Creation vs. Evolution

[Famine]

Every man that researches the Bible and tries to go and prove the events were real is normally a Christian and he goes in as a historian with a second motive. What's wrong with that?

A scientist - even a historical one - should have no motive. Two motives are two too many.

And just an example here: They found what they believed to be Noah's Ark a while back, the boat was seriously eroded naturally but was of the exact length described in the Bible, in the exact part of the world it should have been but was on the top of a mountain and could have only been placed there if there was a world flood as described in the Bible. It also dated to the correct time period, and this is one of the least provable finds they've made, all their others are far more convincing.

From Wikipedia:

Despite all these efforts, no physical remains have been found.

Is your "Jonathan Gray" this guy, where he tells us about 12 foot tall giants (never discovered) which once ruled the world (never documented)? Or this one, where he speaks of the discovery of the Ark of the Covenant (never discovered)?

Just asking.

 

[Joey D]

It was all in a video series made primarily by Jonathan Gray, he is an international explorer, archaeologist, and author. The series was called Suprising Discoveries.

I have some out there ideas and I'm open to them but that guy is crazy and he is not an archaeologist by any means. You also just copied that bolded part directly from his website which makes me think you don't really know all that much about him.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Him crazy? You're all crazy if you ask me, but you didn't- and I don't see where this discussion is ever going. I'm just going to agree to disagree and stop arguing, you people don't have enough faith and that's up to you, not me. Can we just agree not to dislike each other for any reason over this? I don't want to make foes because of cultural differences.

 

[Famine]

Him crazy?

Yeah, the bits where he makes stuff up without any proof kinda seal it.

Which pretty much covers his career.

you people don't have enough faith

Or indeed any.

I don't want to make foes because of cultural differences.

Nobody would dislike you because you're a Christian - look at Pako and Swift. I like them tremendously.

It's disappointing you feel absolutely no reason to examine your beliefs and thoughts - "the unexamined life is not worth living". I reexamine mine all the time.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Yeah, the bits where he makes stuff up without any proof kinda seal it.

Which pretty much covers his career.



Or indeed any.



Nobody would dislike you because you're a Christian - look at Pako and Swift. I like them tremendously.

It's disappointing you feel absolutely no reason to examine your beliefs and thoughts - "the unexamined life is not worth living". I reexamine mine all the time.

What does he make up? He's got concrete video proof if you watch it. Also on your 2 motives being 2 too many, I mean the first motive is to find something. If they don't have that motive then maybe they should be fence post hole diggers because clearly that's all they want to do, dig holes.

 

[Scaff]

What does he make up? He's got concrete video proof if you watch it. Also on your 2 motives being 2 too many, I mean the first motive is to find something. If they don't have that motive then maybe they should be fence post hole diggers because clearly that's all they want to do, dig holes.

Please pull the other one, a video proves nothing at all. In 1957 the BBC aired a program showing a bumper harvest of spagetti from the spagetti trees of Switzerland as an April Fool's day joke, that didn't make it true.

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

Proof comes from independent analysis and peer review, not someones video.

Scaff

 

[sn00pie]

What does he make up? He's got concrete video proof if you watch it. Also on your 2 motives being 2 too many, I mean the first motive is to find something. If they don't have that motive then maybe they should be fence post hole diggers because clearly that's all they want to do, dig holes.

You still need to learn a few things about questioning authority, and like Famine says, re-examination. But foremost: thinking for yourself.

You can't just accept everything like that.

I wish the word gullible were in the dictionary, so I could explain this better.

 

[Diego440]

Gullible:
1. Any person who has three boobs.
2. Any person who believed the first definition.
3. A person who will believe the most unbelievable stories ever created; hence the saying: "Gullible like a member of the church"

 

[Joey D]

What does he make up? He's got concrete video proof if you watch it. Also on your 2 motives being 2 too many, I mean the first motive is to find something. If they don't have that motive then maybe they should be fence post hole diggers because clearly that's all they want to do, dig holes.

The first motive of archaeologist is not to find something, we don't care if we find anything or not since either way you get an answer. And as I've said before archaeologist can not find concrete evidence during an excavation, it takes many years of analysis to figure it out. The main dig I was on last summer produced 15,000 artefacts and we are only about 20% the way through them right now. It takes a long time.

