Should religion have a place in Schools

[F1-Insanity]

Enjoy dealing with 90.73% of world's population.

Yup, and shrinking by the minute.

And don't forget the 'religious-in-name-only' types. Who are still counted as religious but in reality don't follow anything about it anymore.

[Horsefish]

1. Evolutionism is a religion because five of the six parts of evolutionism can not be proven scientifically. Therefore it is a belief that evolutionism is real it is not science. You believe in evolutionism like you believe in any other religion you have your arguments for it and against it but it is your choice to believe in it.

...What does that even mean?

2. The term dinosaur was actually created in 1841 and it pretty much means big lizard. In the evolutionist point of view man and dinosaurs never actually existed on the earth together. But dinosaurs are one of the most prominent myths in human society. They are actually not referred to as dinosaurs however they are called dragons. Dragons are in many religious texts and are real. The Chinese calendar has 11 real animals and then the dragon. If dragons are dinosaurs then that makes sense. But for that to work then humans and dinosaurs lived on the earth at the same time in order for people to know about them. In the 1600s the emperor of China actually appointed a royal dragon caretaker. When Marco Polo went to china he reported that some carts were pulled by large lizards aka dragons or dinosaurs. If dinosaurs went extinct millions of years ago then this is not possible and if evolutionists are right then everyone in Asia is crazy and so were most of the people in the middle ages. All of that is evidence that dragons actually went extinct in the last few hundred years.

So, dragons existed but dinosaurs didn't? Or are dinosaurs dragons?
Also the evidence for dragons having existed is writings from the middle ages? Really?

3. No carbon dating doesn't work once two pieces of the same mammoth were carbon dated and they came out several million years apart.

I'm gonna say source on this, but I'm not holding my breath.

4. How scientist tell how old things are.
How do you determine how old a layer of rock is?
By the fossils that are in it.
How do you tell how old the fossils are?
By the layer of rock that it is in.
Fail.

How scientist tells how something is: radioactive and carbon dating. Not really sure where you pulling these points from.

They smell quite bad, so I have an idea.

[Salandriagado]

1. Evolutionism is a religion because five of the six parts of evolutionism can not be proven scientifically. Therefore it is a belief that evolutionism is real it is not science. You believe in evolutionism like you believe in any other religion you have your arguments for it and against it but it is your choice to believe in it.

Absolute, complete, total and utter garbage, every word of it. This has been refuted so many times in this thread it doesn't require another refutation.

2. The term dinosaur was actually created in 1841 and it pretty much means big lizard. In the evolutionist point of view man and dinosaurs never actually existed on the earth together.

Yes, the evidence in favour of this is astoundingly vast.

But dinosaurs are one of the most prominent myths in human society. They are actually not referred to as dinosaurs however they are called dragons. Dragons are in many religious texts and are real. The Chinese calendar has 11 real animals and then the dragon. If dragons are dinosaurs then that makes sense. But for that to work then humans and dinosaurs lived on the earth at the same time in order for people to know about them.

That's very nice and all, but it doesn't change the ridiculous amount of data disproving it.

In the 1600s the emperor of China actually appointed a royal dragon caretaker.

Source.

When Marco Polo went to china he reported that some carts were pulled by large lizards aka dragons or dinosaurs.

Source.

If dinosaurs went extinct millions of years ago then this is not possible

This is the first correct thing in this post, congratulations.

Hint:
((A => B) ^ ~A ) => ~B

and if evolutionists are right then everyone in Asia is crazy and so were most of the people in the middle ages. All of that is evidence that dragons actually went extinct in the last few hundred years.

Erm, no, because evolution is correct, you're either trolling, being deliberately obtuse or are genuinely insane.

3. No carbon dating doesn't work once two pieces of the same mammoth were carbon dated and they came out several million years apart.

Source. Incidentally, the fossil record is dated with a large number of other methods that are even more accurate than carbon dating, as has been mentioned several times already. See here: http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html

4. How scientist tell how old things are.
How do you determine how old a layer of rock is?
By the fossils that are in it.
How do you tell how old the fossils are?
By the layer of rock that it is in.
Fail.

The last line is correct, except in the perpetrator of the fail in question. Accurate version:

How do you determine how old a layer of rock is?
Using a vast number of radiometric and other dating methods, plus a knowledge of the evolution of the geology of the earth.
How do you tell how old the fossils are?
Using a vast number of radiometric and other dating methods, plus a knowledge of the species, plus a knowledge of the rock strata and nature.

[Dukis]

Mammoth
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us/er ... ating.html
Not exactly what I read before but similar.

Yes dragons and dinosaurs are the same thing. I can provide more proof of humans living with dinosaurs but I didn't feel like taking up a whole page.

After the flood the conditions on earth were very different. One of those changes was more radiation from the sun witch would throw off any guess made by carbon dating if it was beyond 4400 years ago.

Evolutionism is forced upon educated people because they have to take science classes. But that doesn't mean that educated people can't follow some other religion.

[Dukis]

4. How scientist tell how old things are.
How do you determine how old a layer of rock is?
By the fossils that are in it.
How do you tell how old the fossils are?
By the layer of rock that it is in.
Fail.

The last line is correct, except in the perpetrator of the fail in question. Accurate version:

How do you determine how old a layer of rock is?
Using a vast number of radiometric and other dating methods, plus a knowledge of the evolution of the geology of the earth.
How do you tell how old the fossils are?
Using a vast number of radiometric and other dating methods, plus a knowledge of the species, plus a knowledge of the rock strata and nature.

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

[Saikyosia]

Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

That sounds an awful lot like most of the religious texts that wound up as stories in the bible.

[Farnhamia]

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

Oh, he believed in it. Did someone tell you he recanted on his death bed? Never happened. Charles Darwin was fully behind the theory. But just for kicks, who interpreted the book into evolutionism (which doesn't exist the way creationism does, by the way)?

[Dukis]

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

Oh, he believed in it. Did someone tell you he recanted on his death bed? Never happened. Charles Darwin was fully behind the theory. But just for kicks, who interpreted the book into evolutionism (which doesn't exist the way creationism does, by the way)?

I don't know who interpreted the book that way but what Darwin believed in was what he saw around the world. He didn't know about the theory that all life came from some primordial soup.

[Ceannairceach]

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

Source? The woman who claimed that he renounced evolution on his deathbed was proven to be full of shit.

Yes dragons and dinosaurs are the same thing. I can provide more proof of humans living with dinosaurs but I didn't feel like taking up a whole page.

No, you cannot; Our human species, Homo sapien sapien, never existed with the dinosaurs. Mammals were small and underpopulated during the time of the dinosaurs.

After the flood the conditions on earth were very different. One of those changes was more radiation from the sun witch would throw off any guess made by carbon dating if it was beyond 4400 years ago.

That isn't how carbon dating works. This said, there is no proof of the biblical flood, so the logical stance is that it didn't exist. Don't bullshit.

Evolutionism is forced upon educated people because they have to take science classes. But that doesn't mean that educated people can't follow some other religion.

Evolution is taught because it is fact, and it is taught along with the theory of evolution via natural selection because this best explains it in accordance with observed facts.

[Dukis]

Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

That sounds an awful lot like most of the religious texts that wound up as stories in the bible.

Kind of. Religious texts are not in the bible they were created from the bible. I think that is what you ment. Mormans and other people like that took some of their religion from the bible and then believe in something like that.

[Salandriagado]

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

No, you were lying. Now go back and answer the rest of the points, rather than just pulling bullshit out of your arse.

Kind of. Religious texts are not in the bible they were created from the bible. I think that is what you ment. Mormans and other people like that took some of their religion from the bible and then believe in something like that.

If you really think that the bible sprung into existence as a single volume and didn't draw at all on earlier religious texts, then there really is no hope for you.

[Dukis]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

[Samuraikoku]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

Challenge accepted.

Simple: Jesus existed. He was just an ordinary man not unlike you and me.

[Dukis]

I was simplifying.
Gosh some of you people are so defensive against Evolutionism.
Darwin didn't actually believe in evolutionism he just wrote the book that someone else interpreted into evolutionism that we see today.

No, you were lying. Now go back and answer the rest of the points, rather than just pulling bullshit out of your arse.

Hey be nice my tec teacher is looking over my shoulder and someone might feel insulted.
Im trying to answer your questions but it is hard with one of me and several of you.

[Samuraikoku]

Im trying to answer your questions but it is hard with one of me and several of you.

Somehow I don't believe that will help you...

[Ceannairceach]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

Well, there is a fabulous lack of evidence for him around his lifetime, so I don't see why we have to assume he was alive.

This said, it has nothing to do with evolution. Don't change the subject when you're failing to provide subsistence for your bullshit.

[Dukis]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

Challenge accepted.

Simple: Jesus existed. He was just an ordinary man not unlike you and me.

You have the basic idea but did you know that hundreds of other people from that time also claimed to be the son of god. Why do we remember Jesus and not all of them. Simple Jesus came back to life.

[Samuraikoku]

Challenge accepted.

Simple: Jesus existed. He was just an ordinary man not unlike you and me.

You have the basic idea but did you know that hundreds of other people from that time also claimed to be the son of god. Why do we remember Jesus and not all of them. Simple Jesus came back to life.

Or maybe Jesus had enough followers who knew how to write - and exalt - what he might have done.

[Ceannairceach]

Challenge accepted.

Simple: Jesus existed. He was just an ordinary man not unlike you and me.

You have the basic idea but did you know that hundreds of other people from that time also claimed to be the son of god. Why do we remember Jesus and not all of them. Simple Jesus came back to life.

Proof? Why haven't other people risen from the dead, in the same fashion and time period? The reason people haven't is because he didn't.

[Salandriagado]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

1) Go back and answer the points. Hell, start be answering a single one with something that didn't come out of your arse.

2) Disprove that I am god. People have tried and failed, believe me.

3) Prove Jesus. People have tried and failed, believe me.

4) If by the above you wish me to disprove that jesus was the son of god, then by all means (as far as it is possible to prove anything within the context of history):

1 There is no direct contemporary evidence that he existed at all
2 There is not a single documented case of divine intervention
3 Therefore, there is no reason to believe that there was any divine intervention in the conception, birth or life of jesus, if he existed, let alone that he was the son of god

5) That is singularly irrelevant to the debate

6) Disprove evolution

7) Disprove Thor.

[Dukis]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

Well, there is a fabulous lack of evidence for him around his lifetime, so I don't see why we have to assume he was alive.

This said, it has nothing to do with evolution. Don't change the subject when you're failing to provide subsistence for your bullshit.

Actually there is more evidence about Jesus (not counting the bible) then most roman cesars. Diarys and other textual evidence.
I am having a problem with some of my research because most scientific religious sites tend to get illegally deleted for some reason.

[Feral Land]

Only if schools are allowed in religion -- and not just a school for that religion -- but a real school with science and stuff!

[Samuraikoku]

You have the basic idea but did you know that hundreds of other people from that time also claimed to be the son of god. Why do we remember Jesus and not all of them. Simple Jesus came back to life.

Proof? Why haven't other people risen from the dead, in the same fashion and time period? The reason people haven't is because he didn't.

I think what's important here is why Jesus is remembered, not the legend that he might have risen from death.

[Free Soviets]

I have a challenge for you evolutionist people.
Disprove Jesus.
People have tried and failed believe me.

if jesus existed, evolution would be true.
if jesus didn't exist, evolution would be true.
jesus doesn't have shit to do with evolution

but anyways, if jesus was god, then jesus would be able to tell the future correctly. according to the bible, jesus said that the world would end within the lifetimes of people who heard him speak. the world did not end. therefore either the jesus was not god or the bible is not accurate.

[Samuraikoku]

Actually there is more evidence about Jesus (not counting the bible) then most roman cesars. Diarys and other textual evidence.
I am having a problem with some of my research because most scientific religious sites tend to get illegally deleted for some reason.

Yeah, but I don't think Roman Caesars pulled the shit Jesus did. Which makes their lack of evidence solider than Jesus.