Saddoboxing head to head debates

[Gandalf]

Where is Andre when you need him?

Reading up on his Darwin? I haven't the foggiest!

You know Darwin was actually a practicing Christian and never once did it cross his mind that Evolution and Creation were mutually exclusive.

So all you Evolutionists out there can suck it!

Don't tell me you are another creationist wacko? How many extreme views can one man have?

[El Kabong]

Don't tell me you are another creationist wacko? How many extreme views can one man have?

No unlike most people I don't know what happened that brought humans here and unlike the groups of people on either side of this debate I don't force my view on anyone else. I'm open minded, but I have questions like

1. If we did evolve what did we first evolve from and what circumstance put whatever organism we evolved from here on Earth

2. If we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?

[Gandalf]

Don't tell me you are another creationist wacko? How many extreme views can one man have?

No unlike most people I don't know what happened that brought humans here and unlike the groups of people on either side of this debate I don't force my view on anyone else. I'm open minded, but I have questions like

1. If we did evolve what did we first evolve from and what circumstance put whatever organism we evolved from here on Earth

2. If we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?

They are fair questions to ask. I think it always important to question, after all evolution is only a theory with a set amount of evidence to support it. I am most inclined to go with evolution as I think it makes the most sense. It has nothing to do with indoctrination as Bilbo suggests. I am someone that really does question everything, whence my cynicism. I seldom accept anything at face value, but in this case I think science has the more coherent suggestions as to how life has come about as it has. I struggle to take creationism seriously as in any way a reasonable explanation for existance.

I'm cynical about a lot of things and religion itself is something I struggle to take seriously too, but that's another topic entirely. I do respect people who have their particular faiths though. They have a certainty that I just don't have.

[El Kabong]

They are fair questions to ask. I think it always important to question, after all evolution is only a theory with a set amount of evidence to support it. I am most inclined to go with evolution as I think it makes the most sense. It has nothing to do with indoctrination as Bilbo suggests. I am someone that really does question everything, whence my cynicism. I seldom accept anything at face value, but in this case I think science has the more coherent suggestions as to how life has come about as it has. I struggle to take creationism seriously as in any way a reasonable explanation for existance.

I'm cynical about a lot of things and religion itself is something I struggle to take seriously too, but that's another topic entirely. I do respect people who have their particular faiths though. They have a certainty that I just don't have.

Well miles finally something we can actually agree on. I'm no Bible beater myself (although I relate more to that sacred text than any other more than likely because I grew up with it) but I kind of take a Joseph Campbell approach to religion. I think the morals and values that can be taken from these sacred texts and used by the average person are lost because the leaders of organized religion politicize or skew the truth of the stories from those texts.

Lots of people see the story of Adam & Eve and see a story of temptation or deception or whatever. I look at it and see an OMNIPOTENT (all seeing, all knowing, all powerful) God giving humans the opportunity to have free will. If God is omnipotent, then of course #1 Why put the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden? #2 Why point it out to Adam and Eve and say "Make sure you don't eat the fruit from that tree"?....it's because God knew they would eat from it and it could be said that God WANTED them to eat from that tree, but that's an angle on the story not many people take the time to see.

[Nameless]

Jesus is just a rip off Mithra and Horus life, who did exist a couple thousand years before he was ever born: died at 33, had 12 disciples, walked the desert, resurrected after 3 days, it is the copy/paste of the exact same life, really. I am always astonished to discover that most "Christians" do not even know that when dozen evidence have been collected and found for the past couple thousand years, from inscriptions in Luxor to Thebes and in many ancient Indian palaces.
As for Darwin, the only reason why he said he did "believe" was simply to not get the same fate as Lavoisier, Copernicus or Galileo, the guy strongly believed in evolution, gave countless excellent examples (especially his larks).
Now the Dinosaurs thing: It's one of the funniest argument ever advances, all the radiometry and stratigraphy tests conclude unanimously that earth is far far older than 50 000 and so were the dinosaurs. Such arguments as Bilbo stated about "being carved in a palace's wall" are extremely funny, it's like if people in 2000 years would get their hands over a tape of Jurassic Park and conclude that we did live with dinosaurs. Dinosaurs skeletons have been found for a long long time now and it would be naive to imagine that people at the time didn't have a fascination for these bones just like we, modern, do today.
As for the argument of the "hidden agenda", except if you take for granted that all the modern scientists working on archeology and evolution are member of the same plot (for which reason, by the way?? I don't see any reasons why they would secretly and unanimously against a creative factors), that argument just doesn't make sense.

[El Kabong]

Jesus is just a rip off Mithra and Horus life, who did exist a couple thousand years before he was ever born: died at 33, had 12 disciples, walked the desert, resurrected after 3 days, it is the copy/paste of the exact same life, really. I am always astonished to discover that most "Christians" do not even know that when dozen evidence have been collected and found for the past couple thousand years, from inscriptions in Luxor to Thebes and in many ancient Indian palaces.
As for Darwin, the only reason why he said he did "believe" was simply to not get the same fate as Lavoisier, Copernicus or Galileo, the guy strongly believed in evolution, gave countless excellent examples (especially his larks).
Now the Dinosaurs thing: It's one of the funniest argument ever advances, all the radiometry and stratigraphy tests conclude unanimously that earth is far far older than 50 000 and so were the dinosaurs. Such arguments as Bilbo stated about "being carved in a palace's wall" are extremely funny, it's like if people in 2000 years would get their hands over a tape of Jurassic Park and conclude that we did live with dinosaurs. Dinosaurs skeletons have been found for a long long time now and it would be naive to imagine that people at the time didn't have a fascination for these bones just like we, modern, do today.
As for the argument of the "hidden agenda", except if you take for granted that all the modern scientists working on archeology and evolution are member of the same plot (for which reason, by the way?? I don't see any reasons why they would secretly and unanimously against a creative factors), that argument just doesn't make sense.

Well imo what makes these sacred texts and stories so fascinating is that the stories are virtually the same but in some instances the peoples that believed and taught these similar stories never had ANY contact. Look at creation stories, stories of great floods etc. Its the same in India as it was in North America, odd isn't it unless psychologically man just by chance explained things in a similar manner across different cultures (will post a vid proving this point later)

As for your "hidden agenda" deal...what about Global Warming? The scientists seem pretty keen on feigning that man caused that.

[Gandalf]

Jesus is just a rip off Mithra and Horus life, who did exist a couple thousand years before he was ever born: died at 33, had 12 disciples, walked the desert, resurrected after 3 days, it is the copy/paste of the exact same life, really. I am always astonished to discover that most "Christians" do not even know that when dozen evidence have been collected and found for the past couple thousand years, from inscriptions in Luxor to Thebes and in many ancient Indian palaces.
As for Darwin, the only reason why he said he did "believe" was simply to not get the same fate as Lavoisier, Copernicus or Galileo, the guy strongly believed in evolution, gave countless excellent examples (especially his larks).
Now the Dinosaurs thing: It's one of the funniest argument ever advances, all the radiometry and stratigraphy tests conclude unanimously that earth is far far older than 50 000 and so were the dinosaurs. Such arguments as Bilbo stated about "being carved in a palace's wall" are extremely funny, it's like if people in 2000 years would get their hands over a tape of Jurassic Park and conclude that we did live with dinosaurs. Dinosaurs skeletons have been found for a long long time now and it would be naive to imagine that people at the time didn't have a fascination for these bones just like we, modern, do today.
As for the argument of the "hidden agenda", except if you take for granted that all the modern scientists working on archeology and evolution are member of the same plot (for which reason, by the way?? I don't see any reasons why they would secretly and unanimously against a creative factors), that argument just doesn't make sense.

Well imo what makes these sacred texts and stories so fascinating is that the stories are virtually the same but in some instances the peoples that believed and taught these similar stories never had ANY contact. Look at creation stories, stories of great floods etc. Its the same in India as it was in North America, odd isn't it unless psychologically man just by chance explained things in a similar manner across different cultures (will post a vid proving this point later)

As for your "hidden agenda" deal...what about Global Warming? The scientists seem pretty keen on feigning that man caused that.

I suppose dramatic events have always been the same through history. Every so often you get great tsunami's, floods or great plagues. Natural disasters are one common theme which I am sure humans can relate to from way back. I would argue that this has no particular religious significance, though early man may have tried to justify it to himself as such. Whence religious scripture where we are told of such events. I don't really see what role god had to play in the tsunami of 2005. The same as I don't think he was involved in shocking events of yesteryear.

As for the hidden agenda with global warming. That was a small circulation of emails in the great scheme of credible scientific research. Global warming is for real and if you want to ignore the valid opinion of scientists in perhaps one of the most researched areas of recent years, then fair enough. But you've most likely been taken for a ride by corporations whose very future relies upon the continued destruction of the earth.

[Nameless]

Jesus is just a rip off Mithra and Horus life, who did exist a couple thousand years before he was ever born: died at 33, had 12 disciples, walked the desert, resurrected after 3 days, it is the copy/paste of the exact same life, really. I am always astonished to discover that most "Christians" do not even know that when dozen evidence have been collected and found for the past couple thousand years, from inscriptions in Luxor to Thebes and in many ancient Indian palaces.
As for Darwin, the only reason why he said he did "believe" was simply to not get the same fate as Lavoisier, Copernicus or Galileo, the guy strongly believed in evolution, gave countless excellent examples (especially his larks).
Now the Dinosaurs thing: It's one of the funniest argument ever advances, all the radiometry and stratigraphy tests conclude unanimously that earth is far far older than 50 000 and so were the dinosaurs. Such arguments as Bilbo stated about "being carved in a palace's wall" are extremely funny, it's like if people in 2000 years would get their hands over a tape of Jurassic Park and conclude that we did live with dinosaurs. Dinosaurs skeletons have been found for a long long time now and it would be naive to imagine that people at the time didn't have a fascination for these bones just like we, modern, do today.
As for the argument of the "hidden agenda", except if you take for granted that all the modern scientists working on archeology and evolution are member of the same plot (for which reason, by the way?? I don't see any reasons why they would secretly and unanimously against a creative factors), that argument just doesn't make sense.

Well imo what makes these sacred texts and stories so fascinating is that the stories are virtually the same but in some instances the peoples that believed and taught these similar stories never had ANY contact. Look at creation stories, stories of great floods etc. Its the same in India as it was in North America, odd isn't it unless psychologically man just by chance explained things in a similar manner across different cultures (will post a vid proving this point later)

As for your "hidden agenda" deal...what about Global Warming? The scientists seem pretty keen on feigning that man caused that.

The thing is: It is very possible that such thing as a huge flooding happened, matter of fact, I recall some scientists stating that it happened in some part of the desert based on some sediments they did find. Incorporating things that really happened with some fiction and some myth is more or less what the bible is: they took the fiction of Jesus in the modern testament, clogged some facts to it and asked people to shove it down their throat as if it was the truth. MAtter of fact, Jesus probably never existed, neither all the non-sense creation gosspell around it, they just incorporated some facts to the whole and told people "this is how it went, period", which is what the Church did for hundred of years. Still, according to the christian religion, you have to adopt the dogma that Jesus exists, that it happened the way they said it, that the "devil" under a snake appearance forced Eve to eat the evil apple etc, these dogmas are quite necessary to believe in the "real christianism", now some movements are playing the "interpretation" card because the non-sense of all it is getting way too obvious but at the core, that, the holy trinity and the child of God came here to save us (From what??) are necessary to the christian faith/gospell.
Now as for the global warming, there is not much doubts that is true. The thing, however, is that you have some "wise" ones in the whole who thought: "hey, we have to do something for it but we could make it look even scarier faster to make some dimes out of it". So in the whole, you have problems who have one common factor: global warming is real BUT you have those who wants to reverse the thing to save as much human and species as possible, some who just want to make some bucks out of it and the prophet of doom for which we'll all die tomorrow.. or after tomorrow if finally tomorrow happens. It is a very complex situation with many actors having different interests linked to the same problem.