Support NeoGAF

[MisterNugNug]

If you believe that the world is 6,000 years old, how do you reconcile that with going to a hospital? Because evolution is one of the unifying theories in the biological sciences, this includes medicine and its application.

 

[Count Dookkake]

In no other subject do mods here let posters openly insult and berate someone's partner, other than in topics about religious beliefs.

This is not true.

 

[Prez]

When you wake up can you actually post the sources?

I found it in the book (page 175).

Also that book was written in 1968...

 

[xxracerxx]

She must hate Jurassic Park then with their 65 million DINO DNA!!!!!!

RAWR!

 

[CornBurrito]

With that said, these topics usually devolve into people thumping their chests about the infallibility of science, when they themselves lack critical thinking skills.

Nobody here has argued that science is infallible.

Neither does the gf, nor the possibility of the future children being exposed to this pose any threat to society, as GAF would have you believe, OP. When they end up going to school, and end up being exposed to these scientific "truths", then there should be no issue.

When it comes to aging, most take studies at face value, and many evolutionists don't even realize that Carbon dating assumptions are not reliable past even 5,000 years.

Other techniques for radiometric dating rely heavily on circular reasoning, using reference fossils. When dates don't comply with the reference fossils, it is either thrown out as contaminated, or the previous "reliable" date has to be thrown out. I'm not arguing for a particular age of the Earth, but it wouldn't hurt if people go at it with a cynical viewpoint.

Sorry to say, but this is one field of science that relies heavily on assumptions, biased interpretations, and sensationalist discoveries to secure more funding dollars.

1. Voting habits of the religious right are arguably detrimental to society.

2. Sources for all these claims?

Also the 6000 year old earth conflicts with multiple fields of science: biology (the theory of evolution and palaeontology), astronomy (starlight problem), geology (volcanic formation, sedimentation, plate tectonics), archaeology (historic development of ancient civilizations) and physics (radiometric dating).

I found it in the book (page 175).

Also that book was written in 1968...

Not enough :lol smilies exist.

 

[thesoapster]

If you believe that the world is 6,000 years old, how do you reconcile that with going to a hospital? Because evolution is one of the unifying theories in the biological sciences, this includes medicine and its application.

People who hold such fundamentalist-type beliefs in today's society don't think these things through or don't care to. If their system starts unraveling then they're lost. A lot of identity is tied up in your religious upbringing. I feel a lot of community was lost for me as I backed out of it. The official church belief is no sex before marriage. Don't want to wait? Have sex. People who do this are not trying to reconcile their actions vs the doctrine of their own belief system. Religious people of almost every faith do this because as we advance as a society and as a species, old teachings start seeming more and more ridiculous. Adapting beliefs keeps it alive to them, I guess...

 

[hirokazu]

That's the very definition of closed minded.

 

[Deleted member 81567]

Can someone summarize the thread for me, I'm very lazy to go through all these pages.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

For such an obvious bait thread (regardless of how pure the OP's intentions were) I was actually impressed that GAF managed to last about 2 pages before getting completely absorbed by the meta-issues. That's not to say the first two pages had an admirable level of discourse, but they were at least mostly related to the actual topic.

It's all about respect. If you don't respect your significant other, then you're just wasting each others' time. It's not fair to them or yourself, you both deserve better. Who looks at a potential partner and thinks to themselves, "Wow, that person is so stupid, how can they believe that? What a moron! I'm going to ask them out now." The reason could be anything, politics, religion, superstition, it's irrelevant.

You don't build a committed relationship from the groundwork of seething disrespect. If you think you can make a relationship work in such a scenario, I'd be willing to bet you've never told your partner how you truly think and feel of them. And if you can't be honest with your significant other about something as simple as that, I don't think that's a relationship worth having.

 

[Sutton Dagger]

In no other subject do mods here let posters openly insult and berate someone's partner, other than in topics about religious beliefs.

Neither does the gf, nor the possibility of the future children being exposed to this pose any threat to society, as GAF would have you believe, OP. When they end up going to school, and end up being exposed to these scientific "truths", then there should be no issue.

With that said, these topics usually devolve into people thumping their chests about the infallibility of science, when they themselves lack critical thinking skills.

When it comes to aging, most take studies at face value, and many evolutionists don't even realize that Carbon dating assumptions are not reliable past even 5,000 years.

