Read carefully. I said same species. I just explained natural selection and how species evolve. You are comparing two species which is competition if they occupy the same niche. That's something tottally different.[b said:Quote[/b] (Rubra @ Jan. 12 2005,2:34)]So why aren't species like glabrata dying off now that there's nepenthes hamata in the same habitat?
Peter
I had one more point I wanted to add to this. Most of the problems you run into with comparisons between biblical creation and what we accept as evolutional development has to do with the literal translation of the Bible. If you look at the way creation unfolds in Genesis, the pattern is not unlike the pattern we hold for evolution. Separation of earth and sky, life in water before land, the order of creation follows our best scenario of evolution. The big difference is TIME. Why do we have to be so literal with the bible? I believe the bible should be used as a tool for faith, not a tool for science. The bible is full of contradictions when taken word for word. Eye for an eye or turn the other cheek? Noah was over 400 years old, and creation took place in 6 days. Don't get so caught up in literal time.[b said:Quote[/b] (Steve L @ Jan. 12 2005,10:30)]This is a conversation that many of you will have over and over throughout your life. You may find, as I have, that your opinion will evolve (heh, heh..) a bit one way or the other.
When you experience the birth of a child or the end of your rope, you may feel moved by a power that needs no explanation. This is faith. Faith is something that is actively sought. Real Faith is personal, it will never be handed to you or forced upon you. Faith needs no proof. How do you prove that love exists? I have faith that it does. I see it in the faces of my children every day.
I am in a science field. I have worked with science my whole life, and I love it. I do very much believe in evolution, and I do very much believe in a Higher Power. One does not exist to disprove the other.
This has been a circular argument and always will be. Evolution can be approached through science. Faith can not. Try not to get them confused.
Steve
I had one more point I wanted to add to this. Most of the problems you run into with comparisons between biblical creation and what we accept as evolutional development has to do with the literal translation of the Bible. If you look at the way creation unfolds in Genesis, the pattern is not unlike the pattern we hold for evolution. Separation of earth and sky, life in water before land, the order of creation follows our best scenario of evolution. The big difference is TIME. Why do we have to be so literal with the bible? I believe the bible should be used as a tool for faith, not a tool for science. The bible is full of contradictions when taken word for word. Eye for an eye or turn the other cheek? Noah was over 400 years old, and creation took place in 6 days. Don't get so caught up in literal time.[b said:Quote[/b] (Steve L @ Jan. 12 2005,4:44)]Steve
Glabrata is succeeding so every nepenthes species that ever existed in history should have succeeded? Does extinction not exist in the creationist reality?[b said:Quote[/b] (Rubra @ Jan. 12 2005,7:05)]Sorry for the confusion. If the genus developed step by step, and plants with very primitive pitcher forms died out, why isn't glabrata dying out when there is a fanged species in the same habitat? Probably because there is plenty of room, and there are plenty of bugs. So there is no reason for glabrata to die out, and no reason for plants earlier in the evolution process to die out.
I call it hopeful thinking.[b said:Quote[/b] ]When you experience the birth of a child or the end of your rope, you may feel moved by a power that needs no explanation. This is faith.
Because love is an emotion and you can feel it. You can also figure out the hormones that cause love/pleasure/etc.[b said:Quote[/b] ]How do you prove that love exists? I have faith that it does.
Evolution does not disprove a higher power in any way. It does not explain what happens when we die, it does not say religions are wrong, etc. AE, you might think it's not compatible with ANY religion (I don't think it is... aldough I do think that if you take what the bible says as true it is... along with other religios books) but evolution has nothing to do with religion. It only says that all modern organisms have a common ancestor and that species become other species through natural selection. That is all evolution is. There are arguments over how it happens etc. but It is all still evolution.[b said:Quote[/b] ]and I do very much believe in a Higher Power. One does not exist to disprove the other.
why should they?[b said:Quote[/b] ]So why aren't species like glabrata dying off now that there's nepenthes hamata in the same habitat?
oh yes it is. besides obvious things like plants coming before the sun, The earth was dark and void at first (the earth came before the sun), water came before land,[b said:Quote[/b] ]what we accept as evolutional development has to do with the literal translation of the Bible. If you look at the way creation unfolds in Genesis, the pattern is not unlike the pattern we hold for evolution.
that to me says that grass was CREATED and not evolved... and that things only come from the same things... so evolution can't take place[b said:Quote[/b] ]And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb
yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his
kind, whose seed is in itself,
...whose seed was in
itself, after his kind:
then apparently he divided night and day yet AGAIN.[b said:Quote[/b] ]And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the
day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars
also.
so first came fish and birds, then land animals...[b said:Quote[/b] ]And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature
after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the
earth after his kind: and it was so.
... no wonder people think they're the best next thing next to god.[b said:Quote[/b] ]And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over
all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]Why do we have to be so literal with the bible?
where do you draw the line? many "metaphors" or "poems" etc. are presented to you as truth. like I said you can't just select which ones you want to believe and which ones you don't The bible says it is true so you either believe what it says is true or not.[b said:Quote[/b] ]Some things are literal and some are figurative / metaphor. Yet others are prophetic, poetic, historical, theological. We have to look at the big picture.
so if the days are actually eons... we are still on that seventh day... so he ended being with us? or is this another day? or did he take a break (why the hell does a perfect being need a break anyway? he gets tired? GASP!) for just a little while and then came back?[b said:Quote[/b] ]And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made;
and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he
had made.
people it say it didn't rain before the flood (and there were no rainbows)... God broke the laws of nature yet again.[b said:Quote[/b] ]But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole
face of the ground.
this is what I meant.[b said:Quote[/b] ]And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground
why the heck did he put the tree of knowledge there in the first place? How did adam/eve know that they shouldn't disobay god (after all, he talks in many metaphors and riddles doesn't he? LOL) if they were just ignorant fools that don't know right from wrong since they haven't eaten the fruit?[b said:Quote[/b] ]And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of
the garden thou mayest freely eat:
002:017 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt
not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die.
besides doesn't lowii get it's nutrients from bird poop?[b said:Quote[/b] ]Like Darwin's finches one species could develop a large opening (lowii for example) to catch large nitrogen rich deposits and another species a small opening (Aristolichioides, I believe) to catch smaller insects.
There are a million different ways that you can translate or decode the bible, which is obvious by all the different religions there are. Science dismisses it because of that. (Among other things)[b said:Quote[/b] (Steve L @ Jan. 12 2005,4:44)]I had one more point I wanted to add to this. Most of the problems you run into with comparisons between biblical creation and what we accept as evolutional development has to do with the literal translation of the Bible. If you look at the way creation unfolds in Genesis, the pattern is not unlike the pattern we hold for evolution. Separation of earth and sky, life in water before land, the order of creation follows our best scenario of evolution. The big difference is TIME. Why do we have to be so literal with the bible? I believe the bible should be used as a tool for faith, not a tool for science. The bible is full of contradictions when taken word for word. Eye for an eye or turn the other cheek? Noah was over 400 years old, and creation took place in 6 days. Don't get so caught up in literal time.
OK. Try to get this straight, i don't know whats not being clear to you.[b said:Quote[/b] (Rubra @ Jan. 12 2005,7:05)]Sorry for the confusion. If the genus developed step by step, and plants with very primitive pitcher forms died out, why isn't glabrata dying out when there is a fanged species in the same habitat? Probably because there is plenty of room, and there are plenty of bugs. So there is no reason for glabrata to die out, and no reason for plants earlier in the evolution process to die out.
Peter
If one were to read a whole book of the Bible, as opposed to just one verse, it becomes incredibly evident as to how things are being rendered. The context gets easier to determine the more one reads the whole Bible and is referred to as having good hermeneutics.[b said:Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Jan. 12 2005,7:25)]where do you draw the line? many "metaphors" or "poems" etc. are presented to you as truth. like I said you can't just select which ones you want to believe and which ones you don't The bible says it is true so you either believe what it says is true or not.[b said:Quote[/b] ]Some things are literal and some are figurative / metaphor. Yet others are prophetic, poetic, historical, theological. We have to look at the big picture.
obviously not or there would be agreement within christians as of where you draw the line. in this very thread we've seen that. Some christians believe there was a noah's flood, others believe that it was based on sea levels rising, others say it's a metaphor, etc..[b said:Quote[/b] ], it becomes incredibly evident as to how things are being rendered.