Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dr. Cranium

Evolution Vs. Creation

  

181 members have voted

  1. 1. Which do you beleive in?

    • Evolution
      139
    • Creation
      27


Recommended Posts

I don't understand why people care so much

 

What you believe about God will ultimately shape you.

 

If you dont believe in him , then just live your life, do whatever you want, then you die and nothing matters.

 

If there is a God then every action has a consequence and there will be a day of judgement etc.

 

I think its important to work out what you believe about God and have good reasons for it. Listen to debates is a great way to get both sides of the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Human evolution halted the moment we started society and began to alter our environment to suit ourselves.

 

The key part of evolution is survival of the fittest, and in order for that to take place people need to die. Once people began to find ways to circumvent death though making houses, farming and medicine, most of human evolution halted.

 

However there is one un-deniable example of human evolution, the great flu epidemic of 1918. Back then the common flu was deadly to humans, until the flu killed every human who was susceptible to it, leaving only the humans who were not so badly affected by it. We are all descendant of these tougher humans, which is why the common cold is nothing more than an annoyance to us now.

 

Religion is a construct of weak minds to protect themselves from a big scary universe full of death, evil and unfairness.

 

Wrong, humans are still mutating, which is in essence what evolution is, how do you explain people who aren't lactose intolerant? and the increase in the size of the average human since say ancient rome. I think religion has its good points, up until the 18th century, most people were god fearing citizens, who rarely did wrong. the problem with religion comes along when someone uses it to get their own means, say like Osama Bin Laden brainwashing zealots into flying a couple of jets into a couple of buildings. And the downfall of the dreaded flu is due to innovaiton not evolution, we take shots every so often, with weaker forms of viruses to help our immune system develop the needed antibodies to combat the flu, much the same as small pox and other deadly viruses.

 

Atheist's are no better than those who are religious, the self righteous crap that flies out of an atheist's mouth about how smart someone is because they figured out god doesn't exist is nauseous, How do you know god doesn't exist? did you scour every morsel of the universe only to find no evidence? If not shut the f*ck up and be humble.

 

Whilst I don't believe god just vomited us all into existence at once(fancy explaining dinosaurs, hehe), I don't believe that we stem from a thunderstorm prompting the reaction of branch chain animo acids, and various polymers in pre primordial soup. So you could say I believe there is something out there that created life, but what has transpired between then and now, has been at the mercy of nature itself. Do i go to church to keep 'god' happy? hell no, I'm too self centered, lazy and busy whoring it out on NS.. :thumbsup: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

theory

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

 

That's when a theory becomes a hypothesis, unfortunately this word is also misused.

 

Creationism can not be backed up by current scientific understands, there are many discrepancies.

 

Evolution and biology go hand to hand and is more in par with science, but it can not answer all aspects of space origin.

 

Wrong again, a hypothesis, is a presumption that something will behave it's intended, much like predicting water will expand when heated prior to doing so,when it has no empirical evidence whatsoever, a scientific theory is the use of evidence provided to make an ASSUMPTION/explanation of why it is so. This is what make evolution a theory, because there is evidence that suggests so, but there is not definitive proof. I do believe in the theory of evolution, but there are many gaps in life evolutionary path that skeptics can point out to make it a sure thing. Untill otherwise I guess it's innocent until proven guilty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Is that God?

 

Not 100% sure. I think it might be an angel? :S

Whatever it's now my god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

theory

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

 

That's when a theory becomes a hypothesis, unfortunately this word is also misused.

 

Creationism can not be backed up by current scientific understands, there are many discrepancies.

 

Evolution and biology go hand to hand and is more in par with science, but it can not answer all aspects of space origin.

 

Wrong again, a hypothesis, is a presumption that something will behave it's intended, much like predicting water will expand when heated prior to doing so,when it has no empirical evidence whatsoever, a scientific theory is the use of evidence provided to make an ASSUMPTION/explanation of why it is so. This is what make evolution a theory, because there is evidence that suggests so, but there is not definitive proof. I do believe in the theory of evolution, but there are many gaps in life evolutionary path that skeptics can point out to make it a sure thing. Untill otherwise I guess it's innocent until proven guilty

theory

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

 

That's when a theory becomes a hypothesis, unfortunately this word is also misused.

 

Creationism can not be backed up by current scientific understands, there are many discrepancies.

 

Evolution and biology go hand to hand and is more in par with science, but it can not answer all aspects of space origin.

 

Wrong again, a hypothesis, is a presumption that something will behave it's intended, much like predicting water will expand when heated prior to doing so,when it has no empirical evidence whatsoever, a scientific theory is the use of evidence provided to make an ASSUMPTION/explanation of why it is so. This is what make evolution a theory, because there is evidence that suggests so, but there is not definitive proof. I do believe in the theory of evolution, but there are many gaps in life evolutionary path that skeptics can point out to make it a sure thing. Untill otherwise I guess it's innocent until proven guilty

 

Wrong again? when was I wrong the first time?

 

 

 

From wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis

 

hypothesis (from Greek ὑπόθεσις; plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. The term derives from the Greek,ὑποτιθέναι – hypotithenai meaning "to put under" or "to suppose".[1] For a hypothesis to be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories. Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for furtherresearch.[1]

 

If you read my post again I mentioned science, the same definition is used in Statistics, my final exam had a question on the definition of the word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Human evolution halted the moment we started society and began to alter our environment to suit ourselves.

 

The key part of evolution is survival of the fittest, and in order for that to take place people need to die. Once people began to find ways to circumvent death though making houses, farming and medicine, most of human evolution halted.

 

However there is one un-deniable example of human evolution, the great flu epidemic of 1918. Back then the common flu was deadly to humans, until the flu killed every human who was susceptible to it, leaving only the humans who were not so badly affected by it. We are all descendant of these tougher humans, which is why the common cold is nothing more than an annoyance to us now.

 

Religion is a construct of weak minds to protect themselves from a big scary universe full of death, evil and unfairness.

 

Wrong, humans are still mutating, which is in essence what evolution is, how do you explain people who aren't lactose intolerant? and the increase in the size of the average human since say ancient rome. I think religion has its good points, up until the 18th century, most people were god fearing citizens, who rarely did wrong. the problem with religion comes along when someone uses it to get their own means, say like Osama Bin Laden brainwashing zealots into flying a couple of jets into a couple of buildings. And the downfall of the dreaded flu is due to innovaiton not evolution, we take shots every so often, with weaker forms of viruses to help our immune system develop the needed antibodies to combat the flu, much the same as small pox and other deadly viruses.

 

Atheist's are no better than those who are religious, the self righteous crap that flies out of an atheist's mouth about how smart someone is because they figured out god doesn't exist is nauseous, How do you know god doesn't exist? did you scour every morsel of the universe only to find no evidence? If not shut the f*ck up and be humble.

 

Whilst I don't believe god just vomited us all into existence at once(fancy explaining dinosaurs, hehe), I don't believe that we stem from a thunderstorm prompting the reaction of branch chain animo acids, and various polymers in pre primordial soup. So you could say I believe there is something out there that created life, but what has transpired between then and now, has been at the mercy of nature itself. Do i go to church to keep 'god' happy? hell no, I'm too self centered, lazy and busy whoring it out on NS.. :thumbsup: .

Human evolution halted the moment we started society and began to alter our environment to suit ourselves.

 

The key part of evolution is survival of the fittest, and in order for that to take place people need to die. Once people began to find ways to circumvent death though making houses, farming and medicine, most of human evolution halted.

 

However there is one un-deniable example of human evolution, the great flu epidemic of 1918. Back then the common flu was deadly to humans, until the flu killed every human who was susceptible to it, leaving only the humans who were not so badly affected by it. We are all descendant of these tougher humans, which is why the common cold is nothing more than an annoyance to us now.

 

Religion is a construct of weak minds to protect themselves from a big scary universe full of death, evil and unfairness.

 

Wrong, humans are still mutating, which is in essence what evolution is, how do you explain people who aren't lactose intolerant? and the increase in the size of the average human since say ancient rome. I think religion has its good points, up until the 18th century, most people were god fearing citizens, who rarely did wrong. the problem with religion comes along when someone uses it to get their own means, say like Osama Bin Laden brainwashing zealots into flying a couple of jets into a couple of buildings. And the downfall of the dreaded flu is due to innovaiton not evolution, we take shots every so often, with weaker forms of viruses to help our immune system develop the needed antibodies to combat the flu, much the same as small pox and other deadly viruses.

 

Atheist's are no better than those who are religious, the self righteous crap that flies out of an atheist's mouth about how smart someone is because they figured out god doesn't exist is nauseous, How do you know god doesn't exist? did you scour every morsel of the universe only to find no evidence? If not shut the f*ck up and be humble.

 

I don't think that human growth is attributed to mutating, I believe it has more do with what we are eating, I am not aware of anyone qualified that said such a thing, could you quote me a reference? I am not implying that there isn't evidence of bio-diversity.

 

And it's clear that you don't know the difference between brainwashing and mind control.

 

Some atheists know very little about atheism and the same can be said about theists, I don't think I have to repeat what I wrote on post 95.

Edited by Astaroth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A theory and hypothesis are two completely different things, however one is dependent on the other. A theory is an extrapolation on empirical data already provided, whereas a hypothesis is a proposition of what will happen. A scientific theory and scientific hypothesis are two different things.

 

and as for the mutation, there are genentic parameters that control how you naturally grow, hence why you can predict whether someone will be tall or short by looking at their direct relatives, exactly how tall is gets a little more complicated. in the last 10000 years mankind has perfected cultivation(agriculture), and as such our diets are quite similar to those some 4000 years ago, but yet the average height of an ancient roman, is around 30 to 40 cm shorter than that of current man, and yes the tolerance to lactose is a mutation.

here are a bunch of links

http://www.foodnavig...erance-mutation

http://pediatrics.aa...4/5/1372.1.full

http://darwinstudent...-tolerance.html

 

Diet does play a role, as with anything, however there is a point where your genes kick in and slow down the hormones essential for growth.

 

People make the mistake of assuming evolution is linear, meaning that when an organism within a species evolves the whole species does so, this isn't the case, you should view evolution as random mutations in all organisms, a new susb-species/species(or most people's thoughts on evolution) is just the prevalence of a specific mutation, mainly due to the fact that the environment the organism lives in favors said mutation. Much like the domestication of the wolf, now in the wild, the likelyhood of running into a gold coarsehaired wolf are low, because it would have died prematurely, however because man has helped canis familiaris survive and through selective breeding, you have the golden labrador retriever.

 

And brainwashing is just another term for mind control, as is hypnosis, suggestion etc. Brainwashing is the use of overbearing porpaganda, or one's authority in general to make someone behave the way you want them to, religion is also a tool used to brainwash.

Edited by spongeboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I thought, you don't understand what I am talking about.

 

perhaps the fluctuation of height through the ages isn't the best example but lactose tolerance is clear proof that homosapiens is indeed evolving. My point about evolution being constant and random is correct. The only thing that can really hamper man's evolution is the fact we are of the only species that can manipulate our environment. That still doesn't mean we can't evolve. another example of mutation in phenotypes, is the blue eye. homo sapiens at first all had brown eyes, however when man made its mass exodus into europe, light was scarce and need to absorb sunlight in order to synthesize vitamin d became essential, so those with fair skin and blue eyes prospered..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Human evolution halted the moment we started society and began to alter our environment to suit ourselves.

 

The key part of evolution is survival of the fittest, and in order for that to take place people need to die. Once people began to find ways to circumvent death though making houses, farming and medicine, most of human evolution halted.

 

However there is one un-deniable example of human evolution, the great flu epidemic of 1918. Back then the common flu was deadly to humans, until the flu killed every human who was susceptible to it, leaving only the humans who were not so badly affected by it. We are all descendant of these tougher humans, which is why the common cold is nothing more than an annoyance to us now.

 

Religion is a construct of weak minds to protect themselves from a big scary universe full of death, evil and unfairness.

 

Wrong, humans are still mutating, which is in essence what evolution is, how do you explain people who aren't lactose intolerant? and the increase in the size of the average human since say ancient rome.

 

Weather or not my statement is" wrong" depends entirely on your perception of the term "evolution".

My explanation was directed to somebody who believes evolution in their understanding of the term has stopped. I was giving an explanation as to why their perception of evolution has stopped.

 

I do not claim for a second that mankind has stopped changing, and is still subject to evolutionary forces, but nowhere near as much as we were prior to society.

Now rather than being just another species at the mercy of the environment and adapting through death, we are now largely shaped by our own preferences for a mate, a kind of 'self selective breeding'.

Of course our immune systems will continue to evolve, but this is a hard concept to explain to a person who believes diseases are cast upon people by a big man in the sky, so i didn't really bother to get into that.

 

In short, just because i didnt bother to shore up all the possible perceptions of the term "evolution" does not at all mean my explanation was "wrong". I believe the more suitable term would be "insufficient".

 

 

 

 

 

Some atheists know very little about atheism and the same can be said about theists, I don't think I have to repeat what I wrote on post 95.

You talk of Atheism like it is a complicated religion.

I would love to hear your explanation on the wide world of Atheism.

 

Once you are done with that, check the dictionary meaning of the word "Atheist", it's one and only meaning is the belief that there is no god.

That's it.

All the other bits that are attached to Atheism (evolution, big bang theory, astronomy) can be attributed to a persons reason for becoming an Atheist, but are not in themselves part of Atheism.

 

Atheism is not a belief, it is the lack of a belief.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is going to get bad....

 

Can someone explain the whole 'big band theory' to me?

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Try asking a scientist... they will tell you it happened from nothing... can't explain the origins of the universe... just say it was created from nothing... nailed it!

 

...

 

I personally believe in evolution... just because I despise religion and I find that science tends to have a lot less contradictions than religion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A hypothesis is before a theory.

 

Usually an attempt to explain a new phenomena that has not been observed before, usually in research experiments.

exactly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Human evolution halted the moment we started society and began to alter our environment to suit ourselves.

 

The key part of evolution is survival of the fittest, and in order for that to take place people need to die. Once people began to find ways to circumvent death though making houses, farming and medicine, most of human evolution halted.

 

However there is one un-deniable example of human evolution, the great flu epidemic of 1918. Back then the common flu was deadly to humans, until the flu killed every human who was susceptible to it, leaving only the humans who were not so badly affected by it. We are all descendant of these tougher humans, which is why the common cold is nothing more than an annoyance to us now.

 

Religion is a construct of weak minds to protect themselves from a big scary universe full of death, evil and unfairness.

 

Wrong, humans are still mutating, which is in essence what evolution is, how do you explain people who aren't lactose intolerant? and the increase in the size of the average human since say ancient rome.

 

Weather or not my statement is" wrong" depends entirely on your perception of the term "evolution".

My explanation was directed to somebody who believes evolution in their understanding of the term has stopped. I was giving an explanation as to why their perception of evolution has stopped.

 

I do not claim for a second that mankind has stopped changing, and is still subject to evolutionary forces, but nowhere near as much as we were prior to society.

Now rather than being just another species at the mercy of the environment and adapting through death, we are now largely shaped by our own preferences for a mate, a kind of 'self selective breeding'.

Of course our immune systems will continue to evolve, but this is a hard concept to explain to a person who believes diseases are cast upon people by a big man in the sky, so i didn't really bother to get into that.

 

In short, just because i didnt bother to shore up all the possible perceptions of the term "evolution" does not at all mean my explanation was "wrong". I believe the more suitable term would be "insufficient".