Other techniques for radiometric dating rely heavily on circular reasoning, using reference fossils. When dates don't comply with the reference fossils, it is either thrown out as contaminated, or the previous "reliable" date has to be thrown out. I'm not arguing for a particular age of the Earth, but it wouldn't hurt if people go at it with a cynical viewpoint.

Sorry to say, but this is one field of science that relies heavily on assumptions, biased interpretations, and sensationalist discoveries to secure more funding dollars.

I'm sorry to do this, but can you provide legitimate sources for your claims?

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

In no other subject do mods here let posters openly insult and berate someone's partner, other than in topics about religious beliefs.

Neither does the gf, nor the possibility of the future children being exposed to this pose any threat to society, as GAF would have you believe, OP. When they end up going to school, and end up being exposed to these scientific "truths", then there should be no issue.

You will be amazed at the amount of shit people get away with here on gaf as far as it is against religion, its frankly disgusting that such behaviors continue.

 

[Emitan]

You will be amazed at the amount of shit people get away with here on gaf as far as it is against religion, its frankly disgusting that such behaviors continue.

Such as? I've heard people say this numerous times but I've never seen it take place.

 

[rukland]

She watches Stargate with you? Marry her.

This

 

[CornBurrito]

Such as? I've heard people say this numerous times but I've never seen it take place.

To be fair, people have posted stupid one liners like "lol religion" and not gotten banned for it.

But people also post things like "lol Santorum" or "Obama's America" without getting banned. So it isn't exclusive to religion like the poor persecuted Christians would have you believe.

 

[Zzoram]

She watches Stargate with you? Marry her.

Naw, she only watched the movie and she didn't even like it.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Such as? I've heard people say this numerous times but I've never seen it take place.

No need for me to waste my time digging it up to satisfy your curiosity (not meant as an insult, i really am not in the mood), search the OT for any religious thread and you will see.

To be fair, people have posted stupid one liners like "lol religion" and not gotten banned for it.

But people also post things like "lol Santorum" or "Obama's America" without getting banned. So it isn't exclusive to religion like the poor persecuted Christians would have you believe.

OffTopic: I see a religious threads three to four times a week with most of them topping out at 1000 posts (most of them useless and just full of insults), election year is upon us so granted there are santorum, republican and democrat threads going up. When the election is over there will still be threads pertaining to religion going up just like they were going up when there was no election.

Please give the "Persecution complex" argument a rest, it is frankly becoming repetitive.

 

[KtSlime]

You will be amazed at the amount of shit people get away with here on gaf as far as it is against religion, its frankly disgusting that such behaviors continue.

If the topic was "So my girlfriend thinks the moon is made out of cheese...", would this girlfriend be exempt from criticism as well?

 

[CornBurrito]

No need for me to waste my time digging it up to satisfy your curiosity (not meant as an insult, i really am not in the mood), search the OT for any religious thread and you will see.

Why should religion be free from criticism?

 

[Ultimadrago]

You will be amazed at the amount of shit people get away with here on gaf as far as it is against religion, its frankly disgusting that such behaviors continue.

Yeeeeup, I'm not even religious and I fully agree.

 

[Count Dookkake]

If the topic was "So my girlfriend thinks the moon is made out of cheese...", would girlfriend be exempt from criticism as well?

I dunno, but you better not disrespect cheese.

 

[Combine]

For such an obvious bait thread (regardless of how pure the OP's intentions were) I was actually impressed that GAF managed to last about 2 pages before getting completely absorbed by the meta-issues. That's not to say the first two pages had an admirable level of discourse, but they were at least mostly related to the actual topic.

It's all about respect. If you don't respect your significant other, then you're just wasting each others' time. It's not fair to them or yourself, you both deserve better. Who looks at a potential partner and thinks to themselves, "Wow, that person is so stupid, how can they believe that? What a moron! I'm going to ask them out now." The reason could be anything, politics, religion, superstition, it's irrelevant.

You don't build a committed relationship from the groundwork of seething disrespect. If you think you can make a relationship work in such a scenario, I'd be willing to bet you've never told your partner how you truly think and feel of them. And if you can't be honest with your significant other about something as simple as that, I don't think that's a relationship worth having.

Bravo sir. Only post in this wreck of a thread that is solid.

 

[Sutton Dagger]

No need for me to waste my time digging it up to satisfy your curiosity (not meant as an insult, i really am not in the mood), search the OT for any religious thread and you will see.

Every time you have made this claim you have never backed it up, that seems like a regular occurrence with you though.

 

[Dark Octave]

Post what she looks like in the Show off GF thread.

I want to see the face of ignorance.

 

[NervousXtian]

I just couldn't date a girl who's religious beliefs differed so far from mine.

I dated a mormon girl for a bit, and when I found out she took it serious it was over. Just couldn't put up with it.

Strange that some people do.

 

[Count Dookkake]

Every time you have made this claim you have never backed it up, that seems like a regular occurrence with you though.

It is in keeping with the theme, though.

 

[JGS]

Can someone summarize the thread for me, I'm very lazy to go through all these pages.

Go here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=436286&highlight=atheist

Then add irrational love to the mix.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

I can't even hold a 20 minute conversation with people this impossibly ignorant of reality, less alone actually date them or relate to them in anyway. Creationists are terrible.

 

[hirokazu]

In no other subject do mods here let posters openly insult and berate someone's partner, other than in topics about religious beliefs.

Neither does the gf, nor the possibility of the future children being exposed to this pose any threat to society, as GAF would have you believe, OP. When they end up going to school, and end up being exposed to these scientific "truths", then there should be no issue.

With that said, these topics usually devolve into people thumping their chests about the infallibility of science, when they themselves lack critical thinking skills.

When it comes to aging, most take studies at face value, and many evolutionists don't even realize that Carbon dating assumptions are not reliable past even 5,000 years.

Other techniques for radiometric dating rely heavily on circular reasoning, using reference fossils. When dates don't comply with the reference fossils, it is either thrown out as contaminated, or the previous "reliable" date has to be thrown out. I'm not arguing for a particular age of the Earth, but it wouldn't hurt if people go at it with a cynical viewpoint.

Sorry to say, but this is one field of science that relies heavily on assumptions, biased interpretations, and sensationalist discoveries to secure more funding dollars.

"Not a theat to society"
A lot of American politics seem to already prove they are a threat to society in terms of impeding education, rational thinking, social equality and scientific progress.

"Carbon dating is only accurate to 5000 years or so"
That's why we have other dating methods that are used to date things carbon dating can't.

"Other forms of radiometric dating are unreliable and unproven"
Uh, yeah, you're gonna have to back that shit up, son.

 

[Mahonay]

Can someone summarize the thread for me, I'm very lazy to go through all these pages.

An argument on whether or not science nullifies religion and whether those scientific studies/theories are actually true.

That latter part of that should even be an argument in a place like GAF.

 

[Ultimadrago]

If the topic was "So my girlfriend thinks the moon is made out of cheese...", would this girlfriend be exempt from criticism as well?

Funnily enough, that argument would probably go further than this thread has gone in general depth and actual progress of the solution for the baiter's OP's situation.

Can someone summarize the thread for me, I'm very lazy to go through all these pages.

People getting salty that religion and some quite erm...interesting belief(s) exist again.

You know, Gaf.

 

[teh_pwn]

I just couldn't date a girl who's religious beliefs differed so far from mine.

I dated a mormon girl for a bit, and when I found out she took it serious it was over. Just couldn't put up with it.

Strange that some people do.

A single Mormon? Now I've heard everything.


I could not date a young earth creationist. I just wouldn't respect her because she believes something absolutely insane. If some sky daddy created something 6k years ago and all history before that point was fabricated, then this second might as well as be the first. It fundamentally invalidates reality. It's nonsense.

 

[Count Dookkake]

Funnily enough, that argument would probably go further than this thread has gone in general depth and actual progress of the solution for the baiter's OP's situation.

Probably because there aren't many the-moon-is-cheese apologists these days.

 

[JGS]

I just couldn't date a girl who's religious beliefs differed so far from mine.

I dated a mormon girl for a bit, and when I found out she took it serious it was over. Just couldn't put up with it.

Strange that some people do.

Strange that a Mormon is a practicing Mormon? That's...strange.

 

[Alligatorjandro]

I didn't even know it mattered how old the earth is.

 

[Green Mamba]

When it comes to aging, most take studies at face value, and many evolutionists don't even realize that Carbon dating assumptions are not reliable past even 5,000 years.

Other techniques for radiometric dating rely heavily on circular reasoning, using reference fossils. When dates don't comply with the reference fossils, it is either thrown out as contaminated, or the previous "reliable" date has to be thrown out. I'm not arguing for a particular age of the Earth, but it wouldn't hurt if people go at it with a cynical viewpoint.

Sorry to say, but this is one field of science that relies heavily on assumptions, biased interpretations, and sensationalist discoveries to secure more funding dollars.

