Evolution vs. Creationism

[NYBamaFan]

Why do biologists/paleontolgists work so hard to connect one animal to another? At best, the results are like this - silly conjecture without any solid evidence. I wish my job were as simple.

Imagine, I create an outlandish reason that my company's computer systems failed, then say that I can offer no proof that this is what happened, but dare someone to find proof that it didn't happen. Hence, if you can't prove me wrong, I must be right. Give me a promotion... :biggrin:

 

[blackumbrella]

Why do biologists/paleontolgists work so hard to connect one animal to another? At best, the results are like this - silly conjecture without any solid evidence. I wish my job were as simple.

Imagine, I create an outlandish reason that my company's computer systems failed, then say that I can offer no proof that this is what happened, but dare someone to find proof that it didn't happen. Hence, if you can't prove me wrong, I must be right. Give me a promotion... :biggrin:

Why do creationists/intelligent design advocates work so hard to ignore the obvious? At best, the results are like this - silly conjecture without any solid evidence. I wish my job were as simple.

Imagine, I create an outlandish reason that my company's computer systems failed, then say that I can offer no proof that this is what happened, but dare someone to find proof that it didn't happen. Hence, if you can't prove me wrong, I must be right. Give me a promotion... :biggrin:

 

[wisten]

Imagine, I create an outlandish reason that my company's computer systems failed, then say that I can offer no proof that this is what happened, but dare someone to find proof that it didn't happen. Hence, if you can't prove me wrong, I must be right. Give me a promotion... :biggrin:

Heh, now that happens almost every day.

 

[CrimsonNan]

I ran across this article on CNN.com.

From the article:

"The problem with hippos is, if you look at the general shape of the animal it could be related to horses, as the ancient Greeks thought, or pigs, as modern scientists thought," researcher Jean-Renaud Boisserie said in a statement.

In Greek the name hippopotamus means "river horse."

*******************

Oh sighhhhhhhhhhh

Hippos look more like huge pigs to me, as in "river pig", but who cares!!!

As already stated, The Bible is taken by faith, and if you don't have it, forget it!! However the universe was created, God did it, so why all the dissecting and digging up bones.?

The Bible can't be proved, as some on this board have demanded, and neither can evolution.

 

[blackumbrella]

From the article:

As already stated, The Bible is taken by faith, and if you don't have it, forget it!! However the universe was created, God did it, so why all the dissecting and digging up bones.?

The Bible can't be proved, as some on this board have demanded, and neither can evolution.

if i'm one of the 'some,' then rereading the threads will show that insofar as i've demanded proof for biblical claims, it's been in response to statements along the lines of 'it takes more faith to believe in ev than creationism' or in arguing a point presented for the very sake of argument, as in the genesis narative mentioned in this thread's first post. and people study bones to learn more about the world we're a part of, the same reason columbus or lewis and clark went west. on a sidenote, i'm curious as to what people consider provable? any thoughts?

 

[NYBamaFan]

i'm curious as to what people consider provable? any thoughts?

Well, considering the fact that our entire mathematic system is built upon theorems, and that we have only observed a tiny fraction of an infinitesimal portion of the universe, nothing is truly provable. Should just one of the key principles of mathematics prove to be wrong, everything falls apart like a house of cards...

 

[bamabake]

Here are BU’s words from the previous thread: “what we're really talking about is two very different views, one metaphysical, one physical, each with its own accompanying logic.” Here are mine: “No amount of [scientific] evidence will alter your position. That's because [creationism] is based on faith, not reason.” But Bamabake and NYBamaFan -- and now apparently you -- are unwilling to concede this point. Instead, you all have tried to argue that creationism is the better SCIENTIFIC theory. Clearly it’s not. Yet that doesn’t mean that religious explanations have no value. As articles of faith, they represent (as one of my favorite scholars called them) “myths to live by” –- i.e. they give meaning to our lives. But they do NOT empirically reflect what we know about the physical universe. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the evidence.

Well this isnt entirely correct . I have simply asked you two to prove that evolution is a viable theory for the most part. You simply havent done it. The" evidence" cannot be verified or disproved by observation or experiment.
Everything from carbon dating to the age of the universe is knowledge in flux. We know less about our own oceans and climate than we do the universe and the case you have made about evouilution just fails the objective reason test. I have asked many questions that have been ignored or not explained at all. Yet you post this nonsense about people in this forum that "are unwilling to concede" that evolution is a theory. In fact is takes more faith, as I have stated before, to believe that concious humans, clearly set apart from all other living things, came from a chain of apes ( where not a SHRED of evidence suggest that they are more than different extint species). If I assumed we did (which would be an act of FAITH) then logic to its conclusion tells me that we came from some single cell something or other, and that the one cell something or other came from cosmic particles and all of that came from the big bang which came from nowhere or always existed. Then of course magically after who knows how long decided to explode. Talk about faith. I would say that SOMEWHERE intelligent design is a perfectly logical thing to conclude. Of course instead of using the word God you use pap like metaphysical. Come on.
Furthermore, your comments about people that have a relationship with God as people essentially embracing myths to live by, who need those myths for comfort is a total insult at worst and ignorance at best. Your stuffy aloofness is past insulting and nearing the point of boring.

