Creationist/Intelligent Design Bingo Card [Pic]

Submitted by: almightybob1 7 years ago in Science

For the next I-A-B evolution debate. Bonus point: use one of these arguments in the comments below!
There are 76 comments:
Male 1,108
I think he meant gravity. Or more correctly gravitas.
0
Reply
Male 188
levity means "lightness of mind; lack of appropriate behavior." I don`t think you meant to use that word...
0
Reply
Male 474
940 characters isn`t enough space to get the point across. Which is this, using the term "just a theory" in no way shape or form conveys the levity that a theory holds. It`s like saying "Oh that, that`s just the largest man made structure in the world" and be sincere and not facetious. So i may be wrong about the whole law bit, but that doesn`t change what im trying to get across.

Does being wrong about that thing give me less credibility, probably, but the message is still there.

0
Reply
Male 285
I still say that creationists` point of view says what happened and evolutionists` view says how it happened. I don`t see how the two could become spiraled in a conflict.
0
Reply
Female 459
Davymid rules.

I`m not getting into this, I just had to say that. I may get angry for some reason and come back to fight, but right now I`m having my coffee. :P

0
Reply
Male 156
@itsallfake.

*Buzz*!!!!
But thanks for playing.

0
Reply
Female 6
DINOSAURS.a christian once told me that dinosaurs didnt exist, they were all hoaxes.

Have you ever been to the Field Museum in Chicago?

I highly recommended you go, and take a look at Sue the T-Rex. What do you think she is made out of? Paper mache?

0
Reply
Male 48
you`re all wrong i created everything out of play-dough and construx
0
Reply
Male 515
i hate religious/creationist peoples
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]a christian once told me that dinosaurs didnt exist, they were all hoaxes.[/quote]

Your christian friend is lying. Dinosaurs definitely did exist. I have proof:

0
Reply
Female 299
DINOSAURS.a christian once told me that dinosaurs didnt exist, they were all hoaxes.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Nice argument, itsallfake, but it`s wrong. In science, a law is not a proven theory. They`re two different things.

A scientific law is a simple statement concerning what will happen under specific circumstances. It offers no explanation and is very narrowly defined (usually as a single equation, which might be expressed in language).

For example: Newton`s second law of motion is F=ma or "when a force acts upon a body, it imparts an acceleration proportional to the force and inversely proportional to the mass of the body and in the direction of the force."

It offers no explanation regarding why this is so, just a description of it.

A theory is far wider in scope and explains things. Laws and theories are different things. A theory may contain a number of laws.

Also: scientific laws can be broken, which is why I chose that example. It`s not wrong, but it doesn`t apply in all circumstances.

0
Reply
Male 53
"Science is a method, a way of doing things. It is not a person. Two fundamentally different things can`t be each other. You may as well ask "What if democracy is a fish?"

What if it really is???

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I think it`s amazing that we develop from a microscopic little sperm[..] [/quote]

That`s quite a few centuries behind current understanding. It`s now generally considered proven that we develop from a combination of an egg and a sperm.

Genetics is awesome. A fantastically complex system using only 2 pairs of bases. A system which is species-transparent across all life on Earth. A cell from any Terran life form can process any DNA from any Terran life form. Right now, there are monkeys walking around with jellyfish DNA *that their bodies use*.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]It is never made clear that days in the Bible are the days of now.[/quote]

I think it`s worth pointing out that the relevant word is not `day`. It`s `yom` (transliterated Hebrew). If the precise meaning of a word is important, it`s necessary to look at the original and not a translation, and also to look at the original cultural context.

I agree with your point, though. As far as I can tell from reading and discussing it with people who understand Hebrew, `yom` doesn`t have a single fixed meaning as a specific length of time and, as far as we can tell, didn`t have ~2500 years ago when the story was written. Which makes `day` and excellent translation in this case.

Even if a Christian ignores thought and just parrots their book, it`s still the same. There are several places in which a word translated (from Hebrew or Greek) as `day` is explicitly *not* 12 or 24 hours.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]angillion what if science is god?[/quote]

Huh?

Science is a method, a way of doing things. It is not a person. Two fundamentally different things can`t be each other. You may as well ask "What if democracy is a fish?"

0
Reply
Male 474
Regarding the "just a theory" part. Above a theory is a law. Scientific laws are unbreakable. Thermal Dynamics is a good example. The reason evolution is still in the theory stage and not in the law stage is because evidence for the evolution of ALL species has not been unearthed yet. There are just too many species, too many ancenstors to document or catalog in order to say that evolution is LAW. Because there are gaps, the scientific community will not allow evolution to become law. On the flipside, according to christians the bible is the word of god and therefore is LAW. But, as we all know, the LAW of god is not to lie, but humans are capable of lies from the time they are able to speak. Going by the scientific standards, since humans are capable of breaking every LAW that god supposedly made, then by pure difinition, the word of God is "Just a theory"
0
Reply
Male 156
"I say: TEACH THE CONTROVERSY; LET THE CHILDREN DECIDE."

Why? Children are too young to know why they choose to believe in anything.

"Why can`t both be incorporated into each other?"

I think they can. But people are just too intolerant, and major religions are flawed.

"here`s an idea, why don`t we let everyone believe what they want and if someone doesn`t agree with you, get over it and go on with your life"

Mmm, after some thought, I say the future of humankind depends on everyone`s beliefs. So, it`s not that trivial.

0
Reply
Male 162
"Religion without science is ignorant, science without religion is lame" Einstein. Why can`t both be incorporated into each other?"

The Catholic Church FIRMLY believes in this that science and faith MUST co-exist as both are a product of God`s will. Faith cannot conflict with reason and vice versa. Granted one does have to make a leap of faith with certain dogma`s of the Catholic Faith, in the end, Faith and Reason still must co-exist.

0
Reply
Male 162
I don`t care if a person has an opinion about something but when they pass arguments that are wrong like in the idea that the Earth is only 6000 years old I have an issue with that. It`s wrong. It`s not an opinion anymore.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]here`s an idea, why don`t we let everyone believe what they want... and if someone doesn`t agree with you, get over it and go on with your life[/quote]

I`m down with that. However, when it encroaches on the school science class, that`s when I`m going to have some serious beef.

0
Reply
Female 403
here`s an idea, why don`t we let everyone believe what they want
and if someone doesn`t agree with you, get over it and go on with your life
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Baal, reasonable statements? I thought you were smarter than this.
0
Reply
Male 388
Baalthazaq, congrats on your bingo. 2 is pointless because even once a theory is fact it can still be called a theory, because it is one, and evolution is proven. 4 is mere idiocy, how could you call it reasonable? 6, if i am correct in concluding that it refers to the whole "watch must have a watchmaker" argument, it is a bad analogy and makes enormous faulty assumption about life and is quite unreasonable. 7.... I shouldn`t even have to say anything about that one haha. 9; Just because the universe supports life on the one planet we know it does, that does not mean that it is fine-tuned, another jump to conclusions. 10, I won`t comment on, I`m not a paleontologist. 11, religious indoctrination is a form of child abuse. 12, quote-mining is not reasonable. 14, macro and micro-evolution are the same thing. 15, only mutations are `random`, evolution itself is not.
0
Reply
Male 3,756
I think it`s amazing that we develop from a microscopic little sperm, but can`t relate to the complexities of the universe.
0
Reply
Male 4,547
2, 4, 6, 7, 9-12, 14, 15 are mostly reasonable, and/or necessary statements. Some are usually only said in response to common bad arguments.

Some are only offensive if you object to the theistic viewpoint from the get go and/or do not understand the wording.

(Lets take #7, Faith != Blind faith for example, theists usually talk about Faith in a sense that is comparable with an inductive leap between evidence and conclusion. This usually causes much anger amongst their opponents who will start screaming about how they don`t have FAITH, they have FACTS, ignoring the inductive nature of science in general. One of the best demonstrations of which is evolution.)

18 is not an argument I`ve ever heard, though I have heard "DNA is a code", which it is, so what`s the problem? The problem is you don`t like the follow up that "this suggests a creator", but you`re bashing the wrong argument here.

0
Reply
Female 5,222
100pt for @armydillo
0
Reply
Male 159
Thank you Armydillo.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
For example: Most of us are neutral, or don`t have outspoken views one way or the other. Me, almightybob and maddog are outspoken liberal atheists/agnostics who are proponents of evolution, and mainstream science in general. Sixclaws, Primetimekin and Lionhart2 are devout christians. In particular, Prime is a staunch republican who does not support gay marriage, has serious doubts about evolution, and thinks global warming is a lie made up by liberals. Lionhart goes one further - he`s literally a young-earth (Christian) creationist who denies the geological age of the earth and thinks geochronology is a false science.

We take some pride in being a fair and representative cross-section of the I-A-B community, which is why we`ve been individually selected as mods/admins. I for one think it`s very fair.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]lol going off all of the posts on this site that bash christians/creationists, it`s very obvious where I-A-B stands. :P[/quote]

To be fair, the 12 or so people who run I-A-B day to day (fancylad and us mods) are a pretty balanced bunch when it comes to these things.

0
Reply
Female 1,283
@yayforme
Religion is man`s way to get into heaven
Faith is God`s way =p

@ElSombrero
Yea, these things are ridiculous, and people walk the brink of retarded. But damn, is it fun to fuel people and their righteous indignation to protect an opinion which will fizzle in a day or two.

0
Reply
Male 138
I am a Christian who believes in evolution.
It is never made clear that days in the Bible are the days of now.
The six days in which the Earth and Heavens were created could be any amount of time.
So stop the arguing, stop the flame wars, stop the "YOU`RE FORCING YOUR BELIEFS ON ME" on BOTH sides, and seriously you guys:

FACEPALM!!!

0
Reply
Male 975
angillion what if science is god?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]It`s a definitions thing and a wonderful acid test to see how dumb a debate opponent is.[/quote]

Not necessariy dumb. Maybe ignorant. Maybe a person who realises that they have no argument and therefore must resort to lying about the opposing argument.

Whatever the reason, anyone who uses any form of "only a theory" argument proves that they have no credibility. Unfortunately, many people are ignorant enough to fall for it.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]because not all children go to church[/quote]

So why should they be taught the creation stories of the religion those churches are part of?

Schools are for education, not religion. Religious creation stories might fit in a course *about* religion, but that shouldn`t ignore all the other religious creation stories (and there are hundreds).

0
Reply
Male 833
"it may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god."

Hitler

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Why can`t both [science and religion] be incorporated into each other?[/quote]

Because they`re completely different things.

I`s like combining an apple and an aeroplane - sure, you can place the apple on the plane or crush it and smear it over the plane, but that isn`t incorporating them into each other.

0
Reply
Male 833
"A man`s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."

Einstein

0
Reply
Male 2,576
And people wonder why I debate.
0
Reply
Male 633
lol going off all of the posts on this site that bash christians/creationists, it`s very obvious where I-A-B stands. :P
0
Reply
Male 170
ok now i feel really stupid yet satisfied
0
Reply
Male 716
I hate the person that made this. `

They`re only driving the freaking annoying argument further then it needs to.

Half the commenters on this are proof.

0
Reply
Female 208
"Religion without science is ignorant, science without religion is lame" Einstein. Why can`t both be incorporated into each other?
0
Reply
Female 208
I say: TEACH THE CONTROVERSY; LET THE CHILDREN DECIDE.
0
Reply
Male 156
@Skreshavik. Faith, I mean, "Faith", with capital letters, is a religious thing... I think you meant that one can connect with God through oneself, without medians.... then why the "with Jesus as median" thing?? Equating Jesus with God is a 100% religion thing.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Hmmm.....
0
Reply
Female 1,283
This board makes me smile.

@slayer.

God is a faith, not a religion. Just you, Jesus as the median, and God.
Not you, the pedo priest, Mr. T, the TV, the pronz last night, white Jesus, and then God.

0
Reply
Male 7,378
Indeed davymid they are also the same people who think the Iraq war was just, Obama is not American and George Bush was a good president.
0
Reply
Male 776
"What`s interesting to me is that the people who cry out that evolution is a lie are more often than not the same people who cry that global warming is a lie"

of course then there are the people who accept global warming as 100 percent truth... who also accepted global cooling as a problem in the 1970s...

so your logic is kind of flawed here "they are wrong because global warming is right, and they don`t beleive in global warming" because your basis of the truth isnt exactly, well truthful.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
"Davymid: But didn`t we all just learn that Global warming WAS a lie? The leaked emails recently?"

Nope. The leaked emails (or rather, 15 selected sentences from 5 emails between 3 climatologists over a period of 10 years) are innocuous at best if you read them, and best I can tell taken completely out of context to stir up a sh*t-storm. Hardly an overturn of our entire understanding of decades of climate science among the global scientific community. Wikipedia has a decent, impartial article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climategate#E-mails

0
Reply
Male 988
"No morality without God"
See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rbCVcRpn...
Can you think of anything immoral an Atheist would do because he does not believe in god? (No.) How about a Theist? (Definitely; Suicide bombing, crusades, holy wars, etc.)
0
Reply
Male 9,306
Davymid: But didn`t we all just learn that Global warming WAS a lie? The leaked emails recently? We`ve been going through a global cooling instead. (Yes, I`m serious.) Then there was that woman who was all up in arms about the hackers not being the center of attention? It was like someone wanting to punish a peeping tom for discovering a meth lab?
0
Reply
Male 1,406
I think several of those squares could fit under the bottom right one.
0
Reply
Male 78
Wow davymid, you literally just described my physics teacher exactly. He spends the first half hour talking about one of those things, and the next teaching haha
0
Reply
Male 12,138
What`s interesting to me is that the people who cry out that evolution is a lie are more often than not the same people who cry that global warming is a lie. Forgive me for equating their scientific ignorance of the former with their scientific ignorance of the latter.

They`re also usually the same people who oppose gay marriage, think Obama is the antichrist, and oppose socialised heath care. But that`s another story.

0
Reply
Male 672
I`ll take "Darwanism responsible for the Holocaust" for 200, alex.
0
Reply
Male 3
"Teach the controversy/let the children decide"....Sure...teach evolution in schools, creationism in church. Why is that so hard?"
because not all children go to church
0
Reply
Male 156
"The only facts that exist in science are direct observations"

Such as which ones? "The sky is blue?" Jeez.

0
Reply
Male 473
BrimstoneOne:
"Anyone the quote Darwin as saying "survival of the fittest", is misquoting.

`It is not the the strongest of the species that survives, but the one most adaptive to change.`
Charles Darwin"

I`m sorry but you are misquoting and misinterpreting what the word fit means. Fitness is not a measuremnt of strength, speed or any atheletic ability. Fitness in evolutionary sense is the ability to produce viable offspring. So the phrase "survival of the fittest" means the organism that is well adapted to produce more viable offspring will continue longer than less fit organisms. You were close, but your definition of fitness is wrong.

0
Reply
Male 1,455
"The only reason things are considered theories is because religion thinks otherwise. "

Er, no, they are considered theories because science never claims to have all the answers. The only facts that exist in science are direct observations- an explanation of observations, such as gravity or evolution, can never progress beyond a theory.

It`s a definitions thing and a wonderful acid test to see how dumb a debate opponent is.

0
Reply
Male 3,364
"Teach the controversy/let the children decide"....Sure...teach evolution in schools, creationism in church. Why is that so hard?
0
Reply
Male 2,229
if one quotes poo, do it right or don`t do it at all
0
Reply
Male 3,425
The only reason things are considered theories is because religion thinks otherwise. Science has solid evidence, it`s science, truth. There is as much evidence for evolution as there is for gravity, the only difference? No-one ever questions gravity.
0
Reply
Male 2,229
Anyone the quote Darwin as saying "survival of the fittest", is misquoting.

`It is not the the strongest of the species that survives, but the one most adaptive to change.`
Charles Darwin

0
Reply
Male 3,255
Ohh, and I LOVE the "just a theory" bullpoo.

Just a theory? Really? NO poo!! They say that as if there is something higher than theory in science, lol.

0
Reply
Male 3,255
I`m on the science team of the debate, but I don`t get why god and the big bang have to be either one or the other, ya know?

The big bang theory has NOTHING TO DO with the creation of the universe. The big bang theory is about what happened AFTER the universe started.

0
Reply
Female 15,763
In before the deba-

Aww dammit...

0
Reply
Male 3,425
Intelligent design is BS. Take humans for example, why would God give us an appendix if the only purpose it serves is to occasionally go wrong and kill us?
0
Reply
Male 2,592
Teach the controversy/let the children decide... hmm.. it will just end up like it is today, some of the children will have a thirst for knowledge and will learn science, critical thinking, and have a sense of rationality, -or- they`ll say to hell with all that and blindly follow the easiest explanation for everything. god did it god did it and god did it. with a lil help from superjesus.
0
Reply
Male 1,674
I don`t get how to play. Do you have to match columns and topic or just topic. And also, won`t everyone win at the same time if there`s only one card?
0
Reply
Male 1,381
I don`t understand. None of these are arguments used by ID scientists.

These are, of course, things uneducated children would use in the instance of coming up against an educated atheist.

I am an ID guy, and I apologize for all the idiots out there with my viewpoint. I see them as just as ignorant as all of you do. :-)

0
Reply
Male 814
Rule 34 is just a theory.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
How the hell is that suppose to be a BINGO card?
Oh I see, it says "bingo" on it.
I think someone is just trolling for another debate which are always amusing but never get anywhere.
0
Reply
Male 601
Well, I suppose I can address two of the points: That Darwinism is responsible for Hitler and that there is no evidence for evolution.

Social Darwinism, some will argue, is what Hitler used as reason for developing his "supreme Aryan race". However, Darwinism is more about a social version of "survival of the fittest". While Hitler may have believed his race was the "fittest" for domination, many of his views stemmed from a distorted religious view. This also led to things like the Holocaust which was definitely not the result of Social Darwinism.

Also, many scientists have proven evolution on microbial levels. With small organisms, it is not difficult to show evolution in action. Thus I wouldn`t qualify the argument that there is no evidence for evolution.

0
Reply
Male 264
The Joker made me laugh :D
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Link: Creationist/Intelligent Design Bingo Card [Pic] [Rate Link] - For the next I-A-B evolution debate. Bonus point: use one of these arguments in the comments below!
0
Reply