Evolution vs. Creation Myths/other scientific theories

[Solbe M'ko]

Evolution makes sense right now, just as the soul being located in the skull made sense a long time ago. Very few theories have, or will hold up as our methods of observation improve, but for right now, we can accept it because it offers adequate explanation for our purposes, in my opinion.

 

It's important to keep in mind that most religions developed from "science".

 

"How come there are trees, daddy?"

"Well... um... because somebody put them there."

"Who?"

"God, I suppose."

 

Thats the kind of reasoning that most creation myths go by, because when they were being told, we didn't know about microbes and quasars. Conversely, our theory of evolution will seem very ignorant if we somehow found a way to observe God directly. I take the side of evolution, mostly because it makes more sense to my situation, but if someone says that supernatural forces designed the natural world, I will have a hard time convincing them otherwise.

[lukeskywalker1]

What from christianity came from science?

[Solbe M'ko]

Christianity came directly from science, the creation part at least.

 

Someone asked the question why, adn since he knew no better, said that God did it. All creation myths are like this, in fact, all myths period are like this, they explain something based not on fact, but on something else, I call it storytelling.

 

-Edit- You have to understand that most modern, western, monotheist religions come from the Hebrew faith, or at least borrow heavily from it. Creation myths were the best way of explaining things when sophisticated methods of observation didn't exist. For example, in Egypt, when it was too damn hot, the Sun god was busy, and so on...

[lukeskywalker1]

Yeah, thats what myths are. Heres the thing, how long did people think the earth was flat? hundreds of years right? And it got disproven, so the same thing could happen with evolution. Just figure this, it can never be "fully" proven, if it is at all, because no one was around to see any of it.

 

Strawman caricacture (client to the barber). The barber has a state issued license on the wall. One can collect hair samples from his floor. He can be observed in his natural state by independent observers. He can be captured on the video surveillance tape... etc., etc., etc.

 

You sort of missed the clients point....

The barber said God wasnt real because there were too many bad things happening, so if God was real there wouldnt be bad things. The man sees a guy with long hair, and says there are no barbers, because if there were there wouldnt be people with long hair like that, then the barber says he didnt come to get his hair cut, and the man says thats why bad things happen, because people dont turn to God. If you got that point, then you were just arguing needlessly.

 

 

 

 

If you were suspected of committing a crime, that would be a poor alibi. You would need a bit of evidence. Mulitple, independent witnesses, a receipt from the 7-11 where you purchased a 24 oz coffee, etc. The evidence against you would have to be in less preponderance than the evidence you provide for you alibi.

 

 

I wasnt talking about a crime, I just walked down the street, and lets say, some one doesnt beleive me because he didnt see me, does that mean that i didnt, just because i cant prove i went down the street? Its the same with God, just because you havnt seen him doesnt mean that hes not real does it? Ill discuss this further later, i have to go....

 

-lukeskywalker1

[Breton]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

You sort of missed the clients point....

The barber said God wasnt real because there were too many bad things happening, so if God was real there wouldnt be bad things. The man sees a guy with long hair, and says there are no barbers, because if there were there wouldnt be people with long hair like that, then the barber says he didnt come to get his hair cut, and the man says thats why bad things happen, because people dont turn to God. If you got that point, then you were just arguing needlessly.

 

Well, the barber's argument wasn't that good, really. But know that as long as we have no reason to think God excist, there is no point in assuming he does. I'll come back to that later in the post.

 

But on the other hand, you know as well as me that bad things also happens just as much to those who turn to God. That's like people going to a barber and their hair isn't being cut, wich proves that either the barber doesn't excist, or he does a pretty bad job.

 

Its the same with God, just because you havnt seen him doesnt mean that hes not real does it?

 

The universe was created last month, when a friend of mine sneezed it out.

 

Tell me one reason why christianity is more valid than this theory, and one reason why ichristianity should be more likely.

 

Yeah, thats what myths are. Heres the thing, how long did people think the earth was flat? hundreds of years right? And it got disproven, so the same thing could happen with evolution. Just figure this, it can never be "fully" proven, if it is at all, because no one was around to see any of it.

 

Let me remind you that the belief of the earth being flat was because people simply didn't know what shape it was, and therefore assumed it was flat. It's pretty much the same about religion: People don't really know how the universe was created, so they assumed someone had made it on 6 days, even though there is nothing that supports this, they simply only guess it was that that happened.

[lukeskywalker1]

1st off, in another thread somewhere, some one said about there being more than one god, let me clear that up

 

 

 

 

Isaiah (46:9)

 

Remember what happend long ago.

Remember that I am God, and there is no other God.

I am God, there is no one like me.

 

 

 

"belief" would be an inappropriate word. Hypothesis would be better.

 

k, well then, for christianity "religion" would be an inappropriate word. A relationship with Jesus Christ would be better.

 

ive dug up a lot of info, that will help prove that the bible is real.

lol, i was wrong, there is "science" in the bible. Look, no one can prove that some men didnt just sit down and say stuff. The old testimate is what? like 1000 years, i think..... the new testement, maybe 60-70. Lets just say it is true (i believe it is) then most of the men, could have never met each other right? Ok, so they made over 1000 prophecies, and they said God said it, and IT WILLl happen. Either, they really are men of God (after all a prophet has to get all of the thigns he says 100% true, or hes a false prophet) or they are insane, or just plain lyers. Lets face it, you know it as well as i do, the Bible is the best moral code there is, so if a bunch of lyers or insane men wrote it, theres something wrong........... Look at it, its design almost impossible for a group of insane or men that have never met, that lived thousands of years away from each other, could have figured out. I mean... this is weird, but i cant remember it exacly. ive read, the middle chapter of the bible is say 32, and the middle book is say 32, and the middle verse is say 32, (thats not the right number, im just saying though..... its something like that, which is almost impossible for any book, unless God had something to do with it.)

 

K, now for the science (this part isnt about the bible)

 

You say evolution is a mutation sort of.... right so when we, or any other species evolves, its because there is some sort of mutation in there DNA. But the problem is.... mutations take away from our DNA, they dont add, or enhance it! Blind people, Albinos, they have part of there DNA taken away. Diseases such as cancer, are mutations, so there for basically, the theory disproves itself.

 

The universe was created last month, when a friend of mine sneezed it out.

 

Tell me one reason why christianity is more valid than this theory, and one reason why ichristianity should be more likely.

 

 

LOL, i was here 2 months ago. dont have an answere why christianity isnt less likley than that, but heres where the science in the bible comes into it:

 

This will prove lots of stuff about things mentioned in this thread, and in others. It will pretty much prove the bible is real. I mean, look, what other religion has prophecies that are coming true???? huh??? what other book has scientific facts stated, be4 we could even figure them out?

 

One that comes to my mind is, the discovery of America, yeah sounds weird, huh? Actually, he figured there was land on the other side of the earth, and that it was round, because of the bible (yes the bible says its round, ill get to it in a min)

 

first off, the discovery of america

 

 

Isaiah (46:11)

 

I am calling a man from the east to carry

out my plan;

he will come like a hawk from a

country far away.

I will make what I have said come true;

I will do what I have planned.

 

Columbus was in Spain, or at least, he was in the east, and far away, from America. We consider Europe the east right? So theres your discovery of America, fortold in the bible. But of coarse i cant just leave it at that.

 

The fact that the earth is round, is also in Isaiah.

 

 

 

 

Isaiah (40:22)

 

God sits on his throne above the circle

of the earth,

and compared to him, people are like

grasshoppers.

He stretches out the skies like a peice of

cloth

and spreads them out like a tent to sit under.

 

i believe it said CIRCLE OF THE EARTH, ah, a circle is round, then the earth must be round! WOW!!!! Maybe, geeze, it was right under the scientists noses after all, i mean, people spend all of this time trying to figure things out, that have already been figured out. But then again, i dont know why people eventually changed there minds..... must of been a scientist trying to disprove the bible....

 

 

Almost infinite extent of the sidereal universe:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isaiah (55:9)

 

Just as the heavens are higher than the

earth,

so are my ways higher than your ways

and my thoughts higher than your

thoughts.

 

The heavens, is another word used for universe, which means, God said they are higher than earth, meaning that theres more than just earth.... and the heavens keep going past earth.

 

Evaporation:

 

 

 

Isaiah (55:10)

 

Rain and snow fall from the sky

and don't return without watering the

gound.

They cause plants to sprout and

grow,

making seeds for the farmer

and bread for the people.

 

 

 

You see the rain and snow came from the sky, so when it says return, it means, go back to the sky. Hmmm, makes lots of sense, but didnt the scientists say something like that too????? but theres more on this subject:

 

 

 

Ecclesiastes (1:7)

 

All the rivers flo to the sea,

but the sea never becomes full.

 

 

 

 

Law of conservation of mass and energy:

 

 

Peter 2 (3:7)

 

And that same word of God is keeping heaven and earth that we now have in order to be destroyed by fire. They are being kept for the Judgement Day and the destruction of all who are against God.

 

 

The stars:

 

Well, we already know the bible says you cant count the stars many times anyways, but if your interested

 

Jeremiah (33:22)

 

The importance of blood:

 

 

Leviticus (17:11)

 

 

This is because the life of the body is in the blood, and I have given you rules for pouring that blood on the alter to remove your sins so you will belong to the LORD. It is the blood that removes sins, because it is life.

 

Another thing proven by the bible.

 

 

whats this? theres more....

 

 

Circulation of the atmosphere:

 

 

Ecclesiastes (1:6)

 

The wind blows to the south;

it blows to the north.

It blows from one direction and then

another.

Then it turns around and repeats the

same pattern, going nowhere

 

 

 

and finally the gravitational feild:

 

Job (26:7)

 

God stretches the northern sky out over

empty space

and hangs the earth on nothing.

 

 

WOW, that was a lot......

 

-lukeskywalker1

[Solbe M'ko]

That doesn't prove or disprove divine intervention.

 

(Keep in mind that I have not actually read the Bible, so I'm going strictly by what you posted)

 

That whole America thing could have meant just about anything. It could have reffered to Ghengis Kahn or Marco Polo, or for that matter, anyone else who ever lived.

 

A long time ago people thought that the earth was flat, they never said it wasn't round, just that it wasn't spherical, so from what I read in that passage, a) it was translated inaccurately b) it was written like that, hence the author (yes, I said author) could have though the earth was flat.

 

The next passage makes no reference to an infinity, so I'll leave it at that.

 

Well, this next one is a grey area. It doesn't actually say that the water evaporates. That one is interesting.

 

The next one explains nothing, just makes an observation.

 

This next one I don't quite get. What is the context?

 

People knew that blood was necessary long before Christianity. People knew that they could bleed to death. I don't care to find a quote, but I'm sure there is one out there.

 

This next one is another observation. People could lick their fingers and hold them up a long time ago. They, being mostly farmers, could probably also observe certain atmospheric patterns during certain times of the year.

 

The gravity one is less than convincing. It says that the earth is held "up" by nothing, not that it is held up by gravity.

 

I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that these passages don't really prove anything. They make you think though, so I salute you.

 

-Edit- Oh, and, uh... all mutations are not negative. Blind albinos could do quite well in a place with no light. Mutation has benefits. People who live in places like Africa where there is lots of sunlight, don't get sunburns or skin cancer as much because of the pigmentation of their skin. This is, according to evolution, a mutation, and, because it did more good than harm, the trait became prevalent over time.

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

.. well then, for christianity "religion" would be an inappropriate word. A relationship with Jesus Christ would be better.

 

Ahh.... but I'm not so ethnocentric as to attempt to invalidate just christianity... I try to include all cults in that j/k

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Ok, so they made over 1000 prophecies, and they said God said it, and IT WILLl happen.

 

I'd like to see an example of any verifiable, prophetic claim that cannot be attributed to interpretation. (IBHTTVP) <--- a prophecy of my own....

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

You say evolution is a mutation sort of.... right so when we, or any other species evolves, its because there is some sort of mutation in there DNA. But the problem is.... mutations take away from our DNA, they dont add, or enhance it!

 

Poppycock. Take a class in biology that includes genetics (or at least pay closer attention if you are in one). You will see that deletion mutation (which you describe above) isn't the only type of mutation. You totally disregard point mutation, translocation mutation, and inversion mutation. In these mutations dna strands can not only lengthen (translocation), but remain the same length (point & inversion). The latter two, I gather, are the more common, but this is really not my area of expertise. In fact, I got a C+ in biology... but I paid that much attention....

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

... but heres where the science in the bible comes into it:

 

And if you are lazy like me and don't have time to read the bible, here's a link to a site that has, amazingly enough, the same information and more.... handy for cutting and pasting.

 

However...

 

In Genesis 1:16 it says something about god creating two lights... meaning the sun and the moon (even though the moon is only a reflection of the sun with it's light)... one to rule the day and one to rule the night. oh... and he created the stars (lights for his other experiments in creation?). But the moon spends half it's time on the daylight side... what a bad ruler it is. Okay... perhaps this is too early in the bible for any real science....

 

Deuteronomy 17:2-6 or 7... I forget. It makes a passage about killing all that don't believe in god or worship in other religions..... Deuteronomy is filled with hatred and killing, though... God sure got the science of homicide down pat... but maybe this is still too early on in the bible.

 

Joshua ... somewhere around chapter 10, god makes the sun and moon stand still so Josh can get on with the science of homicide before supper time.

 

In the second book of Sammuel (or was it the first?), David kills 20, 000 people in one day... Perhaps Pres. Bush will uncover his WMD's as Darth Rumsfeld digs up Iraq.

 

Are we to assume that 2 Kings 20:11 was any less sincere than the quotes you gave above? If so, then the Earth stood still... nay, it counter-rotated!

 

Job 39:13-16! Not only was science done poorly in biblical times, but they were poor observers as well (myopia probably hadn't been diagnosed by then). The account of ostriches is absolutely contrary to their nature... Job cites them as unfit parents, when they are actually very attentive parents to their eggs and young.

 

Finally, Revelations, Chapter 7 reveals that the Earth is flat with "four corners." (tounge firmly planted in cheek).

 

The bible is so general and open to interpretation it makes a "psychic's" cold read look complex by comparisson. Just as astrologers can give a reading that will fit anyone who is looking for answers, so, too, can many of the religious documents (the bible is but one of many).

 

Cheers!

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

You sort of missed the clients point....

 

Not only did I get the "client's" point, but I got yours as well. I said it was a Strawman argument because the client attempted to create a point that would be attacked in vain (this is essentially what this debate term means) by the barber. The story, by Divya Venkataraman, which you told to us (you really should have given Divya credit, btw) was also a strawman argument in itself. We are meant to attack is premise and thus avoid the real issue of evolution versus creation mythology.

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

If you got that point, then you were just arguing needlessly.

 

Which is the point of the Strawman Caricature... to get someone to argue needlessly.

 

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

I wasnt talking about a crime,....

 

I was attempting to show the value of physical evidence... not suggest you were a criminal.

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Its the same with God, just because you havnt seen him doesnt mean that hes not real does it?

 

When I joined the army in 1984, I remember, rather distinctly, that many of the recruits that I was in basic training with seemed to have a hotrod at home! (I know what you're thinking... what has this to do with god, etc.? Bear with me a minute...)

 

I came to the conclusion that, while a certain number of these soldiers actually did have hotrods, many only claimed to in order to be accepted or to attain status... I merely nodded and grinned as one would go on about it's supercharger or blower or tires, etc.

 

But let me tell you: I have a hotrod in my garage.

"Let's see it," you ask!

"Oh, I'll open the garage, but you can't see it.. it's invisible."

"Ahh.... well I'll throw some talcum powder on the driveway and you can drive across it so I can see how wide your tire treads are."

I say, "that won't work.. you see this hotrod is invisible and it floats on air."

"So start it up! I'll listen to the engine purr."

"Sorry," I add, "it doesn't make a sound at all."

"So I'll just throw this talcum powder on it and we'll see it's outline where the powder rests."

"Nope. Won't work," I suggest... this hotrod is incorporeal and the powder would just fall through to the floor, above which it floats."

 

So for every test of evidence you devise, I merely add a new rule... you will never be able to prove I don't have a hotrod. Hell, I'll even create a bill of sale so you can see written evidence... but this evidence cannot be verified... even the notarization could have be forged or a notary's press "borrowed."

 

Now... by using the bounded rules of science, the evidence is against the existance of my hotrod, even though there is a chance, albeit a slim one, that there are as yet unknown rules of physics and chemistry that might apply.

 

To be fair, I borrowed that analogy from Carl Sagan, who had a Dragon in his garage... not a hotrod.

[lukeskywalker1]

Oh, i got that barber story in an email, and i was going to write about a docter, but it was easir to cut and paste it.

 

But let me tell you: I have a hotrod in my garage.

"Let's see it," you ask!

"Oh, I'll open the garage, but you can't see it.. it's invisible."

"Ahh.... well I'll throw some talcum powder on the driveway and you can drive across it so I can see how wide your tire treads are."

I say, "that won't work.. you see this hotrod is invisible and it floats on air."

"So start it up! I'll listen to the engine purr."

"Sorry," I add, "it doesn't make a sound at all."

"So I'll just throw this talcum powder on it and we'll see it's outline where the powder rests."

"Nope. Won't work," I suggest... this hotrod is incorporeal and the powder would just fall through to the floor, above which it floats."

 

So for every test of evidence you devise, I merely add a new rule... you will never be able to prove I don't have a hotrod. Hell, I'll even create a bill of sale so you can see written evidence... but this evidence cannot be verified... even the notarization could have be forged or a notary's press "borrowed."

 

Now... by using the bounded rules of science, the evidence is against the existance of my hotrod, even though there is a chance, albeit a slim one, that there are as yet unknown rules of physics and chemistry that might apply.

 

To be fair, I borrowed that analogy from Carl Sagan, who had a Dragon in his garage... not a hotrod.

