Hero,
Do you reject Microevolutionary theory?
I think almost everyone (regardless of whether they subscribe to intelligent design, Darwinism, or Creationism) all can accept microevolution as fact...
Do you reject Microevolutionary theory?
I think almost everyone (regardless of whether they subscribe to intelligent design, Darwinism, or Creationism) all can accept microevolution as fact...
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Sorry, some of us just weren't so easily programmed.
Anyway, as a Christian you believe that God started the Big Bang and then sat back for billions of years until these past few thousand when he's finally been able to relate to us?
I believe that he started the big bang, but I don't believe he talks to us. I don't believe in the Old Testament. I think it is just a bunch of exaggerated stories.
Bow:
In fact, the Intelligent Design people agree that evolution occurs as do almost all creation "scientists". It is mostly the extent of evolution and the time period involved that is the breaking point for many of them. For instance, some Young Earthers believe that the earth is only 6000 years old and that all of the variation seen was a result of "fast" evolution and the hand of God.
Proof of evolution is being generated daily in the field, by discoveries in biology, physics, astronomy, and DNA research. The evidence has gotten much stronger in the last 20 years. With the exception of a few of the more scientifically sophisticated IDers and a handful of CSers, nearly everyone who subscribes to these hokie theories knows very little science. I've participated on one of the evolution lists and I have yet to hear a scientific theory of creation. Hero certainly didn't even try.
If anyone has a scientific theory of creation I'd love to hear it. I'd be particularly interested in hearing about its falsifiability.
-Robert
In fact, the Intelligent Design people agree that evolution occurs as do almost all creation "scientists". It is mostly the extent of evolution and the time period involved that is the breaking point for many of them. For instance, some Young Earthers believe that the earth is only 6000 years old and that all of the variation seen was a result of "fast" evolution and the hand of God.
Proof of evolution is being generated daily in the field, by discoveries in biology, physics, astronomy, and DNA research. The evidence has gotten much stronger in the last 20 years. With the exception of a few of the more scientifically sophisticated IDers and a handful of CSers, nearly everyone who subscribes to these hokie theories knows very little science. I've participated on one of the evolution lists and I have yet to hear a scientific theory of creation. Hero certainly didn't even try.
If anyone has a scientific theory of creation I'd love to hear it. I'd be particularly interested in hearing about its falsifiability.
-Robert
Originally posted by: ScottyB
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Sorry, some of us just weren't so easily programmed.
Anyway, as a Christian you believe that God started the Big Bang and then sat back for billions of years until these past few thousand when he's finally been able to relate to us?
I believe that he started the big bang, but I don't believe he talks to us. I don't believe in the Old Testament. I think it is just a bunch of exaggerated stories.
Also if one were too look at all the religions they are pretty close to eachother. Look at Greek Mythology, Zeus' half-mortal son is put on Earth and helps mankind. Remind you of anyone? [Jesus]
Orsorum:
Since 1944 we've moved a lot of science!
But the piece is written with great majesty, insight and wit.
Thanks for that.
-Robert
Since 1944 we've moved a lot of science!
But the piece is written with great majesty, insight and wit.
Thanks for that.
-Robert
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
But you still think the evolutionary process shouldn't be taught in schools??
Or you're just against evolution being taught as an explanation for human existence?
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: ScottyB
Originally posted by: ScottyB
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Sorry, some of us just weren't so easily programmed.
Anyway, as a Christian you believe that God started the Big Bang and then sat back for billions of years until these past few thousand when he's finally been able to relate to us?
I believe that he started the big bang, but I don't believe he talks to us. I don't believe in the Old Testament. I think it is just a bunch of exaggerated stories.
Also if one were too look at all the religions they are pretty close to eachother. Look at Greek Mythology, Zeus' half-mortal son is put on Earth and helps mankind. Remind you of anyone? [Jesus]
You said you are a Christian? By that, apparently, you mean you believe in the existence of a god?
HoP, you may want to look at this
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evolution
You seem to think that evolution has something to do with how life started.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evolution
You seem to think that evolution has something to do with how life started.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Chess9:
I was one of those Young Earthers in my youth, so many years ago. As I read more of the Bible (as opposed to the filtered interpretations pushed by churches) and as I learned more about the history of religion, I realized that the Bible did not have to be taken literally, and in fact could not be taken literally. As much as the Bible may be the expression of the word of God, it is the product of imperfect Man. It is an imperfect document.
While many fundamentalists will call this heresy, the evidence is simple and obvious. Which version of the Bible is the perfect one, King James or New International? They don't always match. In fact, the New International translation was prompted by mistakes found in the King James translation. I'm sure in another decade or ten, scholars will determine that NIV errors require yet another translation. Further, who decides which books to include in the Bible and which to exclude? It's a decision by men. Religious men with good intentions ... but still imperfect.
Once one acknowledges that the Bible is the product of man, it is not such a stretch to recognize that many of the stories, including Genesis, are parables that can be accepted for their meaning. They do not have to be taken literally to be the word of God.
I was one of those Young Earthers in my youth, so many years ago. As I read more of the Bible (as opposed to the filtered interpretations pushed by churches) and as I learned more about the history of religion, I realized that the Bible did not have to be taken literally, and in fact could not be taken literally. As much as the Bible may be the expression of the word of God, it is the product of imperfect Man. It is an imperfect document.
While many fundamentalists will call this heresy, the evidence is simple and obvious. Which version of the Bible is the perfect one, King James or New International? They don't always match. In fact, the New International translation was prompted by mistakes found in the King James translation. I'm sure in another decade or ten, scholars will determine that NIV errors require yet another translation. Further, who decides which books to include in the Bible and which to exclude? It's a decision by men. Religious men with good intentions ... but still imperfect.
