Creation vs. Evolution

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

That's bull crap. It's all a lie.

Quit monkeying us around.

 

[wfooshee]

Way back a few pages, when I first started posting in this thread, I pointed out some issues the Christian church in general has had with science as knowledge advances. Things like the Earth not being the center of the Universe, stars not being points on a fixed firmament, stuff like that.

When people are "educated" by their parents more than their schools, it takes a few generations for new ideas to find a place in the legacy of "facts" that get passed down.

Fortunately, we don't see many folks telling us any more how we're all going to Hell because we think the Earth goes around the Sun, and the Sun is nothing special, just a star like billions of others.

Eventually, they will accept this science. After all, it's adapt or die......

 

[Jet Badger]

Yeah that reminds me of that story when a mother got mad when her kid came back from school and told her about dinosaurs. Apparently she didn't 'believe in' dinosaurs beucause they weren't mentioned in that church-book thing.

Science is not a religion and not an alternative to religion. It is facts that are constantly being proven or disproven using logical methods. And unlike religion it isnt based on blind believing in made up facts and it's always open to new ideas and improvements. Saying that you dont believe in gravity or evoliution is the same as saying that you dont believe that two plus two equals four.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

To those who believe God made us, then we evolved into modern humans:

I'm glad you believe in God but it says in Genesis that God made Adam in his own image, so if Adam was an ape than God must look like an ape, and if God is an ape than Jesus must be half ape because Jesus is God's son.

But that's a dumb reason to not believe in evolution.

----

I can disprove evolution with logic. If we started out as monkies, than we lost our fur as we adapted to our changed environment. But why would that happen? We're the only land mammal without fur.

you can't disprove (or prove) evolution just like miracles as they are acts in the past. Also according evolution both humans and apes came from a mythological creature which can not be proven to exist. You must accept this on faith.

Also, we're the only animal that walks on two limbs...which is less efficient than walking on fours. Why would we adapt and lose an advantage?

Birds walk on two limbs and penguins even walk upright. It's very hard to answer "WHY" living things are the way they are.

As for evolution being taught in schools, I say no because too many people believe in the Bible over science. We'll never be able to prove the origin of humans, so we can never teach it. Besides, it doesn't even matter and the knowledge won't help us in the future.

Don't confuse science with evolution story telling. Evolution stories are based on someone opinion.

 

[Scaff]

you can't disprove (or prove) evolution just like miracles as they are acts in the past. Also according evolution both humans and apes came from a mythological creature which can not be proven to exist. You must accept this on faith.

Faith is not required as we are not talking about mythical creatures at all, the evidence for the existence of early hominids is clear as is the evolutionary path from them to us

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1599/2130.short

Birds walk on two limbs and penguins even walk upright. It's very hard to answer "WHY" living things are the way they are.

Actualy evolution does a rather good job of it.

Don't confuse science with evolution story telling. Evolution stories are based on someone opinion.

No it is not opinion at all, its well documented. falsifiable scientific method that has been rigorously peer reviewed.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Evolution is proven in the fossil record. So, yes. You can prove it.

EVOLUTION ≠ MIRACLES. I don't know how you could even make that comparison.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Faith is not required as we are not talking about mythical creatures at all, the evidence for the existence of early hominids is clear as is the evolutionary path from them to us


Actual evolution does a rather good job of it.



No it is not opinion at all, its well documented. falsifiable scientific method that has been rigorously peer reviewed.

You must not being keeping up with evolution stories as they are continually changing because they are based on opinions more than solid facts.
While "Science & Human Origins" didn't prove human couldn't have evolved from this mythical creature it did show the evidence is no where as strong as many of online evolutionist love to claim.

 

[Scaff]

You must not being keeping up with evolution stories as they are continually changing because they are based on opinions more than solid facts.

Someone clearly has no idea how scientific theories work.

As new evidence is uncovered (literally and figuratively) then theories are revised and refined (that's what science does with everything) however nothing has disproven evolution at all.

Had it then we would no longer have the theory of evolution, and that its subject to feasibility and peer review would mean that would be ensured. Two things that the book you are refering two has never been subjected to at all.

Lets take a look at who the publishers are shall we:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

The Discovery Institute is an American non-profit public policy think tank based in Seattle, Washington, best known for its advocacy of intelligent design. Founded in 1990, the institute describes its purpose as promoting "ideas in the common sense tradition of representative government, the free market and individual liberty."[2] Its Teach the Controversy campaign aims to teach creationist anti-evolution beliefs in United States public high school science courses alongside accepted scientific theories, positing a scientific controversy exists over these subjects

For those interested here's a look at some of the books content:

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2012/07/paul-mcbrides-r.html

http://apomorph.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/science-and-human-origins-chapter-1.html

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

You must not being keeping up with evolution stories as they are continually changing because they are based on opinions more than solid facts.
While "Science & Human Origins" didn't prove human couldn't have evolved from this mythical creature it did show the evidence is no where as strong as many of online evolutionist love to claim.