 

[Pako]

.....look at Pako and Swift. I like them tremendously.

*cocks head* Ahhh....shucks Famine. I like you to, not in a sexual way, but in a brotherly way.

For the record, this is our first sign of public affection towards each other. *feeling kinda weird now...., not icky weird, just....weird*

 

[UnoMOTO]

Not that you guys probably care much but I am beginning to lose some respect for what you are doing here. You all hang out in here with vast experience debating this topic. A person comes in with his own personal opinion and we all know right from the start how it's going to end with said new guy.

Constant bombarding and insinuating incompetence for ones belief in a God or the Bible is making you guys look like classless jerks. You should all admit that you’re not really looking for a discussion but more to get your kicks off of proving someone wrong so that they just go away. This thread is so stale with the over and over replies from the evolution side of it. Yay...you have proven that you spend lots of time observing lots of things in the world around you, but what have you learned from blasting the new guy meandering into this thread.

It is impossible for someone new to follow some of the logic in the past conversations of this thread. Staying on topic lasts only a few pages so tracing the history of our sometimes very screwed up conversations is often pointless and unsuccessful.

One of you moderators should just sticky this thread with a warning that if you have faith then do not enter this thread. “Be aware that the thread you are entering is filled with a roughly an eight to one ratio for debating the topic so be prepared to take on a deluge of criticism for believing in a creator”. The environment you have created for discussion just plain sucks.

[/end rant]

Have a nice day

 

[Joey D]

When someone comes in citing pseudoscientist are reputable sources they are going to get ridiculed. Look at my thread about aliens, I got the same thing. I was mad then but it was a learning experience and I realise I can't make statements like that and expect to be taken seriously at least in an academic setting. Plus, and this is something I need to work on, we need to realise this just a hot topic in a debate and their are going to be posts that prove something "wrong" from the other side.

We shouldn't take it to heart, and as I've said this is something I need to work on as well, and just give our opinion but be able to back it up when questioned. If you can't do that maybe this isn't the section of GTP for you.

 

[Diego440]

*cocks head* Ahhh....shucks Famine. I like you to, not in a sexual way, but in a brotherly way.

For the record, this is our first sign of public affection towards each other. *feeling kinda weird now...., not icky weird, just....weird*

[Billy Bob Thornton in Sling Blade]

Not funny ha ha... just funny

[/Billy Bob Thornton in Sling Blade]

 

[UnoMOTO]

We shouldn't take it to heart, and as I've said this is something I need to work on as well, and just give our opinion but be able to back it up when questioned. If you can't do that maybe this isn't the section of GTP for you.

That is exactly why this thread will live in a perpetual circle. The source most used to back up creation is not viewed as a credible piece of text. Thus any following argument is met with complete skepticism. The debate is completely failed from the very beginning.

 

[Famine]

What does he make up? He's got concrete video proof if you watch it.

I'd like for him to produce the Ark of the Covenant and Noah's Ark for me.

Also on your 2 motives being 2 too many, I mean the first motive is to find something. If they don't have that motive then maybe they should be fence post hole diggers because clearly that's all they want to do, dig holes.

Even finding something is a motive too far. Finding nothing is often more important in science. In fact, science is based on assuming that a cause doesn't produce an effect and experimenting upon that assumption.

*cocks head* Ahhh....shucks Famine. I like you to, not in a sexual way, but in a brotherly way.

For the record, this is our first sign of public affection towards each other. *feeling kinda weird now...., not icky weird, just....weird*

Should this be in the homosexuality thread?

 

[Duke]

One of you moderators should just sticky this thread with a warning that if you have faith then do not enter this thread. “Be aware that the thread you are entering is filled with a roughly an eight to one ratio for debating the topic so be prepared to take on a deluge of criticism for believing in a creator”. The environment you have created for discussion just plain sucks.

[/end rant]

Have a nice day

But, all personal offense aside, how are we to combat the huge quantity of semi-truth, non-truth, and outright deception spewed forth by Creationists Intelligent Design "scientists" and archaeological "historians" whose research begins and ends with the Bible?

We're honestly not here to belittle folks simply for believing in a supernatural god. We're here to get them to question their inherited faith and dogma, and to get them to think for themselves. I disagree heartily with Pako and Swift on the subject of faith. But at least I know they have each arrived at their faith after lots of self-examination and investigation. I can disagree with their conclusions while having some respect for their process.

