Evolution vs. Creationism[W:2571, 3239]

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Hey, that's what this scientist calls it. :shrug:
And he's not just any scientist around - he's big in his field, that's why he can afford to talk about it freely.


Call it whatever you want - but the theory that we all came from the same thing...is not a fact! No one actually understands it!

Don't equate us with your lack of understanding.

We understand evolution just fine and it is a fact.

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I actually liked the article, though the question of "macroevolution" seemms less interesting to me

Well....what can I say? :shrug:

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Don't equate us with your lack of understanding.

We understand evolution just fine and it is a fact.

Then by all means.....contact James Tour. He promised to buy lunch to anyone who can explain it to him!



It is not a matter of politics. I simply do not understand, chemically, how macroevolution could have happened. Hence, am I not free to join the ranks of the skeptical and to sign such a statement without reprisals from those that disagree with me?

Furthermore, when I, a non-conformist, ask proponents for clarification, they get flustered in public and confessional in private wherein they sheepishly confess that they really don’t understand either.

Well, that is all I am saying: I do not understand. But I am saying it publicly as opposed to privately. Does anyone understand the chemical details behind macroevolution?

If so, I would like to sit with that person and be taught, so I invite them to meet with me. Lunch will be my treat.

James M Tour Group » Evolution/Creation


See? Doesn't matter if there's many of you - it'll be his treat!


Since, so many of these scientists don't understand - I'd advice you (and the "we"), to make money out of this.
Offer a workshop to them! :lol:

 

[Chagos]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I am not qualified to enter the public discussion on evolution vs. creation.

Tour, literally.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Sigh.

Was it necessary to push that statement about the Bible? Gee? Why would you do that? Furthermore...you haven't invalidated it. There are literally thousands of ways to interpret the creation story. Something tells me that there isn't any scientist or devout atheist who has sat down to do that.

Anyway.

There is no such thing as a "devout atheist." Atheists are without belief, i.e. without belief of gods.

Bible has a creation myth that does not hold consistent to the known history of the universe. I don't see why this should be denied.

...In the modern world, it is accepted by most Christians and Jews that the story is mythical and should be taken simply as a story that demonstrates that God is all-powerful and that it was written by human beings, and not dictated by God. But many fundamentalist Christians still argue that the Universe really was created as described in Genesis (such people are called Creationists).

The difficulties with the story are insurmountable. The evidence from archaeology, palaeontology, human history, the fossil record, evolutionary biology, geology and physics all show us very clearly that the Earth, the Solar System and the rest of the Universe was created billions of years ago and not at all in accordance with the events listed in Genesis1 . . . The Genesis creation story has been used as an excuse to suppress and punish scientists who have contradicted it throughout the Christian era, and as such, has been an instrument in dementing human understanding of the world.

Christianity's 7 Day Creation Myth

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

There is no such thing as a "devout atheist." Atheists are without belief, i.e. without belief of gods.

I don't think you understand. When I refer to a "devout atheist," I'm referring to someone who feels the need to profess their belief to others, but not stop their. They also feel compelled to insult others for not believing exactly the same. They also feel the compulsion to "disprove" other people's opinions and views. And it doesn't matter if the other person asked or not.

You want a more common reference? Internet atheist vs atheist. I've never had a good discussion with the first. It is always insulting and they lack respect. The second? Had plenty of great discussions. In person and on the Internet. Believe it or not...it is possible to have a discussion about faith and the lack of it without being an asshole. Though you wouldn't know it from this thread.

Now on to your little piece of evidence. You realize that in order for it to stand true that it would require that ALL biblical based creation stories to be the same, for there to be one bible, one translation, and no denominations, and for NO metaphorical translations.

Basically...it would require someone to be a bigoted asshole who stereotypes literally millions of people's views into one tiny little box of a specific view.

Bible has a creation myth that does not hold consistent to the known history of the universe. I don't see why this should be denied.

So we should see it your way? And that is the only acceptable viewpoint? Got it! My point stands.

Ps

I love the justification for being bigoted: science WAS repressed. Nevermind that in the year 2015/16 that the majority believe in evolution and it is taught in universities and schools and is the common held belief. I think some people just want to have a reason to be angry and play the victim to excuse their behavior.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I don't think you understand. When I refer to a "devout atheist," I'm referring to someone who feels the need to profess their belief to others, but not stop their. They also feel compelled to insult others for not believing exactly the same. They also feel the compulsion to "disprove" other people's opinions and views. And it doesn't matter if the other person asked or not.

You want a more common reference? Internet atheist vs atheist. I've never had a good discussion with the first. It is always insulting and they lack respect. The second? Had plenty of great discussions. In person and on the Internet. Believe it or not...it is possible to have a discussion about faith and the lack of it without being an asshole. Though you wouldn't know it from this thread.

Now on to your little piece of evidence. You realize that in order for it to stand true that it would require that ALL biblical based creation stories to be the same, for there to be one bible, one translation, and no denominations, and for NO metaphorical translations.

Basically...it would require someone to be a bigoted asshole who stereotypes literally millions of people's views into one tiny little box of a specific view.



So we should see it your way? And that is the only acceptable viewpoint? Got it! My point stands.

Ps

I love the justification for being bigoted: science WAS repressed. Nevermind that in the year 2015/16 that the majority believe in evolution and it is taught in universities and schools and is the common held belief. I think some people just want to have a reason to be angry and play the victim to excuse their behavior.

Facts trump beliefs. That's called facing reality.

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Facts trump beliefs. That's called facing reality.

Facts and beliefs can coexist. Pretending they cannot is simply bigoted.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Facts and beliefs can coexist. Pretending they cannot is simply bigoted.

When beliefs go contrary to facts, holding onto them is childish at best.

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

There is no such thing as a "devout atheist." Atheists are without belief, i.e. without belief of gods.

Bible has a creation myth that does not hold consistent to the known history of the universe. I don't see why this should be denied.

Not all Christians believe in 7-day creation. And not all Christians care about the details how the universe was made - like me, all I believe is that God created everything. Whether it's a 7-day creation or a theistic evolution-type of creation - who cares? That's my position.


Your insistence to lump all Christians into the literal 7-day creation.....is kinda dishonest (because I assume you know that's not true).

 

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Then by all means.....contact James Tour. He promised to buy lunch to anyone who can explain it to him!

I don't let stupid people buy me lunch.

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

When beliefs go contrary to facts, holding onto them is childish at best.

When one feels the need to belittle other people for having faith: they are childish.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

When one feels the need to belittle other people for having faith: they are childish.

Look, if people want to fill the gaps which are unknown with gods, it's not a problem. But, when they reject hard evidence in order that their beliefs may persist, it is. I do not expect you to know the difference.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Not all Christians believe in 7-day creation. And not all Christians care about the details how the universe was made - like me, all I believe is that God created everything. Whether it's a 7-day creation or a theistic evolution-type of creation - who cares? That's my position.


Your insistence to lump all Christians into the literal 7-day creation.....is kinda dishonest (because I assume you know that's not true).

The point I made is not to say gods do not exist. The point made was that the creation myth as written in the bible is verifiably false. As with the guy above, I do not expect you to know the difference either.

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Look, if people want to fill the gaps which are unknown with gods, it's not a problem. But, when they reject hard evidence in order that their beliefs may persist, it is. I do not expect you to know the difference.

Come again? Evidence of what?

What is this so-called, "hard evidence?"

Support your claim!

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

The point I made is not to say gods do not exist. The point made was that the creation myth as written in the bible is verifiably false. As with the guy above, I do not expect you to know the difference either.

What "myth" are you talking about? Which creation do you refer to as myth? Be specific!

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Come again? Evidence of what?

What is this so-called, "hard evidence?"

Support your claim!

You know: fossils, DNA, rock formations, plate tectonics, astronomical spectroscopy...that sort of thing. All of it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the earth was formed after almost all the stars in the sky, including the sun. Hence, the heavens came before the earth, and long before there was grass and herb yielding seed and fruit trees yielding fruit, not the other way around as described in Genesis.

We also know that creatures crawled on the earth long before they began to fly. Another oops from the Bible exposed.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

What "myth" are you talking about? Which creation do you refer to as myth? Be specific!

Both creation myths in the bible are chronologically inconsistent, not only with each other, but also with reality.
The two contradictory creation accounts.

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

You know: fossils, DNA, rock formations, plate tectonics, astronomical spectroscopy...that sort of thing. All of it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the earth was formed after almost all the stars in the sky, including the sun. Hence, the heavens came before the earth, and long before there was grass and herb yielding seed and fruit trees yielding fruit, not the other way around as described in Genesis.

We also know that creatures crawled on the earth long before they began to fly. Another oops from the Bible exposed.

You're babbling. :mrgreen:


Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.




:lol:


The Bible got that right, eh?



That first sentence is loaded.

There are two other things to remember about that very first sentence in the Bible, calamity:


IN THE BEGINNING. There is a beginning. The universe had a beginning.


GOD CREATED.




According to the National Academy of Sciences,

many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.

Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."

WMAP Site FAQs




All glory to God.

Amen.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

The created and the god part are assumptions lacking any evidence.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

You're babbling.

Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.



:lol:

The Bible got that right, eh?

That first sentence is loaded.

There are two other things to remember about that very first sentence in the Bible, calamity:

IN THE BEGINNING. There is a beginning. The universe had a beginning.

GOD CREATED.


According to the National Academy of Sciences,

many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.

Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."

WMAP Site FAQs

Amen. All glory to God.

Well... Can't say we didn't try to educate you.

 

[calamity]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

You're babbling. :mrgreen:


Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.




:lol:


The Bible got that right, eh?



That first sentence is loaded.

There are two other things to remember about that very first sentence in the Bible, calamity:


IN THE BEGINNING. There is a beginning. The universe had a beginning.


GOD CREATED.




According to the National Academy of Sciences,

many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth.

This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution.

Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."

WMAP Site FAQs




All glory to God.

Amen.

Well, even if you use that version of the GCM (Genesis Creation Myth), it's wrong. In the "beginning" there was no earth. The earth is 10 billion years younger than the "heavens."

 

[tosca1]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Well, even if you use that version of the GCM (Genesis Creation Myth), it's wrong. In the "beginning" there was no earth. The earth is 10 billion years younger than the "heavens."

Your problem and your quarrel, isn't with the Bible, you know. It's with science.
It's not the Bible's fault if science supports what's been stated.
You're ignoring science? :lamo


Refer to post #2294 again.

You've just shown you don't know much about what you're on about. The first sentence of the Bible must've been another "mumbo-jumbo," to you ....or, you haven't even opened the Bible at all! You must've read that stupid argument from an ignorant site somewhere and used it! :lol:


All you guys are simply just in denial and blowing hot air. Hooooo boy. :mrgreen:

 

[Chagos]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Refer to post #2294 again.

why?

As evidence of "creation" it's as useless as it was when first brought up by you. Constantly repeating it like some mindless rosary for months past and months to come in every thread, related to the issue or not, doesn't give it any more value as evidence.

To constantly claim that it constitutes scientific evidence supporting the creation myth is simply lying.

If you wanna talk about blowing hot air, here we have a far better example.

 

[Oberon]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Obviously I am a staunch evolution supporter and think creationism is ridiculous. However, some people are in the middle with opinions like "god started evolution" etc. I also am aware that some people still want creationism taught in schools, which I think is also ridiculous and deprives the child of knowledge.

Thoughts?

I'm an atheist who knows that what passes for 'evolution' theories are in fact just ideologies, not real science, and find that teaching it to schoolkids is merely political indoctrination and even more ridiculous than some forms of the Creationist arguments, with the exception that the evolutionists are lying on purpose while the Creationists are mostly just being honest in their beliefs, and I have no problem with teaching some of the more rational Creationism theories along with the 'evolution' nonsense. If you are going to ban one, then ban them both if you want to be truly objective about it. Many of us can sleep just fine without accepting either explanation.

Many of the Creationist criticisms of the 'evolution' mythology are in fact quite accurate and rational, if maybe not their entire premise itself. And besides, it is the 'evolution' theorists who are ripping off Genesis, not the other way around.