User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 289101112131415 LastLast
Results 89 to 96 of 117

Thread: Further proof of Evolution? 4-finned dolphin....

  1. #89

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lakeland, Florida (near Tampa)
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]That's because it's a mis-application of the problem: science deals *strictly* and *only* with the observable. God, as specified in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is unobservable and unknowable. Therefore one cannot use science to disprove Him.
    I have to say that science does not always deal "strictly and only with the observable." Not all scientific theories can be "proven" by observation. I put proven in quotes because no theory can be proven/disproven. By its definition a theory is "a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena." Einstein could not experimentally demonstrate all of the effects of his general and special theories of relativity, however the few experiments and that fact that it was the only theory that could explain time and its relation to space has made it a widely accepted theory; in much the same way evolution can explain the existance of life. Quantum theory is also another theory that deals with the unobservable. And the Big Bang. Only the 'effects' of a potential Big Bang have been observed, not the Big Bang itself. Yet the Big Bang theory is held up by the assumption that such an "unobserved" event occurred. My point is that there is no true "absolute" proof or the lack thereof for evolution.

    I am a christian and believe that God created everything. I'm not sure how, when, or why but I believe He did. Many of us have never seen the Dodo bird (I hope not). There are no photographs but only manuscripts and artwork that detail its existance from where it lived, what it ate, who killed it... Most of us agree that such a bird existed but not all. It's the same with Jesus Christ. I believe he was observable and very knowable. The Bible describes him in great detail from where he lived, what he ate, and who killed him. Many believe He existed but once again many don't. If today God said he'd prove his existance by coming in human form and preforming miracles, and lets say he does it tomorrow, most modern athiests and agnostics would probably agree to that challenge. And if they "observed" first hand these miracles its possible that some, but not all, would believe. I believe that years later, long after God in the human form had died, many would not believe he was God no matter how much "evidence" there was to support that He is. You could have the testimony of witnesses and probably even video footage and still there are some that would not believe that God existed. This is the difference between christians and non-christians (obviously). I can't say one way or the other that evolution does or does not exist. I do think that it's possible God did use evolution to create life, however, I don't believe that was Gods message. I believe it's more important that christians believe God created the universe and than how he created the universe.

    Just my two cents. I think this is a very interesting topic.

  2. #90
    nepenthes_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Spring Feild Ohio
    Posts
    3,116
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    cause right now I am satisfied, I have to much other crap going on in my life to bother with needing to know more... I would probably want to kill my self If I learnt more... I would hate knowing more about what exactly I did wrong...

  3. #91
    Stay chooned in for more! Clint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metro Atlanta Area
    Posts
    9,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You haven't done anything wrong! Let go and live your life!

    You've got to live your life and do what you want to do! Don't worry about a being that may or may not exist because all you have is NOW! If it feels good, do it! If it makes you happy, do it!

  4. #92

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    427
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]I have to say that science does not always deal "strictly and only with the observable." Not all scientific theories can be "proven" by observation. I put proven in quotes because no theory can be proven/disproven.
    Not so. All scientific theories *must* be testable and falsifiable by experiment. Einstein's theory of relativity *is* testable (albeit difficult), and thus fits. The reason Superstring has been getting hammered lately is that it's *not* testable or observable.

    All science must deal with something we can experiment on, otherwise, well, it's not science.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ] My point is that there is no true "absolute" proof or the lack thereof for evolution.
    You're conflating evolution the theory and evolution the observed phenomenon. The former, like all theories, can only become closer and closer to certain, never absolutely so. The latter, the observed phenomenon of evolution, can be proven, in the sense that it can be directly observed.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Many of us have never seen the Dodo bird (I hope not). There are no photographs but only manuscripts and artwork that detail its existance from where it lived, what it ate, who killed it... Most of us agree that such a bird existed but not all.
    I have. British Museum of Natural History, in the hall of birds, IIRC. You never said a *live* dodo.

    And there is actually plenty of evidence that dodos existed, from photos, mounted specimens, bones, etc. There's even been some talk of trying to clone them.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]I believe it's more important that christians believe God created the universe and than how he created the universe.
    +10 for truly getting the point. Objecting to evolution on religious grounds is like objection to depictions of angels on aerodynamic grounds: it totally misses the point. Religion isn't about the dry facts of what happened 400 million years ago, it's about human life, meaning, and finding your place in the world.

    Mokele
    \"With malleus aforethought, mammals got an earful of their ancestor's jaw.\"
    --J. Burns, on the evolution of auditory ossicles.