 

 

 

 

Some atheists know very little about atheism and the same can be said about theists, I don't think I have to repeat what I wrote on post 95.

You talk of Atheism like it is a complicated religion.

I would love to hear your explanation on the wide world of Atheism.

 

Once you are done with that, check the dictionary meaning of the word "Atheist", it's one and only meaning is the belief that there is no god.

That's it.

All the other bits that are attached to Atheism (evolution, big bang theory, astronomy) can be attributed to a persons reason for becoming an Atheist, but are not in themselves part of Atheism.

 

Atheism is not a belief, it is the lack of a belief.

 

You're correct and incorrect at the same time, you can't have a perception on evolution, the theory itself is well defined. It is the gradual change in successive generations, which can be defined as mutations. Natural selection however, is what defines whether said mutation is successful or not. Humans are unique because we can manipulate our environment, and because of that our living conditions don't change drastically enough for us to have major changes,as for "self selective breeding" this trait isn't reserved to just humans, there are many animals who used similar if not identical mating methods. Lions use the alpha male system, and females from many other species can be aggressive toward males they deem unworthy to mate with. That is just natures way of weeding out the weak..

 

 

And astaroth seems like one of those self righteous atheists I mentioned earlier. Us atheists don't need to find meaning to our existence, we just exist, don't jazz it up bud, or you'll sound like tard who also knows nothing about atheism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A hypothesis is before a theory.

 

Usually an attempt to explain a new phenomena that has not been observed before, usually in research experiments.

exactly

 

To give an example, in a recent experiment i saw something that should not have happened (it was due to an error) and i hypothesised as to why it happened. Another researcher repeated my experiment in order to test my hypothesis and discovered it was an error on my part.

 

Thus disproving my hypothesis, if he had've (not a real word, deal with it) got the same results as i had and many others did the same using the same methods and materials then my hypothesis would become a theory or a law (depending on a number of factors).

 

A very simplified view, but some insight into how it happens.

 

that is the relationship between a hypothesis and theory, but their relationship ends therem as far as definition, I used to study genetics and evolution, along with organic chem back in years 11-12. One thing I hate about science, DAMN LAB REPORTS, even accounting is less tedious.. You can also formulate a theory or law without a hypothesis, I'm sure isaac newton didn't conduct an experiment with a hypothesis to prove the law of gravity.

Edited by spongeboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A hypothesis is before a theory.

 

Usually an attempt to explain a new phenomena that has not been observed before, usually in research experiments.

exactly

 

To give an example, in a recent experiment i saw something that should not have happened (it was due to an error) and i hypothesised as to why it happened. Another researcher repeated my experiment in order to test my hypothesis and discovered it was an error on my part.

 

Thus disproving my hypothesis, if he had've (not a real word, deal with it) got the same results as i had and many others did the same using the same methods and materials then my hypothesis would become a theory or a law (depending on a number of factors).

 

A very simplified view, but some insight into how it happens.

 

that is the relationship between a hypothesis and theory, but their relationship ends therem as far as definition, I used to study genetics and evolution, along with organic chem back in years 11-12. One thing I hate about science, DAMN LAB REPORTS, even accounting is less tedious.. You can also formulate a theory or law without a hypothesis, I'm sure isaac newton didn't conduct an experiment with a hypothesis to prove the law of gravity.

 

He would have come up with an initial hypothesis, that there was some force pulling the apple towards the ground (if the legend is true) and he had to try and prove it through experiments and maths, as well as observation.

 

A hypothesis is always first.

 

I always thought it was by chance, when an apple fell on his head. well, what do you know hehe..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I thought, you don't understand what I am talking about.

 

perhaps the fluctuation of height through the ages isn't the best example but lactose tolerance is clear proof that homosapiens is indeed evolving. My point about evolution being constant and random is correct. The only thing that can really hamper man's evolution is the fact we are of the only species that can manipulate our environment. That still doesn't mean we can't evolve. another example of mutation in phenotypes, is the blue eye. homo sapiens at first all had brown eyes, however when man made its mass exodus into europe, light was scarce and need to absorb sunlight in order to synthesize vitamin d became essential, so those with fair skin and blue eyes prospered..

 

I can understand pigmentation, eye colour and skin depth, I think the problem is not what you are saying but the word "mutation" but I know were your getting at and I agree to some degree.

 

As for hypothesis I was referring to scientific/statistical hypothesis, that is an assertion that has been tested.

 

Brainwashing and mind control are not the same, there are web sites and books that put these two words in the same basket and at times brainwashing is used more loosely, even on wiki, Combating Cult Mind Control by Steven Hassan explains it more clearly, also the link http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/terms.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the words of Albert Einstein, "Science without Religion is lame, Religion without Science is blind".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

came across this, i found it interesting. good read. beats 5mins reading stupid bitchen statuses on facebook..

long but no more than a quick 10min read :)

 

No God or Know God?

 

An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem Science has with God, The Almighty.

 

He asks one of his new students to stand and.....

 

Prof: So you believe in God?

Student: Absolutely, sir.

 

Prof: Is God good?

Student: Sure.

 

Prof: Is God all-powerful?

Student: Yes.

 

Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him.

Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?

(Student is silent.)

 

Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God good?

Student: Yes.

 

Prof: Is Satan good?

Student: No.

 

Prof: Where does Satan come from?

Student: From...God.. .

 

Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?

Student: Yes.

 

Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?

Student: Yes.

 

Prof: So who created evil?

(Student does not answer.)

 

Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?

Student: Yes, sir.

 

Prof: So, who created them?

(Student has no answer.)

 

Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?

Student: No, sir.

 

Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?

Student: No, sir.

 

Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?

Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.

 

Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?

Student: Yes.

 

Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?

Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.

 

Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.

Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?

 

Prof: Yes.

Student: And is there such a thing as cold?

 

Prof: Yes.

Student: No sir. There isn't.

 

(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)

 

Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat,

 

but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold.

 

Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

 

(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)

 

Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?

 

Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't.

 

If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?

 

Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?

Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.

 

Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?

Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure.

 

Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

 

To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

 

Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

 

(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)

 

Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavour, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?

 

(The class is in uproar.)

 

Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?

 

(The class breaks out into laughter.)

 

Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir.

 

With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

 

(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable. )

 

Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.

Student: That is it sir... The link between man & god is FAITH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if we evolved from apes...why are there still apes? why arnt we evolving? theory of evolution states creatures evolve into more efficient and better things...yet our bodies are still developing useless parts like appendix and wisdom tooth's since the dawn ages...

 

if you understand the theory of evolution by Charles darwin..he talks about selective genetics..

like an organ cannot live untill every single part of it is in place over time..so how does that happen? the animal just hangs onto the 'right' genes as time goes by and once all are developed..whoala it has an eye? how does selective genetics occur with a species that hasnt even got a brain like a slug?

 

theory of evolution also states dna in everything causes symmetric things. but snow flakes have no dna?

 

if one animal evolved and got wings and became a flying animal...then logically animal 1 to 2 would be made up of a huge series of complex 'middle' species to make up animal 2. ie 1.001 1.002 etc untill it got to the final animal 2. that being said...where are all the fossils of all these so called "evolved" animals? why is it that its mostly fossils of animal 1 and 2? its a complex thing to evolve into another and would take a huge amount of time AND generation/population...so where are these plethora of middle species that were evolving?

 

its too easy to jump on the anti God bandwagon and just say we evolved from germs because thats what makes most sense in your peanut brains. learn about creation...go and read what charles darwin have published and what people have refuted against him that he cannot answer back....because after all....theory of evolution is just a theory...because it can never be proven

 

i dont blame ppl who think we came from monkeys..i blame hollywood and schools. especially when they make movies/posters of monkeys with human eyes so subconsciously we are made to think we came from apes. or even more when we are shown artifacts of apes with human jaws attached to them so again we fall easily into what they say.

 

read a book, watch david attenborough and think to yourself how that complex species like a slug or insect evolved so perfectly?

 

with all that said, ofcourse i do beleive species can evolve to what they are capable according to what they are and their limits...but theory of evolution is just ridiculously stupid to say we just came from bacteria or whatever..

 

We didn't evolve from monkeys/apes. Monkey, apes and us all share a common ancestor that we all diverged from....

 

Darwin published hundreds of years ago before we had been able to look at DNA, develop video recording, uber microscopes etc...

 

People have taken what Darwin said and gone further with it, Darwin made some very good assumptions based on the information he had, but it would have been like feeling your way down a corridor in the dark....

 

The argument you are talking about is 'irreducible complexity' and is pretty retarded in itself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if we evolved from apes...why are there still apes? why arnt we evolving? theory of evolution states creatures evolve into more efficient and better things...yet our bodies are still developing useless parts like appendix and wisdom tooth's since the dawn ages...

 

if you understand the theory of evolution by Charles darwin..he talks about selective genetics..

like an organ cannot live untill every single part of it is in place over time..so how does that happen? the animal just hangs onto the 'right' genes as time goes by and once all are developed..whoala it has an eye? how does selective genetics occur with a species that hasnt even got a brain like a slug?

 

theory of evolution also states dna in everything causes symmetric things. but snow flakes have no dna?

 

if one animal evolved and got wings and became a flying animal...then logically animal 1 to 2 would be made up of a huge series of complex 'middle' species to make up animal 2. ie 1.001 1.002 etc untill it got to the final animal 2. that being said...where are all the fossils of all these so called "evolved" animals? why is it that its mostly fossils of animal 1 and 2? its a complex thing to evolve into another and would take a huge amount of time AND generation/population...so where are these plethora of middle species that were evolving?

 

its too easy to jump on the anti God bandwagon and just say we evolved from germs because thats what makes most sense in your peanut brains. learn about creation...go and read what charles darwin have published and what people have refuted against him that he cannot answer back....because after all....theory of evolution is just a theory...because it can never be proven

 

i dont blame ppl who think we came from monkeys..i blame hollywood and schools. especially when they make movies/posters of monkeys with human eyes so subconsciously we are made to think we came from apes. or even more when we are shown artifacts of apes with human jaws attached to them so again we fall easily into what they say.

 

read a book, watch david attenborough and think to yourself how that complex species like a slug or insect evolved so perfectly?

 

with all that said, ofcourse i do beleive species can evolve to what they are capable according to what they are and their limits...but theory of evolution is just ridiculously stupid to say we just came from bacteria or whatever..

 

We didn't evolve from monkeys/apes. Monkey, apes and us all share a common ancestor that we all diverged from....

 

Darwin published hundreds of years ago before we had been able to look at DNA, develop video recording, uber microscopes etc...

 

People have taken what Darwin said and gone further with it, Darwin made some very good assumptions based on the information he had, but it would have been like feeling your way down a corridor in the dark....

 

The argument you are talking about is 'irreducible complexity' and is pretty retarded in itself...

Kez you're partially correct, samsta you're slightly ignorant.

 

We didn't evolve from apes, we are greater apes along with chimpanzees/bonobos, gorillas, and orangtutans. The term ape more or less implies we don't have extruding tails, like chimps. Evolution isn't an 'either or' concept(linear), it is a continuous and perpetual system, again as stated the only reason why people think that something has to evolve from another in a direct line is due to the main evidence of evolution being natural selection. People also make the mistake of basing the idea of evolution being linear, by looking at the history of specific examples in a linear fashion, completely ignoring species that branch off. There are key specimens of interest that clearly prove that evolution does exist and is for the most part completely RANDOM.

 

Here is one recent example that proves evolution isn't either or, the 'peppered moth evolution', during the industrial age, there was so much smog produced by factories that the trees were turning black, therefore only the darker coloured peppered were able to better avoid predators, and for a time the darker peppered moths prospered. Now this all hapened within a couple of centuries, The unique thing is that when the issue of pollution was addressed and the trees weren't covered in soot, the black peppered moths died due to predation, and the speckled moths prospered once again.

