The Now Reading Thread

[Div]

Originally Posted by zgodt

Since you phrase it that way -- one type of arbitrary magic versus another -- I guess it's fifty-fifty. Why is a magic ghost in the sky more plausible than wet rocks suddenly getting up and doing the mambo?

Not to mention that God supposedly made Adam out of clay -- so either way, we're all just wet rocks that something happened to.

But since there's a pretty detailed fossil record that shows (for example) that there were homo habilis before there were homo erectus, but not after; and that there were homo erectus before there were homo sapiens, but not after; and since there's a definite line of descent among species that can be and has been traced through comparative analysis of DNA -- which shows (for instance) that we are much more closely related biologically to chimpanzees than we are to dolphins or elephants, even though dolphins and elephants are also highly intelligent -- then it's pretty silly to say evolution is self-evidently absurd. And since the evidence for the other side is what some book says that some dudes wrote 3 or 4 thousand years ago -- long after all those fossils were in the earth, but long before anyone knew where to find them or what they meant -- then I think you may be experiencing some confusion about the distinction between science and religion.



See above. If you think evolution is bullshit science and/or "pretty much a religion," then you simply don't understand what science is or how it differs from religion.

the thing is, i know exactly what science is, and ive yet to see real evidence that doesnt require a leap of faith to make me believe a rock can turn into a form of life and all you have to do is add water. the evolutionist uses time to fill in for anything they cant explain, which isnt scientific fact at all, just skeptisism.

im not biased to either side, but if im told to believe something i need to see the proof. similarities in bone structures and dna dont prove cross species evolution, which is nothing more then a theory sense it has never been observed. honestly i dont think there will ever be enough evidence to either prove the bible or evolution, but a theory shouldnt be taught as fact.

[zgodt]

Originally Posted by Div

the thing is, i know exactly what science is, and ive yet to see real evidence that doesnt require a leap of faith to make me believe a rock can turn into a form of life and all you have to do is add water. the evolutionist uses time to fill in for anything they cant explain, which isnt scientific fact at all, just skeptisism.

im not biased to either side, but if im told to believe something i need to see the proof. similarities in bone structures and dna dont prove cross species evolution, which is nothing more then a theory sense it has never been observed. honestly i dont think there will ever be enough evidence to either prove the bible or evolution, but a theory shouldnt be taught as fact.

No one in their right mind says all you have to do is add water to a rock and voila, there's life. You're obviously exaggerating to make a point. And the point that scientists still don't really have a fucking clue how life actually started on this planet is valid. But it's not an invalidation of evolutionary theory. Whether you think that some weird and fortuitous chemical reaction produced the first single-celled organism (which -- given the billions of galaxies in the universe, each with billions of stars and planets upon which who knows how many chemical reactions have taken place over billions of years -- doesn't seem that crazy from a statistical standpoint) or if you think divine intervention produced it, the biological record still shows pretty conclusively that complex organisms evolved from simpler ones, and that we didn't just wander fully formed out of a garden with domesticated cattle and sheep at our heels.

[Div]

Originally Posted by zgodt

No one in their right mind says all you have to do is add water to a rock and voila, there's life. You're obviously exaggerating to make a point. And the point that scientists still don't really have a fucking clue how life actually started on this planet is valid. But it's not an invalidation of evolutionary theory. Whether you think that some weird and fortuitous chemical reaction produced the first single-celled organism (which -- given the billions of galaxies in the universe, each with billions of stars and planets upon which who knows how many chemical reactions have taken place over billions of years -- doesn't seem that crazy from a statistical standpoint) or if you think divine intervention produced it, the biological record still shows pretty conclusively that complex organisms evolved from simpler ones, and that we didn't just wander fully formed out of a garden with domesticated cattle and sheep at our heels.

That's an interesting point you make about the other planets in the universe. If it's true that the universe is infinite (which I believe, because if it had a finite size light would wrap around the edges and create a mirror effect, and no astronomer has ever seen this) then it would be mathematically impossible for there to not be other planets with life. Provided the process can begin without divine intervention.

[zgodt]

Originally Posted by Div

That's an interesting point you make about the other planets in the universe. If it's true that the universe is infinite (which I believe, because if it had a finite size light would wrap around the edges and create a mirror effect, and no astronomer has ever seen this) then it would be mathematically impossible for there to not be other planets with life. Provided the process can begin without divine intervention.

[zgodt]

The Cultural Politics of Cosimo I de Medici

[ChildrenofSodom]

Originally Posted by zgodt

Okay. Prove gravity. Prove that it really isn't just god shoving us back against the ground every time we jump.

Scientific knowledge comes from drawing the best possible conclusions from the best possible evidence. A lot of what we know isn't "proven" in a laboratory, and doesn't have to be. It's a matter of looking at what facts there be, and determining what explanation accounts for all of them. No alternative explanation accounts for all the facts nearly as well as evolution does, and many accepted theories in other parts of science don't account for all the facts as well as evolution does for the observable facts of biology.

I know how gravity works....but who is to say that God isnt the who/how and gravity is the what?

The best explanation may not always be the right one...many theories have been viewed as the best explanation, only to be disproven later.......I am not saying evolution isnt possible, but to say it IS the answer, is religion......and when it comes to faith, I would rather believe in a God that can grant me everlasting life and happiness then a theory that we evolved over millions of years purely by chance.

A law is something that can be observed in nature......no one has ever observed one species becoming another species.....until that happens, I will look at the theory critically and with skepticim. There are too many holes in the presentation of industrial melanism, the fossil records, the theory of vestigal organs, and speciation for the theory of evolution to be forced down the throats of our children.

[DethMaiden]

Originally Posted by ChildrenofSodom

I know how gravity works....but who is to say that God isnt the who/how and gravity is the what?

Then he spends way too much time bringing things that go up down and not enough time stopping war.

kthxbi.

[ChildrenofSodom]

Also.......evolutionists and big bang theorists discredit Creationists ( I dont entirely believe in the Eden story, myself) they say that it is illogical to say that God (not just some ghost in the sky, you bigot) just snapped his finger and everything was made......But if you think about it.......The theory that swirling gases in the blackness spontaneously combusted and formed life (though there is a LAW that says life cannot come from nonlife) just by chance.....isnt that just as crazy? And no one has explained how those gases came about in the first place.....

Or that just by chance some organism developed a helpful mutation, and some how knew how to use that mutation for the better......Such as...if a fish was born with some primitive lungs (by chance), how would they survive in the water, and if they did somehow survived in the water (with lungs), how did they know to go onto land? And even if they could breathe, the rest of their body wouldnt be suitable for land life....so it would take a substantial amount of time for that fishes offspring (if it had any, which is doubtful) to develop legs or another organs to survive on land.....That chance is so very unlikely......

And I thought I learned that mutations couldnt be passed through gametes, so then how could the new mutations be passed on to offspring?

[ChildrenofSodom]

Originally Posted by DethMaiden

Then he spends way too much time bringing things that go up down and not enough time stopping war.

kthxbi.

omigod...not that shit again.....Man causes war with man.....get that through your fucking head.......WAR IS BAD, OKAY....BUT SAYING THAT THE EXISTENCE OF WAR IS PROOF OF THE ABSENCE OF GOD IS JUST ABSURD!! Blame man for war...not God.

And war isnt even a scientific law...so your comment is invalid...

[zgodt]

Originally Posted by ChildrenofSodom

I know how gravity works....but who is to say that God isnt the who/how and gravity is the what?

The best explanation may not always be the right one...many theories have been viewed as the best explanation, only to be disproven later.......I am not saying evolution isnt possible, but to say it IS the answer, is religion......and when it comes to faith, I would rather believe in a God that can grant me everlasting life and happiness then a theory that we evolved over millions of years purely by chance.

A law is something that can be observed in nature......no one has ever observed one species becoming another species.....until that happens, I will look at the theory critically and with skepticim. There are too many holes in the presentation of industrial melanism, the fossil records, the theory of vestigal organs, and speciation for the theory of evolution to be forced down the throats of our children.

On gravity -- that's exactly my point. There's no problem with you believing that gravity is caused by God. That may be reasonable and it may be true. But it sure as hell isn't science.

Yes, scientific progress means that theories get disproven regularly -- when better science comes along. Not when people simply decide they'd prefer to believe something else. Again, you can prefer to believe something else, and you may even be right -- but it isn't science.

No one ever observed a T Rex eating a Triceratops either, but scientists know it happened. Obviously, scientific observation can be indirect.

You should look at the theory critically and with skepticism. Of course you should. In fact, that's what good scientists always do, and have done ever since Darwin wrote The Origin of Species. I mean, it's not like people instantly embraced his conclusions; people dismissed him as preposterous! He didn't even publish his findings for over a decade because he was terrified of how people would react. But after continual reexaminations of the evidence over the past century, scientists have -- through their skeptical, critical assessment of the evidence -- come to conclude that he basically had it right.