Members comments:

 =  when the dust clears
ion amariutei
[08.Mar.08 21:09]
first off, assuming evolutionism is wrong doesn't make creationism right! let's state it plainly: creationism is just a superstition and has nothing to do with scientific method or research.

"whose children in whose schools are to be taught evolutionism only?" that's very easy to answer: the children going to schools supported by tax money. The reason we pay for their education (even if we don't have children of our own) is that we want to prepare them to be productive in today's society and eventually pay for our retirement. it's a social contract. as such, i only want them to learn those things that will enable them to be productive. the fact that large numbers of people believe in a particular superstition doesn't make it "true".
if some parents would rather have children learn creationism, astrology, alchemy and palm reading doesn't mean the rest of us have to go along with this nonsense.

"Are creationists entitled to a “we” identity, to be kept in schools belonging through their public status not only to the evolutionists “we”? creationists should be free to teach their children whatever they want but should pay for that with their own money.

"Viewed from a strict social angle, creationism and evolutionism are both philosophies"
nope, unless you can show me a lot of verifiable, repeatable observations proving that god created the world in 6 days some 5 thousand years ago, this is not philosophy and is not science.

religious people tend to "appropriate" quotes from scientists who believe in god. identifying god with religion is just a cheap trick. belief in god is a strictly personal, philosophical matter. existence of god can't be proved or disproved. but believing in a religion, in a particular church, in a particular book, is a completely different matter. the church is a political party

 =  For the larger part, I strongly support Ions wievs above...
John Willy Kopperud
[08.Mar.08 22:22]

...though I don't think all churches can be regarded as
political parties. On the other hand, many of them are. In the USA creationism and christian fundamentalism have gained momentum in the decision-making political strata. Religious groups actively limit the freedom of american citizens in large areas. Me, I'm a christian myself. Nevertheless I am much opposed to demanding that any other citizen should share my religious thoughts. As Ion says; it's a private matter!

And; like Orwell, I'm also sympathetic to democratic socialism. I sincerely hope this won't exclude me from
christianity in Romulus eyes! Why should I have a problem with combining Christian and socialist ideas in my life?
Was Jesus a right-winger? When I named Orwell as a free-thinking socialist it was his distaste for Stalinism
I was thinking about, not his religious wievs.

Respectfully yours

 =  Not philosophies but facts and free-will...
Marius Surleac
[10.Mar.08 10:34]
Indeed, Ion is right about what he said, but what I want to say is that in schools should be presented all Life Theories about Evolution, that each one of the children to have a clear idea about what happened and to choose the path him and his family wants.
I am contradictory with learning in schools only about Creationism - if you keep your beliefs in Creationism you can go to the church to find the communion with God, but must not be interdicted in schools, because the religious minds from government said so.
Church is for believing in God and for confessions, and school is for learning, for socialize we the people, for evolution of thoughts.
It is true that this thematic can be discussed more form now on and I’ll express my only opinion about the text and the basic idea of it.
First, about the concept of "theory" I want be a little bit contradictory because there is no need of a huge amount of information to make a theory but you might need a huge amount of information to make the experiments according to the theory and the final result will be the "law" that was build on the "theory". To conclude about the biologist student, first you have to make a theory then to test it.
About the fossils, nowadays it is easy to discover, to conclude what happened millions of years before, because now we have the techniques that allows us to discover new things that weren't possible before and from here to make some conclusions.
Many theories were killed because of the evolution of science, though techniques. Making presumption about "Stratigraphical Column" it is easy to build a law that gives an amount of truth to the discoveries, by using the Carbon 14 method of period diagnostic, and also other techniques and methods that can make a clue about how the animals, or the people looked like many years before ... there are just laws that put a border to the realistic and possible tendencies. All works just straight to a limit point, beyond it there are no possible presumptions or ideas.
Is better that you used "sun and the moon apparently perform a movement from east to west", "apparently" is the true word in whole expression that is not true and for this fact and because many scientists and great minds died when they wanted to express the evolution to the "close" minded persons of the past ... the Earth spins from west to the east around Sun, that's why the hypothesis that Sun appears from east.

Anybody is free to believe what he wants, but, but my opinion is that the most closer to the truth are the Creationism and the Evolutionism (which is strongly sustained by the Big Bang theory - it's all about physics).
Creationism and Evolutionism both have different missing elements but the Evolutionism is even more clear that the Evolution from one species to another was made by genetic modifications in the structure of DNA, by different defects in the chromosomal base and so on ... that is the evolution that is strongly related to the medium where the organisms lived and the proper or non-proper atmospherically conditions during the ages that made the powerful genetic modifications to resist and to evolutes.
That's why the hippo is related with the whale, and has the most similar in a approximation of 95% of the both DNAs, that's why the present shark is a ultra-developed device of the sea and one of the most complex that nowadays exist, instead of his old shark ancestor that was huge but not enough developed, and so on. This is the Evolution and its key is turned on by the atmospherically conditions and so on.
We, the humans reached the present moment of evolutionism but the medium where we develop ourselves has the final word. We depend on other humans and so on; there is a complex web that keeps us tide.
So, Orwell wanted to point that all depends on how we think, on how we manage to develop new ideas and he showed how we act in the present time, that's why he pointed some views that shows that the Evolution can be bad or good - we are the keys that can choose which path we should go.
Is all about free-will!

Cheers Romulus for writing this good text which can be discussed much more days from now on.
You have done a great job.

 =  here I go again
dan marius
[10.Mar.08 13:36]
religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich :)
seriously now, I believe children should be allowed to browse both theories and then choose what they like best.

No sane human being can doubt the existence of "God". It takes just as glance at the stars to KNOW that we are not alone. Religion though... that's a different issue. Religion is a political party indeed. (I strongly agree with Ion). Did Orwell also mention the ministry of Faith ?

 =  Cheers Dan!
Marius Surleac
[10.Mar.08 13:50]
"religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich" - true expression for a true fact Dan.
Glad to hear you on this topic also!

 =  .
dan marius
[10.Mar.08 15:15]
I quoted Napoleon. Little big men know best. How tall is God, I wonder...

 =  ...
Marius Surleac
[10.Mar.08 15:19]
Who knows; maybe one day we'll all find out!

 =  honoured...
Romulus Campan Maramuresanu
[10.Mar.08 16:58]
What an honour to be read!
Folks, I owe you a decent reply, should you bear with me for a little while, as I have some "right now" stuff to do.


 =  ...
Marius Surleac
[10.Mar.08 21:09]
Okay Romulus!
We'll be here!

 =  one more thing
ion amariutei
[10.Mar.08 22:17]
dan, "creationism" can be resumed to a simple sentence: everything that exists was created by god. what else would they "teach" in that creationism class? to me it's pretty obvious: the only thing they're gonna teach would be religious indoctrination.

and i missed this one the first time: "As for the observation on Noah’s Ark, why should I go on wasting precious time by explaining that viruses and bacteria where not mentioned because they were plenty of them in and out every animal, humans, food, wood, etc?"

if any of the ark's passengers was carrying something like the plague virus, we wouldn't be here having this discussion, would we? let's not forget about malaria, hepatitis, aids, cholera, tuberculosis, etc

if interested, you can watch just the first part

 =  no more words left...
Marius Surleac
[11.Mar.08 11:30]
Thanks Ion!
I just watched the Zeitgeist movie - I knew something about and my final opinion is: mass manipulation, self-destruction, game behind the curtains and Slavery!
Anyone should see the entire movie!
Cheers Ion!

 =  "I've been abducted by the Easter Bunny"...
Romulus Campan Maramuresanu
[21.Mar.08 11:59]
I'm glad "Zeitgeist" seem to be such a "strong" evidence against the overall theme of my essays. For further "enlightment" I would suggest after the idiocy called "The DaVinci code", perhaps "Harry Potter" and as final "proof", "Man in Black II".

BUT if any of you my friends would like to hear a pertinent discussion of the subject, please log in for a "Does religious belief damage the health of a society, or is it necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society? Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion in discussion with Professor Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford Univ, chaired by Joan Bakewell" 2 parts discussion at

See you after:-))

 =  ...
Marius Surleac
[21.Mar.08 12:08]
Hy Romulus, I don't know if "Zeitgeist" is a strong evidence but is a fact and explains something that it may be true or it may be not.
I am downloadin the audio file from the link you've put in your response and hardly wait to see what's the truth.
My opinion is that the discussions can last forever ... always will be two different sides.
Cheers and hope that the Easter "Bunny" will let you go.
Have a nice day!

 =  my final and finished opinion Romulus...
Marius Surleac
[21.Mar.08 12:31]
Yes, there is an interesting speech about the existence of God.
My only and final opinion, and hope that I'll not come with comments about this theme, is next one:
I, as a Biophysicist, think that are two pathways. To whom it may concern, I believe in the Big Bang theory about the evolution but also I think that somewhere out of our believes there is an Entity which we call God, in which I believe 50-50% like the theory I pointed before. I think that we are not alone in the Universe, and there are a lot of proofs that Satan exists, and ancient proofs that God indeed exists. So, there has to be an entity which maybe has a more evolved brain, has omnipotent capacities and is omnipresent but in other dimension in space and time. Is somewhere around where we can not be and can not reach that dimension because we are not highly evolved.
No one actually can proof 100% that God exists or that God doesn't exists. We will spend our life believing that somewhere there is a God.
As a final opinion, as a scientist person (and many other can contradict me) I think that there is a God and we'll meet Him someday.
Thank you Romulus for putting the link there, and hope that my pleading is final and you've understood what I meant.

 =  romulus
dan marius
[24.Mar.08 18:01]
"I'm very surprised to hear both speakers using the word "God" and the word "Religion" interchangeably. Surely they've got completely different meanings."
Very interesting. Both speakers were eloquent and bright.
But still it is this question (which as you now, came from the audience) that seems most difficult to answer.
I strongly believe in God. But can't relate to religion in any way whatsoever. What do I do then?

 =  THE Message...
Romulus Campan Maramuresanu
[19.Apr.08 11:47]
Thanks my friend for your clearness. Your question is THE real problem of many, including myself, honestly. What one shouldn't forget is the fact that Jesus' most fierce opposition was exactly against that sort of organized religion which elevated itself above a personal relationship with God. Unfortunately, today's Christianity has fallen exactly in the same trap. But that again, according to Jesus, shouldn't keep anyone away from God, because the sins of any organized, only nominal Church, are not an excuse for rejecting Christ. As Jesus Himself said, He came for the sick and the weak, amongst which all humanity has its glorious place. The Message is all that matters, namely that Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. Chiefly myself...

 =  new-old seasons...
Romulus Campan Maramuresanu
[21.Apr.08 16:04]

a season for change has come.


No anonymous comments allowed !
In order to post comments and texts
you must have an account and then LOGIN !

Go back !