But it's very difficult to have the same respect for someone who swallows what they were taught as a child and never reexamines that teaching. Although I didn't have a particularly religious upbringing, I was baptised into the Episcopalian church. I wasn't raised an atheist. I arrived at that conclusion myself in my early teens after observing just how poorly mysticism fit the physical data and logic that was contained in everything I saw, heard, touched, smelled, breathed, drank, or ate. I questioned the default explanation and arrived at my own conclusions. I continue to do that every day of my life!

I know that many people of faith have grave distrust of science because they seem to think that nothing in science is ever solid at all and everything gets disproven every time something new is "learned". What they are failing to understand is that this is exactly what science is: the continued quest to refine knowledge. These people have been fed an overstated and inaccurate view of science by people who cannot stand unanswered questions and who are scared to question what they themselves believe.

So we've got a lot of history to fight against here. It's never intended personally, though it sometimes seems that way. A lot of that is reaction to a life of dealing with people like the guy quoted in my signature.

 

[Pako]

It is a bit like a pack of hungry dogs. It's unfortunate that even in the sciences, they are finding evidence every day of God's existence, that they still choose to ignore their findings. Look at Hawking, he proved mathematically that God exists but was too arrogant to admit his findings. There is a basic requirement that you must have faith to believe in God. There may be environmental influences and discoveries but regardless if God created the universe or not, I don't see science proving anything other than the process behind it. Further arrogance in science tells us that the only thing that can exist in our reality are things that can be measured scientifically, with man made devices. We have called ourselves gods by defining and limiting reality by our own 'creations'. If we limit our understanding by our own definitions, surly we won't be able to see God.

So yes, this discussion is a banter back and forth, back and forth with no real progress. People with faith can see the advances of science, but people without faith have no appreciation for what other people hold to be true. There has been evidence presented, but has been doubted and rejected. That's fine. The beauty of God is that He's not waiting to strike you down because of your disbelief, but rather He's waiting to accept you because you believe in Him.

No offense intended.

 

[Famine]

Look at Hawking, he proved mathematically that God exists but was too arrogant to admit his findings.

So then...

How do you know about it?

 

[UnoMOTO]

But, all personal offense aside, how are we to combat the huge quantity of semi-truth, non-truth, and outright deception spewed forth by Creationists Intelligent Design "scientists" and archaeological "historians" whose research begins and ends with the Bible?

That again is why this thread has outlasted its usefulness. It's not about two sides anymore. It purely about you correcting the uneducated and ill informed.

I disagree heartily with Pako and Swift on the subject of faith. But at least I know they have each arrived at their faith after lots of self-examination and investigation. I can disagree with their conclusions while having some respect for their process.

I'd hazard a guess that two fellow moderators had your respect long before this thread came into question. That being said I just don't see any new guy getting a chance to earn some respect with a great discussion. The tone from the get go is 'your and idiot and you just don't understand'. How can some of us earn some respect with your predisposition?

But it's very difficult to have the same respect for someone who swallows what they were taught as a child and never reexamines that teaching.

How would you know over a life time what that person went through to arrive at his decsion if your only interested in squashing his comments?

I know that many people of faith have grave distrust of science because they seem to think that nothing in science is ever solid at all and everything gets disproven every time something new is "learned".

Really...I don't think that way and in my sphere of influence none of us spend time thinking about how science is trying to cause us any harm. That’s a common theme in this thread and I believe is over blown.

So we've got a lot of history to fight against here. It's never intended personally, though it sometimes seems that way. A lot of that is reaction to a life of dealing with people like the guy quoted in my signature.

A person would have a really questionable amount of faith if it were convinced otherwise here on gaming website. Even with your enthusiasm and energy I hope you don't think that you could be that effective. A more agree to disagree attitude in here would nurture more conversation.

 

[Pako]

Should this be in the homosexuality thread?

 

[Duke]

Not to get into a quoting battle here, but sometimes it would seem it's the only way to keep things straight.

That again is why this thread has outlasted its usefulness. It's not about two sides anymore. It purely about you correcting the uneducated and ill informed.

To me, that's proof positive that this thread is more necessary than ever.

I'd hazard a guess that two fellow moderators had your respect long before this thread came into question.

