Evolution vs. Creationism[W:2571, 3239]

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

He clearly doesn't understand that scientists don't take their work as gospel. If something doesn't make sense, or they find something that better explains phenomenon obviously they're going to change their mind.

Thats my point! You argue that science is all knowing and at the same time you admit that its not. Your limited understandig of the universe cant disprove or overide the possibility of a god.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Todays science would have been magic 20 years ago. You mock what you do not understand.

On the contrary, I know exactly what I'm mocking....................

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Are there logical problems in our understanding of the mechanisms of natural selection and evolution? Of course, as with all science that is the case. Acceptance of science's contingent character does nothing, however, to support the "young Earth" of creationist theory. That is unsupported by any evidence at all.:shock:

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Define "know a lot". We dont KNOW anything. We believe a lot of theories that are based on other theories but we dont KNOW the first thing about how our world came to be. There are a lot of scientifically accepted "truths" but none of them can be conclusivly proven, they just cant be disproven YET.

*Sigh* Sure, we don't know 100%, in as much as almost nothing in history can be 100% proven. You need more science, less church.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Thats my point! You argue that science is all knowing and at the same time you admit that its not. Your limited understandig of the universe cant disprove or overide the possibility of a god.

You can't prove a negative. It's up to you to provide evidence that a god exists.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

How do you figure? Is it the thought that there could possibly be someone in the universe more advanced than you?

I'm sure there is. What makes you see the demented rantings of the homicidal Yahweh as so "intelligent" ?........................

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

You really do? What about 100 years ago?

Are you actually referring to science or to technology? :think:

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

You can't prove a negative. It's up to you to provide evidence that a god exists.

But im not trying to prove God exists. Your trying to do exactly what you just stated you cant! You trying to disprove God without evidence.

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Are you actually referring to science or to technology? :think:

In this case, it doesnt matter. Our current level of technology is based on our current level of understanding of science.

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I'm sure there is. What makes you see the demented rantings of the homicidal Yahweh as so "intelligent" ?........................

Im not going to reply to that. We are talking about the existence of a God, not insulting others beliefs.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

But im not trying to prove God exists. Your trying to do exactly what you just stated you cant! You trying to disprove God without evidence.

Where have I tried to prove to you that a god doesn't exist? It's theoretically possible, though there's no proof, that a god started everything, but if he did it was billions of years ago. Saying that the 7 day theory doesn't make sense doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Im not going to reply to that. We are talking about the existence of a God, not insulting others beliefs.

I'm curious; Is it the sheer insanity ? The propensity for ragging about anything and everything ? Or is it the lust for murder ?.....................

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Where have I tried to prove to you that a god doesn't exist? It's theoretically possible, though there's no proof, that a god started everything, but if he did it was billions of years ago. Saying that the 7 day theory doesn't make sense doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.

Ok well if your just talking about the 7 day theory then i see where your coming from. The 7 day theory doesnt make sense. Then again i dont know how my cell phone works but it still does.

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

In this case, it doesnt matter. Our current level of technology is based on our current level of understanding of science.

Well, no. Arthur C. Clarke once said that any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic. Your point might therefore be valid if you were discussing technology. Science, however, is a way of understanding nature, and is in many respects timeless. Given time for explanation, our science of today could be made comprehensible to scientists of many years ago, even, perhaps, 100.:yes:

 

[Perotista]

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 suppose it is possible for both to be correct or both to incorrect. Today it definitely looks like evolution. But when it comes to science, quite a lot of the theories and facts presented to me, that I learned way back when have been overturned, replaced and discarded as new discoveries and information become available. What looks like scientific evidence pretty much set in stone today, come tomorrow as more discoveries, new evidence and information becomes available, much of today’s theories and fact will also be replaced, discarded.

As for schools, evolution should be taught, although I would not object to an asterisk in text books denoting a foot note that some still believe in creationism. I wouldn’t spend much time on it, just let the students know that is what some still believe and perhaps an hours class on it. Then back to what looks today as scientific fact. After all, we can only teach what we know today and what science points to today, even if we know that all of this may change tomorrow as more discoveries are made.

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Well, no. Arthur C. Clarke once said that any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic. Your point might therefore be valid if you were discussing technology. Science, however, is a way of understanding nature, and is in many respects timeless. Given time for explanation, our science of today could be made comprehensible to scientists of many years ago, even, perhaps, 100.:yes:

Ok so technology and science are unrelated, check. Im sure given time, God could explain to us how he works on a higher plane of understanding of science than we currently posses as well.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I suppose it is possible for both to be correct or both to incorrect. Today it definitely looks like evolution. But when it comes to science, quite a lot of the theories and facts presented to me, that I learned way back when have been overturned, replaced and discarded as new discoveries and information become available. What looks like scientific evidence pretty much set in stone today, come tomorrow as more discoveries, new evidence and information becomes available, much of today’s theories and fact will also be replaced, discarded.

