Beast, the thing is is that any evidence brought up is easily discounted by one who has faith. I can point to the bible and say "Let there be..." and say that's irrefutable evidence of creation. However, an evolutionist would probably laugh at me. An evolutionist may point to the fossil record, genetics, and so forth but a strict creationist would laugh at him. The arguement is moot. One positive is the fact that the discussion has been civil and that you're atleast willing to listen.
<< any evidence brought up is easily discounted by one who has faith >>
thats not true in my case... if there is some actual evidence out there, i would love to see it, and would except it... but i just havent found any that isnt explainable... such as the whole fossil thing...
Beast - I agree with you. My friend did a huge research paper and eventually did some speeches and proved how the "monkey theory" is totally bogus. Wish I could have remembered the sources he used, I've never seen so much evidence against this theory before.
What evidence are you expecting? They have collections of fossils showing the evolution of primate to man. The similarities between reptile and bird skeletons are highly suggestive of the fact that they are descended from the same type of creature. But you already say you don't believe it. What about carbon dating? These creatures died millions of years ago. Why are there no fossils of homo sapien? Of man? Because we didn't exist at the same time. Unless dinosaurs wandered the earth for eons until God showed up, shoved them off, and created us.
That's why this is moot. You believe in God and the bible. You believe we are the descendents of those who were cast out of Eden. No matter what someone says, you will always believe that. Because that's what faith is about. Think about it: a person with faith is willing to believe in the existence of a supremely powerful all knowing being who leaves them with nothing but a book to guide them. A being possessed of powers we have never seen and have never known. One who is waiting to judge us and decide our eternal fate. And you want someone to prove to that same person that the bible had it wrong? That's why this is moot. Take comfort in your faith and leave it that.
That's why this is moot. You believe in God and the bible. You believe we are the descendents of those who were cast out of Eden. No matter what someone says, you will always believe that. Because that's what faith is about. Think about it: a person with faith is willing to believe in the existence of a supremely powerful all knowing being who leaves them with nothing but a book to guide them. A being possessed of powers we have never seen and have never known. One who is waiting to judge us and decide our eternal fate. And you want someone to prove to that same person that the bible had it wrong? That's why this is moot. Take comfort in your faith and leave it that.
That is one thing that I am curious about... How infact they do date fossils and such... Do you know of any links off the top of your head that explain that type of thing?
I can't think of any links. But I guarantee you that you will find "evidence" both for and against carbon dating. Here's the gist: carbon has a half life of x years. Half life meaning the time it takes for half the carbon to decay. So, by working backwords, you can determine how old an item is by how little carbon remains. Like I said, you'll find "evidence" both for and against, so take what you read with a grain of salt. Also, other elements may be used to determine age. Depending on the half life determines the usability within a certain timespan.
hmmm.. sounds pretty sketchy, but i will have to do some more research on it...
im off to bed now, thank you Spooon for keeping this thread smart
im off to bed now, thank you Spooon for keeping this thread smart
I think most radio-carbon dating is done in a similar fashion, but I think I know about the most about Carbon 14 dating. Carbon 14 is a radioactive element, naturally occuring, that decays into Carbon 12. Scientists know the half-life for the element (what the half-life is, I do not know). Carbon 14 is assumed to have a constant ratio to Carbon 12 in the atmosphere. Because living things replenish carbon 12 (? - or maybe 14) by eating and metabolizing energy, scientists can look at the ratio of Carbon 14 to Carbon 12 and determine how long it has been since the animal died, seeing how much Carbon 14 is left compared to Carbon 12.
It's really just an exponential decay problem if you're into mathematics.
Scientists take this as proof to date things up to a few thousand years old. Since the half-life of Carbon 14 is only in the thousands of years, it is not accurate past then. For ages older than that, scientists use other radioactive isotopes.
The creationist view on dates that do not work out (shows the earth is older than they would like) is that the ratio of Carbon 14 to Carbon 12 has not been constant over the years. Thus, if this ratio has changed significantly, it throws off all the dates.
edit: found a few links. I got a few things wrong, but oh well. Here's a christian site awitness.org, and a thinkquest.org site.
edit2: gotta get the links right
It's really just an exponential decay problem if you're into mathematics.
Scientists take this as proof to date things up to a few thousand years old. Since the half-life of Carbon 14 is only in the thousands of years, it is not accurate past then. For ages older than that, scientists use other radioactive isotopes.
The creationist view on dates that do not work out (shows the earth is older than they would like) is that the ratio of Carbon 14 to Carbon 12 has not been constant over the years. Thus, if this ratio has changed significantly, it throws off all the dates.
edit: found a few links. I got a few things wrong, but oh well. Here's a christian site awitness.org, and a thinkquest.org site.
edit2: gotta get the links right
The thing I don't get about evolutionist thinking is this... where did the first thing come from? By their thinking, everthing evolves from something, but where was the first beginning? Creationists accept that God created everything, and has been around forever... Just a thought
Whenever somebody posts one of these creationist vs. evolutionist threads, it always makes me think of this:
--------------------------------------------------
The Last Question
How will the future of the universe be like? (from Isaac Asimov)
The Story begins in the year 2061, when a colossal computer has solved the Earth's energy problems by designing a massive solar satellite in space that can beam the sun's energy back to earth. The AC (analog computer) is so large and advanced that its technicians have only the vaguest idea of how it operates. On a $5 bet, two drunken technicians ask the computer whether the sun's eventual death can be avoided or, for that matter, whether the universe must inevitably die. After quietly mulling over this question, the AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Centuries into the future, the AC has solved the problem of hyperspace travel, and humans begin colonizing thousands of star systems. The AC is so large that it occupies several hundred square miles on each planet and so complex that it maintains and services itself. A young family is rocketing through hyperspace, unerringly guided by the AC, in search of a new star system to colonize. When the father casually mentions that the stars must eventually die, the children become hysterical. "Don't let the stars die," plead the children. To calm the children, he asks the AC if entropy can be reversed. "See," reassures the father, reading the AC's response, "the AC can solve everything". He comforts them by saying, "it will take care of everything when the time comes, so don't worry." He never tells the children that the AC actually prints out: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Thousands of years into the future, the Galaxy itself has been colonized. The AC has solved the problem of immortality and harnesses the energy of the Galaxy, but must find new galaxies for colonization. The AC is so complex that it is long past the point where anyone understands how it works. It continually redesigns and improves its own circuits. Two members of the Galactic Council, each hundreds of years old, debate the urgent question of finding new galactic energy sources, and wonder if the universe itself is running down. Can entropy be reversed?, they ask. The AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Millions of years into the future, humanity has spread across the uncountable galaxies of the universe. The AC has solved the problem of releasing the mind from the body, and human minds are free to explore the vastness of millions of galaxies, with their bodies savely stored on some long forgotten planet. Two minds accidentally meet each other in outer space, and casually wonder where among the uncountable galaxies humans originated. The AC, which is now so large that most of it has to be housed in hyperspace, responds by instantly transporting them to an obscure galaxy. They are disappointed. The galaxy is so ordinary, like millions of other galaxies, and the original star has long since died. The two minds become anxious because billions of stars in the heavens are slowly meeting the same fate. The two minds ask, can the death of the universe itself be avoided? From hyperspace, the AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Billions of years into the future, humanity consists of a trillion, trillion, trillion immortal bodies, each cared for by automatons. Humanity's collective mind, which is free to roam anywhere in the universe at will, eventually fuses into a single mind, which in turn fuses with the AC itself. It no longer makes sense to ask what the AC is made of, or where in hyperspace it really is. "The universe is dying," thinks Man, collectively. One by one, as the stars and galaxies cease to generate energy, temperatures throughout the universe approach absolute zero. Man desperately asks if the cold and darkness slowly engulfing the galaxies mean its eventual death. From hyperspace, the AC answers: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
When Man asks the AC to collect the necessary data, it responds: I WILL DO SO. I HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR A HUNDRED BILLION YEARS. MY PREDECESSORS HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES. ALL THE DATA I HAVE REMAINS INSUFFICIENT.
A timeless interval passes, and the universe has finally reached its ultimate death. From hyperspace, the AC spends an eternity collecting data and contemplating the final question. At last, the AC discovers the solution, even though there is no longer anyone to give the answer. The AC carefully formulates a program, and then begins the process of reversing Chaos. It collects cold, interstellar gas, brings together the dead stars, until a gigantic ball is created.
Then, when its labors are done, from hyperspace the AC thunders:
LET THERE BE LIGHT!
And there was light....
And on the seventh day, He rested.
--------------------------------------------------
Relevant? Maybe, maybe not. Something to think about? Sure.
--------------------------------------------------
The Last Question
How will the future of the universe be like? (from Isaac Asimov)
The Story begins in the year 2061, when a colossal computer has solved the Earth's energy problems by designing a massive solar satellite in space that can beam the sun's energy back to earth. The AC (analog computer) is so large and advanced that its technicians have only the vaguest idea of how it operates. On a $5 bet, two drunken technicians ask the computer whether the sun's eventual death can be avoided or, for that matter, whether the universe must inevitably die. After quietly mulling over this question, the AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Centuries into the future, the AC has solved the problem of hyperspace travel, and humans begin colonizing thousands of star systems. The AC is so large that it occupies several hundred square miles on each planet and so complex that it maintains and services itself. A young family is rocketing through hyperspace, unerringly guided by the AC, in search of a new star system to colonize. When the father casually mentions that the stars must eventually die, the children become hysterical. "Don't let the stars die," plead the children. To calm the children, he asks the AC if entropy can be reversed. "See," reassures the father, reading the AC's response, "the AC can solve everything". He comforts them by saying, "it will take care of everything when the time comes, so don't worry." He never tells the children that the AC actually prints out: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Thousands of years into the future, the Galaxy itself has been colonized. The AC has solved the problem of immortality and harnesses the energy of the Galaxy, but must find new galaxies for colonization. The AC is so complex that it is long past the point where anyone understands how it works. It continually redesigns and improves its own circuits. Two members of the Galactic Council, each hundreds of years old, debate the urgent question of finding new galactic energy sources, and wonder if the universe itself is running down. Can entropy be reversed?, they ask. The AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Millions of years into the future, humanity has spread across the uncountable galaxies of the universe. The AC has solved the problem of releasing the mind from the body, and human minds are free to explore the vastness of millions of galaxies, with their bodies savely stored on some long forgotten planet. Two minds accidentally meet each other in outer space, and casually wonder where among the uncountable galaxies humans originated. The AC, which is now so large that most of it has to be housed in hyperspace, responds by instantly transporting them to an obscure galaxy. They are disappointed. The galaxy is so ordinary, like millions of other galaxies, and the original star has long since died. The two minds become anxious because billions of stars in the heavens are slowly meeting the same fate. The two minds ask, can the death of the universe itself be avoided? From hyperspace, the AC responds: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
Billions of years into the future, humanity consists of a trillion, trillion, trillion immortal bodies, each cared for by automatons. Humanity's collective mind, which is free to roam anywhere in the universe at will, eventually fuses into a single mind, which in turn fuses with the AC itself. It no longer makes sense to ask what the AC is made of, or where in hyperspace it really is. "The universe is dying," thinks Man, collectively. One by one, as the stars and galaxies cease to generate energy, temperatures throughout the universe approach absolute zero. Man desperately asks if the cold and darkness slowly engulfing the galaxies mean its eventual death. From hyperspace, the AC answers: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
When Man asks the AC to collect the necessary data, it responds: I WILL DO SO. I HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR A HUNDRED BILLION YEARS. MY PREDECESSORS HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION MANY TIMES. ALL THE DATA I HAVE REMAINS INSUFFICIENT.
A timeless interval passes, and the universe has finally reached its ultimate death. From hyperspace, the AC spends an eternity collecting data and contemplating the final question. At last, the AC discovers the solution, even though there is no longer anyone to give the answer. The AC carefully formulates a program, and then begins the process of reversing Chaos. It collects cold, interstellar gas, brings together the dead stars, until a gigantic ball is created.
Then, when its labors are done, from hyperspace the AC thunders:
LET THERE BE LIGHT!
And there was light....
And on the seventh day, He rested.
--------------------------------------------------
Relevant? Maybe, maybe not. Something to think about? Sure.
troglodytis
Golden Member
- Nov 29, 2000
- 1,061
- 3
- 76
beast...
since your asumbtion that
<< Darwin was the one person who came up with the idea of evolution >>
is incorrect, maybe you should take a good strong look at what you don't believe.
seems you have dissmissed it even before you did ANY research on the topic. i hope you do not take this attitude into all your decision making.
also, since your assumption is incorrect...you lose.
since your asumbtion that
<< Darwin was the one person who came up with the idea of evolution >>
is incorrect, maybe you should take a good strong look at what you don't believe.
seems you have dissmissed it even before you did ANY research on the topic. i hope you do not take this attitude into all your decision making.
also, since your assumption is incorrect...you lose.
beast,
The scientific model of evolution has been applied to the study of bacteria. It has been rigorously tested and proven scientifically to work well in this capacity. I'm sure you have heard talk lately about antibiotic-resistant bacteria? Well, this bacteria isn't some new strain. It turns out that the bacteria for which the antibiotic drugs were created to deal with, have become resistant - more specifically they have developed defense mechanisms to deal with the antibiotic drugs. In other words, we say the bacteria has evolved. This, has been observed within the last century.
There has also been direct observational evidence of the evolutionary model at work:
<< Indicator 2 [Proof for Creationism]: Scientists have never observed the evolution of one species into another species. Every species on earth produces only copies of itself, never a new species.
Rebuttal: Several "speciation events" have been demonstrated from direct observation. The evolution of a new species of fruit flies has been observed in the laboratory 2 Evolution of a new species of fish from the Tilapia fish in East African lakes has been studied in the wild.
>>
It's a shock to many Christians that early saints of the Catholic Church (before the Church splintered into the various Christian religions we have now), also believed in evolution. These saints were intellectuals that are now quoted more often in university philosophy class than in their own religion's churches, but nonetheless they were remarkably intelligent philosophers, mathematicians and early scientists.
Here's a good link describing creationism, naturalistic evolution and theistic evolution. It's good reading. http://www.religioustolerance.org/evolutio.htm.
whalen,
It is believed that the first forms of life were very primitive - much mor primitive but not entirely different than the phytoplankton in the ocean which is the basis for our food chain. I'm not familiar with what biologists believe to be the most probable way that these early life forms came about, but in the realm of astronomy there has been some speculation as to the spread of life between planets. The theory goes something like this:
A huge asteroid hits a planet and turns up an immense amount of dust, and large debris. Some of this debris has enough kinetic energy to escape the gravity of the planet and proceeds on its way in space. The catch is that there is biological matter somewhere inside; preserved so to speak within the debris. This debris then falls under the gravitational pull of another planet (say Earth) and comes crashing to the ground as a smaller, less destructive asteroid. The asteroid blows apart upon impact, releasing the biological matter within it. And, provided the right conditions exist, the biological matter thrives.
-GL
The scientific model of evolution has been applied to the study of bacteria. It has been rigorously tested and proven scientifically to work well in this capacity. I'm sure you have heard talk lately about antibiotic-resistant bacteria? Well, this bacteria isn't some new strain. It turns out that the bacteria for which the antibiotic drugs were created to deal with, have become resistant - more specifically they have developed defense mechanisms to deal with the antibiotic drugs. In other words, we say the bacteria has evolved. This, has been observed within the last century.
There has also been direct observational evidence of the evolutionary model at work:
<< Indicator 2 [Proof for Creationism]: Scientists have never observed the evolution of one species into another species. Every species on earth produces only copies of itself, never a new species.
Rebuttal: Several "speciation events" have been demonstrated from direct observation. The evolution of a new species of fruit flies has been observed in the laboratory 2 Evolution of a new species of fish from the Tilapia fish in East African lakes has been studied in the wild.
>>
It's a shock to many Christians that early saints of the Catholic Church (before the Church splintered into the various Christian religions we have now), also believed in evolution. These saints were intellectuals that are now quoted more often in university philosophy class than in their own religion's churches, but nonetheless they were remarkably intelligent philosophers, mathematicians and early scientists.
Here's a good link describing creationism, naturalistic evolution and theistic evolution. It's good reading. http://www.religioustolerance.org/evolutio.htm.
whalen,
It is believed that the first forms of life were very primitive - much mor primitive but not entirely different than the phytoplankton in the ocean which is the basis for our food chain. I'm not familiar with what biologists believe to be the most probable way that these early life forms came about, but in the realm of astronomy there has been some speculation as to the spread of life between planets. The theory goes something like this:
A huge asteroid hits a planet and turns up an immense amount of dust, and large debris. Some of this debris has enough kinetic energy to escape the gravity of the planet and proceeds on its way in space. The catch is that there is biological matter somewhere inside; preserved so to speak within the debris. This debris then falls under the gravitational pull of another planet (say Earth) and comes crashing to the ground as a smaller, less destructive asteroid. The asteroid blows apart upon impact, releasing the biological matter within it. And, provided the right conditions exist, the biological matter thrives.
-GL
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: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter