson. The stupid nickname came from the fact that finding the thing is a pain in the ass. Scientists looked for it for a long time, and it's an elusive little bastard. Due to this, they started simply refering to it as "That god damn partical". Later when a book was written on the subject, it was refered to as the God Particle... obviously not forseeing the rampant hyper-religious nonsense which would follow
#3 - Evidence of God
If you are religious, you'd better hope like hell they don't prove it anyway... read your bible. With evidence, there is no faith, without faith it is impossible to please god, without a happy god you're going to burn.
If you're not religious, then what do you care about this sillyness? History is blanketed in people claiming to prove god exsists, or that certain things we don't understand are the work of god... and as the flashlight of knowledge keeps pushing into the shadows, we're proven right again and again. From proving thunderstorms aren't gods at war, to proving our own evolution. It's enough to be right, no need to drag them through the mud about it.
#4 - Focus
People are losing focus of what we are actually acheiving with the LHC with this nonsense. Stop and take it in, we've created this massive machine which is capable of pushing a partical up to the light barrier and shoving it harder still. We can force nature's hand converting speed to mass. I mean hell, just making a vacume that is miles around is increadible! Don't seek to belittle the efforts of many of our best minds by dragging this pathetic 'athiest vs thiesm' bullshit into their work.
that makes me wish I had mod points
http://www.khou.com/news/mexico/stories/khou081002_jj_hispanic_immigration_economy.d2ca276d.html
google ftw, took 10 seconds
As our economy continues to tank we are getting fewer and fewer immigrents anyway.
I think everyone who is against immigration should thank Mr. Bush for his brilliant tactics in stopping immigration to our country by making it not worth the hassle
I'd say that's 'forbiding discussion' as you said...
Or perhaps, oooooh I don't know... spending that time/effort/money in tracking down the sick bastards who are making it in the first damn place?
Banning some horrible images is going to hide the evidence, not prevent the act... and I'm a hell of a lot more worried about the children being molested then I am some fat kid in his basement downloading porn.
Did they market that they were scientifically accurate dipictions of those events? Because this one did... that's the difference you and every other person posting this same redunant message seem to be missing.
2 things here:
#1, I've lived in Kansas and know many people there. 90% of the plains area are backwards rednecks who deny evolution. I had to work for years to overcome prejudices I learned growing up there... and I'm embarassed every time it slips through. I thank my wife for getting me the hell out of that state before the damage was even more perminant. A lot of them are nice people (if you're straight, white, and faithful), however, they are backwards rednecks who deny evolution.
#2, Yes, everyone knows that not every religious person belives in young earth... however nearly half do acording to studys. Just because these religions have split to the point where commenting on their stupidy is akin to playing whack-a-mole doesn't change the fact that you are defined by the company kept by the majority of a group. If you don't want called stupid for being part of the group don't bitch at the people calling you stupid, bitch at the people making you look stupid.
Did you read on HOW they got that tax break? The history leading to them having the break? Corrput as hell, and not all countrys are falling for it... just greed and influance based policys.
Regardless though, yes it is my place to rain on their parade... the same way I'd rain on the parade of the hail-bop crazys if I'd have known it was going to happen. It's a cult.
Unfortunatly yes. Republicans, being a form of cancer themselves, should probably avoid this one.
oh yes, because 90% of the worlds heroin is for medical reasons.
eh?
Fine then. I believe in fairys and refuse to pay taxes. I also feel that disney is mocking my tiny gods and should pay me fat stacks of cash.
Fact of the matter is, there has to be a defining point of a religion. And the law does that.
For a long time, Scientology wasn't a religion, and it's only a religion now because they are an organized cult.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_as_a_state-recognized_religion#United_States_of_America
If you start allowing people like this to insult the idea of religion, to use people as so many wallets, and hide behind the protections given to religion... doesn't that kill the social meaning of religion as a whole?
Scientology isn't a religion. Start, middle, and end of story.
IF you honestly consiter them a religion, then guess what, I'm a religion and my house is my church. Now it's just two religions arguing with eachother.
Please read up on scientology before accepting them as a real religion, because you're insulting honest religions around the world by letting a company claim this.
so as long as it's something you haven't done some night, then it's bad... but if it's something someone else was dumb one night and did... it's bad.
I really wish I could make you understand how how sound, but you'll just get pissed off and snap back that you're right. I'll let you get the last word in, I'm done.
I really don't understand how this type of thing continues to be modded up.
...to think that the initial opinion of someone who glanced at a 3rd person report of the end result (and really just watch a movie), has anything to hold to that? I know it's 'just slashdot', but god damnit is this the respect we have for science today? To encurage that? It's a free internet, and he can say whatever he wants, but it'd have expected better from people modding. More people will likely read this nonsense then will actually GO to the sight.
How f-king arrogent is it to cheer the response of this or any other person on this forum who after glancing at the idea... an idea which many of the best minds in science have dedicated years of their life, working together with the best possible tools with specialized testing equipment and computer simulations...
Find out WHY they chose this design if you want to learn something... what research was it that made this the best choice. What restriction, what limitation, what pushed this to the front.
But to sit at your computer with a hand in your pants and a finger up your nose and pass pathetic judgement on people who have done more for human understanding then you ever will... it shouldn't be encuraged.
(PS; not directed only at you OP, half the thread are worse examples of this which pissed me off, wasn't yours specifically. Yours was just the first 'wrong' response on the list with +5) (PSS; I'll take the karma hit, so tired of seeing them get plus modded for this)