Creation vs. Evolution

Warthaug · Aug 16, 2006

scubafire:
If you really believe that, prove it. Microevolution, yes. Macroevolution, no. As a Christian I believe the Bible, not to mention that evolution is a statistical improbability.

So if you really believe what you say, visit www.DrDino.com. They offer a large sum of cash if you can prove just one evidence of macroevolution. I have heard the guy speak. Colleges around the nation refuse to debate with him. Kind of funny.

scubafire · Aug 16, 2006

PaulVS:
I also believe in evolution. It's a fact. There is no doubt that animals and man evolve every generation. Cheetahs of 2006 are faster and more adept hunters than cheetahs of 1006.
.

You are correct. However, nobody denies MICROevolution. Just because I run for 6 months straight and my endurance increased does not mean that I evolved.

I have a challenge for you: I will buy you an acre of land. I will bring you food, clothing and all your basic needs. All you have to do is for 9 hours per day, desperately try to fly. Keep trying and trying. As a matter of fact, we can even move your entire family there for generations and have them all try to fly. Then their kids can try to fly and their kids can try and theirs and theirs. I'd bet money that not one of your ancestors will have sprouted wings or any appendage that resembles one.

Warthaug · Aug 16, 2006

scubafire:
Just to post a quick question to evolutionists...Matter cannot be created nor destroyed. That is a law of Science.

No, it is not. E=mc^2; matter and energy are the same thing. So matter can be created from energy, and energy can be created from matter. The heat given off when something is burnt, the energy of nuclear explosions, etc, are all examples where matter is converted into energy (if you carefully weigh the products of these reactions you'll find that weight is lost during the reaction, and that the amount of weight lost is related to the amount of energy released, as predicted by e=mc^2).

Matter is also created - frequently. Virtual particles being the classic example.

scubafire:
So then what was there at the beginning of time? Particles?

A singluarity, we think.

scubafire:
Okay well where did they come from.

We don't know. That's the wonderful thing about being a scientist; we spend our lives trying to figure out the nature of the universe.

scubafire:
It is a statistical improbability to say that they came from something which came from something and did not ever have a beginning.

What makes you say that? Virtual particles are created all the time - from nothing. How do you know there is only one universe? Given enough universes even the most remote statistical probability become guaranteed.

And we also don't say there was never a beginning - that would be the big bang. What occurred before that is unknown at this point in time; but one day me may know.

scubafire:
Unless you admit that it is possible for something to NOT have a beginning

If time didn't exist before our universe was formed then would there be a "beginning"? Relativity tells us that time shouldn't exist within a singularity...

scubafire:
....but then you would acknowledge the possibility of God. (And that, to most evolutionists, is the problem).

No, the evolutionist-atheist myth is a set of lies continually promoted by the creationist lobby, simply to demonize us. After all, if we don't believe in god then everything we say must therefore be ungodly. As I mentioned in a previous post, I've known literally dozens of scientists who both believe in god and evolution. Your claim that we do not is simply an attempt to demonize us, and has no basis in reality.

And how do you explain the over 10,000 clergymen who've signed this letter in support of evolution? Are they denying god? Trying to avoid trouble in the afterlife? If not, then why would they support evolution?

http://www.uwosh.edu/colleges/cols/clergy_project.htm
http://www.uwosh.edu/colleges/cols/religion_science_collaboration.htm

scubafire:
It is tough to realize that if there is a Creator that you may be held accountable for the things you say and do on earth. Much easier to think we happened by chance and there are no moral implications.

Typical creationist propaganda. You see evolution as a way for people to deny god. It's nothing of the sort - its just a really, really good explanation for the observations scientists have made about life. My support of evolution in no way, shape, or form represents any desire of mine to undermine faith, or the existence of god.

Evolution simply is be it a product of godly or a godless universe doesnt matter.

Bryan

adurso · Aug 16, 2006

The difficulty in any debate between religious folks and scientific folks is that one group debates from the heart (faith) and the other group from the head. The languages are generally mutually exclusive, witness the use of the word "theory".

Communication is a two way street, if one party does not interpret the other party's attempt at message sending, and vice-versa, communication will not ensue....

adurso · Aug 16, 2006

scubafire:
You are correct. However, nobody denies MICROevolution. Just because I run for 6 months straight and my endurance increased does not mean that I evolved.

I have a challenge for you: I will buy you an acre of land. I will bring you food, clothing and all your basic needs. All you have to do is for 9 hours per day, desperately try to fly. Keep trying and trying. As a matter of fact, we can even move your entire family there for generations and have them all try to fly. Then their kids can try to fly and their kids can try and theirs and theirs. I'd bet money that not one of your ancestors will have sprouted wings or any appendage that resembles one.

I will accept your challenge! Do you have the wherewithal to support myself and my generational family in this endeavor? I am ready to move right now, and will cheerfully attempt to fly for the rest of my life. I would like my acre of land in Boca, please let me know when I may move!

Thalassamania · Aug 16, 2006

There you go, making the religious and scientific exclusive of each other. This is not a debate between the religious and scientific this is a debate between the those who understand modern science (many of whom are quite religious) and those who demand that we all wallow in the ravings of an 17th century Irish Bishop.

H2Andy · Aug 16, 2006

scubafire:
I have a challenge for you: I will buy you an acre of land. I will bring you food, clothing and all your basic needs. All you have to do is for 9 hours per day, desperately try to fly. Keep trying and trying. As a matter of fact, we can even move your entire family there for generations and have them all try to fly. Then their kids can try to fly and their kids can try and theirs and theirs. I'd bet money that not one of your ancestors will have sprouted wings or any appendage that resembles one.

well, you don't understand evolution. that's not evolution you are describing.

it helps to understand what you are attempting to argue against

i find this true of many people who argue against evolution. their "understanding"
of evolution is amazingly bad

wardric · Aug 16, 2006

adurso:
The difficulty in any debate between religious folks and scientific folks is that one group debates from the heart (faith) and the other group from the head. The languages are generally mutually exclusive, witness the use of the word "theory".

Communication is a two way street, if one party does not interpret the other party's attempt at message sending, and vice-versa, communication will not ensue....

Not that I want to participate in the debate (i read only first and last page).... but i will say only this.

My biology teacher in high school long ago (must be 22 yrs ago or so) happened to be a priest. We studied the history of life on earth, evolution and so on. He said that his faith and his head were not on opposite sides since even though he believed in science, and the protein soup theory, he also believed God had a part in starting it all, putting the elements in place so it could happen.

I have pretty much adopted his explanation.

Now saying the earth is only 6000 yo!!!!! wow...

:11:

:11:

btw, the Simpsons had a good episode on that debate (with as always a good moral at the end). Lisa of course being on the evolutionists side and Flanders on the creationists. Marge found a way to be on both sides. Maybe some people should watch it

Jamdiver · Aug 16, 2006

H2Andy:
well, you don't understand evolution. that's not evolution you are describing.

it helps to understand what you are attempting to argue against

i find this true of many people who argue against evolution. their "understanding"
of evolution is amazingly bad

You would be suprised at how many are willfully scientifically illiterate.

Always easier to wallow in ignorance than learn what you're talking about......

adurso · Aug 16, 2006

Thalassamania:
There you go, making the religious and scientific exclusive of each other. This is not a debate between the religious and scientific this is a debate between the those who understand modern science (many of whom are quite religious) and those who demand that we all wallow in the ravings of an 17th century Irish Bishop.

Religion and science are not exclusive; but the debate, in this and many instances, has differing origins within the individual. The religious scientists that I have experience with, when drawn into such a debate, speak the language. The inherent difficulty still lies within the communication process.
Aquinas puts it best:" the believer and the philosopher consider creatures differently. The philosopher considers what belongs to their proper natures, while the believer considers only what is true of creatures insofar as they are related to God, for example, that they are created by God and are subject to him, and the like." (Summa contra gentiles, bk II, chap. 4)

Creation vs. Evolution

Please register or login

Warthaug

Contributor

scubafire

Guest

Warthaug

Contributor

adurso

Contributor

adurso

Contributor

Thalassamania

Diving Polymath

H2Andy

Contributor

wardric

Contributor

Jamdiver

Guest

adurso

Contributor

Similar threads