Pako was already a mod when I joined the site. Swift became a moderator a year or two after I did. I respected both equally, and both because of their thought processes.

That being said I just don't see any new guy getting a chance to earn some respect with a great discussion. The tone from the get go is 'your and idiot and you just don't understand'. How can some of us earn some respect with your predisposition?

When someone comes in and says, almost literally, "God created everything. I believe that because it's how I was raised and the Bible says so", that person is going to have a very hard time earning respect from people who value critical thinking. Perhaps that person should consider their thoughts and words more carefully if they wish to earn respect.

How would you know over a life time what that person went through to arrive at his decsion if your only interested in squashing his comments?

See answer immediately above. If a person has spent a lot of thought and effort in choosing their faith, and if that person can explain their reasoning and thinking, then they will receive respect for it. Such a person is not likely to appear and say "God made the earth because that's what Catholics believe and I'm Catholic."

Really...I don't think that way and in my sphere of influence none of us spend time thinking about how science is trying to cause us any harm. That’s a common theme in this thread and I believe is over blown.

I never said that you believed science was trying to cause harm. What I said was there is a profound, fundamental distrust of science among many religious people, precisely because science does not rest on an unquestionable, immovable rock.

A person would have a really questionable amount of faith if it were convinced otherwise here on gaming website. Even with your enthusiasm and energy I hope you don't think that you could be that effective. A more agree to disagree attitude in here would nurture more conversation.

So intelligent conversation can't be intelligent if it is found on a videogaming website? That's odd. I've had some of the best conversations, that really made me think about my thoughts and feelings carefully, on a forum dedicated to the Dodge Neon. What does that make me?

Besides, what is the point of an "agree to disagree" conversation 200 pages long? If that was the case, we would have just made a permanent poll and left it at that.

 

[UnoMOTO]

So intelligent conversation can't be intelligent if it is found on a videogaming website? That's odd. I've had some of the best conversations, that really made me think about my thoughts and feelings carefully, on a forum dedicated to the Dodge Neon. What does that make me?

I said, nor implied anything of the sort. GTP is a great place to have intelligent conversation. Again, the point being made that for this conversation is that you question the intelligence of your counterpart simply because of the side of the fence he is standing on.

Sorry to hear about your Neon problem. I'm glad you have moved on and have recovered fully from your traumatic experience.

Besides, what is the point of an "agree to disagree" conversation 200 pages long? If that was the case, we would have just made a permanent poll and left it at that.

I guess my point is being missed. oh well

 

[Danoff]

Constant bombarding and insinuating incompetence for ones belief in a God or the Bible is making you guys look like classless jerks.

If you're talking about nd4holden, I'd say that the response has been about right for his initial posts. I've made this comment several times, but I think it bears repeating. This is not a place to come and say "I believe in God", and have everyone say "I disagree with you, but wonderful job on forming an opinion". This is where we discuss these things, and for the last few pages, that discussion has been stilted at best. If you're not prepared to do some self-evalutation and get into a serious discussion, this is not the right place for you to start posting.

Other creationists have posted here with better reception, it has mostly to do with the level of thought behind their posts.

You should all admit that you’re not really looking for a discussion but more to get your kicks off of proving someone wrong so that they just go away. This thread is so stale with the over and over replies from the evolution side of it.

I'd actually say that we get similar replies from BOTH sides of the debate. But I've noticed a concerted effort on Famine and Touring Mars's behalf to try to avoid rehashing and simply refer new posters to what has already been covered.

It is impossible for someone new to follow some of the logic in the past conversations of this thread. Staying on topic lasts only a few pages so tracing the history of our sometimes very screwed up conversations is often pointless and unsuccessful.

We've covered a LOT of ground and most of the typical arguments in this thread. Most of the things that are added at this point are retreads. That is why it is important for people new to this thread to go back and read it from the beginning. If they feel they have something unique to add after that, then they should. I've read every last post in this thread, so it can be done. And I can tell you that I think it stays pretty well on topic.

The environment you have created for discussion just plain sucks.

The environment here for simply spouting an opinion and refusing to examine it sucks. But I think that's as it should be.

I don't want to make foes because of cultural differences.