As for schools, evolution should be taught, although I would not object to an asterisk in text books denoting a foot note that some still believe in creationism. I wouldn’t spend much time on it, just let the students know that is what some still believe and perhaps an hours class on it. Then back to what looks today as scientific fact. After all, we can only teach what we know today and what science points to today, even if we know that all of this may change tomorrow as more discoveries are made.

Creationism shouldn't be mentioned at all in a science class, since it's not science.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Creationism shouldn't be mentioned at all in a science class, since it's not science.

The fact that in some places it is, is a sign of just how far down the tubes this country has gone.....................

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Im sure given time, God could explain to us how he works on a higher plane of understanding of science than we currently posses as well.

A god could do that anytime they want, but they either choose not to or they don't exist. Considering the lack of evidence for a god, I'm guessing it's the latter.

 

[Perotista]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Ok well if your just talking about the 7 day theory then i see where your coming from. The 7 day theory doesnt make sense. Then again i dont know how my cell phone works but it still does.

Interesting that some are hung up on the 7 day bit. What makes one think 7 days in ancient/biblical/god’s times was the same as now. That days is actually a correct translation, remember for hundreds of years in the English version we read of the Red Sea being parted, not too long ago scholars found out the translated version was wrong and it should have been Sea of Reeds.

How many know a second language out there, there are words in many languages that have no equivalent in English. When translating a book or some other written form from that foreign language into English, sometimes the translator just uses what is close, even if it is wrong. Then again if all of this was created by an immortal god, which time means nothing to, perhaps days was added so those who read and worshiped in that religion would have a basis, something they could understand. Who knows.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

How many times in the last 2 decades have archeologists changed theories regarding the dinosaurs? Yet every time they change, they think they finally have it right, just so they can change again in another couple years. Science is important, but its not all knowing. At least not our current level of understanding of it.

What exactly do you mean dinosaur 'theory'? The theory of their extinction? Their evolution?....

I'm asking to clarify, because I cannot imagine you are referring to a 'theory' that they existed or not...

 

[afr0byte]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Interesting that some are hung up on the 7 day bit. What makes one think 7 days in ancient/biblical/god’s times was the same as now. That days is actually a correct translation, remember for hundreds of years in the English version we read of the Red Sea being parted, not too long ago scholars found out the translated version was wrong and it should have been Sea of Reeds.

How many know a second language out there, there are words in many languages that have no equivalent in English. When translating a book or some other written form from that foreign language into English, sometimes the translator just uses what is close, even if it is wrong. Then again if all of this was created by an immortal god, which time means nothing to, perhaps days was added so those who read and worshiped in that religion would have a basis, something they could understand. Who knows.

Maybe a lot of stuff was translated improperly and we should actually be worshiping Satan! If you're prepared to believe that kind of stuff you could just as easily believe we're all in The Matrix. Who knows, right?

 

[Dpetty]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

A god could do that anytime they want, but they either choose not to or they don't exist. Considering the lack of evidence for a god, I'm guessing it's the latter.

The evidence is all around you, you just refuse to see it for what it is. However we can both guess till we are blue in the face. Like you said there is no conclusive evidence for either argument.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

The fossil record is the only evidence we have of changes or non change in natural hsitory.

"The fossil record, and only the fossil record, provides direct evidence of major sequential changes in the Earth's biota."

Stanley, Steven M. - THE NEW EVOLUTIONARY TIMETABLE (NY: Basic Books, 1981) p. 72

We have a fossil record because of natural events. Yes, I do know some archaeologists and anthropologists. And it is the physical anthopologists who normally are involved with the fossil record. They generall have degrees in biology or other life sciences. The study of the fossil record is often called paleoanthropology. Please point out where I have quoted a creationist. Or, have openly advocated a creationist position. I'm merely exercizeing my right to be cynical of Darwinism.

I never accused you of quoting anybody. If you are cynical of Darwinism, you must support a stance you feel more firmly about. Which do you support?

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

How many times has your scientific truth been contradicted by itself? Scientific theories are constantly being replaced by new theories and each time we are convinced we have it right. If scientific truth has ever contradicted anything, it is itself.

The nature of science is always to challenge itself to better understand the world around us.

You religious aren't in the habit of challenging anything, except progress.