Why evolution is true (another great science lecture)

[DrPizza]

[q]no evidence of said process. This is why it's a theory.[/q]

And this is why everyone here who understand science thinks you are ignorant. You don't even understand the scientific usage of the word "theory."

 

[Inferno0032]

Its amazing that all the people who are arguing in favor of evolutionists seem to feel the need to gang up on the creationists. You really need 15 different people all going after one person - sure seems like something that is "fact" wouldn't need that...

Also, everyone in here is arguing like they are an expert on the topic. I have led Small Groups and Bible studies, I have led Youth Retreats, but I'm no theologian. I can't just pull out a verse from the Bible on queue. My place is not to debate these thinkers - I know what I believe, I know why I believe it. I'm more than happy to have a discussion with people who do not believe in Christ, but God has other purposes for me - I'll leave the debating up to better men/women.

That being said, all of you who claim evolution is a fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then scientists wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

Furthermore, sorry Atheists, you are a religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Religion - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

-Kevin

And may God be with you now, as the onslaught of ATOT is upon you

 

[DrPizza]

gamingphreek - scientists aren't trying to "prove" the theory of evolution. Scientists are trying to better understand the entire process, figure out what happened, when, how. It just so happens that all of the work that they do continues to verify evolution.

Your claim that they're still trying to prove evolution would be like claiming that mathematicians are doing math because they're still not sure that 1 + 1 = 2.

 

[Jeff7]

gamingphreek - scientists aren't trying to "prove" the theory of evolution. Scientists are trying to better understand the entire process, figure out what happened, when, how. It just so happens that all of the work that they do continues to verify evolution.

Your claim that they're still trying to prove evolution would be like claiming that mathematicians are doing math because they're still not sure that 1 + 1 = 2.

Clearly, it equals 1.999...:awe:

 

[zerocool84]

That being said, all of you who claim bible stories are fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then christians wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

fixed

 

[totalnoob]

That is just silly nonsense, desperate attacks from someone that uses emotion rather than logic.

Emotion rather than logic? You are criticizing atheists because they haven't disproven God..but you are demonstrating a WHOPPER of illogic here buddy. One of the most fundamental laws of logic says that it is impossible to prove a negative. In other words, it is impossible prove the non-existence of something for which there is no evidence.

Have you heard of Russel's Teapot?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

 

[DanDaManJC]

Its amazing that all the people who are arguing in favor of evolutionists seem to feel the need to gang up on the creationists. You really need 15 different people all going after one person - sure seems like something that is "fact" wouldn't need that...

Also, everyone in here is arguing like they are an expert on the topic. I have led Small Groups and Bible studies, I have led Youth Retreats, but I'm no theologian. I can't just pull out a verse from the Bible on queue. My place is not to debate these thinkers - I know what I believe, I know why I believe it. I'm more than happy to have a discussion with people who do not believe in Christ, but God has other purposes for me - I'll leave the debating up to better men/women.

That being said, all of you who claim evolution is a fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then scientists wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

What ultimately gets people like myself is that a lot of people are unreasonable and won't look at opposing viewpoints rationally. This happens all the time in P&N... politics is more often than not simply name calling rather than substantive argument and dialogue.

Furthermore, sorry Atheists, you are a religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Religion - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

-Kevin

Some of the people here are just as dogmatic as the religious folk. There's no denying that. But the whole reason they're all so viral is because the facts are there and creationists deny the facts.

I was brought up in a fundamentalist home, taken to church camp and all that. Homeschooled even. And in that time i was taught that evolution was wrong, that scientists are out there to disprove God, that stuff like the big bang was also wrong. Unfortunately, I don't have any real background in biology or evolutionary theory. So I can't speak from experience. However, I am an electrical engineering student... and have thus had plenty of math and physics -- topics that creationists often lawd as being "unaffected" by the agenda of those darn atheists -- but have learned how the scientific process works. How the Big Bang theory was developed and so on and so forth. The point is the scientific theory is quite independent of an agenda, yes there are plenty of people with agendas but that doesn't change what is actually observed.

