 |
DarwinTalk.com
Evolution Debate and Public Discussion Forum
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
darwin_on_trial
Show Poodle
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 262
Location: philippines
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 2:39 am Post subject: Evolution and the Modern Culture. |
 |
|
Here is my point why Evolution is a myth.
Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc., is there anyone can prove that the bible mentioned alien civilization somewhere in the universe existed?
The Bible and Science fiction is NOT compatible.
True science and bible is compatible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Mangetout
Bear
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 695
Location: The Kingdom Of Butter
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm completely failing to understand your point; perhaps you'd like to outline some examples of 'true science' that is compatible with the Bible? Maybe you'd like to expand a little on the 'evolution is a myth' theme? As I understand it, evolution is supported by an enormous weight and diversity of evidence and observation.
| Quote: | | Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc. |
So what? You are aware that science and Science Fiction are two very different things aren't you?
| Quote: | | The Bible and Science fiction is NOT compatible. |
Except in the small matter of describing fantastical, inexplicable events that don't seem to happen in real, everyday life.
| Quote: | | is there anyone can prove that the bible mentioned alien civilization somewhere in the universe existed? |
I'm really not sure why you think anyone would care to prove this point, but just for the sake of argument, how about John 10:16 - | Quote: | | [Jesus Said] And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. |
Last edited by Mangetout on Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:53 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gbunty
Alley Cat
Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 199
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:10 am Post subject: Re: Evolution and the Modern Culture. |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | Here is my point why Evolution is a myth.
Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc., is there anyone can prove that the bible mentioned alien civilization somewhere in the universe existed?
The Bible and Science fiction is NOT compatible.
True science and bible is compatible. |
 This has got to be one of the lamest ideas I have ever heard. What does evolution have in common with science fiction? And so what if it does? Fiction has always taken some of its inspiration from fact.
And why is the bible not compatible with alien civilizations? C.S. Lewis wrote two series of Christian science fiction using the alien civilization concept. Who is to say where else in this immense universe God may have created life? Just because the bible doesn't mention it, doesn't mean God didn't do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meatros
German Shepherd
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 330
Location: Fairfax, VA, The land of the brave.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:19 am Post subject: Re: Evolution and the Modern Culture. |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | Here is my point why Evolution is a myth. |
This should be good.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc., is there anyone can prove that the bible mentioned alien civilization somewhere in the universe existed? |
What? Did this make sense to you when you wrote it? You know sci-fi movies/books use *english* does that mean that *english* is a myth?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | The Bible and Science fiction is NOT compatible. |
This relates to what, exactly?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | True science and bible is compatible. |
Ah, then you really have no problem with evolution, do you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erasmus
Lion King
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1047
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The kid ought to read a bit more widely, at the very least. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
solidsquid
Ferret
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 108
Location: Victoria, Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 7:32 am Post subject: Re: Evolution and the Modern Culture. |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | Here is my point why Evolution is a myth. |
You begin with an opinion, an unbased assertation. Your argument is already logically flawed.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc., is there anyone can prove that the bible mentioned alien civilization somewhere in the universe existed? |
This statement is meaningless and does nothing to support your argument.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | The Bible and Science fiction is NOT compatible. |
Another opinion. I'm sure there are many sci-fi fans that are Christian who might disagree.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | True science and bible is compatible. |
True science and the bible are compatible. You claimed evolution is a myth. According to the scientific community, evolutionary theory is true science. This is a major contradiction. It means that both the bible and evolution are a myth or you have no idea what you're talking about. I'm thinking it's the latter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darwin_on_trial
Show Poodle
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 262
Location: philippines
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:00 pm Post subject: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
Dear all,
I apologize if i exagerrated my point of view where i stated that Evolution is a myth. Let me defend my argument - Evolution is a myth. This belief was based on what i observe in nature.
To: Mangetout
My qoute: | Quote: | | Evolution theory and Science fiction is compatible. Take a good look of sci-fi movies, like star wars, star trek, etc. |
My point is because of evolutionary thinking, science fiction stories were created out of it. For example, if life evolve here on earth, of course evolutionist will think that life could evolve elsewhere in the universe even w/o a shred of evidence supporting it. The SETI project, Sci-fi stories were not the result of reading the bible, but because of the belief of evolution.
| Quote: | | Except in the small matter of describing fantastical, inexplicable events that don't seem to happen in real, everyday life |
I don't really believe the idea that any fantastical, inexplicable events were written in the bible. The unobservable past was being explain through the theory of evolution, and yet it contains fantastical, inexplicable events that cannot be applied or observed in our everyday life. The values written in the bible did not change, but the science as we know it change over time, because science is the search for "truth".
| Quote: | I'm really not sure why you think anyone would care to prove this point, but just for the sake of argument, how about John 10:16 - Quote:
[Jesus Said] And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. |
Im sorry to ask that, but because you qoute the verse in John 10:16 i need to address your misconception. Have you ever thought first of what is the relationship existed between the Shepherd and the sheep? Read the whole chapter 10. Jesus came to save the sinners (lost sheep).
It does not state the the other sheep are the alien life existed elsewhere.
My qoute - "True Science and the Bible is compatible"
Here is my point:
The law of thermodynamics stated that Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed.
This verse was written 2000 years ago, and it is very compatible with the first law:
Corinthians 4:18 - because we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen; for the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." This is also commonly referred to as entropy.
The bible says that because of the sin of one man, the whole creation was in constant decay.
Romans 8:22 - For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
But their is hope.
Romans 8:21 - because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God.
It may sounds rediculous to unbelievers but please do not argue with me in regard to the meanings of the scriptures. They have no right to do so, because in the first place, they are unbelievers so how can i believe and argue with the unbelievers?
I am upset of the theory of evolution because:
1. The fossil record does not support the theory.
2. An alternative explanation of the fossil record was invented in order it to look it supportive to the theory of evolution - "Punctuated Equilibrium"
3. Evolution theory was being taught in school as "fact"
4. Evolution theory was based not on facts but relied heavily on Philosophy.
A leading evolutionist Richard Dawkins stated: "The evidence of evolution theory is the same with the evidence of the Roman Empire" This statement is seriously flawed, why? The Roman Empire does not need a theory, because millions of people were the witnesses of this empire. many of them left writings for us to investigate. However evolution is a "THEORY" because nobody in the ancient past observed that a lifeless atom, evolved into a thinking being and become a university professor. Again another one posted in the net with the same concept: "The theory of evolution is the same with the theory of Gravity." - However gravity is more than a theory, because we are all witnesses of it. It does require a Law - the Law of Gravity, whereas their is no single LAW out of evolution.
I hope i shed some light to my argument - Evolution is a Myth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gbunty
Alley Cat
Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 199
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:14 pm Post subject: Re: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | Dear all,
I apologize if i exagerrated my point of view where i stated that Evolution is a myth. |
Before we go any further, you should know that I am one of the majority of Christians who does not reject evolution.
Evolution does not equal atheism.
Natural does not equal godless.
Christians generally believe that God's hand is seen in all natural processes. There is no reason why evolution should be an exception.
| Quote: | | My point is because of evolutionary thinking, science fiction stories were created out of it. For example, if life evolve here on earth, of course evolutionist will think that life could evolve elsewhere in the universe even w/o a shred of evidence supporting it. The SETI project, Sci-fi stories were not the result of reading the bible, but because of the belief of evolution. |
Do you think science fiction did not exist before the theory of evolution? You need to look at some of the 18th century science fiction.
I bet I could make a good case that the book of Revelation is science fiction. Maybe a few other biblical stories too. A fellow named Velikovsky has (inadvertently) written some compelling science fiction based on the bible and other ancient texts.
| Quote: | Read the whole chapter 10. Jesus came to save the sinners (lost sheep).
It does not state the the other sheep are the alien life existed elsewhere. |
No, it doesn't say that. Problem is, it doesn't say who the other sheep are at all. Now the Mormons have a story (more science fiction based on the bible? ) that the other sheep are the indigenous people of the Americas to whom Jesus revealed himself centuries before European missionaries arrived there.
Possible? Why not?
Jehovah's Witnesses believe almost all JWs are the "other sheep" since the disciples to whom Jesus was speaking are part of the "little flock" of 144,000 who will reign with Christ when he returns.
Possible? Why not?
And if there are aliens on other planets, why not?
All of these are just as plausible as the traditional idea that Jesus was referring to non-Jews. (Scandalous idea!!!)
| Quote: | Here is my point:
The law of thermodynamics stated that Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed.
This verse was written 2000 years ago, and it is very compatible with the first law:
Corinthians 4:18 - because we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen; for the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal. |
The text is too broad to apply to something as specific as the laws of thermodynamics.
| Quote: | | The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." This is also commonly referred to as entropy. |
I hope you noticed the "if" and have taken into account that neither organisms nor the planet as a whole is a closed system, but freely exchange energy with their surroundings. Therefore, their potential energy can be greater than that of the initial state, as long as somewhere else in their surroundings there is an increase in entropy to compensate for the decrease in entropy in earth's living systems.
This regularly occurs in nature. If it didn't an embryo could not grow into a baby, nor a baby into an adult. If it didn't we would have no such thing as snowflakes (which have less entropy than the water droplets they were made from.)
| Quote: | | It may sounds rediculous to unbelievers but please do not argue with me in regard to the meanings of the scriptures. They have no right to do so, because in the first place, they are unbelievers so how can i believe and argue with the unbelievers? |
Why not? Christians like you and I have been debating the meaning of the scriptures for 3,000 years. Why stop a fine old Christian tradition?
| Quote: | I am upset of the theory of evolution because:
1. The fossil record does not support the theory.
2. An alternative explanation of the fossil record was invented in order it to look it supportive to the theory of evolution - "Punctuated Equilibrium"
3. Evolution theory was being taught in school as "fact"
4. Evolution theory was based not on facts but relied heavily on Philosophy. |
1. Name one fact about the fossil record that does not support the theory of evolution. If you can, name three.
2. Punctuated Equilibrium explains some aspects of the fossil record. It was not invented to explain the whole fossil record, and it does not.
3. That is because evolution is a fact, and ought to be taught as such. The theory of evolution should be taught as the theory which explains how evolution is thought to occur, together with the evidence that supports the theory.
4. The theory of evolution, like all scientific theories, relies principally on evidence gathered by observation and experiment. People of many different philosophies and religious persuasions agree this evidence supports evolution.
| Quote: | | A leading evolutionist Richard Dawkins stated: "The evidence of evolution theory is the same with the evidence of the Roman Empire" This statement is seriously flawed, why? |
No, Dawkins is right and if you read his books you will see why. I recommend in particular Climbing Mount Improbable.
| Quote: | | Again another one posted in the net with the same concept: "The theory of evolution is the same with the theory of Gravity." - However gravity is more than a theory, because we are all witnesses of it. It does require a Law - the Law of Gravity, whereas their is no single LAW out of evolution. |
In science there is nothing "more" than a theory. Theories are the magnum opus of science as symphonies are of musical composition. A law is a much more limited statement of a specific (usually mathematical) relationship. A law describes an aspect of nature, but it does not explain it or relate it to other scientific knowledge. That is what a theory does.
| Quote: | | I hope i shed some light to my argument - Evolution is a Myth. |
I hope you take time to learn more about evolution, and especially about why it is not anti-Christian or anti-God or even anti-biblical to accept that evolution is the way God created us.
http://www.theistic-evolution.com/index.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meatros
German Shepherd
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 330
Location: Fairfax, VA, The land of the brave.
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 6:45 am Post subject: Re: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | Dear all,
I apologize if i exagerrated my point of view where i stated that Evolution is a myth. Let me defend my argument - Evolution is a myth. This belief was based on what i observe in nature. |
What you observe in nature or what you've blindedly accepted by preachers who pontificate on things they do not understand?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | My point is because of evolutionary thinking, science fiction stories were created out of it. For example, if life evolve here on earth, of course evolutionist will think that life could evolve elsewhere in the universe even w/o a shred of evidence supporting it. The SETI project, Sci-fi stories were not the result of reading the bible, but because of the belief of evolution. |
I fail to see how any of this relates to whether or not evolution is true.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | I don't really believe the idea that any fantastical, inexplicable events were written in the bible. |
No offense, but have you read the bible? How about the flood, there is no evidence of it happening at all. Or Jacob's ability to effect the genetics of his livestock by placing stripped sticks in a river? Neither of these sound fantastical to you?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | The unobservable past |
Stop right there. We can indirectly observe the past. Fossils are one means of doing so. Not to mention written records.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | was being explain through the theory of evolution, and yet it contains fantastical, inexplicable events that cannot be applied or observed in our everyday life. The values written in the bible did not change, but the science as we know it change over time, because science is the search for "truth". |
Actually for the most part, the only people who make these claims are religious fundamentalists who have an ax to grind because the bible, when literally taken, is contradicted by science.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | Here is my point:
The law of thermodynamics stated that Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed.
This verse was written 2000 years ago, and it is very compatible with the first law:
Corinthians 4:18 - because we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen; for the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal. |
Yes, you can perform mental gymnastics to reconcile the bible with science. I could use this very same passage to justify a belief in ghosts or invisible pink unicorns.
Do you see my point?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." This is also commonly referred to as entropy.
The bible says that because of the sin of one man, the whole creation was in constant decay.
Romans 8:22 - For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
But their is hope.
Romans 8:21 - because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God. |
Again, you are seeing what you want to see here.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | It may sounds rediculous to unbelievers but please do not argue with me in regard to the meanings of the scriptures. They have no right to do so, because in the first place, they are unbelievers so how can i believe and argue with the unbelievers? |
I see, so because nonbelievers disagree with you, they are automatically wrong *BECAUSE* they do not believe?
Nice.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | I am upset of the theory of evolution because: |
I see, so because it makes you angry, your vision is clouded?
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | 1. The fossil record does not support the theory. |
On what planet?
If you mean earth then you obviously haven't really looked into the matter: http://members.aol.com/darwinpage/transitionals.htm
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | 2. An alternative explanation of the fossil record was invented in order it to look it supportive to the theory of evolution - "Punctuated Equilibrium" |
Incorrect, Punk Eek was not a criticism on there being *no* fossils record. Punk Eek was a supportive theory in addition to gradualism which postulated the *RATE* at which evolution occured.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | 3. Evolution theory was being taught in school as "fact" |
Well, generally you want to teach school children facts as opposed to falsehoods. That's how the accumulation of knowledge begins.
I fail to see how this makes you upset.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | 4. Evolution theory was based not on facts but relied heavily on Philosophy. |
Incorrect. The theory of evolution is based on an accumulation of evidence, including DNA, fossil, observed speciation, etc, etc. In fact, everytime you get an immunity shot, thank evolution. 
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | A leading evolutionist Richard Dawkins stated: "The evidence of evolution theory is the same with the evidence of the Roman Empire" This statement is seriously flawed, why? |
Why? Because I'm guessing you are a creationist.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | The Roman Empire does not need a theory, because millions of people were the witnesses of this empire. many of them left writings for us to investigate. |
So what? We witness evolution occuring today.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | However evolution is a "THEORY" because nobody in the ancient past observed that a lifeless atom, evolved into a thinking being and become a university professor. |
Oh, I see, you don't understand much of anything about science do you? Evolution is both fact and theory. It's labelled a 'theory' because it explains the hows and whys of evolution. Not because science has reserves about it's accuracy.
I mean you accept that germs and atoms exist-right? You accept that the earth goes around the sun, right? All of those are *theories*.
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | Again another one posted in the net with the same concept: "The theory of evolution is the same with the theory of Gravity." - However gravity is more than a theory, because we are all witnesses of it. |
Actually gravity is both a theory and a law, Newton admitted this.
Check this out: http://www.amasci.com/miscon/myths10.html
| Quote: | | The more thorny, and many would say more interesting, issue with respect to gravity is the explanation for why the law operates as it does. At this point, there is no well. accepted theory of gravity. Some physicists suggest that gravity waves are the correct explanation for the law of gravity, but with clear confirmation and consensus lacking, most feel that the theory of gravity still eludes science. Interestingly, Newton addressed the distinction between law and theory with respect to gravity. Although he had discovered the law of gravity, he refrained from speculating publically about its cause. In Principial, Newton states" . . . I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypothesis . . ." " . . . it is enough that gravity does really exist, and act according to the laws which we have explained . . ." (Newton, 1720/1946, p. 547). |
Let's see what you said next...
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | It does require a Law - the Law of Gravity, whereas their is no single LAW out of evolution. |
Again, you misunderstand scientific lingo.
Check out this article: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&catID=2
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | I hope i shed some light to my argument - Evolution is a Myth. |
You did shed a lot of light on your argument. You've shown that you don't understand the basics of science or of evolution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
primitive hominid
Pit Bull
Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 358
Location: Oklahoma
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: Re: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | A leading evolutionist Richard Dawkins stated: "The evidence of evolution theory is the same with the evidence of the Roman Empire" This statement is seriously flawed, why? The Roman Empire does not need a theory, because millions of people were the witnesses of this empire. many of them left writings for us to investigate. |
There are no living eye witnesses to the Roman Empire. Therefore the existence of the Roman Empire can only be a theory. All you have are a bunch of documents allegedly written by ancient people supposedly about some Roman Empire. Do you know the languages involved? Can you read the documents? Do you really know what they are saying? Who are the people who wrote those documents? What was their motivation? You are betraying a Romanist bias. When you look at the evidence without these Romanist assumptions, then other interpretations are possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mangetout
Bear
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 695
Location: The Kingdom Of Butter
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 4:02 pm Post subject: Re: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | It may sounds rediculous to unbelievers but please do not argue with me in regard to the meanings of the scriptures. They have no right to do so, because in the first place, they are unbelievers so how can i believe and argue with the unbelievers? |
Oh, you're right on that one; it really does sound ridiculous, but I have to thank you for introducing me to a truly absurd debating tactic I'd never seen or noticed before, at least in this particular form, let me try it out for size:
Did you know that tomatoes don't actually grow on tomato plants, but are hand-carved from blocks of earwax by the invisible tomato faeries.
If you don't believe in the invisible tomato faeries, you're not even capable of discussing it with me (because you'd also be wrong, of course), so don't insult me by trying; I'll just take your silence to mean that you agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erasmus
Lion King
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1047
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 5:46 pm Post subject: Re: Evolution is a myth |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | Dear all,
I apologize if i exagerrated my point of view where i stated that Evolution is a myth. Let me defend my argument - Evolution is a myth. This belief was based on what i observe in nature. |
I suspect that your version of "observing" is gazing upon it uninquisitively with what your equally uninquisitive preachers have told you about it in the forefront of your mind. You are looking through a haze.
| Quote: | | My point is because of evolutionary thinking, science fiction stories were created out of it. For example, if life evolve here on earth, of course evolutionist will think that life could evolve elsewhere in the universe even w/o a shred of evidence supporting it. The SETI project, Sci-fi stories were not the result of reading the bible, but because of the belief of evolution. |
So, evolution has to be wrong because it inspires science fiction writing and intellectual speculation? By that reasoning, the moral prescriptions in the Bible are wrong because they inspire a small group of fanatics in Uganda (called the Avengers of the ten Commandments, or somesuch) to go around murdering people in their sleep. That's just poor reasoning.
| Quote: | | I don't really believe the idea that any fantastical, inexplicable events were written in the bible. |
Alright, please explain Job's fire-breathing behemoth, or Ezekiel's winged chariot, neither of which can be observed currently (just like life on other planets).
| Quote: | | The unobservable past was being explain through the theory of evolution, and yet it contains fantastical, inexplicable events that cannot be applied or observed in our everyday life. |
The theory has been devised in order to explain with evidence and reasoning what was previously unexplicable. You might prefer to leave fossil dinosaurs (for example) to rest in peace, but some people are inquisitive enough to want to learn how they came to be there.
Evolutionary science is not unlike historical analysis in many ways; it uses observations of current events to help explain what happened in the past.
You are suggesting that the only way to understand how natural events might have worked in the past is to look at them through the eyes of people who herded goats for a living and believed the world was a small disc covered with a dish with holes in for the stars and windows for rain. Not a smart move. Forget meteorology, we can rest assured that clouds are useless decorations.
| Quote: | | The values written in the bible did not change, but the science as we know it change over time, because science is the search for "truth". |
So women in your country are stoned to death for giving birth after being raped? (an OT law). So there is no difference between the moral code of the Old Testament and the New? Sure, people are not much different from a few thousand years ago, but a whole lot of ape-human fossils suggest things were a lot different a long time before anyone thought to put stylus to clay. Science changes because it asks questions and is prepared to take on board new evidence based on probability. It is about learning.
Dogmatic individual certainty is absolutely no guarantee that you are right - otherwise, all dogmatists would be right, even when they disagree with each other. That just doesn't make sense.
You don't learn if you sit in a corner with your favourite book and never talk to anyone with a different view or ask questions. I suspect you are beginning to realise that - good move.
| Quote: | | Have you ever thought first of what is the relationship existed between the Shepherd and the sheep? |
Never say that to a New Zealender.
| Quote: | My qoute - "True Science and the Bible is compatible"
[1st & 2nd LOT and some obscure biblical references]
It may sounds rediculous to unbelievers |
Ridiculous doesn't begin to describe it. There's even less of a demostrable connection between those statements and newtonian science as there is between a dugout canoe and a nuclear submarine.
Anyhow, you are being utterly contradictory. There is nothing distinct enough about the intellectual and practical processes that are involved in evolutionary science, and those that are involved in the other sciences, to be able to separate it out as the one science that is not compatible with the Bible. Lots of sciences contribute to evolutionary theory, and vice versa. They are part-and-parcel. Either humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor, as the evidence from a whole heap of scientific disciplines suggests (including that from the nuclear physics you cite), or they didn't. That contradicts the Bible. The Bible comes without a shred of supporting objective evidence. Science 1, Bible 0.
| Quote: | | but please do not argue with me in regard to the meanings of the scriptures. They have no right to do so, because in the first place, they are unbelievers so how can i believe and argue with the unbelievers? |
That's just the sort of fundamentalist arrogance that leads to terrorism. "We can't talk because we have different beliefs/skin colour/sexual preferences/favourite TV shows." If you really believed it, you wouldn't be participating in this forum. Either that, or you have definitely come to the wrong forum. There are lots of atheists around here, and quite a few Christians who accept evolution. After all, diversity is inherent to human existence. Even the Bible says that (there's a conundrum for you: what do you do with an unbeliever who agrees with something in the Bible?)
Emotions are what drive us, but intellect is what makes us human.
| Quote: | of the theory of evolution because:
1. The fossil record does not support the theory. |
If you haven't bothered to read a page of paleantology then all you can claim is ignorance.
| Quote: | | 2. An alternative explanation of the fossil record was invented in order it to look it supportive to the theory of evolution - "Punctuated Equilibrium" |
PE came about as a means of explaining evidence of occasional surges in development. There is no debate about the basic evidence of change in species over time.
| Quote: | | 3. Evolution theory was being taught in school as "fact" |
Just like the theory of gravity. [Edit - but I see you mention that further on. So i challenge you: have you ever "seen" gravity, or are you satisfied that it exists because it has been rationally inferred from observation of its measurable consequences? If the latter, then it is very like evolution, of which you yourself are demonstrably a consequence.]
| Quote: | | 4. Evolution theory was based not on facts but relied heavily on Philosophy. |
If you had read any of Charles Darwin's writings, you would know that the idea came to him gradually, and was based on meticulous observation, from looking at rock formations to microscopic dissection, of what he found during a scientific voyage of South America. He wasn't just laying about waiting for someone to bring him a bunch of rules down from a mountain, but doing hard practical work and disciplined rational thinking - just like most modern scientists. You should try it, you might learn something.
| Quote: | | A leading evolutionist Richard Dawkins stated: "The evidence of evolution theory is the same with the evidence of the Roman Empire" This statement is seriously flawed, why? The Roman Empire does not need a theory, because millions of people were the witnesses of this empire. many of them left writings for us to investigate. |
By this reasoning, nothing important could ever happened unless someone was there to see it with their own eyes and write it down. That's just silly.
Just like millions of organisms left their fossils for us to investigate,, neatly layered in their rock tombs, in a developmental order that coincides with what we have learned about examining modern organisms. As for writings, a certified genealogy would be nice, but DNA is delivering quite a deal of insight. The patterns of evolutionary relationships implicit in DNA just happen to match the apparent patterns of development in the fossil record - neat, don't you think?
| Quote: | | However evolution is a "THEORY" because nobody in the ancient past observed that a lifeless atom, evolved into a thinking being and become a university professor. |
It takes quite a few lifeless atoms, actually, and a great deal of time. "Life from non-life" is called "abiogenesis", and is a science in its own right. Evolutionary science deals with what happens to existing life-forms, and stands up well enough analytically without panicking about the mystery of how the first ancestral life-forms started out. Replicating organisms have been created in the laboratory, by the way, using inanimate molecules. Here's one example: http://www.theharbinger.org/articles/rel_sci/fox.html
| Quote: | | Again another one posted in the net with the same concept: "The theory of evolution is the same with the theory of Gravity." - However gravity is more than a theory, because we are all witnesses of it. It does require a Law - the Law of Gravity, whereas their is no single LAW out of evolution. |
Yes there is. Heard of "survival of the fittest?" It works, every time. In fact it works so reliably that computer programs have been written that are based on it, to devise, for example, ways of avoiding cracks in aircraft frames. It is a very practical principle. You can bet your life on it, next time you fly.
| Quote: | | I hope i shed some light to my argument - Evolution is a Myth. |
I hope you are genuinely receptive to argument, and prepared for a little enlightenment yourself.
Last edited by Erasmus on Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Albion
German Shepherd
Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 341
Location: Eastern USA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I am upset of the theory of evolution because:
1. The fossil record does not support the theory.
2. An alternative explanation of the fossil record was invented in order it to look it supportive to the theory of evolution - "Punctuated Equilibrium"
3. Evolution theory was being taught in school as "fact"
4. Evolution theory was based not on facts but relied heavily on Philosophy. |
Please don't treat us like idiots. You're upset about evolution because it contradicts your interpretation of your holy book. The above list of items is a bunch of excuses - apart from no. 3, which is derived from your religious objections to evolution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darwin_on_trial
Show Poodle
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 262
Location: philippines
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2004 9:04 pm Post subject: I appreciate all your responses: |
|
|
Thankyou all for your responses, this will be my end in this thread i think.
