Creation vs. Evolution

[nd 4 holden spd]

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

You could say that, but most arguments from Evolutionists can be disproved by science itself, let alone how we think it happened.

PS- See my edit in last post.

 

[Kylehnat]

Evolutionists have such a closed mind, you're not willing to open up to possiblity.

Both Duke and I were raised going to church. Realizing that there are other possibilities, we became atheists later in life. For me, part of that reason was my education in science, both in high school and in college. The scientific principles that turned atoms into life now pay my bills. It's hard for me to argue against that. I've evaluated the possibilities of God vs. no God, and for me, the odds stack up heavily on one side.

When judgement day comes you will all wish you had believed from the onset.

That kind of statement will get you nowhere in this thread.

but most arguments from Evolutionists can be disproved by science itself, let alone how we think it happened.

What the hell are you talking about? You have not made a convincing argument on this point, which you keep belaboring. Where does science disprove itself?

 

[Perfect Balance]

You could say that, but most arguments from Evolutionists can be disproved by science itself, let alone how we think it happened.

PS- See my edit in last post.

Yea but the ENTIRE idea of creationism (as in stuff popping out from nothing) is disproved by science just by something as simple as "Matter cannot be created or destroyed", so that's why I believe God did everything through the process of evolution and whatnot. I don't think humans came from monkeys though.

About your edit, that's what I meant. A "day" is a certain amount of time that it takes for the sun to rotate in a circle. Sun comes up, sun goes down, and thats basically a "day"


So how was there a "day" when there was supposedly so sun?
That's part of why I believe what I do.

EDIT: I'm sure some of you guys can tear apart my post piece by piece, but keep in mind I'm just making a point. I don't know about the history of the "day" and stuff like that, so I'm just making general statements.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Science has no grounds against God, he has no rules or laws holding him back- how else would Jesus have turned water to wine? Science states that matter can not be created or destroyed, same with energy. Yet going by science's ideas the whole universe was created in a big bang (out of nothing-what the hell?). How were we formed in a big bang from nothing if there was nothing there to begin with Christianity explains everything, science does not.

Edit: I almost posted a replica argument of the post above me- only proving how science is wrong.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Science has no grounds against God, he has no rules or laws holding him back- how else would Jesus have turned water to wine? Science states that matter can not be created or destroyed, same with energy. Yet going by science's ideas the whole universe was created in a big bang (out of nothing-what the hell?). How were we formed in a big bang from nothing if there was nothing there to begin with Christianity explains everything, science does not.

Edit: I almost posted a replica argument of the post above me- only proving how science is wrong.

You were saying science disproves evolution ( it does? ) so I used the "science" argument the exact same way, just showing that it's not a valid argument.

And read up on the big bang, it didn't "pop out from nothing."

Christianity doesn't "explain" anything, it just says what happened (assuming you believe it) it doesn't explain how. If it did, we could follow the instructions and become God ourselves.

And frankly you've proved almost nothing at all, if anything at all. You keep saying "proof" and how "science proves it wrong", yet you've provided absolutely NONE of this "proof" except for some suggestions for videos or books.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You were saying science disproves evolution ( it does? ) so I used the "science" argument the exact same way, just showing that it's not a valid argument.

And read up on the big bang, it didn't "pop out from nothing."

Christianity doesn't "explain" anything, it just says what happened (assuming you believe it) it doesn't explain how. If it did, we could follow the instructions and become God ourselves.

And frankly you've proved almost nothing at all, if anything at all. You keep saying "proof" and how "science proves it wrong", yet you've provided absolutely NONE of this "proof" except for some suggestions for videos or books.

Chirstianity explains how it happened, we will never have the power of God. What was there before the big bang and the universe then huh? The universe is everything, so what was there before it was created? I have proved it, but you too won't open your mind or your eyes to the truth. I'm out of here, never coming back to this thread because it's just pointless trying to explain to you guys. (That means don't bother quoting me because I won't read it)

 

[Perfect Balance]

Chirstianity explains how it happened, we will never have the power of God. What was there before the big bang and the universe then huh? The universe is everything, so what was there before it was created? I have proved it, but you too won't open your mind or your eyes to the truth. I'm out of here, never coming back to this thread because it's just pointless trying to explain to you guys. (That means don't bother quoting me because I won't read it)

So where's this proof? If you don't want to post in this thread pm me or something, but I really want to see this proof, imagine how much people have been missing out and burning in hell because nobody showed them the proof.

Believing without any proof is kinda the POINT. Religion is a BELIEF, not a proven fact. God is unexplainable, past what the human mind can comprehend. Pick up a dictionary sometime and look up those words for yourself.






The ignorance of some people is astonishing. Sure, believe in what you believe in, I believe the same thing, but there's no PROOF to speak of, it's all based on beliefs. If they're true, sweet, I'm going to heaven, but if it turns out to be all crap, so be it, but I'm not taking any chances with eternity.

 

[wfooshee]

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.

I hope Uno Moto is reading your stuff, so he can reconsider his question about "us" beating "you" up all the time.

Flakes throwing bad "science" out to sell videos does not "prove" anything except the gullibility of humanity in general. We are sheep, and want to be led. By anybody. Even George W.

Apparently you also want to be led. You haven't posted an original thought of your own or a reputable reference yet.

Uno, if you're seeing this, that's why the "new guys" get picked on all the time. They can't back themselves up, and we'd really really like them to learn that. That's the whole point of science, to pick apart someone's ideas and hear their defense of those ideas. No defense, no idea worthy of consideration. Good defense, by experiment or observation, leading to predictable outcomes, then everybody learned something, maybe something new and exciting. But "because my mommy said so" doesn't qualify. (The quotes are not an actual quote of anybody, but a summarization of what I interpret as their most given reasons.)

In my very first post in this thread some months ago I told how the church lost me with "This is true because we say so," "You will not listen to or consider other views, they are heretical," and even sometimes "You will destroy those who oppose the church's teaching." I actually had the nerve to compare that to fascism.

nd 4 holden spd's posts reek of this thought process. "This is what I was told, and I was told the penalty for thinking otherwise, therefore this is the Truth, and that proves it."

Please!

His very first post: "because I'm a Baptist Christian." That's so irrelevant to actually considering the Creation vs. Evolution question that it just makes me shiver! I still fail to see how the basic Creationist belief has anything to do with being Christian.

Yes, Uno, the thread goes in circles. One "side" complains of the other "side"'s inability to see the "Truth," and the other "side" responds with "how can you possibly . . . .?" Whenever someone new jumps in, it starts anew.

(Edit: Geez, 5 posts while I was typing. Now I'm obsolete already again. Or will be soon.)

I'll summarize a point I've made before. The "modern" religiously-based statement that man cannot have evolved from apes because it defies the Creation story (and therefore Evolution itself is "wrong") is just as stupid (yes, I said "stupid") as the church's earlier failure to accept that the Earth was just another planet in the solar system and not the Center of Everything.

 

[Year.Zero]

most arguments from Evolutionists can be disproved by science itself

EXAMPLE.​

(You need one.)​

PS- I find these one-word, direct responses to your posts very efficient. How do you find my approach? To the others: How are you liking these? I think it'll keep him on track and reinforce what GTP stands for.

 

[Year.Zero]

nd 4 holden spd's posts reek of this thought process. "This is what I was told, and I was told the penalty for thinking otherwise, therefore this is the Truth, and that proves it."

That form of thinking is also a logical fallacy, known as appeal to authority. I've seen enough arguments from Christians and many other religious believers alike which lead me to believe that many religions are inherently illogical.

Interestingly, it was the Greeks and Chinese who formed the greatest developments in the logical thought process, and they weren't who founded Christianity or Judahism.

 

[Famine]

Evolutionists have such a closed mind, you're not willing to open up to possiblity.

I just had to quote that line. It's too funny to leave unnoticed.

Chirstianity explains how it happened

No. No religion explains how things happened. They do, on the other hand, tell you that things happened.

Christianity explains everything, science does not.

See above.

Christianity - and other religions - tell you that things happened, and why. Explanations are very, very thin on the ground. You're quite right to say that science doesn't explain everything - but the difference is that no scientist would claim that science explains everything. Science does at least explain some things and gives everyone the chance to try it out for themselves.

If it's knowledge you want, religion is your man - you get the answers you want. If it's understanding you want, you're better to seek elsewhere.

 

[Small_Fryz]

If they're true, sweet, I'm going to heaven, but if it turns out to be all crap, so be it, but I'm not taking any chances with eternity.

I think that right their is a BIG reason we have religions in the 1st place.

People (not saying you) are scared of "eternity" and they belive they are special and "deserve" to live longer than they appear on this earth. An opportunity to do such that lies in religion and i think thats a big reason why many follow.