Personally, until I got to college, I was COMPLETELY ignorant of how science really works thanks to my poor public education AND my fundamentalist religious upbringing. Plenty of my peers are in the same situation, but without the decent education.

 

[Gamingphreek]

And may God be with you now, as the onslaught of ATOT is upon you

Ha - no worries, I've been here quite a while. I still love ATOT

gamingphreek - scientists aren't trying to "prove" the theory of evolution. Scientists are trying to better understand the entire process, figure out what happened, when, how. It just so happens that all of the work that they do continues to verify evolution.

Your claim that they're still trying to prove evolution would be like claiming that mathematicians are doing math because they're still not sure that 1 + 1 = 2

The fact is they have no proof behind their claim that I started out as a single cell organism. You have a point in that they are trying to better understand how they came to that conclusion, but that doesn't make it correct.

All this being said, creation isn't a huge portion of the Bible. It states that on the 7th day God created man. A "day" in the Bible isn't defined - it could have very well been long periods of time between all the days.

Furthermore, dinosaurs seem to be a popular bit of contention. The Bible does make mention of dinosaurs in various parts (ie: Leviathan).

I honestly am not nearly as well read in my Old Testament (or all of the Bible for that matter) to be able to go point by point such as the person in the lecture in the OP. All I am saying, is there very well could be some overlap such as what I have outlined.

I believe that Christ died to save me and that there is a loving God in heaven watching over me - I don't see why this could have any bearing on changing that.

-Kevin

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Clearly, it equals 1.999...:awe:

Oh know he didn't.

 

[Malak]

You're the one claiming that a deity exists and is responsible for the existence of everything.

Quote me, please. I never claimed either.

Side note: The Bible quote would seem to indicate Christianity. How did you arrive at that religion as the best one, and the right one? If I had to guess, it was likely because someone told you about it, right?

The complexity of this answer goes beyond the scope of this thread. I will say it wasn't because somebody told me, I've studied many religions and have had friends of several different religions ranging from wicca to buddhism. I do not give into peer pressure. My beliefs, as few as they are, come only from personal experience.

I ask because you seem to hint that the evidence of God is as though it is blatantly obvious to anyone. I must wonder then, how did you go about arriving at the conclusion that this God was the right one? Did you go through the proper process of elimination, evaluating the validity of the thousands upon thousands of deities throughout the course of history?

This is actually pretty funny. Since you probably won't believe anything in the bible, if you've even read it, you probably won't get the joke. It's an endless theme that God isn't the one hiding, but rather men are. On the other gods... they haven't shown their face. I do not know of any other religion today that has a god that does anything. I have never once heard of another religion that makes blind men see and deaf boys hear. I have never seen another god that heals cancer instantly, nor another god that deletes a tumor from existence. If you ever find one, please let me know.

That's the sort of thing that helps reinforce the idea that religions are just a mass delusion/hallucination/mental virus. So many people have this uncanny knack for finding the "correct" religion to be one that's popular in a given society.

The idea that religions are just mass delusion is only held by the minority of the population that don't believe in any gods. Which is completely understandable and makes sense. All religions are mutually exclusive so that means that either one is correct and all the rest are wrong and are in fact delusional, or none of them are correct and they are all in fact delusional. Completely logical perspective. The problem is... what if one is correct?

I guess that went way OT; this sort of stuff often does tend to mix together, and that kind of came to mind.

If this is really about science, why do these things mix? As I pointed out before, Simmons isn't Christian, nor religious. Evolutionists tend to be atheist, but not all non-evolutions are theists. Yet you never hear of a non-evolutionist attacking atheists, but atheist evolutionists always seem to attack theists. Is this really about science or is it about religion? Evolution is more often than not a belief, not an idea or theory, when it is presented. This video was filmed at an Atheist conference, not a science conference. It is riddled with attacks and insults against theists. It is unprofessional. That is my problem with the video.

 

[totalnoob]

All this being said, creation isn't a huge portion of the Bible. It states that on the 7th day God created man. A "day" in the Bible isn't defined - it could have very well been long periods of time between all the days.