[citation needed]

 

[Slavik81]

If the topic was "So my girlfriend thinks the moon is made out of cheese...", would this girlfriend be exempt from criticism as well?

Depends. Does she think Zeus made the cheese, or does she think it was put there by the CIA?

 

[CornBurrito]

Funnily enough, that argument would probably go further than this thread has gone in general depth and actual progress of the solution for the baiter's OP's situation.




People getting salty that religion and some quite erm...interesting belief(s) exist again.

You know, Gaf.

I'm going to take a pretty bold guess and say that on forums devoted to a specific religion (like say... Mormonism) you'll find that a great deal of the posters are snarky and dismissive of opposing beliefs.

Strange that a Mormon is a practicing Mormon? That's...strange.

I don't know if it is different with Christians/Mormons, but Jews who don't take the religion seriously at all (or are even atheists) will still define themselves as Jews.

 

[Mercury Fred]

OP, with that level of crazy she sounds like a lost cause. Dump her, delete her from your phone and find someone else asap.

 

[Ultimadrago]

Probably because there aren't many the-moon-is-cheese apologists these days.

It will transform tomorrow.* You'll see...YOU'LL ALL SEE!

Spoiler

*Please do not ban if moon doesn't turn to cheese.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

I just couldn't date a girl who's religious beliefs differed so far from mine.

I dated a mormon girl for a bit, and when I found out she took it serious it was over. Just couldn't put up with it.

Strange that some people do.

scratch that, live your life how you see fit son.

 

[CornBurrito]

You dated a Mormon but then dumped her when she took Mormonism seriously? man gaf is full of surprises.

Again, people will often define themselves as being a certain religion without taking it very seriously.

See: People who define themselves as Christian and never go to church.

Is it really hard for you to imagine that the poster may have thought the girl was just another one of these types of people?

edit: Nice stealth edit.

scratch that, live your life how you see fit son.

Question: Would you date a girl who practiced Satanism, and was very serious about it? How would you raise the children if so?

 

[Count Dookkake]

I knew a Mormon chick in college who was an anal fiend. We got along pretty well despite our religious differences.

 

[Mahonay]

You dated a Mormon but then dumped her when she took Mormonism seriously? man gaf is full of surprises.

Sure that's shitty but not everyone is perfect. Undoubtedly this has happened in countless relationships.

I knew a Mormon chick in college who was an anal fiend. We got along pretty well despite our religious differences.

Now we're back on track.

scratch that, live your life how you see fit son.

Christ. Judgmental much?

 

[Roto13]

I don't understand why people date idiots. Because anyone who believes the earth is 6000 years old is an idiot. Religion is no excuse for willful ignorance. It's entirely possible to be religious and not be an idiot, but the girl in the OP is clearly not one of those people.

 

[Raist]

I found it in the book (page 175).

Also that book was written in 1968...

The problem is not the year it was written, but completely gnoring the context.
Called it, quote mining at its finest (see page 176).

 

[Prez]

When it comes to aging, most take studies at face value, and many evolutionists don't even realize that Carbon dating assumptions are not reliable past even 5,000 years.

Other techniques for radiometric dating rely heavily on circular reasoning, using reference fossils. When dates don't comply with the reference fossils, it is either thrown out as contaminated, or the previous "reliable" date has to be thrown out. I'm not arguing for a particular age of the Earth, but it wouldn't hurt if people go at it with a cynical viewpoint.

Sorry to say, but this is one field of science that relies heavily on assumptions, biased interpretations, and sensationalist discoveries to secure more funding dollars.

Interesting. Are there any reliable articles on the reliability of radiometric dating? I'd like to learn more about this. All I can find are religious sources.

 

[Mahonay]

I don't understand why people date idiots. Because anyone who believes the earth is 6000 years old is an idiot. Religion is no excuse for willful ignorance. It's entirely possible to be religious and not be an idiot, but the girl in the OP is clearly not one of those people.

Certainly true. I know plenty of strongly religious people who are perfectly intelligent people that accept science. They just have faith in their life.

 

[JGS]

I didn't even know it mattered how old the earth is.

It only matters if it matters to you.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Christ. Judgmental much?

By telling him to live his life how he sees fit? what? man people like to twist things.

 

[Mahonay]

It only matters if it matters to you.

Being intelligent is important to me.

By telling him to live his life how he sees fit? what? man people like to twist things.

You were inferring judgment with that statement with out saying it outright. Come on you know what I meant. We're not children here.