 

Here's another, Now at one point anthropologist once thought that Homosapien, evolved from homo-ergaster, and that neanderthals were off the same species as modern man. Now that was proven wrong, we evolved from homo erectus, and neanderthals were a completely different species altogether. As stated before, evolution is random, if it wasn't species that branch off would not exist.

 

Final example. Now if you look at a lorus and a ringtail possum, they look quite similar, fluffy, big eyeballs etc. but on closer examination, a lorus has fingernails and is a proper mammal(primates), a possum has claws and is a marsupial. There are numerous examples of parallel evolution. Now if god, being the almighty power he was create all beings, wouldn't he create them to be completely different from animal to animal, the similarities between many separate species(eels and snakes, as stated above), kinda make god look lazy don't they. So Smasta, what you're saying is that god, being the awesome being he is, couldn't be arsed to make every species completely different, even though due to the fact he is so awesome that making them completely different would take the same amount of time and effort as making them similar. Dunno, seem like a lazy god, dunnit?

 

Another key piece of evidence is vestigial limbs and organs. Now if evolution doesn't exist why would whales and most other cephalopods excluding the hippopotamus, have a pelvis, the don't use their legs indepently during self propulsion, do they? It's because their genetic ancestors did walk at one point. An example of a vestigial organ in humans is the appendix, we don't use as we don't eat grass and roots, and we can survive perfectly without one so what's it's point, if we were perfectly created, why would god give us organs we don't have a use for, a little overkill for perfection isn't it?

 

Samsta what you ignore is the fact that, these evolutions you speak so lowly of have occured over hundreds of millions of years in many cases. Now I don't denounce faith, as I personally believe that there can be a corelation between the two, and in most cases, divine intervention can make more sense than some of the self righteous phycisists or biologists who spew out oxygen wasting crap about how we came to be. If by your account evolution cannot be random and is therefore null and void as a theory, then I could just think about flying day and night, and somehow my genes will change and I'll sprout wings. I can't instead I'm 6'6" weigh about 112 kg, and the closests I have to flying by my own means, is dunking in basketball.

 

In conclusion, evolution itself is completely RANDOM, that is it. there is no premeditation on the species part to evolve that way. Don't confuse the concept of evolution itself with evolution by natural selection, which is what Charles Darwin proposed. Natural selection itself states that the success of any mutation, or variation in genes depends solely on it's compatibility in it's environment. Though evolution is natural, that doesn't mean that god or a similar being didn't create life and the universe as we know it. (fence sitting at its best haha)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any one know of any good documentarys on evolution ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any one know of any good documentarys on evolution ?

 

Walking with monsters, dinosaurs, beast and cavemen, they're a little simple, but they do a good job describing evolution and pointing out the differences between evolution and natural selection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any one know of any good documentarys on evolution ?

 

Walking with monsters, dinosaurs, beast and cavemen, they're a little simple, but they do a good job describing evolution and pointing out the differences between evolution and natural selection.

 

If you know anyone who lives in north brissy i'd gladly get it sent your way mang.

Edited by spongeboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i grew up full christian in my teens. born again, creationist all the way...

 

but now i find it just as hard to believe that a god would 'just exist' just as much as the universe 'just exist'

 

both puzzle me, but id rather place my chips on what i can see, and not maybe hoping theres a bearded man in the sky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your all a bunch of wak jobs if you believe in any of these 2 ideals!!

 

 

There is only one true place of life and religion! i came from midichlorians mother f**kers!

 

*runs jumps on the speeder to the spaceship, to go to the rebel base, so i can jump in my x-wing and throw a pebble at the death start, all while waving a glow in the dark stick around that makes a soothing humming sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to be expected, I still haven't seen a strong arguement for creation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to be expected, I still haven't seen a strong arguement for creation

 

That's because they done have one

 

When presented with scientific proof that the earth and all life is older then 5000 years not to mention the existence and discovery of prehistoric life all creationists have to say is god put them there to test their faith. Yeah ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×