Evolution

[Inyri]

I was actually watching a debate between Christians and Atheists (it was on CNN or something. On the christian side it was Kirk Cameron and the dude he preaches with), and they said different.

 

I have also debated with many other people and none disagreed.

If he says all Christian denominations believe that then he's full of crap and is not doing a good job of representing us. My denomination, for instance, believes as I described. We also welcome homosexuals.

 

As to your post, M@RS, I'm not sure how it's relevant to evolution.

[Achilles]

Yeah, it's not easy either for the men in the native tribes in Africa, whom have never heard of god. They're going to burn in hell according to your religion because they are "ill-informed".

Or for the billions that died before christianity was even invented.

 

I was actually watching a debate between Christians and Atheists (it was on CNN or something. On the christian side it was Kirk Cameron and the dude he preaches with), and they said different.

 

Did he look like this man?

 

His name is Ray Comfort and he likes bananas (because everyone knows that you are what you eat).

[Nedak]

In layman's terms that means, if they obey his commandments without really knowing why, then they're going to heaven, so if an African tribe never heard of God but obeyed his word because of their conscience then they're going to heaven, does that sound like a merciful God to you?

 

So you expect men who speak in clicks to obey the word of god without having the ability to do so?

 

All humans are born with original sin, so how could the man know whether he was disobeying god or not?

 

Did he look like this man?

 

His name is Ray Comfort and he likes bananas (because everyone knows that you are what you eat).

Yeah that's him! Forgot his name.

 

His name is kind of ironic.

[Achilles]

Kirk doesn't think it's ironic at all.

[Inyri]

So you expect men who speak in clicks to obey the word of god without having the ability to do so?

What Paul probably meant was that people that are generally 'good' will be saved, because they follow God's laws even without ever having known them.

 

It's kind of irrelevant, though, because Paul's letter to the Romans is all Paul's personal opinions and, despite being in the bible, was not approved by God or Jesus.

[Nedak]

It's kind of irrelevant, though, because Paul's letter to the Romans is all Paul's personal opinions and, despite being in the bible, was not approved by God or Jesus.

 

Exactly. The Bible was changed so many times, it's almost impossible to separate what was actually in there, to what was added later.

[El Sitherino]

does that sound like a merciful God to you?

 

No.

 

Also this is a thread on Evolution.

[KinchyB]

No, he gave us his gifts to use for him, brilliant people are made by God to show that God does indeed exist and that a literal six day creation is true. Now say you had kids, let's just say that, now say you gave two of your kids an order to clean their rooms, one does it immediately and the other goes to their room and doesn't clean it, now to the kid who obeyed you, you give them something they like, the other is punished, now you gave them the choice to do whatever they wanted. Also, let's say that you built the house that you live in. The kid who was punished decides, that since you're so "unfair" You don't exist, and then further decides that the house evolved over a long period of time from a splinter. Do you see how weird that is, that's just how humanity acts today, just on a larger scale.

 

I'm quoting this as it made me laugh...

 

This post is by far the worst example to prove a point that is incorrect I have ever seen... I would go through and point out the fallacies in your post(s), however, I don't have that much time nor do I think anyone else does.

 

Suggestion though...research, read up on, or at least gain a rudimentary understanding of evolution...then post to this thread. Otherwise…I would recommend the Ahto Spaceport Cantina forum. People are a bit less picky about their sources there.

[Ray Jones]

I'd like to add that a house in fact might have grown from like a bunch of tree semen. ^^

[Astor]

No, he gave us his gifts to use for him, brilliant people are made by God to show that God does indeed exist and that a literal six day creation is true. Now say you had kids, let's just say that, now say you gave two of your kids an order to clean their rooms, one does it immediately and the other goes to their room and doesn't clean it, now to the kid who obeyed you, you give them something they like, the other is punished, now you gave them the choice to do whatever they wanted. Also, let's say that you built the house that you live in. The kid who was punished decides, that since you're so "unfair" You don't exist, and then further decides that the house evolved over a long period of time from a splinter. Do you see how weird that is, that's just how humanity acts today, just on a larger scale.[/Quote]

 

So, if I understand this right, you're basically saying that humanity has made up evolution?

 

That's a really bad analogy to be using, though.

 

I'd like to add that a house in fact might have grown from like a bunch of tree semen. ^^ [/Quote]

 

Awesome.

[Tyrion]

I'd like to add that a house in fact might have grown from like a bunch of tree semen. ^^

 

Yes, they're called sea shanties.