Now dont get me wrong, i certainly dont rule out the possiblity of life after death of some sort, and infact i really hope its true. But i think if you have to live your life a certain way in fear or punishment / reward after death then its a sad thing. Of course as danoff has stated many times, you can have morals without religion so its not like us "atheists" are criminals and bad people because we do not fear punishment after death because of a "bad" life.

Let me find a quote that i read that sums up what i mean..

[A scientist] has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple reason that a man's actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in God's eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an inanimate object is responsible for the motions it undergoes. Science has therefore been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death.

 

[Smallhorses]

Science has no grounds against God, he has no rules or laws holding him back- how else would Jesus have turned water to wine?

In possibly the same way we do? Adding water to crushed grapes, allowing a little yeast to get in there, and leaving it all to ferment for a while. I'm sorry if this seems a little facetious, but if you've chosen to believe that someone's age-old story proves that this was accomplished in a matter of seconds, versus the everyday proof, that it takes a couple of weeks then you're welcome to hold your faith. It's a respectable viewpoint that I'm willing to accept that you cherish, and one held by many millions of people around the world, but one that you should also respect and accept that I & many others can't agree with.
It's not your place (nor mine) though to dispute those who choose to believe the logical arguments which something like this raises, when comparing real-life results to a 2 millenia-old document, nor is it acceptable to try and enforce your views on those of us who chose to accept the clear evidence in front of us in place of what you feel we should all accept without question, i.e. that a simple 3-letter word (God) can prove or disprove anything you care to talk about as & when it suits your point of view.

Evolutionists have such a closed mind, you're not willing to open up to possiblity.

Can I just ask then what your Christian viewpoint is on the the fact that there are many different religions out there, some of which existed before Christianity, and some which came after, but none of which seem to agree with each other about who or what their God is, and have spent most of the last 2 Millenia fighting about it? Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to whip up a religious fervour, but it certainly strikes me as odd that a Christian scientist, a Hindu scientist and a Muslim scientist while believing in very different creationist theories, never tend to disagree on concrete proof in front of them, such as, for example, the structure of DNA, the subsequent decoding of the genome and much of the retrosynthetic analysis that has gone on since then which has enabled the curing of may diseases and ailments or what the steps are that cause nuclear reactions, whether they be natural (in the Sun & stars) or man-made (in power stations & atomic weaponry.)

I will admit, that if this has all been covered before, then I did baulk at the fact that this thread is now over 200 pages long, and the thought of having to read through over 5000 posts to make sure what has & hasn't been said before and we're probably just retracing a well trodden path here.

 

[Sureboss]

Christianity explains everything, science does not.

This may be frivolous seeing as you've wimped out of the thread, however...

It does?

Doesn't the bible say (effectively) that we and dinosaurs lived together?
Why are some humans born with tails?
Why did god give us a tailbone?

There are many more, but those are off the top of my head.

 

[Touring Mars]

There are loads of questions I've asked in this thread too, but didn't get an answer - so don't hold your breath, Nigel.

Evolutionists have such a closed mind, you're not willing to open up to possiblity.

"Open-minded" certainly doesn't mean that you should accept that all possibilities have equal validity - and that is precisely what the Creation v Evolution argument is all about.

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.

I respect this viewpoint alot 👍 This is a good example of what open-minded really means. I personally can't see what the big problem with evolution is. Not only does it fit with a theistic (aswell as an atheistic) viewpoint, it also doesn't say much about Christianity at all. As for Evolution theory contradicting certain bits of the Bible, well I'd say that was largely limited to the Old Testament which doesn't even mention Jesus Christ.

I still fail to see how the basic Creationist belief has anything to do with being Christian.

Amen!

 

[Alfaholic]

Chirstianity explains how it happened, we will never have the power of God. What was there before the big bang and the universe then huh? The universe is everything, so what was there before it was created? I have proved it, but you too won't open your mind or your eyes to the truth. I'm out of here, never coming back to this thread because it's just pointless trying to explain to you guys. (That means don't bother quoting me because I won't read it)

Where did God come from then huh? What was here before God? If you can believe that God was just always there, then you can also believe that the cosmic egg which led to the big bang was always there, thus meaning no matter was created or destroyed. Science, by the way, has suggested that the universe is NOT everything (making it's name a misnomer, I believe). Science also does not apply the laws of this universe (conservation of matter / energy) to periods before the beginning of time (Big Bang) or to possible universes that may exist outside or inside this one. Or two. Making your and my references to the laws of conservation moot.

Here's another thing. Just because we can't explain where the stuff of the universe came from doesn't mean or even imply that God did it. It just means we don't know.

P.S. I bet you read this ;-)

 

[Joey D]

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.

👍 Well said, if I could I would +rep that post. You can be religious and accept evolution. Even I can't say for certain how it all happened and maybe it was controlled by a higher power. I don't know.

Maybe you should watch Surprising Discoveries by Jonathan Gray, those who continue to dismiss his work only further prove me correct.

How? Because a pseudoarchaeologist found some "data" that has no scientific merit? As I've asked before do you understand how archaeology works?

You could say that, but most arguments from Evolutionists can be disproved by science itself, let alone how we think it happened.

What?

Yet going by science's ideas the whole universe was created in a big bang (out of nothing-what the hell?). How were we formed in a big bang from nothing if there was nothing there to begin with Christianity explains everything, science does not.

I'm not as well versed in the Big Bang theory as other may be but from my understanding everything in the universe (read matter and energy) were in one solid singularity. It was there and was not created.

 

[UnoMOTO]

I hope Uno Moto is reading your stuff, so he can reconsider his question about "us" beating "you" up all the time.

Let's me make it more black and white then. No new member to GTP could possibly understand what the likes of Famine, Touring Mars, Sage, Duke and Danoff expect out of a debate. Especially one in a field that they work in on a daily basis.

Since those gentlemen are leaders of this website you'd think they would be a little more responsible with introducing the new creationist to the snake pit that is this thread. Show him the ropes and THEN let him proceed to dig his own whole.

Each man to his own in this thread and it’s not my job to correct someone even when he and I are standing on the same side of the fence. If he makes the statement then he should back it up.

His very first post: "because I'm a Baptist Christian."

You should look at that statement as a positive. There is a local radio guy who often uses the phrase, "Tell me where you sit before you tell me where you stand". At least he announces his bias before he begins his argument.

 

[Touring Mars]

Since those gentlemen are leaders of this website you'd think they would be a little more responsible with introducing the new creationist to the snake pit that is this thread. Show him the ropes and THEN let him proceed to dig his own whole.

I reckon a quick glance through the thread should be sufficient warning, to be honest, but I do take your point. There's not much you can do to warn people other than to put a disclaimer in the first post (which nobody reads anyway) that would tell you that some of the most regular posters in this thread are highly qualified scientists/engineers, including architects, geneticists and research biochemists (and even a bona fide rocket scientist) as well as those with decades-long experience/knowledge of Scripture...

 

[Famine]

Let's me make it more black and white then. No new member to GTP could possibly understand what the likes of Famine, Touring Mars, Sage, Duke and Danoff expect out of a debate. Especially one in a field that they work in on a daily basis.

Since those gentlemen are leaders of this website you'd think they would be a little more responsible with introducing the new creationist to the snake pit that is this thread. Show him the ropes and THEN let him proceed to dig his own whole.

Problem is that newcomers to this thread are, generally, on the other side of the coin to the five members you mention. They, generally, don't accept direction from us because they fundamentally disagree with us - and no amount of evidence to the contrary (in the form of the previous 5,500 posts) will convince them otherwise.


That's quite a slope we've got to walk up.

 

[FoolKiller]

Yea but the ENTIRE idea of creationism (as in stuff popping out from nothing) is disproved by science just by something as simple as "Matter cannot be created or destroyed", so that's why I believe God did everything through the process of evolution and whatnot. I don't think humans came from monkeys though.

Well, existence as a whole violates that law, which means that somehow (whether through a higher being or a force we do not yet understand) some thing came into existence creating matter from nothing.

About your edit, that's what I meant. A "day" is a certain amount of time that it takes for the sun to rotate in a circle. Sun comes up, sun goes down, and thats basically a "day"


So how was there a "day" when there was supposedly so sun?
That's part of why I believe what I do.

You know, it could all be that the book of Genesis was written in a time well after the Jewish culture had developed a seven day work week so the author couldn't imagine it being any other way.

Chirstianity explains how it happened, we will never have the power of God. What was there before the big bang and the universe then huh? The universe is everything, so what was there before it was created? I have proved it, but you too won't open your mind or your eyes to the truth.

7. If your opponent has you cornered, just run away!
You can beat any argument simply by not responding! The best feature of this indispensable tactic is that since your opponent is too dimwitted to see your point of view, he'll probably just forget the fact that he's just shot a bigger hole in your logic than a screened door on a submarine!

Doesn't the bible say (effectively) that we and dinosaurs lived together?

