- 14,060
- Ireland
- driftking18594
- CiaranGTR94
The version I heard was "I evolved, you didn't.""I evolved, you created"
The version I heard was "I evolved, you didn't.""I evolved, you created"
I actually made that quote myself i didn't know there was similarityThe version I heard was "I evolved, you didn't."
There is another article on the patheos website saying that many fundamentalist are moving to Russia because of the anti gay stance they have. Sounds good to me, send all those creationists, evangelists and other "radicals" to Russia, so America can get back on track.
BTW, sorry if you are Russian and reading this post. Unless you agree with Putin, in which case, go for a long walk down the short path to the cliff.
I don't believe humans evolved from monkeys/apes.
The reason I don't believe that humans evolved from apes is because the original ancestor is still alive. In all cases I believe the original ancestor is dead. Correct me on this because I may be wrong.
I'm Catholic, but, I do believe that Evolution is a possibility. Like I don't believe that animals and plants were just plopped on the Earth. But I don't believe that the origin of every Animal was bacteria in an Ocean. I'm like half and half. I think every animal evolved from some type of ancestor(not one but several), but I don't believe humans evolved from monkeys/apes.
But you can combine the theories and say that there was a God(or an upper power) that assisted in the creation of the Earth and everything on it. For all I know God(or an upper power) could've said let there be evolution.
The reason I don't believe that humans evolved from apes is because the original ancestor is still alive. In all cases I believe the original ancestor is dead. Correct me on this because I may be wrong.
I also think humans are de-evolving. Animals in nature evolve because of selective breeding. The weak ones die and the strong ones strive and survive. But humans don't do this. We don't kill people with deformities. Its just plain wrong. People with cancer or diabetes or color blindness will have children, and their children have children, and it will just run in the blood lines. Unless they get lucky and it doesn't show up for generations.
It just looks like that there has been more deformities show up in the last hundred or so years. Or they just weren't reported often. IDK.
There is only one scientific theory. The other is unscientific. It's impossible to combine facts with non-facts.
I'll leave others misconceptions in your post for others to respond.
A theory is closer to a fact than a guess. A theory must explain facts and be verifiable. Aerodynamics is a theory, and we don't guess why it is that planes fly. Aerodynamic theory explains that momentum exchange with air provides an upwards force on the airplane.A theory is not fact. A theory is an idea or a guess of what may have happened.
You can, but religion isn't a theory. At best a God driven creation is a hypothesis, but it's pretty hard to test and that defeats the purpose of a hypothesis.So I can't build one large theory with two separate theories?
A theory is not fact. A theory is an idea or a guess of what may have happened. So I'm combining two theories. I'm combining a non-falsifiable with a theory that has some facts backing it up.
So I can't build one large theory with two separate theories?
A theory is not fact.
Well in the case of this "radio" thing, my WiFi (for example) works because tiny little angels carry the packets back and forth. Everybody knows that!Let's see..... Gravity. Relativity. Electromagnetism. These are all Theories. Are you going to say you don't believe in gravity? Or radio?
Maybe we should put a sticky or a [READ THIS FIRST - COMMON MISTAKES PEOPLE MAKE WHEN DISCUSSING EVOLUTION]
Well in the case of this "radio" thing, my WiFi (for example) works because tiny little angels carry the packets back and forth. Everybody knows that!
Theories are not backed up by facts. Theories explain what the facts mean. A theory has to explain all existing evidence, including facts, data and laws - in many ways a theory is the highest peak of knowledge because it aggregates all knowledge.A theory is not fact. A theory is an idea or a guess of what may have happened. So I'm combining two theories. I'm combining a non-falsifiable with a theory that has some facts backing it up.
You can. That's how science works. But you can't build one large theory from two conflicting theories, because they contain data that conflicts and your large theory has to explain both.So I can't build one large theory with two separate theories?
Why do scientists believe that science provides fundamental explanations for how the world works, particularly the nature of causes? An essential feature of science is that scientists contribute to a common body of knowledge, which is scrutinised by other scientists. All key science over the last hundred years has been reported in journals, and subjected to peer review. Unlike religion, contemporary science is almost entirely independent of the particular culture in which it is done: science is universal, and there is no Western or Eastern science. The belief that scientific ideas are continually changing is true mainly at the frontiers of investigation, but the core is largely solid. It is fundamental to science that even the most deeply held beliefs about science, from Einstein to Darwin, can in principle be shown to be faulty and so require modification. It is also important to realise that reliable scientific beliefs have no intrinsic ethical or moral content: they refer to how the world is. There are no ethics in Newton's laws, nor in the genetic code, nor in the fact that genes can affect our mental health.
I think this can go into the first post:
He has to say that, it's in his contract.Although he says God still created the big bang and intended for organisms to evolve.