You must know nothing about evolution. Continuously new species are going to be discovered and their place in taxonomy will be modified around previously discovered species. There is nothing mythological about a common ancestor. Look at plants. I highly suggest you educate yourself further and maybe seek the definition of mythological before comparing miracles to evolution (alarm 1), saying evolution cannot be proven (alarm 2), and calling a common ancestor mythological (alarm 3 you don't know what you're talking about).

 

[JMoney]

Until we can travel backward in time and find unevolved humans, there is no way to prove evolution. There is also no way to prove God made the world in seven days, so neither side is proven.

I think all of us should question any information taught to us in schools. If we are taught evolution, we can't just automatically believe it because our teacher said so. We have to be skeptical. If you say religious people are gullible, you are incorrect because 75% of the world follows a religion while 25% are athiest. We were taught our beliefs by traditions and other people, you were taught by a textbook.

Scientists think they can prove anything based on only a tiny bit of evidence. They're just trying to prove their own theories so they can disprove religion. The truth is that humans know extreemely little about nature (as my signature says).

This issue isn't about being able to prove facts, it's about common sense.

 

[Liquid]

We were taught our beliefs by traditions and other people, you were taught by a textbook.

Of all the things I could have picked from that post, but...

So the Bible is no longer a textbook of some kind?

 

[niky]

There is no such thing as an unevolved human. Evolution is not a process with a definite start and end.

This is like asking for the first chihuahua. There was no first chihuahua. Breeders merely refined the breed over many generations until they got the look they liked.

Statistics tell us nothing. You live in a country where the majority voted an actor into e White House and the biggest draws on TV are the Kardashians... Tell me, how intelligent is the general public, again?

 

[wfooshee]

Until we can travel backward in time and find unevolved humans, there is no way to prove evolution. There is also no way to prove God made the world in seven days, so neither side is proven.

I think all of us should question any information taught to us in schools. If we are taught evolution, we can't just automatically believe it because our teacher said so. We have to be skeptical. If you say religious people are gullible, you are incorrect because 75% of the world follows a religion while 25% are athiest. We were taught our beliefs by traditions and other people, you were taught by a textbook.

Scientists think they can prove anything based on only a tiny bit of evidence. They're just trying to prove their own theories so they can disprove religion. The truth is that humans know extreemely little about nature (as my signature says).

This issue isn't about being able to prove facts, it's about common sense.

Except it's not a tiny bit of evidence, it's everything known on the subject. And many of the people you are calling fools in your statement are people who work within fields very closely associated to evolutionary studies. Micro-biology, medicine, etc.

Saying, "Scientists do anything to try to prove what they want us to believe" just shows how poorly you understand science. No scientist has ever tried to make anyone "believe" or "believe in" anything. The scientific method is based on actually trying to break what you're saying you think happens. It's about facts, observations, and repeatability. Your not believing in the evidence is simply an admission of not understanding the evidence.

Tell me, do you think the Earth is the center of the Universe? Do you think all celestial objects are fixed on spinning transparent spheres centered on the Earth?

 

[gamerdog6482]

Saying, "Scientists do anything to try to prove what they want us to believe" just shows how poorly you understand science. No scientist has ever tried to make anyone "believe" or "believe in" anything. The scientific method is based on actually trying to break what you're saying you think happens.

I could even say that religious leaders go to great extents to try to make other people believe what they believe.


Crusades anyone?

 

[TheDrummingKING]

Until we can travel backward in time and find unevolved humans, there is no way to prove evolution. There is also no way to prove God made the world in seven days, so neither side is proven.

I think all of us should question any information taught to us in schools. If we are taught evolution, we can't just automatically believe it because our teacher said so. We have to be skeptical. If you say religious people are gullible, you are incorrect because 75% of the world follows a religion while 25% are athiest. We were taught our beliefs by traditions and other people, you were taught by a textbook.

Scientists think they can prove anything based on only a tiny bit of evidence. They're just trying to prove their own theories so they can disprove religion. The truth is that humans know extreemely little about nature (as my signature says).

This issue isn't about being able to prove facts, it's about common sense.

Sorry but you clearly don't understand evolution (or even science for that matter). I won't go into detail about that because others will (and already have) in greater detail than I could.

Oh and about your signature: "If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under." -Ronald Reagan, maybe you should go read your constitution, because that is not what it says.

 

[JMoney]

Wfooshee: I don't think think the Earth is at the center of the universe. I believe this because we can collect data using telescopes about things happening in the present. Evolution, according to you, happened in the past very slowly. But the earth is turning around the sun right now, and we have real evidence to prove it. The reason the Catholic Church denied Gallileo is because there wasn't enough evidence to prove it, the exact same reason I have for not believing in evolution.

EDIT: I never said that was in the constitution, so what's your point?

 

[CodeRedR51]

I think we've found enough skeletons burried that show this evolution "proof" you speak of...

Evolution is easier to beileve than us just appearing from thin air, which is a ridiculous story if you ask me.

 

[Schwartz]

The reason the Catholic Church denied Gallileo is because there wasn't enough evidence to prove it, the exact same reason I have for not believing in evolution.

The reason the Catholic church denied Gallileo's theory was because someone challenged their authority. Oh, and Have a ball.

 

[TheDrummingKING]

EDIT: I never said that was in the constitution, so what's your point?

My point is that quote is actually unconstitutional and that the USA is not actually "one nation under God". But that's enough off topic for me.

Oh and by the way saying evolution isn't happening now (ignoring you saying there isn't evidence for it), is just ignorance on the subject.

 

[JMoney]

^Someone creating us is easier to believe than evolution, however. You basically just admitted that you believed the easiest thing to believe in. So it is you who are gullable.

 

[gamerdog6482]

^Someone creating us is easier to believe than evolution, however. You basically just admitted that you believed the easiest thing to believe in. So it is you who are gullable.

So you are saying that it is easier to believe something that has no factual evidence than to believe something proven time and time again?

It is YOU that is gullible.

 

[CodeRedR51]

^Someone creating us is easier to believe than evolution, however. You basically just admitted that you believed the easiest thing to believe in. So it is you who are gullable.

...and then this so called "creator" refuses to show himself. People reading made up stories from a book that's changed to many times over it's lifespan it's not even funny are the gullable ones.

 

[TheDrummingKING]

^Someone creating us is easier to believe than evolution, however. You basically just admitted that you believed the easiest thing to believe in. So it is you who are gullable.

You may want to edit that and quote Turbo. There is a reason evolution is the easiest thing to believe, though: It's a fact. Now before you go saying "oh but it's just a theory", I am talking about something different. Evolution is a fact, it is the theory of evolution that goes about trying to explain how it works.

 

[Liquid]

We were taught our beliefs by traditions and other people, you were taught by a textbook.

So the Bible is no longer a textbook of some kind?

Well, Mr. Money?

 

[TheDrummingKING]

-From the "do you believe in god" thread so it doesn't become derailed.

Oh and its not a fact, its a work in progress, nothing has been proven 100%- Afterall it is still a theory, if it was proven fact it would stop beeing just a theory.

You misunderstood what I just said then. Evolution itself is a fact. Living organisms evolve. The "theory of evolution" is the theory of how the evolutionary process works, of how things evolve.

 

[Flaco13]

-From the "do you believe in god" thread so it doesn't become derailed.



You misunderstood what I just said then. Evolution itself is a fact. Living organisms evolve. The "theory of evolution" is the theory of how the evolutionary process works, of how things evolve.

If it was fact there would be no doubts about it, right?

http://www.windowview.org/sci/pgs/09doubts.html

 

[gamerdog6482]

If it was fact there would be no doubts about it, right?

http://www.windowview.org/sci/pgs/09doubts.html

There are no reasonable doubts.

 

[Flaco13]

There are no reasonable doubts.

You post back after one minute so didn't even read the article in the link... so we got extremist evolutionists now huh? stubborn as any other fanatic believer, sorry but why even care to post if you don't bring anything constructive to the debate?

 

[TheDrummingKING]

That link is cute. If Darwin had any doubts it was because he lacked the equipment and knowledge we do today. The simple fact is, every single shred of evidence found to this day has supported the theory of evolution, perhaps the most important of those being DNA.

 

[Azuremen]

You post back after one minute so didn't even read the article in the link... so we got extremist evolutionists now huh? stubborn as any other fanatic believer, sorry but why even care to post if you don't bring anything constructive to the debate?

Are you suggesting you have brought something constructive to the debate?

Between you and Jmoney, I mostly just see "it is made up non-sense and not different than some man in the sky making people from clay"

As for it being easier to believe, I don't see how taking the time to learn about the process involved and the reasoning behind it is easier than believing what your pastor/bishop/cleric/priest told you is true.