No, it talks of behemoths, whcih could be elephants, rhinos, hippos, etc. ONly teh Earth is just 6,000 year old people claim that it means dinosaurs.

I'm not as well versed in the Big Bang theory as other may be but from my understanding everything in the universe (read matter and energy) were in one solid singularity. It was there and was not created.

But where did the singularity come from? The problem with existence is that it breaks all known physical laws.

 

[Pako]

So then...

How do you know about it?

Sorry I missed this post. I was referring to his book, A Brief History in Time.

 

[Duke]

Since those gentlemen are leaders of this website you'd think they would be a little more responsible with introducing the new creationist to the snake pit that is this thread. Show him the ropes and THEN let him proceed to dig his own whole.

Did our newest newcomer here announce that he was interested in participating, so the we had some opportunity to "show him the ropes"? He did not - he waded right in with some fairly clear but very simplistic statements. Are you proposing some sort of application process where people pre-register to join this thread? Other than that I don't see how we can 'initiate' people if we have no way of knowing who is going to post ahead of time.

I do sort of understand what you're getting at. I'm just not sure it's feasible, and I suspect it's driven by you feeling your side is on the defensive.

 

[Famine]

Well, existence as a whole violates that law, which means that somehow (whether through a higher being or a force we do not yet understand) some thing came into existence creating matter from nothing.

But where did the singularity come from? The problem with existence is that it breaks all known physical laws.

It's a commonly-held misconception that the Big Bang violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. There's no real consensus on the wording of the Law, but the underlying theme is that in a closed system, processes lead to entropy - order leads to chaos.

The italic words are really, really important, and show that arguments against the Big Bang based on the Second Law of Thermodynamics - order from nothing - are without merit.


The universe (the one to which the terms "Big Bang" applies) is not a closed system. It exists within M-Space, which is something we find quite hard to quantify and measure because we do not exist within M-Space (though we do, because we're in the universe which is within M-Space). In fact, it's because our universe isn't a closed system that gravity isn't as strong in our universe as it ought to be...

Sorry I missed this post. I was referring to his book, A Brief History in Time.

So... did he write that he had mathematically proven the existence of God, but chosen not to publish it?

Would the claim be more or less credible if he'd mathematically disproven the existence of God, but chosen not to publish it?

 

[UnoMOTO]

Problem is that newcomers to this thread are, generally, on the other side of the coin to the five members you mention. They, generally, don't accept direction from us because they fundamentally disagree with us - and no amount of evidence to the contrary (in the form of the previous 5,500 posts) will convince them otherwise.

I guess that might depend how fimilar said person is with internet forums. A regular surfer might see 4 moderators explaining how the site works and take that advice to heart. Which is completely different then the debate at hand. Until you annouce your postion you are just a moderator at a site, assuming that he isn't going to read your previous posts, which has been proven to be most likely.

That's quite a slope we've got to walk up.

That must suck with the millions or maybe billions of religious nuts walking the face of the planet. How will you get to us all?

I do sort of understand what you're getting at. I'm just not sure it's feasible, and I suspect it's driven by you feeling your side is on the defensive.

It is feasible by you learning the art of self-control. Just because you think it doesn't mean that you are obligated to say it.

 

[Touring Mars]

That must suck with the millions or maybe billions of religious nuts walking the face of the planet. How will you get to us all?

Remind them that George W. Bush is an advocate of Intelligent Design - that should convert a few.

 

[FoolKiller]

The universe (the one to which the terms "Big Bang" applies) is not a closed system. It exists within M-Space, which is something we find quite hard to quantify and measure because we do not exist within M-Space (though we do, because we're in the universe which is within M-Space). In fact, it's because our universe isn't a closed system that gravity isn't as strong in our universe as it ought to be...

Wait, where did M-Space come from? What is it, etc, etc, etc.

Don't literally trying to bother explaining it because it will just continually lead to more questions or someone's head will explode.

 

[Pako]

Remind them that George W. Bush is an advocate of Intelligent Design - that should convert a few.

, sad, but funny.

 

[Famine]

Wait, where did M-Space come from? What is it, etc, etc, etc.

Don't literally trying to bother explaining it because it will just continually lead to more questions or someone's head will explode.

I'm a little hazy on the physics of it myself - it's not something we can directly observe, which makes it a pig to understand or explain.

 

[Pako]

I'm a little hazy on the physics of it myself - it's not something we can directly observe, which makes it a pig to understand or explain.

I know what you mean......