Regardless of duration, you can't dispute the order. God created the earth BEFORE he made the sun. How did he manage that? Without a sun, how did the earth form..What was it orbiting around, and how did the grass stay alive?? lol

And another question..If God is all-powerful, why the heck did it take him 7 days anyway? Did he get tired? lol..Why couldn't he have wished it into existence all at once? Isn't it painfully obvious that this is an earthbound story written by men on a 7 day calendar? It boggles my mind that people can see it otherwise..

P.S. lol

 

[Gamingphreek]

I was brought up in a fundamentalist home, taken to church camp and all that. Homeschooled even. And in that time i was taught that evolution was wrong, that scientists are out there to disprove God, that stuff like the big bang was also wrong. Unfortunately, I don't have any real background in biology or evolutionary theory. So I can't speak from experience. However, I am an electrical engineering student... and have thus had plenty of math and physics -- topics that creationists often lawd as being "unaffected" by the agenda of those darn atheists -- but have learned how the scientific process works. How the Big Bang theory was developed and so on and so forth. The point is the scientific theory is quite independent of an agenda, yes there are plenty of people with agendas but that doesn't change what is actually observed.

Thats honestly quite disturbing that your parents believe that scientists are out to disprove God and what not. Just because I believe in Christ doesn't invalidate science in its entirety. I'm not sure I have heard of anyone who has claimed that it does before.

That being said, all of you who claim bible stories are fact are delusional. Can it be something you believe in (regardless of what I may believe), well that is your prerogative. However, if it were a fact then christians wouldn't still be trying in vain to prove it. It is a theory regarding life.

Please don't change my quotes around.

The difference being that regardless of what evidence supports Christianity, atheist discredit it - Josephus, Dead Sea Scrolls. Everything Christians believe is automatically refuted simply because Christian believe it.

Furthermore, atheists tend to be of the mind that their way is the absolute only way and that there is 0 misunderstanding on their end. In general, everyone I have debated with is an apparent expert on the topic of everything. Christians (ideally) realize that perhaps we have misunderstood the Bible in some cases (read: 7 Days), maybe we don't know everything in the Bible.

-Kevin

 

[DrPizza]

What do you mean "no proof that you started out as a single celled organism"? Uhhh, you know how babby is made, right? Of course you started out as a single fertilized egg.

Or, are you saying there's no evidence that at one point all life on earth consisted of single celled "animals"? Uhhh, wrong. There is a shitload of evidence.

 

[Malak]

If you are simply attacking this individual speaker, then I'm missing the point of your arguments. I did not watch the lecture, and if he is pompous and a bit snide about how he lectures, I'm sure he would irritate me just the same.

Both the person in the video linked and the person in the debate linked are insulting and aggressive. They are attacks, not serious discussions.

And I'm completely open to ideas or adaptations of evolution, I have no strong ties there, I do believe that the ideas and the evidence make sense, and seem to build on each other. There are obviously flaws in it, as are most things we know in today's science. There are just many many things which we cannot know, which goes right along with the idea of creationism. I can't know anymore than you, so I can't say it isn't true any more than you can say it is. I acknowledge the idea there as well, I just don't throw evolution aside at the same time, I see no reason why there couldn't be coexistence.

I want different theories. I want someone to look at this "evidence" and come up with another reason. The guy in the video attacks creationists saying they can't come up with a reason for this, and feels this is a victory for him. Science isn't about attacking, insulting, or any of what this guy presents. I don't want assumptions presented as "truth." I want discussions and ideas. Evolution isn't fact, it isn't truth, it's just a theory. As you said, a theory with lots of flaws. But why is if those flaws are questioned, it's immediately turned into an attack against a religion? Even when the person questioning them isn't religious.

I completely agree with your statement, there are things we will probably never know. There are certain discussions I simply do not partake in because I know neither side actually knows anything about it.

 

[Gamingphreek]

And another question..If God is all-powerful, why the heck did it take him 7 days anyway? Did he get tired? lol..Why couldn't he have wished it into existence all at once? Isn't it painfully obvious that this is an earthbound story written by men on a 7 day calendar? It boggles my mind that people can see it otherwise..

