Sentences with phrase «one on the creationism»

I think Christians who are stuck on Creationism should think about this: Jesus said «I am the truth.»

On the Creationism side, one simply has to put their belief into that belief, that everything was created.

TOT: Tell us again how many people have been awarded the Nobel Peace Award for their findings on Creationism??

I do nt believe a persons view on creationism or evolution is a «salvation issue» but once you have become a child of God I do nt see how you cant allow yourself to believe in the entire Bible and trust that God is BIG enough to do what He says and did create the world in 7 days with no help from «time and evolution» evolution is a trick from Satan to keep you from completly trusting God for everything.

See the Wiki page on creationism in schools:

His ambition is too obivious... And his statement on creationism versus scientific evidence shows he is not ready for big time national politics

Questions were asked about why it took the government so long to impose the bar on creationism, given concerns about it being taught were raised as soon as the academies programme was introduced.

In best sellers like The Blind Watchmaker and Climbing Mount Improbable, Dawkins has taken on creationism and ripped the notion of «intelligent design.»

Do you think they should wait at least Statistics on Creationism in High School Classrooms.

It can even be used to start a lesson on creationism by leveraging the fact that Pandora is the first human created by the Gods.

Nuclear Decay: Evidence For A Young World by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. «Three of my colleagues and I10 on the RATE project are preparing a paper with full technical details which we hope to present at the International Conference on Creationism in Pittsburgh next summer.

I foolishly assumed that when you said ``... on creationism and atheism» that you meant ``... on creationism and atheism...».

Though I concede that perhaps I missed the unstated point that if one has a belief in a god, it must follow that the said god is necessarily «the creator»... ie a discussion on creationism... (ie, that sure slipped past the mods then...!).

1) S&B 11 is not a paper on creationism.

1) S&B 11 is a paper on creationism 2) Dr. Spencer is in charge of creating climate policy.

For instance you get a similar picture with your studies on creationism (the gradients are a bit different, because creationism is an old and «received» culture).

Interestingly, if I'm not mistaken, the Pope is now on board the climate change movement, while this «charlatan» Ian Plimer is loathed by both the religious right for his attacks on creationism, and by the lunatic left for his dismissal of climate science.

Not exact matches

Bottom line is this, keep it out of the public square; learn to respect others beliefs / disbeliefs; stop trying to tell LGBT they are wrong; stop trying to tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies; stop trying to push bogus creationism crap (backed with zero evidence) on innocent children in the public school system; just stop pushing it outside your home or church.

I've said nothing about teaching creationism, about putting on Christmas pageants of most of the other crap you've blathered on about.

If you do Creationism you have to go through other faith's take on the creation of the universe as well and that wont give our kids the much needed brain power they need to get us out this funk!

(You can check out a philosophical / theological debate for creationism that actually makes sense to me on my blog http://shadetree-theology.blogspot.com/2009/07/just-how-old-is-earth.html).

Scientific and creationism are on two opposing ends.

At least Scientific Creationism honestly admits to being a Belief System that is based on True Science.

not saying all religious in general, but the fanatic nut jobs, and someone that believes on ID / creationism obviously lack a third digit on their IQ.

Please point to a single scholarly paper on scientific creationism published in a reputable scientific journal that successfully concludes with «some god did it.»

Now it is but not back then (and the people on the young earth creationism side are back then).

The goal of yourself and focus on the family is «spritual warfare», that is to replace current accepted science (all fields), with creationism.

The paper's lead author, Ming - Jin Liu, reportedly said on a Plos One journal forum: «We are sorry about drawing the debates about creationism.

When Muslims become 80 % of the population, try and push creationism and other myths into our science classes, force their god on our currency, take over our government as you Christians do then they'll be in the bulls eye.

BTW - One thing both science and Creationism largely agree on - «In the beginning was the Void».

If this is left to stand, then the government can also FORCE religious schools to no longer teach creationism, government can FORCE religious hospitals to perform abortion on demand, government can FORCE a Catholic DIOCESE to recognize gay marriage, government can FORCE...

They try to force their religious ideas on everyone else through legislation, like trying to force children to pray to the Christian god in school, force the teaching of creationism nonsense in the schools and denying a woman's right to choose.

It is a reference to Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort making fools of themselves on national television trying to argue in favour of creationism.

So, Mr. Rubio, how do you plan on handling the issue of Creationism / Evolution?

If you want to claim that creationism is fact, the onus is on you to provide proof.

you'd allow the teaching of creationism and spittle on evolution in public schools.

It is interesting to see how nonbelievers are so quick to define what believers opinions are on issues like creationism, evolution, a deity, etc..

@SeanNJ, I would think the meetings would primarily be about educating the public on the separation of church and state and opposing religious encroachment on the public / government arena, e.g. creationism / ID in the science classroom, ten commandments displays in government buildings, school sanctioned prayer or religious activities.

Then he went on to say that the fossil record is consistent with Creationism because a Biblical year could be several millions of years.

EG: Ridiculing science and forcing creationism on school children by calling it «intelligent design».

I have studied a lot of what they say... it was interesting to watch the Cosmos series on fox tv... they dealt with a lot of the things that the scientific creationism group has to say... they are studying their stuff, perhaps you should too...

It is christians who are out attempting to impose their views (ie: denial of gay rights b / c their book apparently says so; denial of women's rights; using the threat of hell; teaching dis - proven creationism to innocent children) on the public.

You never answered on the 5 pillars of evolution and you never provide evidence for creationism.

Holding to 6 - day creationism makes good philosophical sense if you believe, as you insist, on Scriptural inerrancy.

The Earth being younger than the radiometric age of 4.5 billion years old is based on the Young Earth Creationism religious belief.

Some believe that we must all agree on the age of he earth, creationism vs. evolution, the role of women and thousands of other issues.

What I said was to remove all encroachment on other's lives by religion, e.g. science class creationism, bans on stem cell research, etc..

I doubt if a poll catches the fine points that many average respondents will put on these terms, «creationism,» «guided» and even «atheistic.»

The difference id that evolution is based on facts (fosils, prior extinct animals, the evolution before our very eyes with microbes, etc) and creationism has absolutely no evidence whatsover and is based on fantasy and magical thinking and has no place in science classes.

An entire article based on the assumption that creationism is holding back Science.