Creation vs. Evolution

[Ophiochus]

how do you figure? you either believe we evolved or you dont? if you are in the middle , then you are a waffle.

 

[Touring Mars]

how do you figure? you either believe we evolved or you dont? if you are in the middle , then you are a waffle.

I think the point is that, due to the presence of overwhelming evidence that evolution has occured, then 'belief' is not required in order for it to be considered true. I also 'believe' it happened, but that's irrelevant, since the evidence exists to qualify it as true whether I, you, or anyone else 'believes' it or not. Granted, it's maybe splitting hairs a bit, but in a discussion where the definition of belief is so vital, it is an important distinction to make.

 

[wfooshee]

Exactly.

In the context of a discussion like this thread, a concept you "believe in" is one without physical evidence to support it. You "believe" it because you've been trained all of your life to believe it, without being given any support on the idea other than "because it is so."

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted evolution.

How people own dogs and cats and refute evolution is also funny to me. You can ask some Christians how we got them and they will give the reply "God made them that way."

Dinosaurs...

I grew up in the Church of Christ ( very, very, very conservative), the bible was the law, I went to a private Christian middle/high school.

I took a couple of anatomy and physiology courses, university bio/chem etc. and that was it... doesn't take any convincing when you sit down and study it.

I don't refute the existence of a god or believe we can prove one exists. What I do know is the universe is far too complex, animals are far too complex to have happened by chance. What is the purpose for sub atomic particles and atoms to assemble into conscious life? I don't know. Wish I did. But evolution... far too much supporting evidence. It's piece of the puzzle which people just can't seem to accept.

 

[Denur]

... are far too complex to have happened by chance.

When is something too complex that one has to ascribe it to a higher being? Where do you draw the line?

 

[homeforsummer]

When is something too complex that one has to ascribe it to a higher being? Where do you draw the line?

My view is that the more complex something is the less likely it was to have been produced by a higher being. We're capable of studying the universe - both out in space and right here on Earth - in some pretty staggering detail, and no matter how small or complex we can understand at the moment we're still seeing zero evidence that it was "created".

On the other hand, what if we'd found out through experiment that there was nothing smaller than on a cellular level? As in, with modern technology, we were completely unable to describe the constituent parts of cells? There was no such thing as an atom?

That to me would me a much stronger suggestion that the universe was "created", as science literally wouldn't be able to answer what we were made of.

I see creationism as being at the "we were dropped off by a stork as babies" end of the scale, rather than the irreducible complexity end. Far too simplistic.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

When is something too complex that one has to ascribe it to a higher being? Where do you draw the line?

I have no idea.

I look at how organisms fights against death and in the process increase entropy.... Why? Why does this occur? Why does life work so hard to exist when it will decay and increase the universe to perfect randomness?

I don't know a lot of things.

It's funny the more you know the more you realize how much you don't understand.

We thought gene sequencing would be full of scientific discoveries that would prove existing theories... turns out it did nothing other than let us know we quite don't understand fully what we are looking at when we study DNA.

There are theories, don't know if you have heard of them, that state we are in fact beings from a different dimension and particles of light (us) align along DNA and allow us to exist in the realm we see around us, allow us to experience emotions, chemical reactions, etc. Off the wall none the less, and one theory that I don't personally accept...
But, these types of theories allow me to "think outside the box" more or less.

But, I don't know. All I know is that life is extremely complex, more complex than the majority of people can wrap their head around. You're a collection of sub atomic particles working in harmony to experience conscious thought. Why have conscious thought if the goal of life is to simply reproduce? Why have life if it will only lead to an irreversible point of entropy?

Like I said, I am personally agnostic and I don't waste my time worshipping one of many gods which a specific group of people claim exists. You can't prove a god exists or doesn't. I don't waste my time trying to disprove or prove one either. In my opinion, as a biology/zoology major currently seeking my second degree in computer science (economy... you don't understand how pathetic the job market is for biology students) I personally believe life is too complex, requires too much work for the simple task of reproduction.

If a god does exist I hope it is not the Christian god. A god that condemns you to eternal torture simply for having been born... one that damns you to hell for eternity for acting on chemical impulses which your conscious thought has no control over. No thank you.

One thing I do know, if you don't accept evolution then you are just simply being voluntarily ignorant. There's no other way around it.

Overall, I don't know...

I am reading this and it looks like I went on a rant at you lol. This wasn't directed specifically at you just a general statement.

 

[Encyclopedia]

I have no idea.


There are theories, don't know if you have heard of them, that state we are in fact beings from a different dimension and particles of light (us) align along DNA and allow us to exist in the realm we see around us, allow us to experience emotions, chemical reactions, etc. Off the wall none the less, and one theory that I don't personally accept...
But, these types of theories allow me to "think outside the box" more or less.

I'm guessing these "theories" are more along the line of hypothesis(es?). If not it would be interesting to know what evidence they have to support that claim.

Good post by the way.

 

[TheDrummingKING]

What I do know (should be think, no offense) is the universe is far too complex, animals are far too complex to have happened by chance.

I personally believe life is too complex, requires too much work for the simple task of reproduction.

You believe everything is too complex to have come about by itself.. So you ascribe an even more complex being (as it would have to be to have created everything) as the explanation. That's the only part I don't get.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

You believe everything is too complex to have come about by itself.. So you ascribe an even more complex being (as it would have to be to have created everything) as the explanation. That's the only part I don't get.

I believe it is impossible to know the explanation.

We can see how, not why. If that makes more sense.

Good read:

Fred Spoor, a member of the discovery team who directed the laboratory analysis, said in a news teleconference that the research showed clearly that “human evolution is not this straight line it was once thought to be.” Instead, East Africa, he said, “was quite a crowded place, with multiple species” with presumably different diets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/s...in-human-family-tree.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 

[Denur]

On the other hand, what if we'd found out through experiment that there was nothing smaller than on a cellular level? As in, with modern technology, we were completely unable to describe the constituent parts of cells? There was no such thing as an atom?
That to me would me a much stronger suggestion that the universe was "created", as science literally wouldn't be able to answer what we were made of.

I like that train of thought, you are basically going back to the time when there were no microscopes (or telescopes) and people had no idea that there could be anything smaller than a speck of dust or a drop of blood. “God’s done it” was a beautiful and logical answer back then too (in those circumstances).

I have no idea.
…..
I am reading this and it looks like I went on a rant at you lol. This wasn't directed specifically at you just a general statement.

Haha, I didn’t read it as a rant at all. .
But regarding your answer, I have no idea either on this subject and I think no one will be able to provide a satisfactory answer.

 

[TankAss95]

Was evolution like this?

 

[CodeRedR51]

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted evolution.

This was posted in the Funnies thread. Thought it was good.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted evolution.

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted intelligent design.

How people own dogs and cats and refute evolution is also funny to me. You can ask some Christians how we got them and they will give the reply "God made them that way."

Christians accepted limited evolution as most believe that all creatures came from the Ark. Christians doesn't believe in Darwin's tree of life which recent evidence has shown it doesn't exist outside of textbooks. (Also rejects Dawkin's Blind Watchmaker )

This was posted in the Funnies thread. Thought it was good.

Not really funny since medicine can actually do harm which is why most you need a prescription. I know someone personally who is now taking medicine that making him ill. So you better not give up on prayer. It's the same with operations often involved cutting the patient (doing harm at first) while it up to their (intelligent designed) body to heal.

 

[arora]

It's possible to pray that the medicine you are taking will work is it not? I don't see how the cartoon has anything to do with evolution myself, has more to do with stereo typing if anything.

 

[DK]

Christians accepted limited evolution as most believe that all creatures came from the Ark. Christians doesn't believe in Darwin's tree of life which recent evidence has shown it doesn't exist outside of textbooks.

[citation needed]

 

[Scaff]

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted intelligent design.

No you haven't.

Christians accepted limited evolution as most believe that all creatures came from the Ark. Christians doesn't believe in Darwin's tree of life which recent evidence has shown it doesn't exist outside of textbooks.

Source please, particularly for the highlighted part.

(Also rejects Dawkin's Blind Watchmaker )

Speaking of Dawkin, how are you getting on with the name(s) of the scientists who reject his commentary on the route of the RLN. Its been a few weeks since you made clear mention of them, yet despite numerous requests you have utterly failed to name them.

Please do so in your next post or withdraw the comment (the AUP is quite clear on misleading comments and you have been cut a lot of slack in regard to un-sourced claims).

Not really funny since medicine can actually do harm which is why most you need a prescription. I know someone personally who is now taking medicine that making him ill.

And?

Refusing medical help and relying just on prayer doesn't exactly have a great track record now does it, given the sheer number of Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists that take this route and fail each year.

So you better not give up on prayer. It's the same with operations often involved cutting the patient (doing harm at first) while it up to their (intelligent designed) body to heal.

Are you seriously claiming that we should give up on surgery and just let our bodies sort themselves out.



That's my wife's leg after 4.5 hours of surgery, 12 months after multiple fib and tib fractures she is able to walk perfectly normally, something that certainly would not have been the case had she refused surgery and used her 'intelligently designed' body alone to sort it out (which would have resulted in permanent disability and possible death due to tiny bone fragments in her leg after the accident.

Quite frankly you are now not just talking nonsense, but dangerous nonsense.

 

[arora]

Refusing medical help and relying just on prayer doesn't exactly have a great track record now does it, given the sheer number of Jehovah's Witnesses that take this route and fail each year.

That depends on what their objective is and how they accept the results. The stories involving minors however, bring up another social issue entirely. None of it has to do with evolution though.

 

[Scaff]

That depends on what their objective is and how they accept the results.

I'm basing my point on Zoom Zoom's strongly implied claim that the ID body is as effective as medical treatment.

The stories involving minors however, bring up another social issue entirely.

It certainly does and while I would agree with you that this is for another thread.....

None of it has to do with evolution though.

.....this bit is however different. Zoom Zoom seems to be claiming that the 'Intelligently Designed' body is better placed as healing on its own that with medical assiatance.

Now his posts can be a bit cryptic at times so if that is what he is claiming that its valid for this thread, and if its not then its not valid for this thread. I guess we will have to await his clarification.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

If you go to the hospital and receive antibiotics from a prescription by a licensed doctor then you have unknowingly accepted intelligent design.

I take it you don't understand how antibiotics work? There is a reason they are not sold over the counter. I suggest you research that before making a wild claim like this lol.

If you have a point to make about how antibiotic prescriptions are related more to intelligent design than evolution I would love to hear it.

Otherwise you're just playing with words attempting to make a point.

Also, how does intelligent design and "healing by gods power" come into play with brain injuries. Specifically the ones that require a piece of the brain be removed and loss of brain function which lead to a loss of personality?

You do realize that when you lose function / part of the brain that you have lost some of the "yous" that make you "you." This is why the personality of many brain injury victims rapidly changes. This directly ties consciousness to the brain and limits (I should say biologically removes) the possibility of a "soul."

 

[arora]

.....this bit is however different. Zoom Zoom seems to be claiming that the 'Intelligently Designed' body is better placed as healing on its own that with medical assiatance.

Yeah that would be silly indeed. Modern medicine is really something, add to it all the other tech we have developed and it's easy to see how we live not only a long time, but also live well. For the sake of the thread title, can anything regarding health as we see now have to do with evolution?(since recordable history say)

BTW if an ID body was more ept to heal we would not get sick, I guess injury could be different.

Now his posts can be a bit cryptic at times so if that is what he is claiming that its valid for this thread, and if its not then its not valid for this thread. I guess we will have to await his clarification.

Agreed.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Yeah that would be silly indeed. Modern medicine is really something, add to it all the other tech we have developed and it's easy to see how we live not only a long time, but also live well. For the sake of the thread title, can anything regarding health as we see now have to do with evolution?(since recordable history say)

BTW if an ID body was more ept to heal we would not get sick, I guess injury could be different.

Agreed.

Not quite sure what question you are asking?

Everything ties to evolution. Cell processes, architecture of synapses and neural networks in the nervous system, your gas lol everything.

People only live as well/long as their genes will let them. Organs fail because genetic sequences on the end of DNA strands have been removed and viable genetic information has been lost (everytime DNA replicates a small portion of DNA on each end is removed); when it reaches the point of needed codons for cell replication it can not replicate cells correctly any longer. The organ fails and the individual dies or gets a transplant from the intelligently designed doctor handing out antibiotics like candy lol.

The most understandable and significant point of health / evolution is antibiotics.

Just google why antibiotics are only available by prescription, why you can't take them all the time, and what happens if you do.

 

[arora]

Yeah, not what I was asking. I was strictly speaking in regard to the technology we use and how it increases and improves our life vs/in addition to/etc. evolution. As for antibiotics, I will assume you are not being condesending so I'll simply say I'm educated mate, I know how and why they work.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Yeah, not what I was asking. I was strictly speaking in regard to the technology we use and how it increases and improves our life vs/in addition to/etc. evolution. As for antibiotics, I will assume you are not being condesending so I'll simply say I'm educated mate, I know how and why they work.

No not at all condescending. Apologies if it came off as so.

Evolution doesn't..... improve our life medically. Hard to put this concept into words without completely destroying it. Our understanding of evolution does.

Evolution is occurring at a very minor scale currently; medicine, technology, transportation all have pretty much thwarted human evolution. It will not occur at a scale recorded in fossil evidence until future global disasters, as significant as earth's landscapes being completely changed, and technology is knocked back down to the dark ages or even pre-Roman.

 

[arora]

No worries.

Evolution is occurring at a very minor scale currently; medicine, technology, transportation all have pretty much thwarted human evolution. It will not occur at a scale recorded in fossil evidence until future global disasters as significant as earth's landscapes being completely changed and technology knocked back down to the dark ages or even pre-Roman.

👍 on the short term part. Long term, excluding asking for disaster, would be interesting to see.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Are you seriously claiming that we should give up on surgery and just let our bodies sort themselves out.

What? If our bodies does not do the healing then surgery is useless. This is not saying surgery is totally useless since our bodies does heal itself including the wound made by the surgery.
This is the same with medicine as I know a few family members who put too much faith in medicine. This is not saying medicine is bad but has it's limits. The majority of Christian I know would say medicine is an answer to prayer and not that prayer and medicine/doctors are at odds. When Christian thank God for healing them this is no way of showing disrespect to doctors.

 

[Scaff]

What? If our bodies does not do the healing then surgery is useless. This is not saying surgery is totally useless since our bodies does heal itself including the wound made by the surgery.
This is the same with medicine as I know a few family members who put too much faith in medicine. This is not saying medicine is bad but has it's limits. The majority of Christian I know would say medicine is an answer to prayer and not that prayer and medicine/doctors are at odds. When Christian thank God for healing them this is no way of showing disrespect to doctors.

Can you honestly be surprised that the question needed to be asked when:

a) You're posts are often rather difficult to comprehend

and

b) A number of Christian sects reject all forms of medical treatment


However given this clarification any further discussion would drag the thread off topic (but feel free to open the discussion in the 'Do you believe in God' thread).


Back on topic I once again see that we have a few blanket statements you have made and then failed to expand upon (despite being asked to do so), namely:

• How antibiotics prove ID
• The name of the scientist(s) who refute the RLN expliantion covered in the Dawkin's video

Now I do have to pop my moderation hat on for a moment here as this has become a very disturbing trend of yours. You make a factual claim (i.e. "Even some scientist disagree with Dawkins poor design arguments since it an unproven assumption instead of looking for the reasons for RLN.") and when asked to provide further details you ignore, distract and outright avoid the subject.

The AUP is quite clear about this kind of behavior:

You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading, or inaccurate.

Now can you provide details of these scientist(s) and the information supporting your claim or not?

If its the former then post the links so we can discuss them, and if its the latter then acknowledge so and withdraw the statement. However be warned that if you continue to avoid the subject the staff will have little option but to consider the posted information to be deliberately misleading. A route I would rather not take, but one that you are leaving very little option on.

 

[Denur]

The majority of Christian I know would say medicine is an answer to prayer and not that prayer and medicine/doctors are at odds. When Christian thank God for healing them this is no way of showing disrespect to doctors.

So what you are saying, is that God gave men the ability to discover healing procedures and medicine. Given the thousands of years to get in medicine where we are to day, it looks to me that answers to a lot of those prayers have been a bit slow in coming. Slow but steady...

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

I take it you don't understand how antibiotics work? There is a reason they are not sold over the counter. I suggest you research that before making a wild claim like this lol.

If you have a point to make about how antibiotic prescriptions are related more to intelligent design than evolution I would love to hear it.

So you don't believe prescriptions antibiotics are intelligent designed? Now evolution "trial and error" was probably a factor in researching a new drugs. Since bacteria reproduces at a very fast rate it can use "trial and error" more effectively to discovery a way to keep antibodies from locking onto them.

Otherwise you're just playing with words attempting to make a point.

My point is you're just playing with words. I simple replace evolution with ID to show my statement made sense as well.

Also, how does intelligent design and "healing by gods power" come into play with brain injuries. Specifically the ones that require a piece of the brain be removed and loss of brain function which lead to a loss of personality?

Brain injury may or may not be a result of intelligent design. If a brain injury is intelligent designed than the law will step in.

You do realize that when you lose function / part of the brain that you have lost some of the "yous" that make you "you." This is why the personality of many brain injury victims rapidly changes. This directly ties consciousness to the brain and limits (I should say biologically removes) the possibility of a "soul."

When someone stuffing from brain injury and acts different people will say "they are not acting like themselves."

A DVD is nothing of plastic disc yet it's not the disc I'm paying $20 for. The data (movie) which has no mass is what I'm buying. The data is different for the plastic disc yet if the disc gets damage so will the data. The same with the brain. This doesn't prove brain = person no more than Disc = movie even though both are one.

 

[Scaff]

So you don't believe prescriptions antibiotics are intelligent designed? Now evolution "trial and error" was probably a factor in researching a new drugs. Since bacteria reproduces at a very fast rate it can use "trial and error" more effectively to discovery a way to keep antibodies from locking onto them.
My point is you're just playing with words. I simple replace evolution with ID to show my statement made sense as well.

Unless you are saying that God used ID to develop all antibiotics you are being deliberately obtuse and misleading and it will stop right now.