- Joined
- Apr 8, 2006
- Messages
- 3,002
- Reaction score
- 545
- Location
- Midwest
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I sure hope that isn't true...Because if so, then we stop learning.
Absolutism is never a good position to take with unknowns out there.
I got a littly myopic in my debate with Aekos but in the end we found much to agree on. Maybe my answers to him would help in answering your questions.
No one suggested we stop learning because we accept the science we know is true. We still have much to learn about evolution, but we know it exists. I am not going to debate whether gravity exists or not, because I can observe it. I am not going to debate whether the earth revolves around the sun or not, although just like today's debate on evolution, people use to debate that very issue. Yet science won out in the long run.
There is a reason why we accept scientific theories like gravity and evolution . . . because there is so much data involved. The idea is that the data makes so much sense it can be considered fact. Do you believe in gravity J? The same method works for evolution.
It doesn't.
Dumb question. I never said that I didn't accept evolution theory.
Originally Posted by DiavoTheMiavo
Do you believe in gravity J?
Dumb question. I never said that I didn't accept evolution theory.
Well then, feel free to ask anything you'd like...I'll answer it if I can...But, please don't be so foolish as to think I am going to pour over 500 postings to find your particular needle in this haystack....Either ask it again, or don't, doesn't matter to me.
I agree. But it seems some people equate this 6000 year thing with creationism. To me faith is faith and science is science, but even so one of faith can delve deeply into science and be a boon to mankind.
Well then, feel free to ask anything you'd like...I'll answer it if I can...But, please don't be so foolish as to think I am going to pour over 500 postings to find your particular needle in this haystack....Either ask it again, or don't, doesn't matter to me.
"Most likely" - Meaning you don't know for a certainty?
(2.) Terms like "suggestive" are commonly used in evolution theory largely because there are holes that can not be explained. That is all I am saying.
But not all organisms right? I mean, you can't say that with absolute definity when there is so much about our own earth, much less the entirety of the universe that hasn't been scientifically proven.
Before I take your supposed conclusions as credible in the scientific sense, you'd have to lay out your bonafides. You know, why should I believe what you have to say? For all I know, you're a Walmart employee with too much time on his hands....:mrgreen:
How educated do you think the average Walmart employee actually is? Do you think that the average Walmart employee has a good grasp of science or history... that they graduated high school with praise for critical thought?
It is my understanding that someone sat down with the bible and used the genealogy listed in it to determine the 6000 years you talk about. As for falling behind in the core subjects, it is a result of the dumbing down of our public school system. I am an old fart who graduated high school in the early 60's. When my daughter went to college and brought her homework home, I found out she was learning in college what I learned back in my high school days. I came to the conclusion my High School education was about the same as 2 years of college now.
I do not think whether a belief in creation or evolution or both stymie's curiosity at all. Mankind is a species that is always searching for answers to the unknown. If a few show no interest, well you will always have your 10% as the old adage goes. Also my dad became very religious and he scoffed at this 6000 year thing that has been put forth. He said there is no way of know how old the earth is and just adding up generations as stated in the bible will not provide that answer. To him, when the earth was created didn't matter. 6000 years or a couple of billion years, to him god created the heavens and the earth. Time had no meaning when he did this, time has meaning today, but not then. That was just his view.
So, if I take this correctly . . . you believe it is OK for you to tell someone to read the entire thread . . . but it isn't OK for someone to mention that very same thing for you? The answers for your questions exist in the thread, not "needlein haystacks", but you don't have time for it. You have time for questions but not answers.
If I did not know better, I would think you were being contrary on purpose.
Poor performance of schools doesn't make the influence of religious fundamentalists any less damaging,
If it helps you out at all Dave, I'm not a scientist, nor do I claim to be knowledgeable in all concerning evolution science. For the most part I accept that people much smarter than I know more than me and accept what they find out, and can only marvel at what they are able to conclude. Some of the answers I have questions for I admit are unfair to ask, or come from a place of simple lack of knowledge on the subject.
What gets me, is that the knee jerk reaction to a fair number of people that think they understand it, is to either attack someone like me for simply asking the question, or to use evolution as a jump point to ad hom religion generically. I think that is wrong morally to do.
To a point you are correct, maybe I am a little. But I tell ya, if half the vitriolic **** that gets posted in these threads toward people simply for disagreeing on the matters of the day by both sides is heartfelt, then we are in real trouble. I think that God created the Universe, put it in motion if you will, but after that, he let evolution take over. And I trust that either I will never know all the answers, or maybe that is for after I shake off this mortal coil....I don't know.
We'll see.
But this is just further evidence of how stubbornly ignorant the young earth creationist crowd is. (I should clarify that my criticism is aimed solely at them, the ones with that 6000 year number) The bible doesn't actually say the age of the earth, some human calculated that. And did so very, very wrong. But we have a group of people unable to see that their assumptions aren't based on divine truth, but rather a flawed human perception. It doesn't occur to them that there's a possibility of their belief being wrong.
Thing is, your dad is wrong too. And isn't curious. It is possible to know the age of the earth within a pretty decent margin. Assuming there is no answer to a question is just as bad as never asking the question in the first place. "We can't know the answer to this" is an inherently blind notion.
Yes, public school is a mess in some places, but at least it's not teaching people information that is provably false. And really, the problem is mostly public schools in non-wealthy neighborhoods. The upper middle class suburb high schools do a lot better. Poor performance of schools doesn't make the influence of religious fundamentalists any less damaging,
Well I hope you do not consider any of my replies as an attack. They were not intended to be.
That's because a great deal of pseudo-science from the religious side used it as the foundation to build the rest of their 'scientific justification on.'
I do not think I understand what you are getting at. If it is this 6000 year thing, that is just someone's best guess and really has nothing to do with the bible or with science.
An entire cottage industry has risen up trying to bolster creationism with pseudo-science. Because of that 6000 yr date (someone explained how they derived that from the Bible in another post), they start their 'theories' there and everything has to fit upwards from there.
Are you aware of the Creationism Museum?
creationmuseum.org
One example: in it they explain how dinosaurs are only 6000 yrs old.
No, I never heard of the creationism Museum. It is kind of sad that so many people would automatically take someone's word the earth is only 6000 years old when that person who put that theory out there wasn't even religious. But if they want to believe it, I have no problem with them believing it. If it puts their mind at ease and sooths their inner soul, so be it. I may believe in UFO's and the existence of Atlantis, it does no one else harm in my believing this as it does no one else harm believing the earth is only 6000 years old.
Moderator's Warning: |
Creationism as religion I have no problem with. Teaching it to children as science, IMO, is an great injustice to them.
Creation Museum - Creation, Evolution, Science, Dinosaurs, Family, Christian Worldview | Creation Museum
I think "Perverse" is a word that I think applies to those who want deny or attempt to minimize children's exposure to a real science education.
As long as it is not taught in a public school's science class, fine.
But as I said, they created an entire web of pseudo-science to support the creationism myth...trying to justify it scientifically. They go point by point to destroy the actual evidence of evolution and then create their own of convenience to dispute it. And it completely reels in the gullible that do not have a basic understanding of science (which unfortunately seems incredibly prevalent in this country). They have no way of distinguishing it from legitimate science.
Creationism as religion I have no problem with. Teaching it to children as science, IMO, is an great injustice to them.
Creation Museum - Creation, Evolution, Science, Dinosaurs, Family, Christian Worldview | Creation Museum
Agreed but I'm completely confused by the thread smackdown.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?