You're asking me like you expect me to know this haha. I don't have the slightest clue why God things the way he did. Quite frankly I'm not terribly concerned with why he took 7 days as opposed to 6 or 5

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

I believe light was created before anything else . You are correct that the sun was created after vegetation on the 4th day. No I don't have any insight as to how light was created without the sun - the Bible just says light. That is the extent of my knowledge on the subject.

-Kevin

 

[RESmonkey]

Lol religion

 

[Gamingphreek]

What do you mean "no proof that you started out as a single celled organism"? Uhhh, you know how babby is made, right? Of course you started out as a single fertilized egg.

Or, are you saying there's no evidence that at one point all life on earth consisted of single celled "animals"? Uhhh, wrong. There is a shitload of evidence.

Different type of single cell organism. Come on Pizza, you know what I mean. (Just in case you missed what I was getting at) There is no evidence that we lived and died as single cell organisms, then over the course of a ton of time, we decide to get bigger, and then form limbs, etc..

As for the second point, look I'm a Senior in College studying Computer Science - I don't know what you, as someone who is very well educated as evidenced in other posts, hope to gain from debating me other than exposing my youthfulness. There are other people (read: CS Lewis, Ravi Zaccharrias) who are better suited for such debates.

I have not heard of any solid evidence to prove your theory that everything was a single cell at one point and just decided to start growing.

-Kevin

 

[Malak]

Regardless of duration, you can't dispute the order. God created the earth and all living things BEFORE he made the sun ("light"). How did he manage that? Without a sun, how did the earth form and what it orbiting around? lol

The sun was created first, actually. Read the first paragraph of the bible again.

And another question..If God is all-powerful, why the heck did it take him 7 days anyway? Did he get tired? Why couldn't an infinitely powerful being create everything at once?

Why does it matter? By the same logic we could say, why didn't he make it over the course of millions of years, a little bit at a time? Why didn't he make it in 7 hours, or 7 minutes? Why didn't he make it in 9 days? The length of time does not matter. It is irrelevant.

 

[totalnoob]

I have not heard of any solid evidence to prove your theory that everything was a single cell at one point and just decided to start growing.

-Kevin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

obviously proof going THAT far back is difficult to come by since single cells don't leave fossils or other proof lying around after they disintegrate..but as you can see from the various links above, the theory of life's origins is being worked on.

 

[Iron Woode]

there is only one way to settle this dispute:

Creationists either produce God right now (writ of habeas corpus anyone?) or STFU.

Well, we're waiting....

 

[magomago]

Good video on the evidence for evolution. Crystal clear explanations. I'll eventually pick them up once I get through my current reading.
However, I think it got shaky at the very end with the increased attacks on religions - especially when he brought in the tenuous charts with % belief in God vs % Harmonious Lol, I can't believe he referred to it as 'objective', without understanding that the reasons that they are in their existing state may in no way deal with religion. Correlation doesn't imply causation.

Outside of the bash on religion (lulz), great lecture.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Outside of the bash on religion (lulz), great lecture.

I noticed you made similar comments on the other video about the origin of the universe from the same conference. You have to understand the context in which these talks were given - at a meeting of atheists. Like any good speaker he is indulging his audience with what they want to hear, and I think that's fair enough. If he had given a talk on evidence for evolution at a university or some other type of conference I'm sure he would have toned that down or eliminated it altogether.

 

[Malak]

I noticed you made similar comments on the other video about the origin of the universe from the same conference. You have to understand the context in which these talks were given - at a meeting of atheists. Like any good speaker he is indulging his audience with what they want to hear, and I think that's fair enough. If he had given a talk on evidence for evolution at a university or some other type of conference I'm sure he would have toned that down or eliminated it altogether.

Are you certain? His comments are more than just indulgences, he flat out says he doesn't want anything to do with anyone that doesn't believe in evolution.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Are you certain? His comments are more than just indulgences, he flat out says he doesn't want anything to do with anyone that doesn't believe in evolution.

No, he says he doesn't want anything to do with someone who refuses to be swayed by rock solid evidence. I tend to agree, which is why my participation in this thread and threads like it is so minimal.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The instant I saw who was at the podium I turned it off. I love science, not intellectual masturbation :fap: