Creation vs. Evolution

[lamont]

Naturally, everyone wants to confine discourse within a framework of their own making.

If you control the framework then you can control the discussion.

If you are the definer of terms then you are determiner of what is meaningful.

You are the decider!

The problem that I have is when people stumble into my framework and then proceed to make absolute fools of themselves.

When people who desperately want the Earth to be only a few thousand years old and start arguing with me that the light from the Andromeda galaxy isn't really 2.5 million years old because the speed of light might vary over the distance between here and there, that annoys me greatly because they have no background in astronomy, quantum mechanics or electromagnetism and don't realize how radical modifications to the speed of light would destroy all our observations due to the effect that the modification of the speed of light has on the force of electromagnetism and the effects it would have on chemistry and spectral lines to begin with.

If someone wants to believe that God created the universe a few thousand years ago with the photons already in flight to make it look just like Andromeda is 2.5 billion years ago and just like the universe is 10 billion years old, but its just a big joke on the astronomers and cosmologists pulled off absolutely perfectly and undetectably -- well, that's outside of my framework. I don't have much to say about that other than that I'm going to bet against it.

But when someone stumbles into a scientific framework and starts to think that they can randomly twist and turn dials like the speed of light to make astronomical observations fit with their preconcieved notions of what must be correct, then that annoys me because they're just wrong.

Keep your religion out of my science and I'll keep my science out of your religion. I've got no problems with seperate frameworks.

 

[Thalassamania]

This still makes it sound a little too disconnected from the normal failings of human culture though. Critics often cut up other people's work due to entirely subjective qualities, but there's an important distinction between scientific criticism and aesthetic criticism which is that in science, experiment is the ultimate arbiter.

Snip

I'm certain that before Special Relativity that there were graduate students that were chopping up presentations because the presenter didn't take into account the motion of the Earth through the Ether and scored a lot of points with the people in the audience that they were trying to impress. Scientists are human and this will go on, but ultimately reality took precidence and scientists have had to do away with the Ether.

The point is that when you come out with something there's no free lunch, your work is inspected closely, for all the right, and all the wrong, reasons.

 

[Uncle Pug]

In science (properly done) you should be able to do experiments which can force an overwhelming majority of people who do not want to accept your theories that they are in fact correct.

How's that workin' for all ya'll?

Actually, not so well... unless of course your framework defines *people* as only those who finally accept your theory... or at least are willing to play within your framework and abide by your predefinition of acceptable reality.

THE FACT however, is the overwhelming majority of people believe in a spiritual reality that your version of science waves off as inadmissible at best... and more often, as demonstrated in this thread, with outright and arrogant distain.

To wave off something as significant and pervasive as this spiritual component simply because it lies outside your experience hardly argues for thoroughness. Since you already have complete understanding of everything that lies within the sphere of your knowledge... perhaps it is time to turn your attention to what you do not know, understand nor can as of yet even conceive.

There is a spiritual understanding that cannot be discovered by your methodology nor even considered within your framework... it is specifically disallowed. Take a chance, set aside what you think you know and search for what you don't know. It is real and it is there, you just can't see it yet.

Anecdote: Yesterday while walking down in my field to check mole traps, near the tree line I spooked a large blacktail buck. He bounded a 100 yards (100 meters for you science types) away and stopped. I was standing out in the open with a black lab at my feet (who fortunately knew what a whispered 'down' meant.) The breeze was in my face and the lab and I remained more or less still while the buck scanned the scene with all his senses at high alert. The breeze was rustling the maple leaves in the trees behind him and masked any noise I might have made and carried my scent the opposite direction.

Because we didn't move he couldn't see us.

Well, he could see us, he just couldn't perceive us. Deep down inside he must have known that we were there but soon he began a stiff leg prance back to where we had spooked him! As the breeze covered my voice I quietly told the lab to 'stay' and started a glacially slow shuffle toward the buck.

When I was 20' away he stood up. He knew something was there but even looking directly at me he couldn't perceive me though there was nothing but short green grass between us. I moved to within 10' and still he couldn't *see* me.

And then I backed away leaving him wondering.

Moral: sometimes you sense that there is something there but can't perceive it. If you are a lucky buck it is a mole trapper and not a bowhunter.

As for experimental *proof* that will compel others to accept.... I really don't have to satisfy anyone else nor is it my goal to compel the *unbeliever* to accept anything. I have all of the proof that I need in order to believe. Some of it is objective, some it is subjective and some of it is direct personal experience. More *proof* is being added each day.

And I'd still dive with you even though your framework of allowed understanding is different than mine.

 

[H2Andy]

sometimes you sense that there is something there but can't perceive it.

and sometimes you think you perceive something that is there, but you're wrong

one time, i was out spotting deer (mostly does; my skills weren't good enough to get near bucks), and had been waiting for hours when finally, i saw a doe's head coming out from behind some trees, about 50 yards away. the doe just stood there, her head still, listening (her body was hidden by the trees).

after a bit, she lowered her head and began to eat. then she raised her head again, then lowered it and began to eat.

after a while, something was wrong. her rhytm was too abrupt for a deer. then i noticed that the doe would eat pretty much everytime the wind blew with a bit of force.

i made my way to the "doe."

she was just a trick of a branch, the light, and my willingness to see a doe there.

I have all of the proof that I need in order to believe. Some of it is objective, some it is subjective and some of it is direct personal experience. More *proof* is being added each day.

you're the one that has to make the call, so if you're convinced, that's that

 

[Soggy]

While I do not believe there is a god, I am open to the possibility of it. I do not have an issue with a person's belief in god. It is the details of that belief where the absurdity can come in.

What I disagree with is the 'history' of the bible. It is factually incorrect. No one ever lived to be 800+ years old and the universe is is about 2 million times older (literally 2 *million times*) than the ~6000 years mentioned by biblical literalists. Creationism is illogical. It is without reason and it directly contradicts what we know to be true about the world around us. The bible has the facts wrong, yet people believe it...generally because that is how they grew up (though, that is not always the case, obviously).

I don't have that sense of a supreme being. Maybe that's evolution or devolution...I don't know.

Like Pug, I will dive with you believers anyhow. Just don't preach to me

 

[Uncle Pug]

one time, i was out spotting deer

More deer have seen you than you have seen deer, Andy.
In fact, I'd wager that a couple of deer were watching you watch the branch.

 

[H2Andy]

More deer have seen you than you have seen deer, Andy.
In fact, I'd wager that a couple of deer were watching you watch the branch.

and i'd wager that some other deer were watching you mess with that poor buck




my point is that the mind is a funny thing. if we want to believe badly enough, we'll "see" what we want to see, or expect to see.

you argue that you can't trust your senses (or logic) because you may have blind spots.

i am arguing that you can't trust your faith because it too may have blind spots.

 

[Soggy]

I hate to point it out to y'all, but deer aren't gods.

Analogies are great to illustrate a point, but this one is lacking.

 

[Uncle Pug]

and i'd wager that some other deer were watching you mess with that poor buck

Well... that is a fact. His girlfriend was just inside the tree line but she could perceive me either.

 

[bwerb]

I love good quotations, sometimes a few simple words can reveal so much at so many levels...reading over this thread, I thought I'd post a few somewhat related quotes as a moment of reflection.

You have no right to erect your toll-gate upon the highways of thought.
Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899), _The Ghosts_
US lawyer, orator, statesman

We think few people sensible except those who agree with us.
La Rouchefoucauld

Horatio: O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!
Hamlet: And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
W. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act I, Scene V

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It
is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this
emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand
rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.
Albert Einstein

There's a world of difference between truth and facts. Facts can
obscure truth. Maya Angelou

Some things have to be believed to be seen.
RALPH HODGSON