Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

1…124125127129130…232

Comments

  • #3782
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    NASA isn't like you guys ... they are an equal opportunities employers ... and equal opportunities apply to everyone ... including people of faith ... like Jewish, Muslim and Christian Creationists ... and minorities like Atheists.:)

    So if we were to translate into English what you really mean is that you have no proof of your claim? Don't even post a link just name ONE known creationist scientist working for NASA.


  • #3783
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    then you should have no problem providing evidence of you claims.
    It's far more important to let you guys provide the evidence for your belief in job discrimination along religious lines.:(

    ... and the onus is actually on you guys, if you are alleging that NASA (as a reputable publicly-funded body) isn't the equal opportunities employer, that I (and they) say they are. :)


  • #3784
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    It's far more important to let you guys provide the evidence for your belief in job discrimination along religious lines.:(

    ... and the onus is actually on you guys, if you are alleging that NASA (as a reputable publicly-funded body) isn't the equal opportunities employer, that I say they are. :)

    All of the above is deflection. You've made a claim and are now doing your best to avoid proving it has any basis in reality.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #3785
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So if we were to translate into English what you really mean is that you have no proof of your claim? Don't even post a link just name ONE known creationist scientist working for NASA.
    It's really very simple ... NASA is a reputable publicly funded body that is an equal opportunity employer ... and if they're not (by never employing a Creationist) then I would certainly like to know this ... please provide any evidence that you may have.
    Do remember that NASA operates in a country where 46% of the population are Creationists (and 78% believe that God played a role in the development of the human race).

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2154923/Half-Americans-believe-creationism-just-15-percent-accept-evolution.html#ixzz2qDM50FHG


    So are you saying that despite receiving 46% of their funding from Creationists ... they don't employ a single one of them? ...
    ... that would be some 'achievement' (in blatant sectarianism) if it were true ... but, of course it isn't.


  • #3786
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    you still haven't provided any proof for you claim. All you've offered is supposition.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #3787
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    All of the above is deflection. You've made a claim and are now doing your best to avoid proving it has any basis in reality.
    All of the above is proving that it's you guys who have the serious religious discrimination tendancies ... and you guys who therefore think that everybody else (including publicly-funded equal opportuity employers) would (and indeed should) behave as latter day sectarian bigots.


  • #3788
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    All of the above is proving that it's you guys who have the serious religious discrimination tendancies ... and you guys who therefore think that everybody else (including publicly-funded equal opportuity employers) would (and indeed should) behave as latter day sectarian bigots.

    so because I'm asking for proof creationists working at NASA, I support discriminatory policies at NASA? Pull the other one, it's got bells on!

    So you've no proof and have now taken to mudslinging.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #3789
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    you still haven't provided any proof for you claim. All you've offered is supposition.
    ... and you guys haven't provided any proof that NASA is discriminating against 46% of the US population ... a bizzarre situation, to say the least (and one deserving of very rapid legal remedy in the land of no established religion) ... if it is true, like you claim it to be.

    I don't believe it for one moment ... but if you guys know of any evidence that NASA is doing this please make it available.


  • #3790
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    ... and you guys haven't provided any proof that NASA is discriminating against 46% of the US population ... a bizzarre situation, to say the least (and one deserving of very rapid legal remedy in the land of no established religion) ... if it is true, like you claim it to be.

    I don't believe it for one moment ... but if you guys know of any evidence that NASA is doing this please make it available.

    no-one has claimed anything of the sort. Just more smoke and mirrors instead of addressing the query regarding your unsupported claim that many NASA scientists are creationists.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #3791
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    so because I'm asking for proof creationists working at NASA, I support discriminatory policies at NASA? Pull the other one, it's got bells on!

    So you've no proof and have now taken to mudslinging.
    I am 'pulling the other one' ... and dragging your underlying religious discrimination beliefs out into the light ... where we can all look at them ... and they aint pretty!!

    Why do you ask me for proof that NASA isn't discriminating against the 46% of Americans who are Creationists by not employing a roughly similar % of its workforce who are Creationists ?


  • Advertisement
  • #3792
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    no-one has claimed anything of the sort. Just more smoke and mirrors instead of addressing the query regarding your unsupported claim that many NASA scientists are creationists.
    If you're not claiming that NASA is discriminating against Creationists (and I don't believe that they are) ... then about 46% of their scientists should be Creationists.
    ... and I'm happy to accept that ... barring any evidence to the contrary ... and if you have such evidence of illegal job discrimination, the onus is strictly on you to please make it available.


  • #3793
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    I am 'pulling the other one' ... and dragging your underlying religious discrimination beliefs out into the light ... where we can all look at them ... and they aint pretty!!

    Why do you ask for proof that NASA isn't discriminating against the 46% of Americans who are Creationists by not employing a roughly similar % of its workforce who are Creationists ?

    You are the one who made the claim that there are creationists working at NASA, no one has said there are not creationists working there all we are asking (as usual) and you are failing to provide (as usual) is for a small piece of evidence to back up your claim. If i claimed ex Nazi SS officers worked at Google I would be expected to provide evidence.


  • #3794
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    I am 'pulling the other one' ... and dragging your underlying religious discrimination beliefs out into the light ... where we can all look at them ... and they aint pretty!!
    You've done nothing of the sort. You've engaged in unfounded mudslinging due to lack of evidence for your claim.
    Why do you ask for proof that NASA isn't discriminating against the 46% of Americans who are Creationists by not employing a roughly similar % of its workforce who are Creationists ?
    I haven't suggested that NASA is discriminating. I'm querying your claim that many scientists are creationists. I want to know how you came to this conclusion. just because X% of a population is creationist doesn't mean that X% of bus drivers/doctors/postmen/police are creationists.

    I'm not asking for proof that NASA don't discriminate, but rather proof that your claim of many scientists are creationists.

    I enjoy a dance as much as the next person but it would be nice if you could actually answer the query.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #3795
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    I haven't suggested that NASA is discriminating. I'm querying your claim that many scientists are creationists. I want to know how you came to this conclusion. just because X% of a population is creationist doesn't mean that X% of bus drivers/doctors/postmen/police are creationists.
    That's precisely what I would expect in an equal opportuities society ... and if the percentages were significantly skewed (and especially if there wasn't a single bus driver/doctor/postman/police officer who was a creationist (in a population with 46% of the people Creationists) that would be incontravertible prima facie evidence of gross discrimination.
    SW wrote: »
    I'm not asking for proof that NASA don't discriminate, but rather proof that your claim of many scientists are creationists.
    It's one and the same thing ... if you are correct that NASA hasn't a single scientist employed who is a Creationist. That is one of the more objective means of measuring discrimination against minorities.
    If, as an employer, I say I don't discriminate against, for example Roman Catholics ... and yet I don't have a single Roman Catholic on my workforce, in a community made up of 46% Roman Catholics (providing a service 46% funded by Roman Catholics) ... nobody would believe me that I wasn't discriminating against Roman Catholics.
    Ditto with Creationists ... or any other faith minority.:(


  • #3796
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    That's precisely what I would expect in an equal opportuities society ... and if the percentages were significantly skewed (and especially if there wasn't a single bus driver/doctor/postman/police officer who was a creationist (in a population with 46% of the people Creationists) that would be incontravertable prima facie evidence of gross discrimination.

    It's one and the same thing ... if you are correct that NASA hasn't a single scientist employed who is a Creationist. That is one of the more objective means of measuring discrimination against minorities.
    If, as an employer, I say I don't discriminate against, for example Roman Catholics ... and yet I don't have a single Roman Catholic on my workforce, in a community made up of 46% Roman Catholics (providing a service 46% funded by Roman Catholics) ... nobody would believe me that I wasn't discriminating against Roman Catholics.
    Ditto with Creationists ... or any other faith minority.:(

    I wouldn't dispute a single creationist working at NASA but you claimed many scientists were creationists. I'm looking for evidence of the claim as I'm curious as to what percentage of the scientific staff are creationists.

    So once more, would you care to provide proof of your claim?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #3797
    brian_t
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,921 ✭✭✭brian_t


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So if we were to translate into English what you really mean is that you have no proof of your claim? Don't even post a link just name ONE known creationist scientist working for NASA.

    Michael Tigges


  • #3798
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    You are the one who made the claim that there are creationists working at NASA, no one has said there are not creationists working there all we are asking (as usual) and you are failing to provide (as usual) is for a small piece of evidence to back up your claim. If i claimed ex Nazi SS officers worked at Google I would be expected to provide evidence.
    Not quite the same thing ... there are practically no ex Nazi SS officers alive (and the handful who are alive, are in their nineties and therfore not expected to be active in the workforce) ... but 46% of the US population are Creationists ... and up to 78% of the population believe the 'God did it' (even if not exactly within 6 literal days)


  • #3799
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    J C wrote: »
    That's precisely what I would expect in an equal opportuities society ... and if the percentages were significantly skewed (and especially if there wasn't a single bus driver/doctor/postman/police officer who was a creationist (in a population with 46% of the people Creationists) that would be incontravertible prima facie evidence of gross discrimination.

    To show that NASA discriminated against people who hold creationist beliefs, you would need to be able to show that it refused to hire someone solely on the basis that they were a creationist. You claim that creationists work at NASA - I can't say that they do, and neither can you. You simply can't know that, and it's pretty irrelevant in any case.

    Edit: Just saw brian_t's post regarding Michael Tigges. So at least one creationist works at NASA, but as an aerospace engineer. It hardly gives him any extra authority on matters relating to evolution / origins.