Once one acknowledges that the Bible is the product of man, it is not such a stretch to recognize that many of the stories, including Genesis, are parables that can be accepted for their meaning. They do not have to be taken literally to be the word of God.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
This sure didn't sound like your stance from your posts
"I'm calling it a theory. I'm also calling evolution a theory. Neither has any place in a science classroom"
CalBear:
Don't mind Hero, he's "mildly illiterate".
Bwuahahahaha!!!!
Are those pigeons roosting on this thread? I declare....
Don't mind Hero, he's "mildly illiterate".
Bwuahahahaha!!!!
Are those pigeons roosting on this thread? I declare....
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: calbear2000
This sure didn't sound like your stance from your posts
"I'm calling it a theory. I'm also calling evolution a theory. Neither has any place in a science classroom"
The thread was about macroevolution, so I used evolution in that context. Are you saying you don't believe in the "creation" of anything. What about a cake? Can that be "created".
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
The thread was about macroevolution, so I used evolution in that context. Are you saying you don't believe in the "creation" of anything. What about a cake? Can that be "created".
A cake is composed of several elements which are combined in various stages, chemical reactions are induced by prolonged heat, and voila! It does not magically appear. Although one does and will argue that a higher life form is still required to combine the elements in the requisite fashion.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
The thread was about macroevolution, so I used evolution in that context. Are you saying you don't believe in the "creation" of anything. What about a cake? Can that be "created".
A cake is composed of several elements which are combined in various stages, chemical reactions are induced by prolonged heat, and voila! It does not magically appear. Although one does and will argue that a higher life form is still required to combine the elements in the requisite fashion.
You know Orsorum, it would be nice to have an intelligent conversation with those who can hold one about issues like this, but it isn't going to happen here.
Agreed. It is fun to throw some wood on the fire from time to time, however. Most of these issues have been worked out to hell and back, and some people have changed their minds on issues (I know I have!), but the vast majority of people just throw the same half-arguments and half-facts around for a few hours, then skulk back to their particular camp, their hurt and fragile belief unchanged. It takes a very mature, very secure person to attempt to examine all the evidence in an unbiased, calm manner. Very few of those around here.
I am also surprised to see HeroOfPellinor, who is normally very well-documented, coming up with little to no supporting evidence or arguments for his claims.
\me steps back and grabs a beer. Keep arguing, boyos. :beer:
Cheers!
Nate
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: calbear2000
This sure didn't sound like your stance from your posts
"I'm calling it a theory. I'm also calling evolution a theory. Neither has any place in a science classroom"
The thread was about macroevolution, so I used evolution in that context. Are you saying you don't believe in the "creation" of anything. What about a cake? Can that be "created".
Actually the thread was originally about schools in Georgia... if you read the article posted
"If Georgia approves the revised curriculum, the state will be among six that avoid the word "evolution" in science teaching"
Doesn't sound like they're even talking about the creation of the universe to me. Sounds more like education of Darwin's finches in Galapagos.
Anyways, let Georgia teach Creation "science". The world will not miss their scientific contribuitions.
They wanna stop evolving that's their business, but they shouldn't be suprised if they get the Darwin award when competing against students from other states for college admissions in scientific fields.
They wanna stop evolving that's their business, but they shouldn't be suprised if they get the Darwin award when competing against students from other states for college admissions in scientific fields.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
The thread was about macroevolution, so I used evolution in that context. Are you saying you don't believe in the "creation" of anything. What about a cake? Can that be "created".
A cake is composed of several elements which are combined in various stages, chemical reactions are induced by prolonged heat, and voila! It does not magically appear. Although one does and will argue that a higher life form is still required to combine the elements in the requisite fashion.
No, I was just confused by everybody's use of the word 'creation' when what they really meant was 'DIVINE creation'.
These debates make me think in bigger pictures. What rights do parents have over their children? Do they have the right to keep them ignorant or versed only in the bible? Can they refuse their children life saving medicine? Can they brainwash them in communism? Is it fear that reflects in how we fund our schools? Are we afraid of knowledge?
As far as evolution goes, there is a theory of evolution that seeks to explain how evolution works. Evolution, however, the fact that all life arose from former life and has slowly changed is a fact.
As far as evolution goes, there is a theory of evolution that seeks to explain how evolution works. Evolution, however, the fact that all life arose from former life and has slowly changed is a fact.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Anyways, let Georgia teach Creation "science". The world will not miss their scientific contribuitions.
They wanna stop evolving that's their business, but they shouldn't be suprised if they get the Darwin award when competing against students from other states for college admissions in scientific fields.
I see this every now and again. My wife teaches biology, and the random student comes along wanting to go into the program. Of course if they know nothing, they are not qualified and others get in where they do not. Darwinism indeed.
They did a more detailed report in this evenings News. Also stripped from the Science Cirriculum:
NO such thing as the Big Bang Theory, God just placed everything as it is.
The planet does not have Tectonic plates and they never shifted, that we always had these separate Continents, that God placed it this way.
"If you're teaching the concept without the word, what's the point?" said Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, easily one of the legislature's most socially conservative members. "It's stupid. It's like teaching gravity without using the word 'gravity.' "
NO such thing as the Big Bang Theory, God just placed everything as it is.
The planet does not have Tectonic plates and they never shifted, that we always had these separate Continents, that God placed it this way.
"If you're teaching the concept without the word, what's the point?" said Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, easily one of the legislature's most socially conservative members. "It's stupid. It's like teaching gravity without using the word 'gravity.' "
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter