fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2590 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2590 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Star Trek: The Next Generation]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Don't Hug Me I'm Scared]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Cloud Atlas]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Hannibal]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Goonies]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Gwilym Lee]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Mass Effect]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Sherlock]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Sleepy Hollow]

__________________________________________________

11.

[Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith]

__________________________________________________

12.

[Sherlock]

__________________________________________________

13.

[Being Human UK]

__________________________________________________

14.

[Craig Ferguson]

__________________________________________________

15.

[Christina Ricci]

__________________________________________________

16.

[High School Musical]

__________________________________________________

17.

[Blue Exorcist]

__________________________________________________

18.

[Frozen, Tangled]

__________________________________________________

19.

[Amanda Palmer, Emilie Autumn]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 065 secrets from Secret Submission Post #370.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

You're only a "creationist" if you reject scientific explanations in favor of a literal interpretation of scripture. There are some creationists who aren't married to the idea of six 24-hour days of creation that happened 6000 years ago, but still deny the findings of biology, astronomy, and cosmology.

And there are Christians who self-identify as "Creationist", and even believe in that six 24-hour days that accept a lot of the provable facts of biology, astronomy and cosmology.

Someone up-thread mentioned the belief that disease was caused by demons. Modern biology has proved it is caused by germs, viruses and genetic problems. A lot of Creationist would accept that.

Is the Earth round instead of flat? Does the Earth circle the Sun instead of the other way around? A lot of Creationists accept that.

Do galaxies exist? Are the spaces between stellar objects mindbogglingly huge? A lot of Creationists have no problem there!

The problem comes when you start insisting absolutely and definitely that humans are descended from some sort of ape-like creature, and throw around numbers like millions of years.

I just love this idea people have that all Creationists scorn all science, instead of just the section of it that their beliefs stand in opposition to.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to reply to anon as they are absolutely correct that some creationists reject any or most science that contradicts the bible. I also take exception with the suggestion that you can reject just evolution without rejecting the hundreds of different methods, fields of study, and basic mathematical principles that support the theory of evolution.

Rejecting any science because it contradicts a preconceived notion *is* scorning all science. Cherry picking data, no matter who does it, defies the very definition of science. Anyone who states creationism or intelligent design is scientifically equivalent to the theory of evolution does not have a good grasp on the scientific method, are deluding themselves, or are just lying.

I take no issue with people who believe in a higher power. Neither do I have a problem with people who reject the theory of evolution based on their interpretation of the bible or another religious text. But personal beliefs are just that, personal beliefs. The problem comes when people take their personal beliefs and attempt to legitimize them using contrived pseudoscience and then try and leverage them into schoolbooks using the term "creationism" or "intelligent design".

If you think evolutionary scientists don't cherry-pick data just as much, you've never studied the topic. All the things that, as you say, they are using to support the theory of evolution don't need to be rejected to reject the conclusion (evolution) that they're extrapolating from it. Everyone has assumptions, although creationists start out with one that's maybe harder to accept since it's a non-physical phenomenon. In all my science classes they made sure to say "Of course, half of these 'facts' will probably be proven wrong in the next ten years, just like most of the things I learned in college are thought to be wrong now"--not because the facts of the universe changed, but because the scientists studying those facts didn't have accurate data, or extrapolated false conclusions from it.

You put into words what I find hard to say when discussions of this kind come up. It's my inability to put words to it that is a part of why I tend to be a bit shy of it.

[ SECRET POST #2590 ]

Re: Little off-topic: honest question, no trolling

Re: Little off-topic: honest question, no trolling

Re: Little off-topic: honest question, no trolling

Re: Little off-topic: honest question, no trolling

Re: Little off-topic: honest question, no trolling