First someone mentioned that the bible can't be trusted by a someone claiming to be a Theistic evolutionist, and someone who said that the flood have no archaelogical evidence, and sounds fantastical. Please do not argue with me things like that... Or i will treat as you as bunch of IDIOTS. I know u know there are lots of Christian scientists who are not evolutionists, go and debate with them. Im not a scientist to addressed all your accusations that i believing in something superficial. I don't think any of you who believed that before big-bang or before the beginning of the universe, all events are natural. What is super-natural anyway? What i believed is in conformance with the scriptures, i believed the bible is the source of truth. The bible is not a science book, but it is NOT un-scientific. If all of you will deny this, then its ok,, it is better to hear the rebuke of the wise than the advice of fools. Someone who response that a bunch of christian radicals in africa killed people. So what is the problem with that? The problem is that they are not following what is written in the christian scriptures - Christianity commanded - Love your neighbors as yourself, then why they are committing genocide? Is it a "Christian Act"? Jesus said that love your enemies and pray for them. Besides God caused the sun to rise for both righteous and unrighteous. Anyway why bothered to believed that God made the sun? If you did not believed things written in the bible, and it says that God is the creator of all things, then you have a tremendous problem of understanding why there are christians who are murderers. If you broke the LAW, then you are unrighteous, then if you broke the christian law, how can i call you a "Righteous Christian"? The problem is that lots of you denied the bible even some of you claimed to be a christian, and my problem is that i believed the bible solely. Many of you failed to understand the bible, for this main reason i conclude that it is not worthy to continue. I know i have not fully explored the theory of evolution, but doing such a thing will make me an evolutionist. It's kinda boring, evolution is the place of refuge for atheists, a meaningless life. I remember another who response that the Roman empire can be a theory or a theory, i wonder what this guy was really saying, its kinda boring to read such responses, it is so nonsense, frankly i will tell you all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Albion
German Shepherd
Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 341
Location: Eastern USA
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2004 9:27 pm Post subject: Re: I appreciate all your responses: |
|
|
| darwin_on_trial wrote: | | First someone mentioned that the bible can't be trusted by a someone claiming to be a Theistic evolutionist, and someone who said that the flood have no archaelogical evidence, and sounds fantastical. Please do not argue with me things like that... Or i will treat as you as bunch of IDIOTS. |
Why shouldn't we argue with you? A theistic evolutionist is entitled to express opinions about both Christianity and evolution, and people with advanced degrees in science are entitled to express opinions about archaeological and geological evidence for things, without being treated as idiots by someone who has no more knowledge than they do.
| Quote: | | I know u know there are lots of Christian scientists who are not evolutionists, go and debate with them. |
There are very few scientists who are not evolutionists.
| Quote: | | Im not a scientist to addressed all your accusations that i believing in something superficial. |
You're not a scientist but you're criticising major areas of mainstream science, and you think the scientists here are idiots? Interesting.
| Quote: | | The problem is that lots of you denied the bible even some of you claimed to be a christian, and my problem is that i believed the bible solely. |
Well, then, you'll just have to face the uncomfortable fact that this God of yours created the universe and left evidence of having done it one way, and then caused people to write accounts in scripture that claim he actually did it in a totally different way. This deity of yours has quite a sense of humour, apparently. Or he's a cosmic deceiver.
| Quote: | | I know i have not fully explored the theory of evolution, but doing such a thing will make me an evolutionist. It's kinda boring, evolution is the place of refuge for atheists, a meaningless life. |
Don't talk such stupid rubbish. There are Christians on this board and elsewhere who accept evolution and who certainly aren't atheists even though they may not be your sort of Christian. You're right, however, about not having fully expored the theory of evolution - it sounds as if you haven't explored it at all apart from reading what the creationists have to say about it. So you're rejecting something you know nothing about on a basis that isn't true. And fundamentalists wonder why they have a reputation for being anti-intellectual.
Here's part of an article about evolution by an Anglican clergyman who most certainly isn't an atheist:
"First, the theory of evolution, far from undermining faith, deepens it. This was quickly seen by Frederick Temple, later Archbishop of Canterbury, who said that God doesn't just make the world, he does something even more wonderful, he makes the world make itself. God has given creation a real independence and the miraculous fact is that working in relation to this independent life God has, as it were, woven creation from the bottom upwards: with matter giving rise to life and life giving rise to conscious reflective existence in the likes of you and me. The fact that the universe probably began about 12 billion years ago with life beginning to evolve about 3 billion years ago simply underlines the extraordinary detailed, persistent, patience of the divine creator spirit."
"The bible is a collection of books made up of very different kinds of literature, poetry, history, ethics, law, myth, theology, wise sayings and so on. Through this variety of different kinds of writing God's loving purpose can come through to us. The bible brings us precious, essential truths about who we are and what we might become. But biblical literalism hinders people from seeing and responding to these truths."
"Sadly, biblical literalism brings not only the bible but Christianity itself into disrepute."
http://www.oxford.anglican.org/tftd.php?id=178 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
