If creationism is taught in schools, it should be taught in a mythology class with Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Egyptian mythology, Norse mythology, etc.
kur vgazati Atheism cannot be taught as mythology because for something to be taught as mythological it has to involve some sort of belief and atheism is literally defined as the lacked there of. Evolution is rightfully taught in science classes because it is literally science. And before you say that evolution is a theory, which it is, a theory in science is above just about everything else. Such as gravity
Bryce McCandless No I am not against evolution :) and I know what`s the difference in the term "theory" in science...I am a Christian and I don`t think the world is 6000 years old...and about my comment- I was just simply "trolling" around :D you know
+Quantrel Bishop strawman argument. All of the matter in the universe has always existed. Back about 14 billion years ago all of that matter was in one location. Before that time we don't know, it is impossible to know. Currently all matter is expanding, and in theory should have an expiration date
You don’t have to imagine, it literally happened. Mormonism was created in 1830 by Joseph Smith, who came up with the concept when he was just 14 YEARS OLD, he’s been proven numerous times to be a charlatan and liar too. Scientology was founded in 1950 by a bad SCIENCE FICTION author L Ron Hubbard, need I say more? These religions are so recent and less than 200 years old, written by frauds, have ridiculous doctrines, yet still have millions of followers today. Plenty of nutjobs around.
@@ivonikolov2916 what's more believable? Space rocks bringing in alien microbes and with the right conditions took billions of years to evolve into modern day organisms or a sky fairy that magically clicked its finger and boom humanity came into existence. Lmfao.
@@ML-sv5ez intelligent designer created intelligent beings. Things don’t pop out of nowhere and neither is evolution scientifically correct. Life comes from life, never have life come from a rock and never have we seen something evolve into something different. That’s the lie you choose to believe by Darwin, while he himself was a theist. You need more faith with your beliefs than my beliefs “a sky daddy”. Aren’t you sky a daddy yourself? What’s so crazy if another sky daddy exists in this big universe? But no, keep in believing in rocks.
@@ivonikolov2916 🤣 so according to your logic the intelligent designer of intelligent beings then have its own intelligent designer in existence then and so on. Since "things" don't pop out of nowhere. Grade A logic 😂.
In a hundred years, people will be looking at the conflict between evolution and Creationism the same way we look at the conflict between Galileo and the Roman Inquisition. It will be the great embarrassment of our century.
In one hundred years I'd say religion will be in the minority of the worlds population. Look around. Only old people go to church for the most people (40plus years) Nobody from my grad year goes to mass. My school is a christian school from ages 12-20/ 13-17/18 Basically some are older than others. When your about 15 or 16 people start becoming more aware and they stand up for themselves and dont give a shit about being mr holy good guy anymore. Even if they were raised too far down the rabbit hole of brainwashed indocrination of religion since before they could remember they still know deep down its bullshit and that will pass onto generation to generation without the child indocrination. Lets face people are not going to care so much to the point of baptising someone. They dont even care about going to church. You would think in at least 2 generations time that religon will be so obsolete and the churches will no longer be robbing people with their no tax having asses
Soundgarden97 Yeah, it will probably take about 2 to 4 generations (max) for religion to become a complete fairy tail for almost 100% of the world's population. You already have countries such as Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Norway, Estonia, Netherlands, for example, where more than 70% of their population are atheists, some of them with more than 80%. And the countries with the largest amount of religious people are either the most underdeveloped countries (mostly in the African continent) or the ones where the country's constitution itself has a religious base, such as the USA. Obviously the USA is a developed country unlike most African countries and the percentage of religious individuals is also much smaller than in those underdeveloped countries, nevertheless, the amount of people in the USA who still believe in angels is still ridiculously high. I'm only using the USA as an example but there are more examples of developed countries with that same problem. My country is another example. I live in Portugal and I'd say my country is a developed country, not at the top of the list that's for sure, but in 188 countries it ranks 41 in terms of human development if I'm not mistaken, so it's not too bad. The percentage of religious people is almost the same as in the USA. My country has a very old population, most of which didn't even have the opportunity to get an education and those older individuals are the ones who make the majority of the religious people. Fortunately nowadays all of us have that privilege and most of the younger folks here (40 years old or less), such as myself (20), were taught to make our judgement based on scientific evidence. I believe that the belief in God is inversely proportional to the degree of education an individual has. The more scientific education an individual possesses, the least likely he/she is to be religious. It's also probably related to the degree of intelligence and ability to think rationally. I mean, if someone believes in creationism even after looking at the evidence supporting evolution, then that does speak a lot about their intelligence. God damn even my 80 year old grandmother doesn't believe in creationism and she didn't get a very extensive education like we do now. She got little more than 4th grade. She's very religious and regularly goes to the church, but also very curious and loves documentaries and debates, specially about the cosmos and medicine. I'd bet if she hasn't been "brainwashed" to believe in God since a young age like 99% of older folks here and actually had access to an education like mine, then she'd probably be an atheist or agnostic. It's all about the environment you're brought up on. If you're brought up by your parents to believe in God and don't have access to a sofisticated education, then there is a 99% chance that you'll just pick up the religious you were taught to believe. Ignorance leads to religion. Sorry if I went on a long ass rant, got a bit carried away. XD
MrBluePants Twenty years young myself. The problem with people believing in specific stories in their respective religions is that you simply can't nitpick the things you believe or you'll render your religion unfulfilling. The thing is this sense of unfulfillment is blocked by the brainwashing and fear of giving up 'hope' of survival in the supposed afterlife. In most cases due to been taught at a young age. Especially with your grandmother (no offense). She's been around too long to give up her faith. It would have been with her forever which is why she still has her faith even when she is educating herself. A lot of people for example practicing the christian faith wouldn't believing in creationism yet they still practice their faith. These undeniably stupid and outlandish stories like noah's ark and the garden of eden are never mentioned in church along with the contradictory passages and iniquitous statements said in the bible. Instead the people get their daily does of pretentious readings from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that mean nothing. These charatans tell you what you want to hear, not what you will question. Also your second last sentence should be the other way around. 'Religion leads to ignorance' XD. I actually appreciate your comment because I only became an atheist like 2 months ago so discussing this with people who have the same view as myself especially people who I know are literally the same age as me gives me fulfillment and assurance of my newfound beliefs and way of thinking. Its quiet a big deal changing your views on such profound topics. Its a personal revolution in a way.
Well judging from that debate, those taught creationism as fact are intolerant, blind to scientific knowledge and lack a understand of other people's religious or cultural perspective. Their not the type of people I want our state system to produce. So keep myth out of science education and let parents teach their children about their own heritage, culture and faith.
@Tony Piano yes, copy paste your comment, i'm sure that gives it more validity. but in regards to your other statement, if you believe that something is irrefutably true you have failed as a scientist. It is religion which is based on faith and irrefutable truths, science is based on eternal skepticism. To mock someones skepticism of modern day science is counterproductive to the purpose and basis of science. Also the capitalization in your comment makes me think you're quite upset when i challenged what you view as irrefutable, once again, as someone who presumably follows science, this is an oxymoron
@@michaelschaefer1904 The fetus prior to the forming of a neocortex, which happens _after_ 20 weeks, it is just a blob of tissue, no different than the mole on your arm.
Actually the church hasn't always denied it, both young earth and biblical literal-ism are not universal. I'm not religious, but you could plausibly argue that evolution is just how the live god created adapts to it's environment.
@@leehighland5435 Scientific Theories aren't religions. You really think the Theory of Gravity is a religion? 🤣🤣😂😂 How about the Germ Theory of Disease, is that a religion too?
István Mága Many of these so called facts are just theories, the creation account could be viewed as such. There certainly appears to be a great deal of intelligence in the structure of all living things, especially the DNA Code. Only man's thinking and understanding lacks this kind of organized intelligence.
The lady complaining about children’s feelings being hurt when their views are challenged by facts needs to realise those are of course the consequences of feeding lies to children from birth. It’s laughable. Don’t do it in the first place.
Children get hurt with all manner of facts. Gravity being the most obvious one. They don't seem to like it very much when they discover how much gravity hurts. They seem to cope quite well when they learn.
@Neil Rusling You underestimate religious peoples ignorance - they will tell you someone survived cancer; hence god exists. They will even call it a fact and you will stand there baffled.
@Neil Rusling I don't think 2 years is enough job security for the people promoting these ideas. I mean, some institutions have spent centuries milking it....
Whenever someone posts that god needs to be put back in schools, I always say - yeah, Odin has been left out too long. Well, which of the 3000+ gods did you mean?
@@scaletownmodels Woden, Thor, Freyr, Jupiter, Apollo, Neptune, Hades, whatever you like. I enjoyed being introduced to such myths when I was around 9 years old.
@@scaletownmodels they should all be taught. School is supposed to me the teaching of the world and everything in it. You can't ever teach young people too much
The atheist replacement ideology that will replace Christianity is being taught, ie wokism, the new secular religion/ideology, which caters for atheism. Atheists who are rational, I heard one the other day say, it's wrong to say only a woman has a cervix, ie, men came have them too. No Christians believe this, but plenty of atheists do, which shows how smart the atheist is, because they are scientifically enlightened. I bet you believe that rev James C, you look smart.
I have said it before and I will say it again. Countries should split into 2 halves. Those that believe in Science and those that believe in creation. Sit back and watch which prospers
***** How do you figure atheists are screwed? How does the application of science and reason when faced with a challenge vs praying screw anyone? Take away all of your modern technology and see who is screwed
***** So 1. you have to distinguish "Christian" with creationists. Ok the BBT was coined by a Christian, but no creationist believes it. 2. What is the proof of your claim?
SuperSlartibartfast What part of ''Geologists proved there was no global flood'' don't you understand? Iron ore can't rust in high oxygen content? Why not?
Jonathan gardner They found an unconformity, dummy. Rocks that are laid down flat, tilted, then worn flat and then another layer of level rocks are over that. That takes millions of years. Read a history book.
Jonathan gardner History goes back 11,000 years. Tree rings go back 11,000 years. Geology goes back hundreds of millions of years. Astronomers can see back 13 billion years back in time.
Jonathan gardner If the Earth is only 6000 years old, then all inorganic matter is only 6000 years old. All you Creationist Clowns have to do is develop an age detecting device that is accepted as accurate by everyone, and then you can test all the non organic matter on Earth and you will have proof of your hypothesis. It's that easy, yet all you Clowns ever do is trash every age detecting device or method that anybody comes up with, why? Because NONE of them come CLOSE to justifying your claims of the age of the Earth, so you Clowns HAVE to trash every age detecting device ever conceived, and you wonder why everybody is laughing at you.
Children raised to believe that the earth is flat would also receive bullying, so should we also teach flat earth. Their argument is an absurd reason to teach something that isn't a fact. The fault is with the parents there, not with the schools or education. Why should we have a level playing field between scientific fact and religion?
Host: "You believe the Earth is 6-10,000 years old but dogs were domesticated 15,000 years ago." Former Science Teacher: "Let me completely dodge that point backed by tangible evidence and talk about how all of this confuses the brainwashed religious students."
Creationism should not be taught as a religious subject, but discussed in a biological science class to show the danger of having uninformed, uneducated people making laws and rules.
Should creationism ever be taught in schools? Yes. But definitely NOT in a science class. It isn't science, it's mythology. I personally find mythology to be very interesting, and always have done ever since I was a kid. Cultures throughout history have had their own creation myths, and these should be taught, but they should be taught for what they are. Stories, not facts. And not only the Christian creation myth should be taught. There are far more interesting ones around.
Dat Gamer If it's not mythology then show us the evidence that proves that your god is real and the thousands of other gods that you don't believe in are myths.
Dat gamer LOL that's the dumbest answer in the book from Christians who assume they know why atheists are atheists.. Atheists do NOT even believe God exists so how can they "accept" God is they don't believe he exists? Do you "reject" the tooth fairy? You probably wouldn't put it that way would you? You'd just say "I don't believe in the tooth fairy". You need to learn what "disbelief" actually means
Haakon Johansen I learned about Greek and Roman mythology at school. There is nothing wrong with that because the myths weren't being taught as fact. The same is true of Christian mythology. There is nothing wrong with teaching creationism in school AS LONG AS it is taught in a context of world mythology and not as scientific fact.
No, no it shouldn't be taught in school just like we don't teach that lightning is God showing his anger. When are we gonna fucking grow up as a species?
It's happening, just far too slowly for people like us. Sociopolitical issues, health, wealth and education need to be ironed out a little bit more. Religion comes from the fear of death and the unknown. I only see scam artists tricking the lowest common denominators these days. Sure there are wealthy, healthy theists... but that is obviously changing over time.
@@majmunjole8570 Then "we aren't smart enough (maybe just yet)" We don't know why mass attracts mass (you could say because of gravity but that's the definition, not an actual explanation why) but we don't say it's because of some higher, more intelligent being, we assume we just don't have the tools to get to the answer. Not everything can be explained and understood but it doesn't mean we should say it's god who made it. We just don't get it, we aren't infinitely smart.
Right but neither is your science its constantly changing just like scientist found fossils of dinosoars and made one Dino out of two. Or you could say evolution is also false.
funny how many nerds will talk crap over the internet but don't say crap in the real world. and there you go take a min breath and shut up I never said I was religious I just said I didn't believe in evolution ..... GIVE ME A EEXAMPLE OF EVOULTION THAT DOSENT CHANGE IT GENTIC INFORMATION if you can then you need read a book and learn something besides what your mammie tells you. and yes you uneducated ways for example . It's you're not your Miss educated what the hell? grammar hello. P.S try talking to someone with respect idc who you are everyone deserve some.
HeadCaptain it's possible the Priest is delusional, of course that thought would not enter your mind would it? The Bible and Evolution are not now nor will ever be compatible. Anyone who says otherwise is dilusional in my mind.
One of the best analogies I heard was this; "Imagine three baskets. The first one labelled 'Things We Don't Know The Cause Of', the second 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God', the third 'Things We Know the Cause of And It IS a God'. Basket number 1 is the biggest, but every day we put more things in basket number 2. But nothing ever goes in basket number 3. That basket has been empty since the dawn of humanity."
I agree with the concept but I can't help but see a flaw with this analogy. To know something was "Not caused by a 'god'" is impossible. You would have to define a "god" and know what it's capable of. Of course, you could absolutely point out specific discrepancies between what we observe and what is clearly stated in a religious book; that's not difficult. But to say we KNOW water is 2 hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom *And that has NOTHING to do with any "God"* isn't a claim you can make. Whoever is filling these baskets is either lying or making unjustified presumptions. But like I said, I agree with the vague meaning of the analogy. Nothing we have ever observed can be attributed to a "god" specifically. The problem is (And probably one of the main reasons religious "philosophy" is still so prevalent in the world) you can't prove there isn't some magic-man behind it all. As long as manipulators exist and naivety exists, there will always be that subconscious twinkle of "But what if" that leads most people into a supernatural/transcendent mindset. Even if we explored every inch of the universe, people could still ask "But what's outside of it/why is it here?"