It's ironic. You're trying not to make enemies by avoiding this discussion. But the best way to earn the respect of the people you've been "arguing" with is to really dig in and have a good discussion (and really listen, that's just as important as explaining your point of view). You would try to avoid making enemies by running away. But the truth of the matter is that your presence here and disagreement is not making enemies. Running away, however, just might. If you want to be taken seriously, first of all, change your name, second of all, you've got to stick it out, address the points made by other members, and have a good discussion.

That is exactly why this thread will live in a perpetual circle. The source most used to back up creation is not viewed as a credible piece of text. Thus any following argument is met with complete skepticism. The debate is completely failed from the very beginning.

Ah, but that's just the beginning of the discussion. One can easily start an excellent, stimulating discussion based on the premise you just posted.

 

[UnoMOTO]

If you're talking about nd4holden, I'd say that the response has been about right for his initial posts. I've made this comment several times, but I think it bears repeating. This is not a place to come and say "I believe in God", and have everyone say "I disagree with you, but wonderful job on forming an opinion". This is where we discuss these things, and for the last few pages, that discussion has been stilted at best. If you're not prepared to do some self-evalutation and get into a serious discussion, this is not the right place for you to start posting.

I guess by now you guys would just know better. What's wrong with giving the guy a rundown of how this thread works rather then just licking your chops when you see that first delcious post.

Other creationists have posted here with better reception, it has mostly to do with the level of thought behind their posts.

Sure...I've stepped in dog crap once because I did expect it to be there. If there were a sign in the park that said to be on the lookout then everyone could enjoy that park.

But I've noticed a concerted effort on Famine and Touring Mars's behalf to try to avoid rehashing and simply refer new posters to what has already been covered.

We've covered a LOT of ground and most of the typical arguments in this thread. Most of the things that are added at this point are retreads. That is why it is important for people new to this thread to go back and read it from the beginning. If they feel they have something unique to add after that, then they should.

Well said. That has "READ THIS FIRST" written all over it. Should this be the first sticked thread in the opinions forum?

Ah, but that's just the beginning of the discussion. One can easily start an excellent, stimulating discussion based on the premise you just posted.

Amen

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Evolutionists have such a closed mind, you're not willing to open up to possiblity. The reason most of Gray's work is not recognised is most of what he did- going into hostile territory etc. was illegal. Plus governments hush up these kinds of discoveries to keep people who can't believe to not go into a wild let's all kill each other riot. When judgement day comes you will all wish you had believed from the onset. You dismiss the work of Christian archaeologists because you simply can't comprehend their work and refuse to believe it, not because there is no truth in it.

 

[Duke]

I'm sorry, but at least for my part, that's a completely incorrect assumption about my motives.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I'm sorry, but at least for my part, that's a completely incorrect assumption about my motives.

The whole reason you are not a Christian is because you can't accpet it right? I'd say that pretty much sums it up.

 

[Perfect Balance]

The whole reason you are not a Christian is because you can't accpet it right? I'd say that pretty much sums it up.

The "Whole reason" he isn't a Christain is because he doesn't believe in a higher power. If God appeared in front of him right now or something like that, I'm sure he'd accept it. He can accept it.

Oh, and evolution is real, it's just the monkey idea that's making uninformed Christians avoid it like the plague, when it's not really what evolution is about.

EDIT: I'm a Christian myself, but I believe that God did all his work in the way it scientifically happened. The Bible NEVER goes into great detail, so just saying "and it was done" or something like that is typical of the way the Bible is written, so it doesn't have to literally mean that everything popped out all of a sudden all over the universe.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

The "Whole reason" he isn't a Christain is because he doesn't believe in a higher power. If God appeared in front of him right now or something like that, I'm sure he'd accept it. He can accept it.

Oh, and evolution is real, it's just the monkey idea that's making uninformed Christians avoid it like the plague, when it's not really what evolution is about.

Yeah, so Evolutionists can't accept something without hard core, in front of your face proof. Maybe you should watch Surprising Discoveries by Jonathan Gray, those who continue to dismiss his work only further prove me correct.

Edit: Seen your edit, and now I know what you are saying, in that it's almost possible to have both Evolution and Creation. It is even said by many Christian researchers that we don't know how long those 7 days lasted for, and that 7 days in God's "time" (for lack of a better word) could have lasted hundreds and even thousands of years in Earth time.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Yeah, so you can't accept something without hard core, in front of your face proof.

The same can be said the other way around, and all the "in front of your face proof" only proves them right too.