 

Get it? It's a pun

 

You know, because a shanty is a crudely built domicile constructed primarily from wood.

 

And, you know, seamen is a homonym of semen. Seamen sing sea shanties.

 

So seamen build sea shanties by the sea shore! I'm twisting the meaning of your words through the clever use of well placed puns.

 

It's really quite brilliant, you see.

 

Brilliant.

[Ray Jones]

Ah,.. you mean like, seamen grow trees from semen to build sea shanties by the sea shore while they sing sea shanties only when they're at sea and not at home in their shanty town of sea shanties by the sea shore which they built with wood from trees they grew from semen the other day?

 

BRILLIANT, INDEED! I've never seen more excellence in twisting my words into something so different, yet similar. ^^

[SkinWalker]

[...]there are 500 different historical accounts saying that they all saw Jesus alive.

 

Could you, perhaps, name these "500 different historical accounts?" Or just 250. Tell you what, name just one. But keep in mind that the so-called gospels of Mark, John, Luke, and Matthew (as well as the 'Q' document) are not historical accounts since two of these rely on two others heavily and neither is demonstrated to be contemporary to anyone that might have been an actual witness to the alleged events. Moreover, inconsistencies between them work to invalidate them.

 

But I digress, this is, after all, a thread on evolution. As such, I'll close the critique in my previous paragraph with the notion that the mythology surrounding Jesus is evidence of religious evolution. Cultures evolve in much the same manner as nature with outside and inside selective pressures, etc.

 

While I apologize for my digression, I should be permitted some latitude since it's clear that your intent for this thread wasn't to discuss science but superstition. It's not a thread on evolution but one that allows you a soapbox to proselytize your religion.

[Jan Gaarni]

Nope, he has set events but not how you think, he gives us a choice, do what we want, and he doesn't know what you'll do, or you can follow God's plan for your life. Which is about serving him and having a life filled with Joy, Happiness, but not easy, it's not always easy to serve God. Jesus knew Judas would turn him in, he had to, to make the prophesy true, but, he didn't have to hang himself, he could've asked for forgiveness and become a great apostle but he did things the way he wanted and went to hell because of that. If Judas was the savior, then he would've have died for us, no he died for his guilt. Jesus died for us, now how many witnesses do you need to believe that Jesus did raise from the dead?

Well of course Jesus knew.

According to recent discovery, Jesus was the one who told Judas to turn him in in the first place. And I don't mean the thing when he said that "Before the sun set" and all that "one of you will betray me" stuff.

 

I mean, literally telling Judas to turn him in.

 

If he didn't, he would have disobeyed the command of God, and probably burned in hell for taht too.

[Achilles]

According to recent discovery, Jesus was the one who told Judas to turn him in in the first place.

So far as one is willing to accept the gospel of judas as...well, gospel.

 

The beauty of just making stuff up is that it can say whatever you want it to say.

[M@RS]

I've decided to go through this whole thread and answer as many Q's as I can related to Evolution and Creationism, please don't ask any more but allow me to answer the ones I was unable to earlier...

 

Just one? Okay.

 

Whales have don't "vestigal" bones (they say it proves that it used to be used for walking) those bones serve as anchor points for muscles. Without them whales can't reproduce, they have nothing to do with walking on land... Even IF it was vestigal, isn't losing something against evolution?

 

Some of you asked couldn't have God just used Evolution?

 

Simply put, no... God didn't use a process in which millions of creatures have to die just to get the perfect creature. Besides he's perfect, if he created something macro evolution doesn't need to happen in order to perfect it... Sure micro evolution happens but it's not to perfect an animal, but to allow it to fit into it's surroundings better. If you claim to be a Christian and believe in Evolution, you're not a Christian because you don't believe in the Genesis Account.

 

I will work on the rest later... You guys sure can ask a lot of questions...

[True_Avery]

I was under the impression that things died every day. Where is your so called perfect god in those situations? What about things born with deformities? Disabilities?

 

Also, sources and proof on all of the above.

 

Also "fitting into your surroundings better" is evolution. Look it up. It seems your confusion over what evolution actual is has caused you to believe in something that has no basis in fact. Evolution has never been about "creating the perfect creature". It is just about animals adapting to ever changing situations in a short, or long period of time. Yet again the disbelief in evolution comes from plain ignorance of what evolution is.

 

You believe in micro but not macro? Its that being hypocritical? If you believe in micro, then you aren't a christian by your flawed logic.

[SkinWalker]

Whales have don't "vestigal" bones (they say it proves that it used to be used for walking) those bones serve as anchor points for muscles. Without them whales can't reproduce, they have nothing to do with walking on land... Even IF it was vestigal, isn't losing something against evolution?

 

No. "Losing something" isn't "against evolution." It will be exceedingly difficult to engage in discourse if you aren't prepared, so I might recommend Biology by Miller and Levine, you can pick up used versions at any used book store. This will give you some primer and offer good source material for evolutionary theory.

 

The vestigial bones on whales are, indeed, vestigial bones. We have a seriation of fossils that exist chronologically in strata and show the gradual changes these bones went from legs to their current form. This is empirical data. To give an idea, these are but a few diagrams:

 

 

"The photo shows three ankles, respectively those of Rodhocetus, a modern pronghorn antelope, and Artiocetus. Remarkably, all three show a "double-pulley" astragalus. The astragalus is the bone with the deep, rounded groove in it (imagine a rope fitting into the groove of a pulley wheel). This groove, called a trochlea, fits another bone to form a sliding joint. The artiodactyl astragalus -- in both the modern pronghorn and these ancient swimming whales -- has the unique feature of having two trochleas, one on each end. This is the "double-pulley." These protocetid whales were definitely not runners, but they retain a clear mark of their ancestry as hoofed running animals. "

 

Protocetid hindlimb/ankle reconstructions from Figure 2, p. 2241 of: Gingerich, P. D.; M. Haq; I. S. Zalmout; I. H. Khan; and M. S. Malkani (2001). "Origin of Whales from Early Artiodactyls: Hands and Feet of Eocene Protocetidae from Pakistan." Science 293(5538), 2239-2242.

 

 

Muizon, Christian (2001). Walking with Whales. Nature 413, 259-260.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/features/whales/

 

Its not clear why you state that the bones on whales are not vestigial. Perhaps they were used for muscle attatchment -from photos I've seen, however, I don't see the raised ossification indicative of muscle attatchment- but that doesn't imply they aren't vestigial.

 

God didn't use a process in which millions of creatures have to die just to get the perfect creature. Besides he's perfect,

 

In that case, this would seem to be evidence for an absence of gods.

 

You guys sure can ask a lot of questions...

 

I see no reason to ask you questions regarding evolution as there is no indication that this is a subject you're well-versed in. Sorry.

[GarfieldJL]

I have no argument with Evolution after life began, but there part where the theory of Evolution breaks down is how did life begin?

[ET Warrior]

That's abiogenesis, and the Theory of Evolution, while related, does not rely on knowing the hows or whys life began, it picks up after the first replicating organic molecules came into existence.

[True_Avery]

I have no argument with Evolution after life began, but there part where the theory of Evolution breaks down is how did life begin?

Correct.

 

Evolution doesn't necessarily break down when considering how life began, as we do not yet know how life began (abiogenesis) in the first place. Two things, while somewhat related, are completely different fields. Evolution picks up after the first living thing appeared, and goes on till this moment.

 

So, I argue M@r's point that you cannot believe in both evolution and god. I personally find it unlikely, but there is no proof to support or deny the thought that a god of some kind may have created the first lifeform, and then evolution took over from there.

[GarfieldJL]

Correct.

 

Evolution doesn't necessarily break down when considering how life began, as we do not yet know how life began (abiogenesis) in the first place. Two things, while somewhat related, are completely different fields. Evolution picks up after the first living thing appeared, and goes on till this moment.

 

So, I argue M@r's point that you cannot believe in both evolution and god. I personally find it unlikely, but there is no proof to support or deny the thought that a god of some kind may have created the first lifeform, and then evolution took over from there.

 

I think it's the end of the world because we actually agree for once.

[Agent_Katarn00]

I believe personally that it's justa matter of what you truly believe.I believe there is not an exact true answer.I believe how lif began is a mix of parts of a large amount of different theories.The only thing i believe in is that man weren't the first to walk the earth.I have no arguments whatsoever about any other beliefs.Again i think this is a subject of what religion or what you believe in.

[SkinWalker]

Regardless of what one believes in, there is an objective truth that exists. The question is are your beliefs informed by rational thought or cultural tradition? If cultural tradition and rational thought result in the same truth its all well and good, but with evolution vs. creationism, the results are rational thought vs. superstition.