@@biteyalmighty7874 True we can't say absolutely that a god or goddess is not involved, but that doesn't mean the scientific explanation is balanced 50/50 with what might emerge later with regards to a god input. For example, I can say; "50 metres below my feet is a magic bar of gold that grants wishes." Now the bar either exists or it doesn't exist, but the 'weighting' on whether it exists or not isn't an equal 50/50; the chances of it existing are so infinitesimally small that to all intents and purposes we can say 'it doesn't exist'. We can only really explore the reality we observe. It may be the case that the world was brought into being last Tuesday, with all our memories implanted into our heads, but until we see evidence of this it's a pretty pointless discussion. I think the analogy stands; until a supernatural creature is shown to exist, the basket labelled 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God' is correctly named. Although we could modify it; 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God or a Magic Bar of Gold'!! :)
"The natural bedfellow of evolution is atheism". I'll fix that for him... "The natural bedfellow of one rational position is another rational position." Also, I have trouble thinking any intelligent adult can actually think that being teased as a child for advocating creationism is in anyway evidence that this is the correct view. Profoundly illogical. Of course kids shouldnt be ridiculed, but a rational person must realize that if they put forth an opinion on a highly controversial topic they will experience pushback for doing so, and some reactions to their words may be unfair
I think she referred to the question in the debate, not wether creationism is correct or not. I think fostering critical thinking is vital in children development, but that is not mutually exclusive with rationalism or atheism for that matter. As stated by many on this panel, faith is a choice and highly educated and merited academics are religious despite the rationalism being pushed around by young people on the internet. Now her point is a bit moot because kids ask dumb questions all the time, but I think there is a bit of a truth to the fact that forcing a uniform curriculum to children is a bad idea.
Children are bullied for countless reasons. We don't decide what should or shouldn't be taught in school on the basis of what might cause a child to bully or be bullied. Teaching Judaic myth as fact may cause a Hindu child to suffer abuse at other children's hands and produce intolerant school leavers whom are ill-equipped for modern work place life.
A couple good examples of scientific theories Theory of Evolution Theory of Gravity - any gravity deniers here? Heliocentric theory - which is the 'theory' that the earth rotates around the sun :P www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html
Evolution has NEVER been OBSERVED, it is the secular scientists who have put their slant on the evidence. The grand canyon is proof of a massive amount of water,the ground is LAYERED.
Bernie Fynn I hope this isn’t your real name, otherwise everyone is going to know how dumb you are. Or at least how you don’t know how to do research before you comment on things you know nothing about.
When I was in R.E class, I remember the majority of my fellow 10 year old students poking holes in creationism. When you have children acknowledging how ridiculous something is you are fighting an uphill battle.
Qiute right Major, same here,in fact we made a point of ridiculing the entire Hebrew OT,especially "Genesis",and our poor RE teacher ended up giving up the ghost.{not the holy one of course} From then on we spent RE classes in the cricket nets. LOL
Major MajorMajor I went to a very religious school, and I was actually mocked as a 9 year old for my belief in evolution. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in big groups.
jayrod jones Stupid? Is that really all you have? Evolution and naturalistic origins have holes in them that you could drive a Mac Truck through. What is YOUR explanation for how life got here aside from God. Let's see how "smart" you are.
Tim Spangler Ok then, poke a hole in evolution. Then tell me, if science cannot answer something, how is it logical to say "well then there must have been a magical creator, this two millennium old compilation of letters and ravings says so" as opposed to saying "I guess I'll wait til science figures it out".
As soon as you say... I believe the Earth is 6000 years old.. I'm just going to ignore pretty much everything else you have to say. That puts you right next to flat Earthers.
As soon as you say nothing made everything I don’t continue the conversation with you it would be quite foolish of me to lower myself to such standards it is a scientifically impossibility foolish nonsense, I believe God created everything oh for goodness sake evolutionist believe they came from a rock. That puts you right next to madness.
@@andylee2815 no dear it doesn't they never said we came from a damn rock. Are you referring to the big bang. We know evolution happened. It's theory is how. And you can believe in evolution and believe in God I do I just don't follow the bible.
Tim Spangler This video is about whether young earth creationism (as depicted in the Book of Genesis) should be taught in schools. So what the fuck has Jesus got to do with the subject matter being discussed!? Do you believe that a God created the universe in six days, created Adam from a handful of dust, created Eve from a rib from Adam's rib cage, and all happened 6000 years ago!?
Gertrude Perkins Nope. you are the offspring of your parents. Creation is different. Which is why atheists are completely impotent in creating life. THINK pal.
Evolution is being questioned all the time. It is being tested all the time. But you'll have to come up with a stronger theory than creationism which is easily debunked if you want to challenge the theory of evolution.
If you are interested in the evidence provided by creationist to support their theory of creationism, check out creationist Kent Hovind's debate. If you feel that he is too hostile toward evolutionist you can search for creationist Ken Ham or Answer In Genesis, I'm sure you will find some of the proves interesting one way or another.
@@redmed10We can have different opinion on whether if the Bible is a book of religious stories that were made up by human's imagination or are they true religious stories. We can leave that to RE teachers. We can also have different opinion on whether the evidences on both sides convincing or no. Just because they are not convincing to you and many people that doesn't mean it is not scientific valuable or it is "false". Any rational creationists will always admit their theories are base on their Biblical believe and evidence with scientific knowledge, unlike most evolutionist will tell people that evolution is "a fact" base on only scientific evidence without any level of believe. After watching these kind of video some how it doesn't matter anymore that one's statement is genuine or not, as long as the people who listen to it hear what they want to hear or they have a charisma that people like. By the way this apply to creationist too. I think it's fair to say that you can make a bold statement if you are having a strong believe but don't do that if you are claiming to only rely on evidence that we are still not 100% sure and without faith. I understand it's hard for science teachers to teach students evidence provided by creationist just like me as a christian I need to "agree" with evolution to gain marks on my biology exam. I also understand it seems unfair to other religion not being taught with the same amount of attention. As I say these we can leave them to RE teachers. Before other religions have any scientific evidence (theory) to support their beliefs, lets leave them as they are at the moment. However science teachers can simply stop addressing evolution as "a fact" rather than "still a theory". Science teachers can tell students what theory they believe in the class, but don't say it is "a fact" that doesn't need any level of believe or faith. At least the education system is less one sided towards evolution.
@@yathongtam5907 Science questions itself all the time. Religions don't. To put them together because you think science is based on belief or faith the same as religion is disingenuous. True mainstream education can expect certain answers at certain times and that can suck.
@@redmed10 "theory Noun explanation that has not been proven as fact." education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/theory-evolution "But evolution did not reach the status of being a scientific theory until Darwin’s grandson, the more famous Charles Darwin, published his famous book On the Origin of Species." "In the theory of natural selection, organisms produce more offspring..." education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/theory-evolution First of all, evolution is not science. It is still a scientific theory according to National Geographic. Please stop refer evolution theory as science. Evolution is a scientific theory but it is not part of science that has been proven. I believe It is impossible to prove the theory of evolution and creation to be science base on the definition of science which is to test the world through observation and experiments because it is in the past. We just can't test the past. Secondly, "science question itself all the time" is just a tactic to wins people's heart by making people feel evolutionist are open minded people. Trying to connect the idea of open minded people to their personal view on politic and the ideology of new things are most of the time better than the old things. Same goes with the point of "we are trying our best as a human to search the truth of the universe." Another tactic to convince people by moving their heart. Yes, these tactics can be use as part of a debate but still they are not scientific evidence to prove evolution. It is good for scientist to be open minded since many have been corrected proving their may have made mistakes. However, sometime scientist who believe in evolution doesn't seems to be that open to question. To me, scientist who believe in evolutionist is open to question for almost everything in recent years but some how they would not allow any question on things that are before the existence of modern science other than evolution i.e. "where life come from". Sure you know the phrase "no question about that"? How can students come up any question to a science teacher who believe in evolution when things on the other perspective are not taught. If we are so open to question when it comes to science, why are scientific theories provided by creationist are not taught in school for the sake of "open to question" and "logical thinking" that we encourage so much? I believe in the Bible (including the 6 days 24 hour creation) and that Jesus is alive because of the empty tomb, the testimony of christian who witnessed Jesus that sacrifice their life and because Jesus saved me from sinful desires! This is my confession of faith and I hope people will be honest to their belief and will do the same whether they are christian or not. I wouldn't use the word "suck" to describe mainstream education not only because it's inappropriate as a Christian but also it is such an understatement. To me this a matter of life to find salvation from sins and death and the theory of evolution hinders people from coming to Christ who sacrifice most precious life for our sins so we can live!
Don't ever give children knowledge without also giving them the ability to do critical thinking, logical thinking and scepticism. And whilst you're at it, teach them how the scientific method works.
why are you treating science like dogma? You are doing the exact same thing religious wackos do, you just replace the word god with fact, truth, or science. The moment you believe something is irrefutably true, you have failed as a scientist. Religion is for you if you want to believe something is true, science is for you only if you are ready and willing to have your view and understanding eternally changed, undermined and challenged
@@majmunjole8570 twaddle. I am not stating that the exact age of the earth or evolution is irrefutably true, but I will dismiss as ridiculous, claims that are solely supported by a bronze age book of myths and delusional thinking. If you're going to go against evidence, you have to bring something to the table.
@@LudvigIndestrucable This "bronze age" book, along with other "fairytale books" as i'm sure you would refer to them all share common themes. The epic of gilgamesh written 6000 years ago speaks of earth and sky separating and there being a massive flood wiping nearly all life. The bible written 2000 years ago mentions the separation of earth and heavens, along with the flood story. The Quran written 1000 years ago describes similiar events. Ancient ruins of Aztec temples which the natives described as "built by the gods" and their size show that the only thing which could have toppled them was a massive body of water. Thousands of years between them, thousands of miles between them, all have the same motives. At a certain point you realize that religious books (excluding religious law) are more historical books with a bias rather than a fairytale
@@majmunjole8570 nope, they are in no way historical books, you've merely chosen to interpret them as such. A lot of the middle East fairytales have great flood myths, actual historians trace this back to an actual local flood event and a merchant sailing a few miles down river. Stop misrepresenting myth as fact, you just look silly. The Bible also mentions a giant earthquake and mass zombie uprising when Jesus woke up on the third day, funnily enough that whacky part of the tale is left out of Sundays because it's too silly even for you.
@@LudvigIndestrucable The epic of gilgamesh describes the same event. You ignored my point on the aztec temple ruins. With modern day simulations we have no other explanation to how they would have been felled other than a massive body of water. There is no objective fact, there is only something that is currently accepted as reality
I like it when that guy in glasses accepted evolution being questioned but couldnt accept the same to be done on religion and became ready to jump at anyone who intended the latter
Everything we teach in science is based on information that has passed peer-reviewed selection. So if creationism wants to be taught in schools, it must first present evidence that are credible enough to pass scientific peer-review.
abigmacsass No, because science does not need belief. Science are facts, so it doesn't matter if you belief in it or not. As long as there is no evidence for something it is important that both people belief in it.
Co0kiEGAb Evolution is not a fact, it is a story that is not supported by the evidence. A fact is an observable truth. have you observed evolution? if not, then it is a belief of yours. Has anyone observed evolution in recorded history? If not, then it is a popular belief, shared by many.
dave cartner uhm have you heard of Darwin? Or the birds he OBSERVED to PROVE evolution?... educate yourself man. The only thing about evolution that has not been proven yet is the chemical evolution which would mark the creation of life. We did come pretty close to that already though and im sure we will prove it aswell
By evolution I am not merely referring to a simple change of a characteristic of within a species or even genus. Creation scientists estimate that the "kinds" spoken of in the book of Genesis would probably be a near equivalent of the scientific classification "family". Yes I've heard of Darwin and the Galapagos finches.
There is direct DNA evidence, 100% showing undeniable proof that we have common ancestry with other apes. This is a slam dunk for common ancestry. Evolution is a fact. Plain and simple.
Wouldn't it be indirect evidence rather than direct? Common ancestry can be inferred from shared genomes but the genomes itself don't directly point to shared ancestry.
@@steven21736 - The common ancestry is not inferred from this evidence. It's like saying that 4 is the inferred answer of 2 + 2. It's absolutely undeniable direct proof that we have common ancestry.
@@shannonjhanlen indirect evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence. A footprint would be indirect evidence of a foot, but from the presence of the footprint you an infer with a great deal of confidence that a foot of the size/shape stood there.
@@steven21736 - We aren't talking about DNA scraped off a wall or from a blood pool on the ground or something like that. We are talking about living breathing creatures that had their blood taken and put under a microscope as it were. So the time frame that you're talking about is irrelevant. So it's direct evidence. "Indirect evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence" - I agree with you completely. Your analogy of the foot print is accurate for a description of indirect evidence. But again, these commonalities are directly observed, and can be directly observed right now. So the common ancestry in the DNA isn't indirect, it's direct.
Fuck you man. Deplatforming is retarded. I became an atheist because of debates like these, don't let people be isolated in their own ideology, regardless what it is.
@@carbon1255 Wrong. Isolating stupidity is the ONLY way to kill it. Bad ideas DO need to see the light of day, but not to be discussed in this manner. They need to be brought out in the front yard and shot in the head in front of the whole neighborhood.
@@Christobanistan I think he's arguing it the other way around. Debates like these show the lack of substance in religions. Keep these debates, there are too many religious extremists around that do not have their worldview challenged. Some can overcome their religion and these kind of debates help.
@@carbon1255 hey I know this was 3 years ago, but I think the gentleman at 9:40 perfectly sums up this concept. As he explains, we are all partially responsible for these harmful ideas perpetuating and we are responsible for the popularity of some horrible ideas BECAUSE we give these people a platform. I know that censorship is a controversial topic, but when you give people like these any credibility whatesoever is when other people see them as worth their time and I think that's what OP was referring to. The idea that "rational debate" is going to naturally clear these ideas because everyone seeing these debates will have common sense or any reason to change their belief, well thats nonsense. I'm glad you're a rational enough person to be changed by something like this but you truly are the exception
Anybody else think it's hilarious that the young earth Creationist says that we have to look at the science carefully and we need to separate interpretation from fact?
We approached evolution in school from three different sides. Our bioligy teacher explained creationism, the theory of Lamarck and Darvinism, then divided us in three groups and let us argue for one side. This way we learned what each theory says, but also, that you can not defend creatonism on a factual basis. I think that was a really good approach.
It doesn't even need to be brought up in the debate because intelligent design and creationism deserve a spot at the table as much as the Easter bunny.
@James Henry Smith Why would it make sense to you that Satan and the antichrist are real if you have an all powerful god? You really believe he created the universe but is helpless to stop Satan and the antichrist messing up the Earth? That sounds completely retarded dude and you can't even prove god exists yet alone Satan.
Answer: yes - in theology classes. Never in science. If you allow creationism to be taught in science class you might as well teach about how snakes and donkeys used to talk
+Anime Fan. He said "probably." Do you know what that word means and what its usage does to his statement? Well, obviously not because you asked for proof. Let me educate you. If you ever come across something like this again, instead of demanding proof for something somebody is guessing about, you should ask what makes them think that their guess might be correct. In this circumstance you should have asked, "What are the circumstantial facts that make you think he might be Syria?" Or you could just leave people that actually know how to use language alone.
+ozowen This guy is not "most Muslims". He's a takfiri Salafist who tries to excommunicate other Muslims under no actual judicial authority. The Muslim woman who talked in the video is certainly not fighting in Syria because she doesn't believe in the same kind of rot as the Salafist maniac who I have no idea why was even allowed to come on this show in the first place (would you invite neo-Nazis to a debate show?).
@@Rogue_Console No! The one problem you idiots have is that you think you have good ideas just because Allah said so. News flash, not all ideas are good ones. Bad ideas need only enough light so that we can see them to kill them.
If you found out that the teachers in your kid's school were allowing them to drink or smoke weed during classes you would be rightfully outraged, because this space is for education not for making your student stupid. I met one of these homeschool creationist kids in a freshman biology class I took many years ago and she gave some of the most interesting answers to the questions, loud and proud in her ignorance. She just couldn't understand for several weeks why the class kept laughing at her answers to the teacher's questions, at least until she read the first two chapters of the textbook and found out that she learned absolutely nothing of value in her "high school" curriculum. For example. The teacher was asking was about the coloration of a subspecies of starfish. He wanted to know our opinion on why there were be so many different colors of starfish within the same subspecies. Obviously, he knew the whys he just wanted us to learn to use the data available to put together some rudimentary hypotheses. The answers he was looking for were along the lines of; predation (different predators can see in different wavelengths so having various coloration may be a defensive adaptation), diet, and habitat niche (maybe they ate different things because they lived in different places and picking up pigment from their food), mutation (maybe these different species were separated by some distance or other phenomena and evolved separately), dimorphism/multimorphism (maybe the male and female of this species are differentiated for sexual selection, or in the case where there are more than two genders, that), and so on, and so on. This girl answers, "Because God made them that way?" Yeah. Right. That's why we're paying $3,000 for this course, so you can regurgitate a 5-year-old's Sunday school lesson. Did you notice that the textbook is thicker than your bible and has about 10 times the content? What the fuck is wrong with you? Oh. Yeah. You had your brain fried at an early age. No. No thank you. Not for my kids.
I wouldn't have been mean to her but would have said that answer doesn't tell us anything about what happened. No supernatural explanation yields information unless you can describe and adduce evidence for how it happened. I would have said as gently as I could do it that she's just repeating what sounds like a slogan. I would say she needed to cast her arguments in terms of what happened on the earth over time, because of course we all know the Ceiling Cat ultimately created everything, but how did the Ceiling Cat accomplish this?
The language of your post leads me to believe you are an American, yet I wonder if you know what's happening in public schools all over the US, if you think this question is a joke.
eatthisvr6 Short version: Right-wing Republicans are channeling millions of dollars into school board elections so they can get control over what's taught to millions of children. This is not in all states, but in enough of them to be a problem for the future. Creationism was the "wedge" issue, but they also push revisionist history (for example, slaves in the South were foreign workers), and I guess eventually they expect to have near total mind control over a fundamentally illiterate populace. So, yeah, scary as hell.
+qhsperson the scariest thing about it is these people have tested power to make the planet uninhabitable and they're by far the most aggressive nation on earth to start with!
Creationism should absolutely be taught in schools alongside every other major religion, perhaps even mythological religions, to educate on different non-scientific beliefs. It should never be taught as fact.
I would phrase it differently - either it is taught alongside greek, roman and north mythology or none of them should be discussed in a classroom. I would much rather see a philosophy class be introduced where you learn about the beginning of philosophy - which is essentially religion - than actual religions class.
Well I think we can forgive some people in the amazon rainforest etc who don't have the benefit of modern science. Beyond that there isn't really a good reason.
The first element is Hydrogen H ...............from which comes all elements Helium etc etc .................Why and where did that Hydrogen come from in the first place...........with or without a God funny yer why is there hydrogen how come its hydrogen and how did it get there ??????? why is it there..................
wonder fuller but why choose a God to fill in your blanks. It's not an either or debate. Just because an answer has not been found, doesn't instantly mean a God did it. It's not 4000 years ago, when we never had the understandings and comprehension we have now. So the easy answer was, we need rain so let's pray for it. Eventually it rains, does that mean God made it so. Or was it alway going to rain eventually? Over the last few hundred years so many answers have been found, eventually we will fill in the blanks. Maybe I should pray for said blanks, as one day the answers will come 😉
wonder fuller Simple, at the beginning of the big bang the universe was so hot and dense that all there was was pure energy. As it expanded and cooled down, eventually matter formed in the form of quarks and electrons. For a while, it was still too hot for atoms to form, so it was just plasma, but as space expanded even further, this soup cooled down even more, quarks stuck together forming nucleons, eventually allowing for electromagnetism to take over and hydrogen atoms to form. No god required, just physics.
Indoctrination. It begins the process of accepting what is not evidently true. The cognitive bias corrupts the brain into thinking that whatever is insinuated by the 'leaders', should always be accepted as fact (even without demonstration). Religions thrive on it.
So the woman's argument amounts to, "Don't challenge false beliefs because someone's feelings may get hurt!" You can't avoid that and it is not a goal of science. I've had my feelings hurt, the idea that this BS would be taught as science to young impressionable children hurts my feelings.
By her reasoning, the creation beliefs of all religions should be given equal teaching in schools because you wouldn't want buddhists / hundus or pagans to feel left out
You cannot wrap them in bubble wrap. I taught high school. The Christian kids avoided grade 11 and 12 biology They mostly avoided Chem and Physics too. The Christian teacher refused to teach senior biology: this made staffing really hard. Yet even in an English class, Darwin would naturally come up say in a discussion of Kate Chopin. If I glanced at the Christian kids they were staring straight ahead. I later learned that they were praying demons away. Between 1850-1960, Quebec solved the problems of the incompatibility of scientific understanding and religious dogma. We got rid of the Provincial Department of Education from 1875-1961. We turned over education to the religions.The Catholics got straight dogma, no science to speak of. Quebec’s population was kept in ignorance and in poverty by the Church. But their invisible souls were saved,they were told. Today, many Québecois hate the Church. The provincial government promotes secularism to all An object lesson for anti science religious folk. You promote gibberish, you lose everything.
Creationist: "I accept Young Earth Creationism as fact, without question." Also Creationist: "How dare you accept Evolution as fact, without evening questioning it."
@Bors de Ganys You're assuming God into existence to make your point. If it's valid, my turn. I assume into existence an anti-God. It's a being that negates all other gods (and itself) out of existence by its very nature. See why this kind of reasonning is fucked up ? ^^
toshir0m1 That is really neat. I'm going to go ahead and continue worshiping God though. Until science can prove how life can come from non-life. And then how those molecules in a primordial soup turned into humans. Until then God is a much more likely answer. Also, I'm super biased and bigoted and have no interest in what you say.
Indeed. I don't understand why creationism even needs a course. Isn't their answer for everything: god did it? How long would that take to teach? Don't these religious fools already believe that ? It's not as if they're going to be teaching how god did it, or why god did it. I mean, imagine taking the end of the year test in creationism, everybody would get 100% because there's only one right answer: god did it. It makes no sense.
I hope you beasts will one day come to understand that mocking and withdrawing yourself from religion as a concept is harmful and obscene. Materialist and godless interpretations of the world have brought mainkind to despair, and shall continue to bring mankind to despair as long as gits such as yourself praise and perpetuate it.
@@maple2524 right... we were far better off in the middle ages when there was no despair. And one who calls others beast has lost any credibility already. Back into your cave, troll.
@@bernhardstil6128 Religion has been part of humanity for much longer than the Middle Ages. Modern secularism is a subversion of the value of religion, and a diversion from our nature. Regardless, if you want to strawman and insult me, go right ahead. It won't win you the argument.
@@bernhardstil6128 funny how you blame religion for the the dark ages yet conveniently glance over the fact that science has been prospering perfectly fine in the eastern european, middle eastern and indian world. It's almost as if the problem isn't religion itself, but rather that a primitive people (germanics) caused the destruction of all culture and history in central and western europe (which is exactly where the dark ages are most famous and influential). And of course as it is western and central europe which did the most colonization, they spread that primitive train of thought.
That's the way we do it in Sweden. All the religions are taught but they are all taught as myths. We start with animism, because it is part of early human history, then Asatro (the Viking religion) because it was part of early Swedish history, then christianity because it was part of later Swedish history, and then we spend the last couple of years in school learning about islam, hinduism etc. But it's all taught as myth and it's only for an hour a week.
craze1701 Actually it is like this. Evolutionists rely on public opinion to keep them going. For example if one were to show just how complex the chromosome of the simplest organism on the planet is, the person concludes the opposite of what the scientific evidence clearly proves. this could never happen by chance. Still someone finds two similar characteristics in two creatures and use their imaginatioin to find the connection. Essentially this is the process by which it is taught in school and even in university. The central doctrine of Evolution is if you cant dazzle them with your brilliance baffle them with your Bull Shit. There never has been and never will be evidence that creatures jump from being fish to amphibians and from amphibians to reptiles and reptiles into birds. it is purely science fiction but the only other alternative is to look at the evidence from a point of view that respects a creator. Other wise it is like the teacher that tells his students the sky is pink and if you say it is blue you will fail. This is the entire premise and option open to scientists who are in their fields and the moment they question this myth or sacred cow they will be ostracized form their peers. No support means no support to their truly scientific research. Change the peer system and then you will see someone get that nobel peace prize. First you have to extablish a society that will listen to the truth as it is and not be conned by the pseudo scientific teaching of evolution.
@@davidvarley1812 People die twice. When their brain activities cease to function and when other people forget them. So he does still "exist", as part of our memories. Nothing supernatural, just philosophical ... crap, I hate philosophy ... xD
The muslim world did indeed add to our scientific knowledge. However. That stopped the moment they became more extreme in their relgious views somewhere in the middle ages. The moment it became more extreme, nothing noteworthy on the scientific field came from the muslim world anymore. Only to be later taken over by Europe when the renaissance started and europe became less extreme in its religious views. And that is constantly the whole issue here. The more religious a society, the fewer scietific breakthroughs come from that society. Also. We donot teach kids 2+2=5. You can beieve that all you want, but when you take those views in the public square, you are derised. And rightly so.
Being more extreme does not mean being more religious, unless what you're saying is that Islam around the time of its foundation was less religious than Islam in the middle ages, hundreds of years later, during a time where Muslims killed Muslims because of what type of a Muslim they were. If you look at Saudi Arabia, one of the most extreme 'Islamic' countries in the World, you can see how extremists manipulate religion to control the public, practice beliefs that strengthen their power and ignore those that threaten them. Saudi Arabia claims to be Islamic, however it is a dictatorship and a monarchy, contrary to the earliest Islamic state, the Calipate, which exhibited direct democracy. When it comes to freedom of religion, the government claims it is infidelity, apostasy, and uses force to ensure the population stays Muslim so that they can use Islam to control the public and strengthen their grip on power. When it comes to politics, Saudi ignores true Islamic teachings. Extremism is about power, not religion.
lI Hishler Il "eing more extreme does not mean being more religious" What I said was... "the moment they became more extreme in their relgious views" The next tme I said "became more extreme" you can infer I was talking specifically about religious extremism from that point on.
And then there are galaxy/star/planet/moon formations, red shift, nuclear fusion and chemical elements that it forms, distance between galaxies and photons that are crossing it.
I had a Jewish friend who, when he was at school, would ask questions about religion. The teachers answer amounted to "Do ask, just accept it." When he asked why he was given an enquiring mind, if were not to ask questions, he got the same reply.
+Patrick Parker Uh how is it back to front? Are you saying that they are correct? Then you are just wrong. Saying they are dishonest at least gives them some cred for not really believing what they claim but only lying about it. Do you actually think they are dumb enough to actually think the earth is 6000 years old?
Since when is a scientific field like evolution a bed fellow of atheïsm? Is gravity also a bed fellow of atheïsm? Atheïsm only says something about a god claim, not about science. If evolution would be disproven tomorrow by a new scientific peer reviewed theory, I would still be an atheïst when it comes to all god claims.
@@daedalron Wrong, even the Vatican has agreed that evolution is a fact and the origin of species. Many Christians accept evolution as a fact (which it is) including many christian scientist. I am an atheist myself (everyone is an atheist!) and if next week evolution would be disproven this would still not change my atheist position. If however creationism woud be proven, I would then have to accept that there is a god.
@@sanderdeboer6034 Well, the Vatican has agreed because the other position was no longer possible to defend. But from the start, accepting Evolution means you refute the story of Genesis as written in the bible. And once you start refuting part of the bible as untrue, it's just one more leap to consider other parts as just myths as well, and that path lead straight to considering god himself as a myth. The Vatican position is a way to try to defuse that and avoid their followers to question the rest of the book.
@@daedalron Obviously I have to fully agree that evolution and the bible are incompatible. I am fully onboard with your previous post. However we can't deny that many theist can bend their mind in such crazy loops to allow evolution and the genesis account to not conflict in their view. In some ways I feel creationists are more honest about their theism. Problem is that they have to lie to themselves and the world around them about scientific facts. Inventing micro evolution and putting dinosaurs on Noah's arc are some clear examples of their cognitive dissonance. I still love how Ray Comfort used the banana as proof for god and against evolution. So funny!
absolutely. There is plenty of room for the two to coexist. You can be a christian who believes in an old earth and evolution (theistic evolutionist). God doesn't explain how he/she made things in the Bible, only that it was so; God doesn't say how old the Earth is either, an Irish priest 'worked it out' 250 years ago. This creation-science nonsense isn't even in the Bible and if it was really so important as these creation *cough* scientists say it is, wouldn't you just think God would include it the damn book???? Come off it - creation science is a cash grab from a bunch of charlatans. And this current idea they perpetuate about having to believe in the 6000 year old earth to be a true christian is absolutely vile and does society a disservice.
@@berniefynn6623 OK let's say everybody without brown dies faster. So people with brown hair are going to be more likely to have children because they live longer, other people with different hair are still going to have kids. Just not as many. So over thousands of generations other haircolors are naturally going to die out. Makes sense, right?
Religious people often use the gaps in scientific knowledge to insert their gods in there. This fallacy is colloquially known as the ''god of the gaps'' fallacy.@frozenboy712
"some people say religious people are illogical. That's not true, they just have a different outcome and belief in the information." Yeah that's called illogical reasoning. :-\
@@deanmoncaster Well those who "ceased" to exist just took new form, the spirituality remained the same though. So can you name the current religions ? Since you know a lot about religions and religious people with your statement "pretty much yeah"
Religion, made the Judaeo-Christian World, PREMIER.. See how in "Wat Suan Mokkh AAA TruthS" - the 2nd 5 minutes thereof. Oh and ah, by the way.. GOD makes the rockets fly : ) GOD is the GREATEST Scientist, of all..
Kelvin Ko the only thing atheists have in common is absence of belief in a deity. That doesn't say anything about the person though. One atheist can be an egoistic rapist and other can be a humanist giving away all his money to charities and living with minimal requirements. Absence of faith does not say a damn thing about you or atheists as a whole.
All Things Fishy To go from atheist to believer takes a leap of faith. To go from believer to atheist requires a leap in the opposite direction: rationality.
I've been thought christianity in school since I was 5-6 years old and I am glad I have had that, because now as an adult I have a better understanding of the complete BS it all was.
Ditto. I had the crap shoved down my throat even up to the sixth form, and despite asking to be excused, was not allowed to be exempt (although Jehovahs, Jews and Muslims were)
You can question evolution, the same way that you can question the theory of gravity, the big bang, germ theory, particle theory, etc but if you're going to question it you must come with something more then what a 2000 year old book says. Facts and beliefs are not equal and shouldn't be treated as such.
I was lucky enough to go to a science high school and creationism _was_ taught. Alongside Quetzalcoatl, a whole class of Hindu gods, the Egyptian posse, people coming out of bamboo. It was heaps of fun, really. I still love my flaming birds. After that, we moved on to reading hieroglyphs because who wouldn't want to learn that?
+jacob mcgill jacob your evolution is a false theory...all the evidence is against evolution....nothing comes out of nothing....no scientists has created anything out of thin air....there has to be a designer and creator God for this creation...
+baal2177 no one created God...God is eternal...he is the creator and nothing was before him..he was before time matter space and everything...in because of him all that has existence came in to being...
+Jacob Mathew nothing comes of thin air, expect god :Dd. anyone with a brain knows god is a thing that was made to controll and explain this people YET cant explain. its alright if u want tobe stupid, but lets not brainwash children in to lies thx.
+Aksuongay its ur thinking...but to those who have faith God is real...God cant be explained by materialistic theories...nor he can be proven...he is invisible guider of universe...so a person coming to God must believe that he exists...Jesus said that if u have faith as little as mustard seed u can move mountains...nd many of his people r doing great things for him....the reason athesists doubt God is because he is unseen...just because something is unseen doesnt mean it doesnt exist....dark matter is unseen...air is unseen..many more things are unseen...atheists take it for granted these things exist...in the same way God exists and he has left his imprint upon his whole creation...from dna to dark matter and oceans and cells nothing can sustain itself without a sustainet...God is not man's invention...God exists thats why people call upon him...nor he is only an imagination...God is real just as u and me are real...stop believing in stupid and imaginatory evolution theory which explains nothing...all is lie in evolution...say proudly we are sons and daughters of Adam and Eve not monkeys...we were created to love and care for each other...not to hate each other...
Exactly! That is stunning! "Gravity is just a theory" ... if anyone would look up the term "scientific theory" they would realise that it is essentially equal to "fact"
This is from Wikipedia: "A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. "
Just so you know, the theory of gravity is still a theory as it should be. Nothing in science is fact. Only so close to fact that we regard it as such. There may come a time when the current theory of gravity is challenged and if the theory changes, it becomes the new theory of gravity. Science is nothing like religion. It allows itself to be corrected from time to time.
Essentially is the key here. Though it may be supported with evidence this can change at any time dependant on newly discovered evidence. So even though someone might say fact. This is not the be all and end all.
That answer from the professor at the start is ridiculous, but unsurprising from a creationist. Never mind proving creationism, but rather swaying the conversation from the get go by judging the validity of evolution, depending on whether or not you are an atheist. What the hell does that have to do with the scientific evidence that supports evolution and disproves the creationist explanation. It's a massive red herring.
If anyone has never read the Bible, start with Deuteronomy 13.13-19.21 Which tells its readers to murder all the men, women and children in a town if just one person in that town worships a different god. Then, possibly for completeness, burn the entire town to the ground. Personally, I don't want that taught in any school on Earth.
Believer: I used to be an atheist. Then... Atheist (interrupting): I used to be an atheist to until I converted to atheism. Believer: What? B..yu..ygd...ser... (brain explodes)
Some people don't know the difference between a conviction and a fact. You might be 100% convinced that the sky is made out of caramel, doesn't make it a fact.
I actually think that the "moderate" religious people that try to accommodate their imaginary friend with modern science are just as dangerous. They are also peddling irrationality but they are providing it a cover up that most people can't see through.
I suspect that most people whom we might call 'moderates' are actually deists. They are constantly trying to reconcile what they really believe with the history and ritual of their denomination, both of which seem to give them comfort in a bizarre way. It's the authority that their church holds (in their eyes) that is potentially dangerous. Thank FSM for secular society!
Marius Cheek The one you really should be thanking is "Benedictus de Spinoza". It is he who you own your freedom of speech from as well. If you are interested I would recommend to read about his life first before you start reading one of his books because it is quite difficult to understand if you are unfamiliar with his background. "Men are conscious of their desire and unaware of the causes by which [their desires] are determined."
Benedictus Spinoza thought that the judeochristian god was an insult to the real grandeur of the universe. He was a "pantheist", which means that he worshipped the universe as if it was a god, but he accepted that this "god" was not personal at all.
"The proper stance to take towards God is not one of reverence or religious awe, but instead one of objective study and reason, since taking the religious stance would leave one open to the possibility of error and superstition". Benedictus de Spinoza ideas in a nutshell. Source: Steven Nadler.
Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, Corinthians 1:20 - 22)
I like what Ricky Gervais said (paraphrasing, of course)...If the world as we know it ended, and all books and knowledge were lost, 1000 yrs from now religion would be completely different..but math and science would be exactly the same.
It was disappointing when this was recorded years ago, and it's even MORE disappointing now, that people STILL don't understand what theory means in relation to science!
If creationism is taught in schools, it should be taught in a mythology class with Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Egyptian mythology, Norse mythology, etc.
Agreed
+Patrick Cornwall of course.
+Bryce McCandless and atheistic mythology
kur vgazati
Atheism cannot be taught as mythology because for something to be taught as mythological it has to involve some sort of belief and atheism is literally defined as the lacked there of.
Evolution is rightfully taught in science classes because it is literally science. And before you say that evolution is a theory, which it is, a theory in science is above just about everything else. Such as gravity
Bryce McCandless
No I am not against evolution :) and I know what`s the difference in the term "theory" in science...I am a Christian and I don`t think the world is 6000 years old...and about my comment- I was just simply "trolling" around :D you know
Creationists are delusional. Sorry, but it's true.
+Jimmie A Nothing became a marble of matter and energy, and then that expanded over A LOT OF TIME
+Jimmie A Nothing became a marble of matter and energy, and then that expanded over A LOT OF TIME
+Quantrel Bishop strawman argument.
All of the matter in the universe has always existed. Back about 14 billion years ago all of that matter was in one location. Before that time we don't know, it is impossible to know. Currently all matter is expanding, and in theory should have an expiration date
goaliedude32 Still points to a creator
+Quantrel Bishop No, it doesn't.
Just imagine if JRR Tolkein was born 3000 years ago and wrote lord of the rings then, half of these nutjobs would still be worshipping Sauron
underrated!
Sauron is mighty. Sauron is.
You don’t have to imagine, it literally happened. Mormonism was created in 1830 by Joseph Smith, who came up with the concept when he was just 14 YEARS OLD, he’s been proven numerous times to be a charlatan and liar too. Scientology was founded in 1950 by a bad SCIENCE FICTION author L Ron Hubbard, need I say more? These religions are so recent and less than 200 years old, written by frauds, have ridiculous doctrines, yet still have millions of followers today. Plenty of nutjobs around.
Its funny because JRR Tolkien was a christian.
There would be four different religions all based on lord of the rings at war with each other and also at war with the harry potter worshipers
"People have a different set of facts" I'm not sure that's how facts work bud
Yeah, that annoyed me also
state your facts? you came from a rock 13.8 bilions years ago?
@@ivonikolov2916 what's more believable? Space rocks bringing in alien microbes and with the right conditions took billions of years to evolve into modern day organisms or a sky fairy that magically clicked its finger and boom humanity came into existence. Lmfao.
@@ML-sv5ez intelligent designer created intelligent beings. Things don’t pop out of nowhere and neither is evolution scientifically correct. Life comes from life, never have life come from a rock and never have we seen something evolve into something different. That’s the lie you choose to believe by Darwin, while he himself was a theist. You need more faith with your beliefs than my beliefs “a sky daddy”. Aren’t you sky a daddy yourself? What’s so crazy if another sky daddy exists in this big universe? But no, keep in believing in rocks.
@@ivonikolov2916 🤣 so according to your logic the intelligent designer of intelligent beings then have its own intelligent designer in existence then and so on. Since "things" don't pop out of nowhere. Grade A logic 😂.
In a hundred years, people will be looking at the conflict between evolution and Creationism the same way we look at the conflict between Galileo and the Roman Inquisition. It will be the great embarrassment of our century.
In one hundred years I'd say religion will be in the minority of the worlds population. Look around. Only old people go to church for the most people (40plus years) Nobody from my grad year goes to mass. My school is a christian school from ages 12-20/ 13-17/18 Basically some are older than others. When your about 15 or 16 people start becoming more aware and they stand up for themselves and dont give a shit about being mr holy good guy anymore. Even if they were raised too far down the rabbit hole of brainwashed indocrination of religion since before they could remember they still know deep down its bullshit and that will pass onto generation to generation without the child indocrination. Lets face people are not going to care so much to the point of baptising someone. They dont even care about going to church. You would think in at least 2 generations time that religon will be so obsolete and the churches will no longer be robbing people with their no tax having asses
Soundgarden97 Yeah, it will probably take about 2 to 4 generations (max) for religion to become a complete fairy tail for almost 100% of the world's population. You already have countries such as Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Norway, Estonia, Netherlands, for example, where more than 70% of their population are atheists, some of them with more than 80%. And the countries with the largest amount of religious people are either the most underdeveloped countries (mostly in the African continent) or the ones where the country's constitution itself has a religious base, such as the USA. Obviously the USA is a developed country unlike most African countries and the percentage of religious individuals is also much smaller than in those underdeveloped countries, nevertheless, the amount of people in the USA who still believe in angels is still ridiculously high. I'm only using the USA as an example but there are more examples of developed countries with that same problem.
My country is another example. I live in Portugal and I'd say my country is a developed country, not at the top of the list that's for sure, but in 188 countries it ranks 41 in terms of human development if I'm not mistaken, so it's not too bad. The percentage of religious people is almost the same as in the USA.
My country has a very old population, most of which didn't even have the opportunity to get an education and those older individuals are the ones who make the majority of the religious people. Fortunately nowadays all of us have that privilege and most of the younger folks here (40 years old or less), such as myself (20), were taught to make our judgement based on scientific evidence.
I believe that the belief in God is inversely proportional to the degree of education an individual has. The more scientific education an individual possesses, the least likely he/she is to be religious. It's also probably related to the degree of intelligence and ability to think rationally. I mean, if someone believes in creationism even after looking at the evidence supporting evolution, then that does speak a lot about their intelligence.
God damn even my 80 year old grandmother doesn't believe in creationism and she didn't get a very extensive education like we do now. She got little more than 4th grade. She's very religious and regularly goes to the church, but also very curious and loves documentaries and debates, specially about the cosmos and medicine. I'd bet if she hasn't been "brainwashed" to believe in God since a young age like 99% of older folks here and actually had access to an education like mine, then she'd probably be an atheist or agnostic. It's all about the environment you're brought up on. If you're brought up by your parents to believe in God and don't have access to a sofisticated education, then there is a 99% chance that you'll just pick up the religious you were taught to believe. Ignorance leads to religion.
Sorry if I went on a long ass rant, got a bit carried away. XD
MrBluePants Twenty years young myself. The problem with people believing in specific stories in their respective religions is that you simply can't nitpick the things you believe or you'll render your religion unfulfilling. The thing is this sense of unfulfillment is blocked by the brainwashing and fear of giving up 'hope' of survival in the supposed afterlife. In most cases due to been taught at a young age. Especially with your grandmother (no offense). She's been around too long to give up her faith. It would have been with her forever which is why she still has her faith even when she is educating herself. A lot of people for example practicing the christian faith wouldn't believing in creationism yet they still practice their faith. These undeniably stupid and outlandish stories like noah's ark and the garden of eden are never mentioned in church along with the contradictory passages and iniquitous statements said in the bible. Instead the people get their daily does of pretentious readings from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that mean nothing. These charatans tell you what you want to hear, not what you will question.
Also your second last sentence should be the other way around. 'Religion leads to ignorance' XD. I actually appreciate your comment because I only became an atheist like 2 months ago so discussing this with people who have the same view as myself especially people who I know are literally the same age as me gives me fulfillment and assurance of my newfound beliefs and way of thinking. Its quiet a big deal changing your views on such profound topics. Its a personal revolution in a way.
Im not sure. I put them in the same room as the flat earth society. The real shame will be the climate change deniers.
There'll be completely new religions after the great bomb.
Short answer: No.
Long answer? This video.
Long answer: Oh heeeeeeeell no!
Well judging from that debate, those taught creationism as fact are intolerant, blind to scientific knowledge and lack a understand of other people's religious or cultural perspective. Their not the type of people I want our state system to produce. So keep myth out of science education and let parents teach their children about their own heritage, culture and faith.
@Tony Piano Funny how science is becoming dogma, that's the real oxymoron in my opinion
@Tony Piano yes, copy paste your comment, i'm sure that gives it more validity. but in regards to your other statement, if you believe that something is irrefutably true you have failed as a scientist. It is religion which is based on faith and irrefutable truths, science is based on eternal skepticism. To mock someones skepticism of modern day science is counterproductive to the purpose and basis of science. Also the capitalization in your comment makes me think you're quite upset when i challenged what you view as irrefutable, once again, as someone who presumably follows science, this is an oxymoron
I like short answers.
Should the 'stork brings babies' theory ever be taught in schools?
@David Davison Sure, what's the worst that could happen?
*9 months later*
Oh...
They still teach the fetus is a blob of tissue to the masses. Ultrasound is a "right-wing trap."
If it's going to prevent atheism then yes... LOL
@@Emp6ft10in If they have as much brain cells as you do it probably will.
@@michaelschaefer1904 The fetus prior to the forming of a neocortex, which happens _after_ 20 weeks, it is just a blob of tissue, no different than the mole on your arm.
Short answer: No
Long answer: Noooooooooo
"The natural bedfellow of evolution is atheist."
Translation: rational thought tends to yield atheists.
Actually the church hasn't always denied it, both young earth and biblical literal-ism are not universal. I'm not religious, but you could plausibly argue that evolution is just how the live god created adapts to it's environment.
Except this particular claim made by a creationist is false.
It's strange you say that, given Darwin was a creationist and founder of your religion, sorry I mean theory.
@@arnigeir1597 Except that's not what the church said until they were forced to. The bible says God created man, and woman.
@@leehighland5435 Scientific Theories aren't religions. You really think the Theory of Gravity is a religion? 🤣🤣😂😂 How about the Germ Theory of Disease, is that a religion too?
it's a silly debate. One side brings scientic facts to the table, the other brings his Holy book.
Fact vs. bedtime story.
you are joking, right? please tell me, it's just a joke.
István Mága why he agreed with you atrongly
István Mága
Many of these so called facts are just theories, the creation account could be viewed as such. There certainly appears to be a great deal of intelligence in the structure of all living things, especially the DNA Code. Only man's thinking and understanding lacks this kind of organized intelligence.
all you prove here is your ignorance of what a scientific theory is
The Holy Bible carries far more weight than science because it's author is God himself
The lady complaining about children’s feelings being hurt when their views are challenged by facts needs to realise those are of course the consequences of feeding lies to children from birth. It’s laughable. Don’t do it in the first place.
feel really sorry for the kids of that ginger bearded Muslim.....
And also completely redundant to the argument altogether.
Children get hurt with all manner of facts. Gravity being the most obvious one. They don't seem to like it very much when they discover how much gravity hurts. They seem to cope quite well when they learn.
@Neil Rusling You underestimate religious peoples ignorance - they will tell you someone survived cancer; hence god exists. They will even call it a fact and you will stand there baffled.
@Neil Rusling I don't think 2 years is enough job security for the people promoting these ideas. I mean, some institutions have spent centuries milking it....
Yes, creationism should be taught in schools. And ridiculed accordingly.
Whenever someone posts that god needs to be put back in schools, I always say - yeah, Odin has been left out too long. Well, which of the 3000+ gods did you mean?
@@scaletownmodels Woden, Thor, Freyr, Jupiter, Apollo, Neptune, Hades, whatever you like. I enjoyed being introduced to such myths when I was around 9 years old.
@@scaletownmodels they should all be taught. School is supposed to me the teaching of the world and everything in it. You can't ever teach young people too much
@Heroniden people are already taught the history of communism and Nazism ?
The atheist replacement ideology that will replace Christianity is being taught, ie wokism, the new secular religion/ideology, which caters for atheism. Atheists who are rational, I heard one the other day say, it's wrong to say only a woman has a cervix, ie, men came have them too. No Christians believe this, but plenty of atheists do, which shows how smart the atheist is, because they are scientifically enlightened.
I bet you believe that rev James C, you look smart.
I have said it before and I will say it again.
Countries should split into 2 halves. Those that believe in Science and those that believe in creation. Sit back and watch which prospers
***** what do #s have to do with anything?
The fact is the majority of the scienin the world are agnostic or atheist.
*****
How do you figure atheists are screwed? How does the application of science and reason when faced with a challenge vs praying screw anyone?
Take away all of your modern technology and see who is screwed
*****
Oh there would certainly be a lot of those, at 1st. But as time goes on their numbers will drop
***** As time went on the side that was anti-science would slowly get dumber until they were stuck in the stone age
***** So
1. you have to distinguish "Christian" with creationists. Ok the BBT was coined by a Christian, but no creationist believes it.
2. What is the proof of your claim?
FACT: 200 years ago Geology proved the earth is many millions of years old and there was no global flood,
SuperSlartibartfast What part of ''Geologists proved there was no global flood'' don't you understand?
Iron ore can't rust in high oxygen content?
Why not?
Jonathan gardner 200 years ago geology proved the earth is millions of years old.
Go count the layers in the Grand Canyon.
Jonathan gardner They found an unconformity, dummy. Rocks that are laid down flat, tilted, then worn flat and then another layer of level rocks are over that.
That takes millions of years.
Read a history book.
Jonathan gardner History goes back 11,000 years. Tree rings go back 11,000 years. Geology goes back hundreds of millions of years. Astronomers can see back 13 billion years back in time.
Jonathan gardner If the Earth is only 6000 years old, then all inorganic matter is only 6000 years old.
All you Creationist Clowns have to do is develop an age detecting device that is accepted as accurate by everyone, and then you can test all the non organic matter on Earth and you will have proof of your hypothesis.
It's that easy, yet all you Clowns ever do is trash every age detecting device or method that anybody comes up with, why? Because NONE of them come CLOSE to justifying your claims of the age of the Earth, so you Clowns HAVE to trash every age detecting device ever conceived, and you wonder why everybody is laughing at you.
Children raised to believe that the earth is flat would also receive bullying, so should we also teach flat earth. Their argument is an absurd reason to teach something that isn't a fact.
The fault is with the parents there, not with the schools or education.
Why should we have a level playing field between scientific fact and religion?
Host: "You believe the Earth is 6-10,000 years old but dogs were domesticated 15,000 years ago."
Former Science Teacher: "Let me completely dodge that point backed by tangible evidence and talk about how all of this confuses the brainwashed religious students."
Creationism should not be taught as a religious subject, but discussed in a biological science class to show the danger of having uninformed, uneducated people making laws and rules.
I agree. It's a nonsense, but it's dangerous and it's actual.
@Michael Brown why the hell would anyone ever teach science in anything outside of science.. I call bullshit
Sorry. No science teacher wants wntpything to do with that. In a litigious society, doing what you suggest is a good way to get fired and sued
Should creationism ever be taught in schools? Yes.
But definitely NOT in a science class. It isn't science, it's mythology. I personally find mythology to be very interesting, and always have done ever since I was a kid. Cultures throughout history have had their own creation myths, and these should be taught, but they should be taught for what they are. Stories, not facts. And not only the Christian creation myth should be taught. There are far more interesting ones around.
Dat Gamer If it's not mythology then show us the evidence that proves that your god is real and the thousands of other gods that you don't believe in are myths.
Dat Gamer You really haven't thought that through have you?! Atheists don't believe in the devil either. We don't accept either of them.
Dat gamer LOL that's the dumbest answer in the book from Christians who assume they know why atheists are atheists.. Atheists do NOT even believe God exists so how can they "accept" God is they don't believe he exists? Do you "reject" the tooth fairy? You probably wouldn't put it that way would you? You'd just say "I don't believe in the tooth fairy". You need to learn what "disbelief" actually means
It should be teached in ignorant class, and church.
Haakon Johansen I learned about Greek and Roman mythology at school. There is nothing wrong with that because the myths weren't being taught as fact. The same is true of Christian mythology. There is nothing wrong with teaching creationism in school AS LONG AS it is taught in a context of world mythology and not as scientific fact.
No, no it shouldn't be taught in school just like we don't teach that lightning is God showing his anger. When are we gonna fucking grow up as a species?
It's happening, just far too slowly for people like us. Sociopolitical issues, health, wealth and education need to be ironed out a little bit more. Religion comes from the fear of death and the unknown. I only see scam artists tricking the lowest common denominators these days.
Sure there are wealthy, healthy theists... but that is obviously changing over time.
Exactly. It’s infantile. There’s no other description for it.
You act like it’s a species thing. Very few countries have that issue. Very few have that debate.
Evolution takes time.
@@ronytheronin7439 Yeah, in places like Finland, god botherers are in a small minority.
> Something that we don't understand happened
> smart people: "let's try to understand it"
> dumb people: "it must have been god"
what happens when "smart" people can't understand it?
@@majmunjole8570 Then "we aren't smart enough (maybe just yet)"
We don't know why mass attracts mass (you could say because of gravity but that's the definition, not an actual explanation why) but we don't say it's because of some higher, more intelligent being, we assume we just don't have the tools to get to the answer. Not everything can be explained and understood but it doesn't mean we should say it's god who made it. We just don't get it, we aren't infinitely smart.
@@majmunjole8570
"what happens when "smart" people can't understand it?"
We are honest, and say "we don't know ........... yet".
Scripture is not Fact, if you think otherwise you are ignorant. Education is Free, Get Some
my point exactly, get some. It is the only truth.
Right but neither is your science its constantly changing just like scientist found fossils of dinosoars and made one Dino out of two. Or you could say evolution is also false.
joshua barnes once again evolution.... never occurred
***** Oh and btw give me a example of evolution give me a kind not a
species that doesn't add genetic information
funny how many nerds will talk crap over the internet but don't say crap in the real world. and there you go take a min breath and shut up I never said I was religious I just said I didn't believe in evolution ..... GIVE ME A EEXAMPLE OF EVOULTION THAT DOSENT CHANGE IT GENTIC INFORMATION if you can then you need read a book and learn something besides what your mammie tells you. and yes you uneducated ways for example . It's you're not your Miss educated what the hell? grammar hello. P.S try talking to someone with respect idc who you are everyone deserve some.
When the PRIEST calls creationism delusional, it's time to reevaluate your position.
HeadCaptain it's possible the Priest is delusional, of course that thought would not enter your mind would it? The Bible and Evolution are not now nor will ever be compatible. Anyone who says otherwise is dilusional in my mind.
When the guy that believes bread literally turns into flesh and wine literally turns into blood tells you your ideas are delusional.... LoL
@@oscargr_ Is that really the stance on transubstantiation of the Church of England these days?
One of the best analogies I heard was this;
"Imagine three baskets. The first one labelled 'Things We Don't Know The Cause Of', the second 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God', the third 'Things We Know the Cause of And It IS a God'.
Basket number 1 is the biggest, but every day we put more things in basket number 2.
But nothing ever goes in basket number 3. That basket has been empty since the dawn of humanity."
Badum tssss. winner
meh its alright
I agree with the concept but I can't help but see a flaw with this analogy.
To know something was "Not caused by a 'god'" is impossible.
You would have to define a "god" and know what it's capable of.
Of course, you could absolutely point out specific discrepancies between what we observe and what is clearly stated in a religious book; that's not difficult.
But to say we KNOW water is 2 hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom *And that has NOTHING to do with any "God"* isn't a claim you can make.
Whoever is filling these baskets is either lying or making unjustified presumptions.
But like I said, I agree with the vague meaning of the analogy. Nothing we have ever observed can be attributed to a "god" specifically. The problem is (And probably one of the main reasons religious "philosophy" is still so prevalent in the world) you can't prove there isn't some magic-man behind it all. As long as manipulators exist and naivety exists, there will always be that subconscious twinkle of "But what if" that leads most people into a supernatural/transcendent mindset.
Even if we explored every inch of the universe, people could still ask "But what's outside of it/why is it here?"
Well said. Also, this video makes me not so embarrassed to be American.
@@biteyalmighty7874 True we can't say absolutely that a god or goddess is not involved, but that doesn't mean the scientific explanation is balanced 50/50 with what might emerge later with regards to a god input.
For example, I can say; "50 metres below my feet is a magic bar of gold that grants wishes." Now the bar either exists or it doesn't exist, but the 'weighting' on whether it exists or not isn't an equal 50/50; the chances of it existing are so infinitesimally small that to all intents and purposes we can say 'it doesn't exist'.
We can only really explore the reality we observe. It may be the case that the world was brought into being last Tuesday, with all our memories implanted into our heads, but until we see evidence of this it's a pretty pointless discussion.
I think the analogy stands; until a supernatural creature is shown to exist, the basket labelled 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God' is correctly named. Although we could modify it; 'Things We Know The Cause of And It's Not a God or a Magic Bar of Gold'!! :)
"The natural bedfellow of evolution is atheism".
I'll fix that for him... "The natural bedfellow of one rational position is another rational position."
Also, I have trouble thinking any intelligent adult can actually think that being teased as a child for advocating creationism is in anyway evidence that this is the correct view. Profoundly illogical. Of course kids shouldnt be ridiculed, but a rational person must realize that if they put forth an opinion on a highly controversial topic they will experience pushback for doing so, and some reactions to their words may be unfair
I think she referred to the question in the debate, not wether creationism is correct or not. I think fostering critical thinking is vital in children development, but that is not mutually exclusive with rationalism or atheism for that matter. As stated by many on this panel, faith is a choice and highly educated and merited academics are religious despite the rationalism being pushed around by young people on the internet.
Now her point is a bit moot because kids ask dumb questions all the time, but I think there is a bit of a truth to the fact that forcing a uniform curriculum to children is a bad idea.
Atheism must be the default position pending any proof that any so called god exists . Don’t hold your breath on that one !
Children are bullied for countless reasons. We don't decide what should or shouldn't be taught in school on the basis of what might cause a child to bully or be bullied.
Teaching Judaic myth as fact may cause a Hindu child to suffer abuse at other children's hands and produce intolerant school leavers whom are ill-equipped for modern work place life.
Anyone who feel that evolution is just a theory, and not a fact, please take some time to learn the definition of a scientific theory.
A couple good examples of scientific theories
Theory of Evolution
Theory of Gravity - any gravity deniers here?
Heliocentric theory - which is the 'theory' that the earth rotates around the sun :P
www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html
whare did this evolution come frome. Is it some fairt floating around the sky.????
Evolution has NEVER been OBSERVED, it is the secular scientists who have put their slant on the evidence. The grand canyon is proof of a massive amount of water,the ground is LAYERED.
Bernie Fynn
I hope this isn’t your real name, otherwise everyone is going to know how dumb you are. Or at least how you don’t know how to do research before you comment on things you know nothing about.
Bernie Fynn viruses evolve all the time!
When I was in R.E class, I remember the majority of my fellow 10 year old students poking holes in creationism. When you have children acknowledging how ridiculous something is you are fighting an uphill battle.
Qiute right Major, same here,in fact we made a point of ridiculing the entire Hebrew OT,especially "Genesis",and our poor RE teacher ended up giving up the ghost.{not the holy one of course} From then on we spent RE classes in the cricket nets. LOL
Major MajorMajor I went to a very religious school, and I was actually mocked as a 9 year old for my belief in evolution. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in big groups.
jayrod jones Stupid? Is that really all you have? Evolution and naturalistic origins have holes in them that you could drive a Mac Truck through. What is YOUR explanation for how life got here aside from God. Let's see how "smart" you are.
Tim Spangler Ok then, poke a hole in evolution.
Then tell me, if science cannot answer something, how is it logical to say "well then there must have been a magical creator, this two millennium old compilation of letters and ravings says so" as opposed to saying "I guess I'll wait til science figures it out".
***** What the fuck are you talking about? Science is literally the study of facts
As soon as you say... I believe the Earth is 6000 years old.. I'm just going to ignore pretty much everything else you have to say. That puts you right next to flat Earthers.
Meh, a little.
But you could argue they've been brought up that way, most flat earthers find they're own dumb ass way to their conspiracy.
@@skindred1888 Flat earthers are brought up without the faculties to differentiate between science and utter bullshit
Actually lol very well said
As soon as you say nothing made everything I don’t continue the conversation with you it would be quite foolish of me to lower myself to such standards it is a scientifically impossibility foolish nonsense, I believe God created everything oh for goodness sake evolutionist believe they came from a rock. That puts you right next to madness.
@@andylee2815 no dear it doesn't they never said we came from a damn rock. Are you referring to the big bang. We know evolution happened. It's theory is how. And you can believe in evolution and believe in God I do I just don't follow the bible.
Yesss!!!! Let creationsim be taught in schools, The life of a Student is so hard, they need 45 minutes of comedy a week
Imagine studying applied biology and being a creationist. Jesus Christ
You must be an "evilutionist". Lol
My bio teacher would have ended them if she was there
I am taking a bachelor's in biology and in the 170 people in our course there are at least 5 or 6 young earth creationists
@@vuk96zj You spelled evolutionist wrong and there’s no need to quotation marks because you aren’t quoting anyone.
The more you study applied biology, the more you see the reality of creation
It should NEVER be taught! It is utter bollocks, a Hebrew fable, a fairy tale!
Gertrude Perkins Jesus is the most influential person in history. Makes you mad huh? Take it up with him on Judgment day.
Tim Spangler This video is about whether young earth creationism (as depicted in the Book of Genesis) should be taught in schools.
So what the fuck has Jesus got to do with the subject matter being discussed!?
Do you believe that a God created the universe in six days, created Adam from a handful of dust, created Eve from a rib from Adam's rib cage, and all happened 6000 years ago!?
Gertrude Perkins What has Jesus got to do with it? Uh, he created YOU. Still upset that Jesus is the most influential person EVER?
Tim Spangler I think my parents created me, you fuckwitted religious fuckwit!
Gertrude Perkins Nope. you are the offspring of your parents. Creation is different. Which is why atheists are completely impotent in creating life. THINK pal.
Evolution is being questioned all the time. It is being tested all the time. But you'll have to come up with a stronger theory than creationism which is easily debunked if you want to challenge the theory of evolution.
If you are interested in the evidence provided by creationist to support their theory of creationism, check out creationist Kent Hovind's debate. If you feel that he is too hostile toward evolutionist you can search for creationist Ken Ham or Answer In Genesis, I'm sure you will find some of the proves interesting one way or another.
@@yathongtam5907 they are not as convincing as you believe. These are religious stories.
@@redmed10We can have different opinion on whether if the Bible is a book of religious stories that were made up by human's imagination or are they true religious stories. We can leave that to RE teachers. We can also have different opinion on whether the evidences on both sides convincing or no. Just because they are not convincing to you and many people that doesn't mean it is not scientific valuable or it is "false".
Any rational creationists will always admit their theories are base on their Biblical believe and evidence with scientific knowledge, unlike most evolutionist will tell people that evolution is "a fact" base on only scientific evidence without any level of believe. After watching these kind of video some how it doesn't matter anymore that one's statement is genuine or not, as long as the people who listen to it hear what they want to hear or they have a charisma that people like. By the way this apply to creationist too. I think it's fair to say that you can make a bold statement if you are having a strong believe but don't do that if you are claiming to only rely on evidence that we are still not 100% sure and without faith.
I understand it's hard for science teachers to teach students evidence provided by creationist just like me as a christian I need to "agree" with evolution to gain marks on my biology exam. I also understand it seems unfair to other religion not being taught with the same amount of attention. As I say these we can leave them to RE teachers. Before other religions have any scientific evidence (theory) to support their beliefs, lets leave them as they are at the moment. However science teachers can simply stop addressing evolution as "a fact" rather than "still a theory". Science teachers can tell students what theory they believe in the class, but don't say it is "a fact" that doesn't need any level of believe or faith. At least the education system is less one sided towards evolution.
@@yathongtam5907
Science questions itself all the time. Religions don't. To put them together because you think science is based on belief or faith the same as religion is disingenuous. True mainstream education can expect certain answers at certain times and that can suck.
@@redmed10 "theory
Noun
explanation that has not been proven as fact." education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/theory-evolution
"But evolution did not reach the status of being a scientific theory until Darwin’s grandson, the more famous Charles Darwin, published his famous book On the Origin of Species." "In the theory of natural selection, organisms produce more offspring..." education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/theory-evolution
First of all, evolution is not science. It is still a scientific theory according to National Geographic. Please stop refer evolution theory as science. Evolution is a scientific theory but it is not part of science that has been proven. I believe It is impossible to prove the theory of evolution and creation to be science base on the definition of science which is to test the world through observation and experiments because it is in the past. We just can't test the past.
Secondly, "science question itself all the time" is just a tactic to wins people's heart by making people feel evolutionist are open minded people. Trying to connect the idea of open minded people to their personal view on politic and the ideology of new things are most of the time better than the old things. Same goes with the point of "we are trying our best as a human to search the truth of the universe." Another tactic to convince people by moving their heart. Yes, these tactics can be use as part of a debate but still they are not scientific evidence to prove evolution.
It is good for scientist to be open minded since many have been corrected proving their may have made mistakes. However, sometime scientist who believe in evolution doesn't seems to be that open to question. To me, scientist who believe in evolutionist is open to question for almost everything in recent years but some how they would not allow any question on things that are before the existence of modern science other than evolution i.e. "where life come from". Sure you know the phrase "no question about that"? How can students come up any question to a science teacher who believe in evolution when things on the other perspective are not taught. If we are so open to question when it comes to science, why are scientific theories provided by creationist are not taught in school for the sake of "open to question" and "logical thinking" that we encourage so much?
I believe in the Bible (including the 6 days 24 hour creation) and that Jesus is alive because of the empty tomb, the testimony of christian who witnessed Jesus that sacrifice their life and because Jesus saved me from sinful desires! This is my confession of faith and I hope people will be honest to their belief and will do the same whether they are christian or not.
I wouldn't use the word "suck" to describe mainstream education not only because it's inappropriate as a Christian but also it is such an understatement. To me this a matter of life to find salvation from sins and death and the theory of evolution hinders people from coming to Christ who sacrifice most precious life for our sins so we can live!
Don't ever give children knowledge without also giving them the ability to do critical thinking, logical thinking and scepticism. And whilst you're at it, teach them how the scientific method works.
Q: Should Creationism Ever Be Taught In Schools?
A: No!
Bible yes! Best way to make an atheist.
Jason Byrne th-cam.com/video/EUbjpwyesk0/w-d-xo.html
@@sagerider2 nope
This could have been a 5 second long program:
'Should creationism ever be taught in schools?'
'No'
'Okay everyone thanks for watching and goodnight!'
Amen
Puzzleguy123 also it's technically lillegal
Although it would have been good morning, as it's aired just before Sunday lunchtime...
Lee Ball or good day
"you've loaded the question"
Yes, with reality. How dare we preload questions of reality with reality.
why are you treating science like dogma? You are doing the exact same thing religious wackos do, you just replace the word god with fact, truth, or science. The moment you believe something is irrefutably true, you have failed as a scientist. Religion is for you if you want to believe something is true, science is for you only if you are ready and willing to have your view and understanding eternally changed, undermined and challenged
@@majmunjole8570 twaddle. I am not stating that the exact age of the earth or evolution is irrefutably true, but I will dismiss as ridiculous, claims that are solely supported by a bronze age book of myths and delusional thinking.
If you're going to go against evidence, you have to bring something to the table.
@@LudvigIndestrucable This "bronze age" book, along with other "fairytale books" as i'm sure you would refer to them all share common themes. The epic of gilgamesh written 6000 years ago speaks of earth and sky separating and there being a massive flood wiping nearly all life. The bible written 2000 years ago mentions the separation of earth and heavens, along with the flood story. The Quran written 1000 years ago describes similiar events. Ancient ruins of Aztec temples which the natives described as "built by the gods" and their size show that the only thing which could have toppled them was a massive body of water. Thousands of years between them, thousands of miles between them, all have the same motives. At a certain point you realize that religious books (excluding religious law) are more historical books with a bias rather than a fairytale
@@majmunjole8570 nope, they are in no way historical books, you've merely chosen to interpret them as such. A lot of the middle East fairytales have great flood myths, actual historians trace this back to an actual local flood event and a merchant sailing a few miles down river.
Stop misrepresenting myth as fact, you just look silly.
The Bible also mentions a giant earthquake and mass zombie uprising when Jesus woke up on the third day, funnily enough that whacky part of the tale is left out of Sundays because it's too silly even for you.
@@LudvigIndestrucable The epic of gilgamesh describes the same event. You ignored my point on the aztec temple ruins. With modern day simulations we have no other explanation to how they would have been felled other than a massive body of water. There is no objective fact, there is only something that is currently accepted as reality
I like it when that guy in glasses accepted evolution being questioned but couldnt accept the same to be done on religion and became ready to jump at anyone who intended the latter
Everything we teach in science is based on information that has passed peer-reviewed selection.
So if creationism wants to be taught in schools, it must first present evidence that are credible enough to pass scientific peer-review.
Sean Armstrong yeah but peer review only works if you actually believe in it doesnt it :D :D
abigmacsass No, because science does not need belief. Science are facts, so it doesn't matter if you belief in it or not. As long as there is no evidence for something it is important that both people belief in it.
Co0kiEGAb Evolution is not a fact, it is a story that is not supported by the evidence. A fact is an observable truth. have you observed evolution? if not, then it is a belief of yours. Has anyone observed evolution in recorded history? If not, then it is a popular belief, shared by many.
dave cartner uhm have you heard of Darwin? Or the birds he OBSERVED to PROVE evolution?... educate yourself man.
The only thing about evolution that has not been proven yet is the chemical evolution which would mark the creation of life. We did come pretty close to that already though and im sure we will prove it aswell
By evolution I am not merely referring to a simple change of a characteristic of within a species or even genus. Creation scientists estimate that the "kinds" spoken of in the book of Genesis would probably be a near equivalent of the scientific classification "family". Yes I've heard of Darwin and the Galapagos finches.
The main problem is that everybody thinks what they BELIEVE is more important than FACTS.
I believe creationism because it's a fact.
True, creationism is in fact a real belief system. People believe it is fact. This alone doesn't make creationism factual.
Sole Player People also believe evolutionism is a fact and that alone doesn't make evolutionism factual.
Irish Jester define empirical
My beliefs change with given the facts. That's what INTELLIGENCE is all about.
The bearded Muslim homophobe is the type of ppl that are genuinely frightening.
He needed a reason to hate and his religion provided it in abundance.
There is direct DNA evidence, 100% showing undeniable proof that we have common ancestry with other apes. This is a slam dunk for common ancestry. Evolution is a fact. Plain and simple.
Wouldn't it be indirect evidence rather than direct? Common ancestry can be inferred from shared genomes but the genomes itself don't directly point to shared ancestry.
@@steven21736 - The common ancestry is not inferred from this evidence. It's like saying that 4 is the inferred answer of 2 + 2.
It's absolutely undeniable direct proof that we have common ancestry.
DNA doesn't survive past 10k years so it's not direct but indirect based on an analysis of commonalities/differences.
@@shannonjhanlen indirect evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence. A footprint would be indirect evidence of a foot, but from the presence of the footprint you an infer with a great deal of confidence that a foot of the size/shape stood there.
@@steven21736 - We aren't talking about DNA scraped off a wall or from a blood pool on the ground or something like that.
We are talking about living breathing creatures that had their blood taken and put under a microscope as it were.
So the time frame that you're talking about is irrelevant.
So it's direct evidence.
"Indirect evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence" - I agree with you completely. Your analogy of the foot print is accurate for a description of indirect evidence.
But again, these commonalities are directly observed, and can be directly observed right now. So the common ancestry in the DNA isn't indirect, it's direct.
Giving creationists any type of platform only makes their lunacy seem credible. There is no debate, it's not even worth discussing.
Fuck you man. Deplatforming is retarded. I became an atheist because of debates like these, don't let people be isolated in their own ideology, regardless what it is.
@@carbon1255 Wrong. Isolating stupidity is the ONLY way to kill it. Bad ideas DO need to see the light of day, but not to be discussed in this manner. They need to be brought out in the front yard and shot in the head in front of the whole neighborhood.
@@carbon1255 "Deplatforming??" Seriously? It's religion, not science. And why teach just YOUR creation myth instead of the thousands of others?
@@Christobanistan I think he's arguing it the other way around. Debates like these show the lack of substance in religions.
Keep these debates, there are too many religious extremists around that do not have their worldview challenged. Some can overcome their religion and these kind of debates help.
@@carbon1255 hey I know this was 3 years ago, but I think the gentleman at 9:40 perfectly sums up this concept. As he explains, we are all partially responsible for these harmful ideas perpetuating and we are responsible for the popularity of some horrible ideas BECAUSE we give these people a platform. I know that censorship is a controversial topic, but when you give people like these any credibility whatesoever is when other people see them as worth their time and I think that's what OP was referring to. The idea that "rational debate" is going to naturally clear these ideas because everyone seeing these debates will have common sense or any reason to change their belief, well thats nonsense. I'm glad you're a rational enough person to be changed by something like this but you truly are the exception
Anybody else think it's hilarious that the young earth Creationist says that we have to look at the science carefully and we need to separate interpretation from fact?
We approached evolution in school from three different sides. Our bioligy teacher explained creationism, the theory of Lamarck and Darvinism, then divided us in three groups and let us argue for one side. This way we learned what each theory says, but also, that you can not defend creatonism on a factual basis. I think that was a really good approach.
It doesn't even need to be brought up in the debate because intelligent design and creationism deserve a spot at the table as much as the Easter bunny.
@James Henry Smith Why would it make sense to you that Satan and the antichrist are real if you have an all powerful god? You really believe he created the universe but is helpless to stop Satan and the antichrist messing up the Earth? That sounds completely retarded dude and you can't even prove god exists yet alone Satan.
Answer: yes - in theology classes. Never in science. If you allow creationism to be taught in science class you might as well teach about how snakes and donkeys used to talk
think snakes and donkeys talking is very plausible
@@paulrichards6894 well good luck with that thought. Why don’t you try to get one from Ebay?
@@canbest7668 i am an atheist always been one and I was joking .....but these poor Christians have to defend it......
@@paulrichards6894 thanks for clarifying. Hard to believe some folks actually think these things are true
Jeff Dunham can make them talk...................................
holy shit...Jeff Dunham is God O.O
That ginger Muslim guy is probably in Syria now.
+GoGamerz GnO
Most Muslims are not interested in going to Syria, Da'esh or Afghanistan. Don't be a dick.
+ozowen
He's not saying it because he's muslim, he's saying it because he's obviously got extremist views
+Anime Fan. He said "probably." Do you know what that word means and what its usage does to his statement? Well, obviously not because you asked for proof.
Let me educate you. If you ever come across something like this again, instead of demanding proof for something somebody is guessing about, you should ask what makes them think that their guess might be correct. In this circumstance you should have asked, "What are the circumstantial facts that make you think he might be Syria?"
Or you could just leave people that actually know how to use language alone.
+ozowen This guy is not "most Muslims". He's a takfiri Salafist who tries to excommunicate other Muslims under no actual judicial authority.
The Muslim woman who talked in the video is certainly not fighting in Syria because she doesn't believe in the same kind of rot as the Salafist maniac who I have no idea why was even allowed to come on this show in the first place (would you invite neo-Nazis to a debate show?).
Either that or he's a chickenhawk
I think it is a terrible idea to give a fundamentlist muslim like this guy a voice on national television
@@Rogue_Console No!
The one problem you idiots have is that you think you have good ideas just because Allah said so. News flash, not all ideas are good ones. Bad ideas need only enough light so that we can see them to kill them.
The fact that some of these elderly people have reached late life still believing this horseshiite, makes me lose hope in humanity.
If you found out that the teachers in your kid's school were allowing them to drink or smoke weed during classes you would be rightfully outraged, because this space is for education not for making your student stupid.
I met one of these homeschool creationist kids in a freshman biology class I took many years ago and she gave some of the most interesting answers to the questions, loud and proud in her ignorance. She just couldn't understand for several weeks why the class kept laughing at her answers to the teacher's questions, at least until she read the first two chapters of the textbook and found out that she learned absolutely nothing of value in her "high school" curriculum.
For example. The teacher was asking was about the coloration of a subspecies of starfish. He wanted to know our opinion on why there were be so many different colors of starfish within the same subspecies. Obviously, he knew the whys he just wanted us to learn to use the data available to put together some rudimentary hypotheses.
The answers he was looking for were along the lines of; predation (different predators can see in different wavelengths so having various coloration may be a defensive adaptation), diet, and habitat niche (maybe they ate different things because they lived in different places and picking up pigment from their food), mutation (maybe these different species were separated by some distance or other phenomena and evolved separately), dimorphism/multimorphism (maybe the male and female of this species are differentiated for sexual selection, or in the case where there are more than two genders, that), and so on, and so on. This girl answers, "Because God made them that way?"
Yeah. Right. That's why we're paying $3,000 for this course, so you can regurgitate a 5-year-old's Sunday school lesson. Did you notice that the textbook is thicker than your bible and has about 10 times the content? What the fuck is wrong with you? Oh. Yeah. You had your brain fried at an early age. No. No thank you. Not for my kids.
I wouldn't have been mean to her but would have said that answer doesn't tell us anything about what happened. No supernatural explanation yields information unless you can describe and adduce evidence for how it happened. I would have said as gently as I could do it that she's just repeating what sounds like a slogan. I would say she needed to cast her arguments in terms of what happened on the earth over time, because of course we all know the Ceiling Cat ultimately created everything, but how did the Ceiling Cat accomplish this?
New drinking game. Take a shot every time the bearded man says "yea"
Too pissed to see the end. YESS
edmch31 Hahaha 🤣🤣🤣
I blacked out
i dont understand why he does that, yea? Is it a replacement for 'umm' or does it mean something?
It seems intended to be coercive. Is that a Brit thing or a Muslim thing? Or just this guys speaking style?
why is this even a fucking question worth asking? is it a joke?
The language of your post leads me to believe you are an American, yet I wonder if you know what's happening in public schools all over the US, if you think this question is a joke.
no im english and if what i read about american schools is correct then its scary as hell
eatthisvr6
Short version: Right-wing Republicans are channeling millions of dollars into school board elections so they can get control over what's taught to millions of children. This is not in all states, but in enough of them to be a problem for the future.
Creationism was the "wedge" issue, but they also push revisionist history (for example, slaves in the South were foreign workers), and I guess eventually they expect to have near total mind control over a fundamentally illiterate populace.
So, yeah, scary as hell.
+qhsperson yup that's what I heard too
+qhsperson the scariest thing about it is these people have tested power to make the planet uninhabitable and they're by far the most aggressive nation on earth to start with!
HELL NO! Education is supposed to help eradicate ignorance, not spread ignorance.
Creationism should absolutely be taught in schools alongside every other major religion, perhaps even mythological religions, to educate on different non-scientific beliefs. It should never be taught as fact.
I would phrase it differently - either it is taught alongside greek, roman and north mythology or none of them should be discussed in a classroom. I would much rather see a philosophy class be introduced where you learn about the beginning of philosophy - which is essentially religion - than actual religions class.
Good luck defining what a “mythological religion” is or isn’t. To me they’re all mythology.
I just find it embarrassing that we still have any creationists left in this country.
*world*
Well I think we can forgive some people in the amazon rainforest etc who don't have the benefit of modern science. Beyond that there isn't really a good reason.
The worst people to deal with are true believers, and the worst true believers are recent converts.
The moment a young creationist comes up with actual evidence then we can talk about it
Creationists don't know what the word evidence means.
Very embarrassing for creationists, theory of evolution has been a FACT for a very long time
"Religious knowledge"; an oxymoron if ever I heard one.
The first element is Hydrogen H ...............from which comes all elements Helium etc etc .................Why and where did that
Hydrogen come from in the first place...........with or without a God funny yer why is there hydrogen how come its hydrogen and how did it get there ??????? why is it there..................
I think that trying to turn a mere theory into fact to be stupid and not someone who reads and remembers the word's of God
Sam Swing Isn’t that saying more about you?
wonder fuller but why choose a God to fill in your blanks. It's not an either or debate. Just because an answer has not been found, doesn't instantly mean a God did it. It's not 4000 years ago, when we never had the understandings and comprehension we have now. So the easy answer was, we need rain so let's pray for it. Eventually it rains, does that mean God made it so. Or was it alway going to rain eventually?
Over the last few hundred years so many answers have been found, eventually we will fill in the blanks. Maybe I should pray for said blanks, as one day the answers will come 😉
wonder fuller
Simple, at the beginning of the big bang the universe was so hot and dense that all there was was pure energy. As it expanded and cooled down, eventually matter formed in the form of quarks and electrons. For a while, it was still too hot for atoms to form, so it was just plasma, but as space expanded even further, this soup cooled down even more, quarks stuck together forming nucleons, eventually allowing for electromagnetism to take over and hydrogen atoms to form. No god required, just physics.
How do so many creationists exist in the modern world?
Indoctrination. It begins the process of accepting what is not evidently true. The cognitive bias corrupts the brain into thinking that whatever is insinuated by the 'leaders', should always be accepted as fact (even without demonstration). Religions thrive on it.
Sub-humans will always exist. sadly... :\
shows how far we have come and have a long way to go ..... if we make it
You do realize that Einstein was a creationist?
That's a joke, right? Einstein wasn't a creationist.
So the woman's argument amounts to, "Don't challenge false beliefs because someone's feelings may get hurt!" You can't avoid that and it is not a goal of science. I've had my feelings hurt, the idea that this BS would be taught as science to young impressionable children hurts my feelings.
By her reasoning, the creation beliefs of all religions should be given equal teaching in schools because you wouldn't want buddhists / hundus or pagans to feel left out
not only does it hurt your feelings but it hurts future society
You cannot wrap them in bubble wrap.
I taught high school. The Christian kids avoided grade 11 and 12 biology They mostly avoided Chem and Physics too. The Christian teacher refused to teach senior biology: this made staffing really hard.
Yet even in an English class, Darwin would naturally come up say in a discussion of Kate Chopin. If I glanced at the Christian kids they were staring straight ahead. I later learned that they were praying demons away.
Between 1850-1960, Quebec solved the problems of the incompatibility of scientific understanding and religious dogma. We got rid of the Provincial Department of Education from 1875-1961. We turned over education to the religions.The Catholics got straight dogma, no science to speak of. Quebec’s population was kept in ignorance and in poverty by the Church. But their invisible souls were saved,they were told.
Today, many Québecois hate the Church. The provincial government promotes secularism to all
An object lesson for anti science religious folk. You promote gibberish, you lose everything.
Creationist: "I accept Young Earth Creationism as fact, without question."
Also Creationist: "How dare you accept Evolution as fact, without evening questioning it."
Grow up
Good one
The fact this question even needs to be asked, Scares me.
Agreed. Well doesn’t scare me but it’s ridiculous
What evidence do creationist have ? Must have missed that.
John Parker
Genesis and a belief in God. All biology is doing is putting mans logic to what God has made.
@Bors de Ganys You're assuming God into existence to make your point. If it's valid, my turn. I assume into existence an anti-God. It's a being that negates all other gods (and itself) out of existence by its very nature. See why this kind of reasonning is fucked up ? ^^
toshir0m1
That is really neat. I'm going to go ahead and continue worshiping God though. Until science can prove how life can come from non-life. And then how those molecules in a primordial soup turned into humans. Until then God is a much more likely answer.
Also, I'm super biased and bigoted and have no interest in what you say.
@Bors de Ganys "I'm going to go ahead and continue worshiping God" No, you won't. But yes, you will keep on pretending. Coward.
toshir0m1
Did you just assume my spiritual preference???? HOW DAAAAARE YOU!
" religious knowledge " ?
An oxymoron if ever there was !
Indeed.
I don't understand why creationism even needs a course. Isn't their answer for everything: god did it? How long would that take to teach? Don't these religious fools already believe that ? It's not as if they're going to be teaching how god did it, or why god did it.
I mean, imagine taking the end of the year test in creationism, everybody would get 100% because there's only one right answer: god did it.
It makes no sense.
I hope you beasts will one day come to understand that mocking and withdrawing yourself from religion as a concept is harmful and obscene. Materialist and godless interpretations of the world have brought mainkind to despair, and shall continue to bring mankind to despair as long as gits such as yourself praise and perpetuate it.
@@maple2524 right... we were far better off in the middle ages when there was no despair. And one who calls others beast has lost any credibility already. Back into your cave, troll.
@@bernhardstil6128 Religion has been part of humanity for much longer than the Middle Ages. Modern secularism is a subversion of the value of religion, and a diversion from our nature. Regardless, if you want to strawman and insult me, go right ahead. It won't win you the argument.
@@bernhardstil6128 funny how you blame religion for the the dark ages yet conveniently glance over the fact that science has been prospering perfectly fine in the eastern european, middle eastern and indian world. It's almost as if the problem isn't religion itself, but rather that a primitive people (germanics) caused the destruction of all culture and history in central and western europe (which is exactly where the dark ages are most famous and influential). And of course as it is western and central europe which did the most colonization, they spread that primitive train of thought.
Can't believe this is still getting discussed. Stone age still not left some people.
There is no debate. That ended a long time ago.
Creationism should be taught in schools.. as myth. Myth alongside Thor, Scientology, Mormonism, and Islam (and every other myth).
That's the way we do it in Sweden. All the religions are taught but they are all taught as myths. We start with animism, because it is part of early human history, then Asatro (the Viking religion) because it was part of early Swedish history, then christianity because it was part of later Swedish history, and then we spend the last couple of years in school learning about islam, hinduism etc. But it's all taught as myth and it's only for an hour a week.
You left out Evolution for it fits in with all your other fairy tale myths.
monith6 LOL Nope, evolution is taught where it should be taught...in biology class.
monith6 Can you provide proof to discredit Evolution as fact? If so, I will personally cheer you on to get your Nobel prize.
craze1701 Actually it is like this. Evolutionists rely on public opinion to keep them going. For example if one were to show just how complex the chromosome of the simplest organism on the planet is, the person concludes the opposite of what the scientific evidence clearly proves. this could never happen by chance.
Still someone finds two similar characteristics in two creatures and use their imaginatioin to find the connection. Essentially this is the process by which it is taught in school and even in university. The central doctrine of Evolution is if you cant dazzle them with your brilliance baffle them with your Bull Shit.
There never has been and never will be evidence that creatures jump from being fish to amphibians and from amphibians to reptiles and reptiles into birds. it is purely science fiction but the only other alternative is to look at the evidence from a point of view that respects a creator.
Other wise it is like the teacher that tells his students the sky is pink and if you say it is blue you will fail. This is the entire premise and option open to scientists who are in their fields and the moment they question this myth or sacred cow they will be ostracized form their peers. No support means no support to their truly scientific research. Change the peer system and then you will see someone get that nobel peace prize. First you have to extablish a society that will listen to the truth as it is and not be conned by the pseudo scientific teaching of evolution.
‘The natural bedfellow of evolution is atheism.’ That might be a surprise to the Vatican.
This is the moment where I wish I had a button to press to UNLEASH HITCHENS
Haha yes totally agree (as a Christian)
Would say rip Christopher Hitchens but that implies he still exists.
So all I will say is our world as lost a fantastic mind, unfortunately.
@@davidvarley1812 People die twice.
When their brain activities cease to function and when other people forget them.
So he does still "exist", as part of our memories. Nothing supernatural, just philosophical ... crap, I hate philosophy ... xD
Agree. For me I've only known of him since his death. But he lives on through his work and TH-cam.
@Cee
What? Why would a Christian like C. Hitchens?
The man shits on your religion better than anyone else.
The muslim world did indeed add to our scientific knowledge. However. That stopped the moment they became more extreme in their relgious views somewhere in the middle ages.
The moment it became more extreme, nothing noteworthy on the scientific field came from the muslim world anymore.
Only to be later taken over by Europe when the renaissance started and europe became less extreme in its religious views.
And that is constantly the whole issue here. The more religious a society, the fewer scietific breakthroughs come from that society.
Also. We donot teach kids 2+2=5. You can beieve that all you want, but when you take those views in the public square, you are derised. And rightly so.
Being more extreme does not mean being more religious, unless what you're saying is that Islam around the time of its foundation was less religious than Islam in the middle ages, hundreds of years later, during a time where Muslims killed Muslims because of what type of a Muslim they were.
If you look at Saudi Arabia, one of the most extreme 'Islamic' countries in the World, you can see how extremists manipulate religion to control the public, practice beliefs that strengthen their power and ignore those that threaten them. Saudi Arabia claims to be Islamic, however it is a dictatorship and a monarchy, contrary to the earliest Islamic state, the Calipate, which exhibited direct democracy. When it comes to freedom of religion, the government claims it is infidelity, apostasy, and uses force to ensure the population stays Muslim so that they can use Islam to control the public and strengthen their grip on power. When it comes to politics, Saudi ignores true Islamic teachings.
Extremism is about power, not religion.
lI Hishler Il "eing more extreme does not mean being more religious"
What I said was...
"the moment they became more extreme in their relgious views"
The next tme I said "became more extreme" you can infer I was talking specifically about religious extremism from that point on.
I used to have a Christian ethics teacher that claimed that the earth is 6000 years old. It didn't end nicely when I asked about dinosaurs
+Mein Kampf Why would he want to watch Buddhist porn?
Clearly god put them there, and fabricated carbon 14 dating to make it all fit in the 6000 years timeframe.
And then there are galaxy/star/planet/moon formations, red shift, nuclear fusion and chemical elements that it forms, distance between galaxies and photons that are crossing it.
@@IAT1964 ;-)
I had a Jewish friend who, when he was at school, would ask questions about religion.
The teachers answer amounted to "Do ask, just accept it."
When he asked why he was given an enquiring mind, if were not to ask questions, he got the same reply.
Almost every time the bearded guy kept saying “yeah?” I wanted to say “...no.”
I wonder if he watches this back and thinks _"I should stop doing that."_
That would require self-awareness.
The self-awareness that a man who writes what he wrote on his blog surely doesn't possess.
If you teach Creationism , you have to teach Alchemy , Astrology , Homeopathy , Palm Reading and Tarot Card Reading.
Creationists and these believers are just so dishonest debaters.
+Manik Sethisuwan Another back to front statement .
+Patrick Parker So?
+CalicoVall " So " , hum .
+Patrick Parker Uh how is it back to front? Are you saying that they are correct? Then you are just wrong. Saying they are dishonest at least gives them some cred for not really believing what they claim but only lying about it. Do you actually think they are dumb enough to actually think the earth is 6000 years old?
*****
Sad isn´t it?
Theist : We have stories from the past !
Atheist : We have facts from the past !
Since when is a scientific field like evolution a bed fellow of atheïsm? Is gravity also a bed fellow of atheïsm?
Atheïsm only says something about a god claim, not about science. If evolution would be disproven tomorrow by a new scientific peer reviewed theory, I would still be an atheïst when it comes to all god claims.
"Since when is [...] evolution a bed fellow of atheïsm?"
It's a double reverse actually. Rejection of creationism leads to rejection of religion.
@@daedalron Wrong, even the Vatican has agreed that evolution is a fact and the origin of species. Many Christians accept evolution as a fact (which it is) including many christian scientist.
I am an atheist myself (everyone is an atheist!) and if next week evolution would be disproven this would still not change my atheist position.
If however creationism woud be proven, I would then have to accept that there is a god.
@@sanderdeboer6034 Well, the Vatican has agreed because the other position was no longer possible to defend.
But from the start, accepting Evolution means you refute the story of Genesis as written in the bible. And once you start refuting part of the bible as untrue, it's just one more leap to consider other parts as just myths as well, and that path lead straight to considering god himself as a myth.
The Vatican position is a way to try to defuse that and avoid their followers to question the rest of the book.
@@daedalron Obviously I have to fully agree that evolution and the bible are incompatible.
I am fully onboard with your previous post. However we can't deny that many theist can bend their mind in such crazy loops to allow evolution and the genesis account to not conflict in their view.
In some ways I feel creationists are more honest about their theism. Problem is that they have to lie to themselves and the world around them about scientific facts.
Inventing micro evolution and putting dinosaurs on Noah's arc are some clear examples of their cognitive dissonance.
I still love how Ray Comfort used the banana as proof for god and against evolution. So funny!
absolutely. There is plenty of room for the two to coexist. You can be a christian who believes in an old earth and evolution (theistic evolutionist). God doesn't explain how he/she made things in the Bible, only that it was so; God doesn't say how old the Earth is either, an Irish priest 'worked it out' 250 years ago. This creation-science nonsense isn't even in the Bible and if it was really so important as these creation *cough* scientists say it is, wouldn't you just think God would include it the damn book???? Come off it - creation science is a cash grab from a bunch of charlatans. And this current idea they perpetuate about having to believe in the 6000 year old earth to be a true christian is absolutely vile and does society a disservice.
I’m under no obligation to “respect” your beliefs if your beliefs are stupid.
I'm just impressed that the BBC are able to locate so many crazies...
+Snookbone haha, i was thinking the same.
The internet had made finding crazies as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.
I think you underestimate the number of the crazies.
That didn’t age well unfortunately ... Brexit, anti-vaxxers, ...
i feel sorry for that white Muslims kids
to teach creationism in school there must be an exam for it ,so all the answers are god did it ,
as against evolution did it,something that appeared out of no where and no one can see it od observe it.
What about the thing Satan did?
@@berniefynn6623 OK let's say everybody without brown dies faster. So people with brown hair are going to be more likely to have children because they live longer, other people with different hair are still going to have kids. Just not as many. So over thousands of generations other haircolors are naturally going to die out. Makes sense, right?
@@berniefynn6623 🤦🏼♂️
What would the answer be for stoning unmarried non-virgin women?
The creationist sums it all up in his opening statement - scientific knowledge reduces the need for religion. Give the man a cigar.
God of the gaps.
Religious people often use the gaps in scientific knowledge to insert their gods in there.
This fallacy is colloquially known as the ''god of the gaps'' fallacy.@frozenboy712
"some people say religious people are illogical. That's not true, they just have a different outcome and belief in the information."
Yeah that's called illogical reasoning. :-\
Religious people from *all* religions ?
@@justaguywithaturban6773 yeah pretty much though those without Gods and just those that help in life not so much
@@deanmoncaster
Can you name all the religions ?
@@justaguywithaturban6773 no too many have ceased to exist
@@deanmoncaster
Well those who "ceased" to exist just took new form, the spirituality remained the same though. So can you name the current religions ? Since you know a lot about religions and religious people with your statement "pretty much yeah"
The fact that this is even a debate is insane.
Science makes rockets fly. Religion does fuck all.
Vox Iratus Indeed.
I salute you sir
Religion, made the Judaeo-Christian World, PREMIER.. See how in "Wat Suan Mokkh AAA TruthS" - the 2nd 5 minutes thereof. Oh and ah, by the way.. GOD makes the rockets fly : ) GOD is the GREATEST Scientist, of all..
AllSeeingEye ofGod Prove it then
Religion does make things fly......planes into buildings.
If you can't prove it to be true, then it shouldn't be tought in school.
I love these game shows. A point scored for every time you say “let me finish”
or a beer for every yea?see if you can avoid alcohol poisoning,yea?
That bald guy was never ever an atheist.
It's good he converted, no atheists would want to associate with that piece of bigoted crap.
Kelvin Ko
the only thing atheists have in common is absence of belief in a deity. That doesn't say anything about the person though. One atheist can be an egoistic rapist and other can be a humanist giving away all his money to charities and living with minimal requirements. Absence of faith does not say a damn thing about you or atheists as a whole.
Kelvin Ko He wouldn't be able to be an atheist and have those outrageous views at the same time. The two are incompatible
I usually find that many fundamentalists claim "i used to be an atheists" as if that gives more weight to their nonsense.
All Things Fishy To go from atheist to believer takes a leap of faith. To go from believer to atheist requires a leap in the opposite direction: rationality.
I've been thought christianity in school since I was 5-6 years old and I am glad I have had that, because now as an adult I have a better understanding of the complete BS it all was.
I was about to facepalm, but thank you sir.
Ditto. I had the crap shoved down my throat even up to the sixth form, and despite asking to be excused, was not allowed to be exempt (although Jehovahs, Jews and Muslims were)
You can question evolution, the same way that you can question the theory of gravity, the big bang, germ theory, particle theory, etc but if you're going to question it you must come with something more then what a 2000 year old book says. Facts and beliefs are not equal and shouldn't be treated as such.
I was lucky enough to go to a science high school and creationism _was_ taught. Alongside Quetzalcoatl, a whole class of Hindu gods, the Egyptian posse, people coming out of bamboo. It was heaps of fun, really. I still love my flaming birds. After that, we moved on to reading hieroglyphs because who wouldn't want to learn that?
Oh you silly creationists.... They have to try so hard to believe in a lie.
+jacob mcgill jacob your evolution is a false theory...all the evidence is against evolution....nothing comes out of nothing....no scientists has created anything out of thin air....there has to be a designer and creator God for this creation...
+Jacob Mathew then who created god kappa
+baal2177 no one created God...God is eternal...he is the creator and nothing was before him..he was before time matter space and everything...in because of him all that has existence came in to being...
+Jacob Mathew nothing comes of thin air, expect god :Dd. anyone with a brain knows god is a thing that was made to controll and explain this people YET cant explain. its alright if u want tobe stupid, but lets not brainwash children in to lies thx.
+Aksuongay its ur thinking...but to those who have faith God is real...God cant be explained by materialistic theories...nor he can be proven...he is invisible guider of universe...so a person coming to God must believe that he exists...Jesus said that if u have faith as little as mustard seed u can move mountains...nd many of his people r doing great things for him....the reason athesists doubt God is because he is unseen...just because something is unseen doesnt mean it doesnt exist....dark matter is unseen...air is unseen..many more things are unseen...atheists take it for granted these things exist...in the same way God exists and he has left his imprint upon his whole creation...from dna to dark matter and oceans and cells nothing can sustain itself without a sustainet...God is not man's invention...God exists thats why people call upon him...nor he is only an imagination...God is real just as u and me are real...stop believing in stupid and imaginatory evolution theory which explains nothing...all is lie in evolution...say proudly we are sons and daughters of Adam and Eve not monkeys...we were created to love and care for each other...not to hate each other...
Scientific theory is essentially fact. People still don't understand this!!!
Exactly! That is stunning! "Gravity is just a theory" ... if anyone would look up the term "scientific theory" they would realise that it is essentially equal to "fact"
This is from Wikipedia:
"A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. "
Just so you know, the theory of gravity is still a theory as it should be. Nothing in science is fact. Only so close to fact that we regard it as such. There may come a time when the current theory of gravity is challenged and if the theory changes, it becomes the new theory of gravity. Science is nothing like religion. It allows itself to be corrected from time to time.
Essentially is the key here. Though it may be supported with evidence this can change at any time dependant on newly discovered evidence. So even though someone might say fact. This is not the be all and end all.
understand basic of science, there are laws and there are theories and theories are definitely not facts.
That answer from the professor at the start is ridiculous, but unsurprising from a creationist. Never mind proving creationism, but rather swaying the conversation from the get go by judging the validity of evolution, depending on whether or not you are an atheist. What the hell does that have to do with the scientific evidence that supports evolution and disproves the creationist explanation. It's a massive red herring.
No, you don’t have “another set” of facts. The only fact is that your book was written just like Steven King writes books.
If anyone has never read the Bible, start with Deuteronomy 13.13-19.21
Which tells its readers to murder all the men, women and children in a town if just one person in that town worships a different god. Then, possibly for completeness, burn the entire town to the ground.
Personally, I don't want that taught in any school on Earth.
creationism should be put taught in philosophy classes. That way religion as a whole can be studied, not just one sect.
Wish I had a gold coin every time I heard "I used to a atheist" like that means something. I myself used to be an atheist and guess what I still am.
yeah especially out of this guy, holy cow. I used to be an atheist and now i am a lunatic. he may have been an atheist but he sure wasn't rational.
Yeah, and if he hadn't become a Muslim he would have made a wonderful Nazi
Believer: I used to be an atheist. Then...
Atheist (interrupting): I used to be an atheist to until I converted to atheism.
Believer: What? B..yu..ygd...ser... (brain explodes)
7:30"for muslims the quram is fact" ( spot the falacy) if quram is a fact, it should be for everyone.
Some people don't know the difference between a conviction and a fact.
You might be 100% convinced that the sky is made out of caramel, doesn't make it a fact.
Remember, these are people believing in talking snakes.
what evidence is there for creationism? Just show it, don't assert it.
+Derek Martin "God made a way! GOD BLESS HALLELUYA!"
+I'm Nubby as I said, show it, don't just assert it. A claim made without evidence, can be rejected without evidence.
Derek Martin I was being sarcastic...
+Derek Martin Ah have evidence! The bahble!!! GAWD TOLD US IN THE BAHBLE!
***** That is what I said? He didn't understand my sarcasm.
I actually think that the "moderate" religious people that try to accommodate their imaginary friend with modern science are just as dangerous. They are also peddling irrationality but they are providing it a cover up that most people can't see through.
I suspect that most people whom we might call 'moderates' are actually deists. They are constantly trying to reconcile what they really believe with the history and ritual of their denomination, both of which seem to give them comfort in a bizarre way. It's the authority that their church holds (in their eyes) that is potentially dangerous. Thank FSM for secular society!
Marius Cheek
The one you really should be thanking is "Benedictus de Spinoza". It is he who you own your freedom of speech from as well. If you are interested I would recommend to read about his life first before you start reading one of his books because it is quite difficult to understand if you are unfamiliar with his background.
"Men are conscious of their desire and unaware of the causes by which [their desires] are determined."
Benedictus Spinoza thought that the judeochristian god was an insult to the real grandeur of the universe. He was a "pantheist", which means that he worshipped the universe as if it was a god, but he accepted that this "god" was not personal at all.
"The proper stance to take towards God is not one of reverence or religious awe, but instead one of objective study and reason, since taking the religious stance would leave one open to the possibility of error and superstition".
Benedictus de Spinoza ideas in a nutshell.
Source: Steven Nadler.
Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, Corinthians 1:20 - 22)
I like what Ricky Gervais said (paraphrasing, of course)...If the world as we know it ended, and all books and knowledge were lost, 1000 yrs from now religion would be completely different..but math and science would be exactly the same.
It was disappointing when this was recorded years ago, and it's even MORE disappointing now, that people STILL don't understand what theory means in relation to science!
It’s a common problem and shows the pitiful lack of scientific education in school.