  • #3800
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    I wouldn't dispute a single creationist working at NASA but you claimed many scientists were creationists. I'm looking for evidence of the claim as I'm curious as to what percentage of the scientific staff are creationists.
    I'd say about 46% ... now prove me wrong ... and do your bit for enforcing anti-discrimination laws ... if I'm not correct!!:)


  • #3801
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    I'd say about 46% ... now prove me wrong ... and do your bit for enforcing anti-discrimination laws ... if I'm not correct!!:)

    Yes, I'm aware of your unsupported claim. How did you arrive at this conclusion?


    Currently I'd say 0.00005555555% (1 out of 18,000 employees) is the correct figure as Michael Tigge is the only creationist on staff I'm aware of (thanks to brian_t for the link ;))

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #3802
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    Not quite the same thing ... there are practically no ex Nazi SS officers alive (and the handful who are alive, are in their nineties) ... but 46% of the US population are Creationists ... and up to 78% of the population believe the 'God did it' (even if not exactly within 6 literal days)

    50% of the population are women yet the % of women airline pilots is 6% are you saying that the aviation industry is discriminating against women?


  • #3803
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    To show that NASA discriminated against people who hold creationist beliefs, you would need to be able to show that it refused to hire someone solely on the basis that they were a creationist.
    That's not how it works Benny ... otherwise every bigot could carefully show that they gave everyone a 'fair chance' on paper ... but 'mysteriously' somehow nobody of a particular belief (representing 46% of the population) ever was employed.
    How it works is, if this is found to be the case, the employer is convicted of discrimination (barring some very good reason, other than religious belief) ... and its up to the employer to think of ways they might re-structure their recruitment activities to avoid ending up 'mysteriously' with, nobody from a faith community of 46% the population, within its workforce.
    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    You claim that creationists work at NASA - I can't say that they do, and neither can you. You simply can't know that, and it's pretty irrelevant in any case.
    It would be relevant if significantly less than 46% of the workforce wasn't Creationists ... and incontrovertible evidence of gross discrimination if no Creationists were employed.

    I thought that you guys were up to speed with anti-discrimination law ... to say nothing about my expectation that ye would also be fully supportive of it.


  • #3804
    Safehands
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,348 ✭✭✭Safehands


    J C wrote: »
    They obviously were very hard-hearted ... and their Laws matched their hearts.

    Its in the Bible JC, "the word of God"


  • #3805
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    That's not how it works Benny ... otherwise every bigot could carefully show that they gave everyone a 'fair chance' on paper ... but 'mysteriously' somehow nobody of a particular belief (representing 46% of the population) ever was employed.
    How it works is, if this is found to be the case, the employer is convicted of discrimination ... and its up to them to think of ways they might re-structure their recruitment activities to avoid ending up 'mysteriously' with, nobody from a faith community of 46% the population, within its workforce.

    It would be relevant if about 46% of the workforce wasn't Creationists ... and incontrovertible evidence of gross discrimination if no Creationists were employed.

    I though you guys were up to speed with anti-discrimination law ... to say nothing about my expectation that ye would also be fully supportive of it.

    So an abattoir that solely deals in pork products MUST hire a Muslim?


  • #3806
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    50% of the population are women yet the % of women airline pilots is 6% are you saying that the aviation industry is discriminating against women?
    Could well be ... especially if significantly more than 6% of applicants to be pilots, were women ... and if no women pilots were employed, despite numerous women applicants, it would be incontrovertible evidence of discrimination.


  • #3807
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Safehands wrote: »
    Its in the Bible JC, "the word of God"
    ... yes it is in the Bible (along with many other things that would make the people involved blush) ... and its also true that they were heard hearted (as Jesus said) ... unless you're saying that stoning women is somehow 'soft-hearted'.


  • #3808
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So an abattoir that solely deals in pork products MUST hire a Muslim?
    A Muslim wouldn't want to work in a pork abbatoir for religious reasons ... this is not true for Creationists working in NASA.


  • #3809
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    A Muslim wouldn't want to work in a pork abbatoir for religious reasons ... this is not true for Creationists working in NASA.

    How do you know this? Maybe there is only 1 creationist working at NASA because he is the only one who ever applied.


  • #3810
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    Could well be ... if significantly more than 6% of applicants to be pilots, were women ... and if no women pilots were employed, despite numerous women applicants, it would be incontrovertible evidence of discrimination.

    50% of the population are women, how many are priests, bishops, popes? The catholic church discriminates against women will you be calling for them to be sued and closed down under anti discrimination laws?


  • Advertisement
  • #3811
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    How do you know this? Maybe there is only 1 creationist working at NASA because he is the only one who ever applied.
    We can speculate forever ... but, for the sake of argument, if some employer claimed that they had no employees from a faith group representing 46% of the population, simply because nobody from that faith group ever applied to join their organistion ... then the reasons why this is happening would need to be explained ... and barring a very good objective reason ... such a situation would be prima facie evidence of a culture of hostility towards the faith community, within the employers organisation ... which would also be against anti-discrimination law.

    Of course, none of this exists in NASA ... and that is why I believe that roughly 46% of their employees are Creationists.

    It your biases that are coming out here ... and not NASA's.


Advertisement