  5. #93
    nepenthes_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Spring Feild Ohio
    Posts
    3,116
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So youre telling me If I felt like forcing a girl to have sex with me that would be good, cause I would want to do that?

    or maybe killing that guy just cause he pissed me off would be right cause in the end I would over all feel good?

    Or maybe ending my life because I felt it would feel better in the end?

    Or maybe getting so stoned I end up in the middle of a corn feild cause I FELT GOOD at the moment?

    ARE YOU kidding me?

    no...

  6. #94
    Stay chooned in for more! Clint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metro Atlanta Area
    Posts
    9,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ugh.. that is not what I meant and you know it.... Let me stipulate that it's ok and great as long as it doesn't hurt other people. As far as suicide goes, I'm pro-choice when it comes to euthenasia as long as there is no mental illness aspect.

    Want to have sex with 5 hookers? Ok with me.
    Want to smoke meth? Fine with me.
    Want to gamble in vegas? sounds great!

    Want to give those hookers an std? not ok.
    Want to sell drugs to addicts and dumb kids who don't know what they are doing? I disagree with that.
    Want to gamble all you have while trying to support 3 kids and an alcoholic wife? That's bad.

    See? those things are fine with me as long as you don't hurt other people (You can say "well that hurts your friends and family blah blah". No. That's a different matter entirely. You can control your life, not theirs. Don't overindulge.) and you take responsibility for your actions. do what you will, but don't expect too much sympathy when your an HIC positive meth addict with a compulsive gambling problem.

    Maybe the corn field is ok, lord knows i've been in worse places.

  7. #95
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Somewhat against my better judgement I am steping back into this. I usually avoid these type of discussions because they almost always end badly but I do think a few things need to be said. As I said before, I am not going to go into the details of the science, Mokele has/is doing a great job of that and he is not making it personal which is very commendable. I alo appreciate Cstriker's very civil and well thought out post from the faith side. And rattler has made some excellent points as well which are likewise thought provoking while not being insulting. Now on to what I was going to say...

    JLAP and Nep_AK, you guys are just not going to see eye to eye and personally I'd advocate steping back from replying drectly to one another because just reading through all of this there is obvious escalation and the potential for it to all go BOOM is looking possible. Just a personal opinion but please both of you consider it. I would hate to see this thread turn into a flame fest.

    Nep_AK, I would also like to address something to you. You have made a couple statments that I find some what bothersome:

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]But whats the point in trying when you guys wont even concider.
    and

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Im sorry you have a beef with christians, get the hell over it ok!? IM sorry you are so close minded that you can even begin to concider creationism. Let alone talk about it with some kind of humanity.
    In both of these you are more than happy to point out how others are so stubborn that they willnot consider your point of view. Have you thought about how you yourself are behaving the exact same way? You are refusing to consider evolution. You are being just as close minded.

    I am not saying that because I have a beef with you because you are Christian. I don't have any problems with Christianity (per say) and I certainly do not have a problem with you. What I have a problem with is hypocracy. And I apply that problem to all the faithful whether they have faith in religion or faith in science. To put it in terms you might understand better (though I usually hate using scripture as an argument); Comment not on the mote in thine brother's eye before removing the plank from thine own.

    On to more direct matters. rattler has mentioned a number of time how we take the curent translation of the bible as the facts and ignore the past versions. Theologians of almost all denominations have stated explicitly that the bible today is not written or worded as it was in the past. The most telling example is that the Hebrew word for "young girl" was mistranscribed as "virgin" when refering to Mary. That right there is a pretty big mistake and lots of atheists like to try using it to prove religion is bunk. The point is that the bible is not going to be 100% accurate. There are untold "current" versions and each is basically the product of a game of telephone played over 2000 years. Errors are bound to pop up, some unintentional and some purpose driven. None of that matters though because, as Mokele said, it is not about the dry facts and the minute details. It is about finding meaning in life. And that meaning is going to be personal. It is going to be different (possibly very different) for you thant it will be for me. That does not make either of us wrong.

    And in closing I am going to reiterate what I said earlier. I think both fields need to stick to their own areas. The religious should stick to religion and the scientific should stick to science. The only ones who should be doing both are the theologiaclly scientific or the scientifically theological
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  8. #96
    Stay chooned in for more! Clint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metro Atlanta Area
    Posts
    9,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Auctually, Cody and I are good online pals lol.

    Sorry, didn't mean to give the wrong impression.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •