What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Where does everyone stand in regards to...

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #281
[b said:
Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Dec. 31 2004,12:40)]and yet... do you have ANY proof ANYTHING like we have for evolution? can you go out and ask god if he created the animals how they are? no. That is why evoluton is scientific. Because you DO have proof and you can go out and touch/experiment with it. You can drasticaly change species (even make subspecies in just a couple thosuand years) like cultivars of plants and varieties and you can experiment with bacteria and fruit flies.
Religion has no proof, only some book that could have been writtne by idiots for all we know.
 
  • #282
yeah so don't go acusing us of having no proof because you don't have 1% of the proof we have!
and we don't relie on faith, we rely on science.
 
  • #283
I know I haven't posted to this in while but I just couldn't resist posting again. Wow, this has gotten to be Really long. I think this is the first one that we haven't had locked before it got to page 20! LOL

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]And if you want to bring this ingroup-outgroup bias into the mix
smile.gif
... enemies of those regions would easily start to conclude very confidently that God was punishing those "wrong/evil/lesser" people. If the earthquake had occurred in the Middle East I have no doubt I'd be hearing this from people in my neighborhood even.
some extremists would say that that's proof god was punishing US and that he favors animals.

I absolutely HATE it when people say God is punishing another religion because it is "wrong" even if is right or wrong.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I decided to start learning a little about politics this year, and quickly discovered I just couldn't stomach it. The political world is an unabashedly unsound place when it comes to logic and conclusion-making. So few people in politics seem to see any value in intellectual accountability... I don't get it. The fact that they have so much influence in the workings of the world scares me.

Ah politics. The definition of politics: many bloodsucking creatures, poly meaning many, and tics mean blood sucking creature.... I really hope there aren't any politians here....
smile_h_32.gif


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Quote
And to those of you who keep calling religion evil, i say you are the ignorant, evil people, since you do not respect peoples rights and can only site a few instances where religion has been misused to base your accusation on

Maybe you're a fool for beliving something that was written by man.

Many Many things that were written were written by a man... but some things were written by women! I couldn't resist!
smile_n_32.gif
But Seriously everything that was written was written by a human, so would that make everything uncrdedible because it was written by a human being? That would nulify all biographies as being fiction.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I won't accept a quote from the bible. i want proof that the information in it is sent from our creator. Faith isn't an answer either.

There is proof, the prophecies that have been tested by atheists have been shown to be impecible. The ones that predicted stuff in the near future were thought to be wrong until the same prophecy went into more depth and further into the future.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]If you want me to give you physical proof and facts that evolution is a true, i can give it to you. There is so much that i could be posting here all night.

There is SOOO much that we could be posting.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]of course the "missing link" has been found.
several of them in fact.
Australopithecus afarensis being the most obvious.
those who say "there is no missing link" or "transitional fossils have never been found" are simply ignoring reality, because it conficts with their views..
Scot

And 3/4 of them have been shown wrong, or to be hoax.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]atoms came together and formed RNA like molecules (they where not living) all they could do was copy themselves (the copying process was sort of like a "reaction", if they where in the right conditions (correct temperature, pH etc) they copied themselves. These RNA molecules evolved to be more complex and came bacteria (the first cells).

Anything else?

Wow, I don't think I have enough faith to believe that life came from the unliving. We have done experiment after experiment trying to get life the way evolution says it happened, and we have nothing to show for it. We may get all the protiens and stuff but no life. If so, it would be everywhere, and the Bible would have ceased to exist hundreds of years ago.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]This is science, not science fiction. You will never have a turtle suddenly be born with wings

What about the koopa troopers in Mario? Dang those guys are cool!
smile_n_32.gif

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]It's not just words, unlike the bible, you can experiment and prove. a bunch of lunatics could of written it for all you know.

Religion has no proof, only some book that could have been writtne by idiots for all we know.

I sated above atheist historians have tested the Bible and it has been shown to be the most consistant book ever written. I know you'll say I'm wrong, but I have seen demonstrations using atheist books to back up the Bible. And pleas don't accuse me of not really seeing it. That would be testing my cedibility, and it would be rude to call me a liar if you've never even met me in person.
 
  • #284
LOL wes!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]What about the koopa troopers in Mario?  Dang those guys are cool!  

afrensis was the lucy species not the recently described one


hum homo erectus is a good example of a closely releted species, we have stone tools from that species too
 
  • #285
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]But Seriously everything that was written was written by a human, so would that make everything uncrdedible because it was written by a human being?
no because they are not talking about this omnipotent being with no begining and no end that somehow made the earth be covered in water... that is very good and yet asks abraham to kill his own son for him... etc.
You can actually go out and look at fossils, look under a microscope, etc.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]And 3/4 of them have been shown wrong, or to be hoax.
no they haven't. One in hundreds does not qualify as 3/4ths. What about all the hoaxes of religion? Besides, scientists uncovered the hoaxes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6770329/
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]There is SOOO much that we could be posting.
well post it. You're not very credible by just saying that.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I sated above atheist historians have tested the Bible and it has been shown to be the most consistant book ever written
... Of course the historical part is going to be consistant because that's when it was written! (about the jesus box and others... click that link above...)
The others that CAN be tested (math... physics, etc) are either said to be metaphors for something (ie. the flood) or they're just not possible to test (god existing)
 
  • #287
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Wesley @ Dec. 31 2004,1:18)]I sated above atheist historians have tested the Bible and it has been shown to be the most consistant book ever written.
The bible has hundreds of versions, and hundreds of variations. How can it be the most consistant book ever written? I doubt it was an atheist, probably a creationist.
 
  • #288
Okay, maybe the Bible was written by a by a bunch of idiots, but those "idiots" made detailed prophecies centuries before hand that were fulfilled in every way.

I agree that there are tiny organisms that act in some ways like plants and in some ways like animals. But there is nothing substancial that has evolved from these things. Almost all organisms must have decided on one characterisic or another because this would make them more hardy, right?

Also, it has been scientifically proven that all humans today are descended from one pair. I guess that means that a male superanimal and a female superanimal evolved at the same time and then continued to thrive while all others died out.

The explanation for creatures and ape-men that aren't around today - The Flood (of which there is also evidence). It's all pretty simple.

Peter
 
  • #289
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Rubra @ Dec. 31 2004,4:09)]Okay, maybe the Bible was written by a by a bunch of idiots, but  those "idiots" made detailed prophecies centuries before hand that were fulfilled in every way.
There are prophets in many religions who have made accurate predictions. There are also future-seers who aren't considered to be religious prophets like Nostradamus and various other psychics through the centuries who have made accurate predictions as well.

Does making accurate predictions about the future indicate that someone has a direct line of communication to God and can be trusted concerning the true state of the spiritual universe? If so, why pick Christianity and ignore the other religions with prophets in their history? What makes some future-tellers with accurate predictions more valid than others, beyond the fact that one group conveniently confirms what you believe and the other group doesn't?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I agree that there are tiny organisms that act in some ways like plants and in some ways like animals.  But there is nothing substancial that has evolved from these things.  Almost all organisms must have decided on one characterisic or another because this would make them more hardy, right?

What about a third kingdom of large, complex organisms entirely different from animals and plants... why don't they exist? You could come up with ideas for thousands of possible species that you think should exist but don't. The fact that they don't exist isn't evidence. Evolution doesn't progress based on expectations. It's merely a process of results. Things not appearing very planned out fits the concept of evolution very well.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Also, it has been scientifically proven that all humans today are descended from one pair.  I guess that means that a male superanimal and a female superanimal evolved at the same time and then continued to thrive while all others died out.

If one creature mutates into the imaginary threshold of "homo sapien" (a line between species doesn't exist... I don't know why people don't get this... it's the classification that has a harsh boundary, not the reality), that doesn't mean the creature suddenly can't breed with those around it.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The explanation for creatures and ape-men that aren't around today - The Flood (of which there is also evidence).  It's all pretty simple.

If you can believe in the Noah's Ark story you can believe anything, unfortunately. The great thing about top-down thinking is since one "knows" the conclusion ahead of time, one can manufacture anything to "explain" away any discrepancy along the way. It's conveniently self-sustaining, which is why it's such an easy trap to fall into.

But people's faith isn't really what I take issue with in this thread. There are plenty of things I have faith about rather than knowledge. I'm mainly concerned about people misinterpreting and strawman-ing science in a feeble attempt to use it against itself. I'm not bothered by the belief in creationism because it isn't a threat to science in the way science is a threat to creationism... but we might as well get some facts straight at least.
 
  • #290
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Quote
There is SOOO much that we could be posting.

well post it. You're not very credible by just saying that.

Then you post it.... since youre not posting it, that doesn't make you very credible does it?

I'm hearing a lot of this "you don't understand evolution, youre WRONG!!!!" Here is another point. You don't really understand creationism very well, so don't even think about getting mad if we don't understand evolution when you don't understand creation. I'm not pointing at anyone spacific, cause we're all guilty of it.
 
  • #291
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]But there is nothing substancial that has evolved from these things.
oh of course not... unless you count algae, plants, fungi, and animals.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Also, it has been scientifically proven that all humans today are descended from one pair
umm... can you give me a source? last I heard we came from just a few pairs... and that's because of a supervolcano exploding and killing off most of the civilization.
speaking of adam and eve..
first of all, If eve was made from adam's rib, she would have (technically identical... but let's say it wasn't) very similar DNA. If you don't believe in evolution, then how the heck did all the variations come about? How can chinese have straight hair and blacks have curly hair? How can people have types A, B, O, AB blood? How come we have so many skin tones? etc? Some of those could have never come from just TWO people (If you don't believe in evolution that is)
[b said:
Quote[/b] ] The Flood (of which there is also evidence).  It's all pretty simple.
what evidence?
people people!!! stop saying there is evidence and not saying anything else! sure, WE are ignoring facts. What facts? I don't know. Nobody told us. sure, there is tons of evidences for creationism. What evidence? I don't know. Nobody told us. Sure, there's evidence for the flood. What evidence? I don't have any clue because nobody bothers to tell us.
 
  • #292
We've been posting links and proof throughout this whole thread.
 
  • #293
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Wesley @ Dec. 31 2004,5:35)]Then you post it.... since youre not posting it, that doesn't make you very credible does it?

I'm hearing a lot of this "you don't understand evolution, youre WRONG!!!!"  Here is another point.  You don't really understand creationism very well, so don't even think about getting mad if we don't understand evolution when you don't understand creation.  I'm not pointing at anyone spacific, cause we're all guilty of it.
I understand it as much as you, I have been educated creatisonism since I was very small, but turned to science when I was older.
And the flood only flooded some parts of theworld, not the whole earth as the bible claims.
 
  • #294
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The bible has hundreds of versions, and hundreds of variations. How can it be the most consistant book ever written?
not to mention hundreds of possible interpretations. After all, who knows when metaphors begin and when they end?
ok... here's what merriam webster dictionary says:

cre·a·tion·ism
Function: noun
: a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis

let me emphasize "created by God out of nothing"... I don't know how you (you as in you all... I'm not singling out anyone) would twist it but to me that means that there is nothing before and you create something. If there's a horse-like thing that mates and gives birth to a horse, that is NOT creating a horse out of nothing.
I'm talking about that creationism. The one that says evolution is wrong. We're talking about evolution not the big bang or anything else so we're talking about the part of creationism that involves evolution.
I don't know about you but I don't want to specify which type of creationism (some of the most extreme creationists believe the earth is flat. I am NOT saying all of or even most of creationists believe that though) I'm talking about because it's pretty logical we are talking about the one concerning evolution
 
  • #295
And while I'm thinking about it, I'm surprised Adam and Eve haven't really come up much in this discussion. They're in the bible. The bible is believed to be the truth. There's been a lot of talk about how one can believe in the bible and evolution at the same time... I'm having trouble seeing how one could fit the literal Adam and Eve story in there. Neanderthals and humans coexisted... were they in the garden of eden? Adam and Eve were bestowed with language from the get go. What does that suggest about the anthropological history of the development of language? It's thought that neanderthals may have had a primitive form of language... was it given to them too? Obviously if you believe in evolution you have to believe that creatures lived for millions of years before the Adam and Eve story (i.e. dinosaurs)... but it's said that there was no death until the fruit of knowledge was eaten. Does that mean there was no death for those millions of years (which I hope sounds completely absurd)? Or were all the carnivorous animals modified when the garden of eden was created and then changed back after the fall? Why would a perfect being need an eraser on his pencil when he was creating the world?

I know the "answer" is faith and all that... it's just mind-boggling to me that people can confidently say that the old belief that the sun was a chariot of fire was obviously a naive myth born out of ignorance of the workings of the world, and then wholeheartedly believe in these biblical stories at the exact same time.
 
  • #296
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Wesley @ Dec. 31 2004,5:35)]I'm hearing a lot of this "you don't understand evolution, youre WRONG!!!!"  Here is another point.  You don't really understand creationism very well, so don't even think about getting mad if we don't understand evolution when you don't understand creation.  I'm not pointing at anyone spacific, cause we're all guilty of it.
I would love to hear a solid creation theory. I can't find any so far.
 
  • #297
[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I'm having trouble seeing how one could fit the literal Adam and Eve story in there
I asked that... they're metaphors
smile_n_32.gif

speaking of carinovorus animals... How did carnivorous animals survive? or were there no carnivorous animals? how did they get their giant pointy teeth, internal organs JUST for digesting meat, evil looking talons, flesh tearing beaks...
wait... did they CHANGE???
GASP!!!
 
  • #298
[b said:
Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Dec. 31 2004,6:16)]I asked that... they're metaphors
smile_n_32.gif
But the Flood isn't?

Who decides which parts of this book are literal and which aren't?

This is consistency?
confused.gif
 
  • #299
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Who decides which parts of this book are literal and which aren't?
easy. They're literal until they're disproven by science (I edited the previous post btw... I edit too much.)
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]This is consistency?
lol... apparently so! I'm afraid what they consider an INconsistant book! wow.
smile_k_ani_32.gif
 
  • #300
[b said:
Quote[/b] (endparenthesis @ Dec. 31 2004,6:21)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Dec. 31 2004,6:16)]I asked that... they're metaphors
smile_n_32.gif
But the Flood isn't?

Who decides which parts of this book are literal and which aren't?

This is consistency?
confused.gif
Exactly the point, who does decide?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top