 

[It's On A Slab]

I do not think T&T meant to insult you as a believer.

Well this isnt entirely correct . I have simply asked you two to prove that evolution is a viable theory for the most part. You simply havent done it. The" evidence" cannot be verified or disproved by observation or experiment.
Everything from carbon dating to the age of the universe is knowledge in flux. We know less about our own oceans and climate than we do the universe and the case you have made about evouilution just fails the objective reason test. I have asked many questions that have been ignored or not explained at all. Yet you post this nonsense about people in this forum that "are unwilling to concede" that evolution is a theory. In fact is takes more faith, as I have stated before, to believe that concious humans, clearly set apart from all other living things, came from a chain of apes ( where not a SHRED of evidence suggest that they are more than different extint species). If I assumed we did (which would be an act of FAITH) then logic to its conclusion tells me that we came from some single cell something or other, and that the one cell something or other came from cosmic particles and all of that came from the big bang which came from nowhere or always existed. Then of course magically after who knows how long decided to explode. Talk about faith. I would say thbe verified or disproved by observation or experiment.
Everything from carbon dating to the age of the universe is knowledge in flux. We know less about our own oceans and climate than we do the universe and the case you have made about evouilution just fails the objective reason test. I have asked many questions that haved by observation or experiment.
Everything from carbon dating to the age of the universe is knowledge in flux. We know less about our own oceans and climate than we do the universe and the case you have made about evouilution just fails the objective reason test. I have asked many questions that have been ignored or not explained at all. Yet you post this nonsense about people in this forum that "are unwilling to concede" that evolution is a theory. In fact is takes more faith, as I have stated before, to believe that concious humans, clearly set apart from all other living things, came from a chain of apes ( where not a SHRED of evidence suggest that they are more than different extint species). If I assumed we did (which would be an act of FAITH) then logic to its conclusion tells me that we came from some single cell something or other, and that the one cell something or other came from cosmic particles and all of that came from the big bang which came from nowhere or always existed. Then of course magically after who knows how long decided to explode. Talk about faith. I would say thbe verified or disproved by observation or experiment.
Everything from carbon dating to the age of the universe is knowledge in flux. We know less about our own oceans and climate than we do the universe and the case you have made about evouilution just fails the objective reason test. I have asked many questions that have been ignored or not explained at all. Yet you post this nonsense about people in this forum that "are unwilling to concede" that evolution is a theory. In fact is takes more faith, as I have stated before, to believe that concious humans, clearly set apart from all other living things, came from a chain of apes ( where not a SHRED of evidence suggest that they are more than different extint species). If I assumed we did (which would be an act of FAITH) then logic to its conclusion tells me that we came from some single cell something or other, and that the one cell something or other came from cosmic particles and all of that came from the big bang which came from nowhere or always existed. Then of course magically after who knows how long decided to explode. Talk about faith. I would say that SOMEWHERE intelligent design is a perfectly logical thing to conclude. Of course instead of using the word God you use pap like metaphysical. Come on.
Furthermore, your comments about people that have a relationship with God as people essentially embracing myths to live by, who need those myths for comfort is a total insult at worst and ignorance at best. Your stuffy aloofness is past insulting and nearing the point of boring.

I think he meant "myth" in the first definition and not the third. As in the fact that nearly every culture or tradition has a creation myth.

In this sense, I don't see where there is an insult.

myth (mth) KEY

NOUN:


1. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.

2. A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.

3. A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.

4. A fictitious story, person, or thing: "German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth" (Leon Wolff).

 

[Ramah Jamah]

You explained what causes the wind, but not precisely where it comes from nor where it is going Evolution as a theory does not explain what started it all or what existed before everything began.

Agree 100%

 

[Ramah Jamah]

I would say that SOMEWHERE intelligent design is a perfectly logical thing to conclude. Of course instead of using the word God you use pap like metaphysical. Come on.
Furthermore, your comments about people that have a relationship with God as people essentially embracing myths to live by, who need those myths for comfort is a total insult at worst and ignorance at best. Your stuffy aloofness is past insulting and nearing the point of boring.

1. My understanding of the theory of intelligent design is that only a creationist power could have created such complex body parts as eyes, ears etc. If this is the case why do we have such things as wisdom teeth, appendix, pubic hair, ear lobs etc etc. None of these make sense. There is no reason for them except that perhaps we needed them millions of years ago.

2. I have a relationship with God but believe that the story of creation is a myth. This does not make me any less of a Christian.

 

[BAMARICH]

Although ...

I have a relationship with God but believe that the story of creation is a myth...

It seems that this is a harmless statement, I wonder how you harmonize this statement with 2 Timothy 3:16 (all scripture is given by inspiration of God) & Titus 1:2 (God, who cannot lie). If all scripture comes from God & God does not tell a lie, we have one of 2 choices. Either (1) the book of Genesis is not from God or (2) if it is from God, He lies. In either case, one passage is going to be contradicted. "Faith" says that we believe everything (not only certain parts) that God says in His word.

 

[bamabake]

I think he meant "myth" in the first definition and not the third. As in the fact that nearly every culture or tradition has a creation myth.

In this sense, I don't see where there is an insult.

myth (mth) KEY

NOUN:


1. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.

2. A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.

3. A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.

4. A fictitious story, person, or thing: "German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth" (Leon Wolff).

Thanks,

He said:

Yet that doesn’t mean that religious explanations have no value. As articles of faith, they represent (as one of my favorite scholars called them) “myths to live by” –- i.e. they give meaning to our lives.

Religious explainationS, articeS of faith, THEY, MythS. All plural. THEY give meaning.
I stand by my comments.

 

[bamabake]

1. My understanding of the theory of intelligent design is that only a creationist power could have created such complex body parts as eyes, ears etc. If this is the case why do we have such things as wisdom teeth, appendix, pubic hair, ear lobs etc etc. None of these make sense. There is no reason for them except that perhaps we needed them millions of years ago.

2. I have a relationship with God but believe that the story of creation is a myth. This does not make me any less of a Christian.

First I am not the one here saying who is or isnt more or less of anything. See all of the secularist for a rebuf of your faith. Your thoughts in the first paragraph fall in line with your statement about creation being a myth. So it is consistant at least. However if you keep going back far enough in this evolution biz you get to some place in the past where everything started. Where did that come from? What holds atoms togather? What holds what holds them togather?

 

[blackumbrella]

Thanks,

He said:

Yet that doesn’t mean that religious explanations have no value. As articles of faith, they represent (as one of my favorite scholars called them) “myths to live by” –- i.e. they give meaning to our lives.

Religious explainationS, articeS of faith, THEY, MythS. All plural. THEY give meaning.
I stand by my comments.

his comments reflect that he's addressing the topic objectively, talking about religion. you're addressing it subjectively, talking from religion.

 

[blackumbrella]

1. My understanding of the theory of intelligent design is that only a creationist power could have created such complex body parts as eyes, ears etc. If this is the case why do we have such things as wisdom teeth, appendix, pubic hair, ear lobs etc etc. None of these make sense. There is no reason for them except that perhaps we needed them millions of years ago.

2. I have a relationship with God but believe that the story of creation is a myth. This does not make me any less of a Christian.

good points. also, intelligent design is no more necessarily aligned with a belief in god than evolution isn't. look at the raelian movement--by the logic of intelligent design it's just as probable that aliens were the designer than god. that's not to say it's bad logic, just that it's nonscientific.

 

[bamabake]

his comments reflect that he's addressing the topic objectively, talking about religion. you're addressing it subjectively, talking from religion.

I am being as objective if not more so .

It is infered clearly that these are objective facts. That is that religion deals in the realm of myths and that the poor and deluded need them for the meaning they add to their lives. It also clearly infers that value found in religious explainations are anecdotal. Which is an opinion, not a fact as he structured the two sentences.

Yet that doesn’t mean that religious explanations have no value. As articles of faith, they represent (as one of my favorite scholars called them) “myths to live by” –- i.e. they give meaning to our lives.

 

[bamabake]

good points. also, intelligent design is no more necessarily aligned with a belief in god than evolution isn't. look at the raelian movement--by the logic of intelligent design it's just as probable that aliens were the designer than god. that's not to say it's bad logic, just that it's nonscientific.

What a rediculous juxtaposition. Even if there were or are aliens, following this , er , line of reas, thinking, where did the aliens come from?

 

[Displaced Bama Fan]

Better yet, where did that big ball of dust come from in the Big Bang Theory....there must be a higher order.

 

[NYBamaFan]

In the end, that is the ultimate question - Where did it all begin? If God created everything, where did God come from? I mean, really - where did He come from?

 

[CrimsonNan]

In the end, that is the ultimate question - Where did it all begin? If God created everything, where did God come from? I mean, really - where did He come from?

I must confess NYBamaFan, I've wondered the same thing.