 

 

 

Hmmm, but God doesnt keep on making stuff up to why you cant see him. You have never seen outer space with your own eyes (or you could have, but lets say you havnt) but you still know and believe its there right? its the same with christians (true christians) they can feel God, its something you would have to go through yourself to really understand.

 

(IBHTTVP) <--- a prophecy of my own....

 

Whats the prophecy? (i guess im slow...)

 

 

 

Poppycock. Take a class in biology that includes genetics (or at least pay closer attention if you are in one).

 

I have biology next semester...

 

I'd like to see an example of any verifiable, prophetic claim that cannot be attributed to interpretation.

 

It doesnt have to say that IT WILL HAPPEN, just when you make a prophecy, it has to come true, or its not real, right? And of course, why make just make something up and make yourself look like a fool?

 

Well, this next one is a grey area. It doesn't actually say that the water evaporates. That one is interesting.

 

I see your point, but its implyed.

 

-Edit- Oh, and, uh... all mutations are not negative. Blind albinos could do quite well in a place with no light. Mutation has benefits. People who live in places like Africa where there is lots of sunlight, don't get sunburns or skin cancer as much because of the pigmentation of their skin. This is, according to evolution, a mutation, and, because it did more good than harm, the trait became prevalent over time.

 

Hmm, thats true. I read somewhere, on some site... about the single celled organisms. Wasnt it an ameba, or however you spell it. So if we evolved form that, then why do they attack us?

 

 

 

And if you are lazy like me and don't have time to read the bible,

 

I try and make time to read the bible.

 

In the second book of Sammuel (or was it the first?), David kills 20, 000 people in one day... Perhaps Pres. Bush will uncover his WMD's as Darth Rumsfeld digs up Iraq.

 

Im not sure if your saying it could, or couldnt happen, but even though, if a man had God's help, its possible. And also, it would depend on the method he used to kill the men, say he used a catipalt, that could take out some men....

 

 

 

 

That whole America thing could have meant just about anything. It could have reffered to Ghengis Kahn or Marco Polo, or for that matter, anyone else who ever lived.

 

A long time ago people thought that the earth was flat, they never said it wasn't round, just that it wasn't spherical, so from what I read in that passage, a) it was translated inaccurately b) it was written like that, hence the author (yes, I said author) could have though the earth was flat.

 

Yeah, i could have meany anyone, but still, im pretty sure this was said somewhere in Israel, so the only place east of Israel is Asia, so that narrows it down sort of.... but east of north america is Europe, where columbus was.

 

About the flat thing, yeah, they could have thought it was flat, but modern geometry didnt exist back then, did it? im not sure? so i doubt they used the word sphere, and either way, no matter which way you look at a sphere, it looks like a circle, right? Each side, top or bottom, at every angle looks like a circle just like earth.

 

 

 

Are we to assume that 2 Kings 20:11 was any less sincere than the quotes you gave above? If so, then the Earth stood still... nay, it counter-rotated!

 

All i can say is, all things are possible through God. man, even Christ said, if you have as much faith as the size of a mustard seed, you could move a mountain.

 

 

 

 

The next passage makes no reference to an infinity, so I'll leave it at that.

 

Yeah, but the universe doesnt go on forever.

 

This next one I don't quite get. What is the context?

 

I got it from some site, i dont get it... there was also another one i left out, i really didnt get:

(of course i looked up every verse in my own bible, just to make sure, except this one):

 

Law of increasing entropy (Psalm 102:25-27)

I dont have a clue what that is.... but its there, i guess

 

 

 

 

 

 

People knew that blood was necessary long before Christianity. People knew that they could bleed to death. I don't care to find a quote, but I'm sure there is one out there.

 

 

that was written be4 Christianity.... in fact that was written like over 4000 years ago....

 

 

 

 

Finally, Revelations, Chapter 7 reveals that the Earth is flat with "four corners." (tounge firmly planted in cheek).

 

That was answered earlier in the thread, but anyways its a prophecy of the future, and it doesnt say flat it syas angels will go to the 4 corners of the earth. but also it was a vision john was having, and even right now, very slowly those prophecies are coming true.

 

Perhaps Pres. Bush will uncover his WMD's as Darth Rumsfeld digs up Iraq.

 

yeah, uhh... i dont know what happend there.....

 

 

but ive been thinking, for The Revelation to take place, the antichrist must basically take over the world. What dictater (Im taliing about suddam and others) would give up there throne? but if they were already overthrown, there would be no opposition, then the currencies are starting to become one, and even the language, english is now the world's business language, just about everyone knows english. All there needs is for the world to unite into one huge organization (the UN possibly?) and then for some awful tragedy, that effects most of the world to take place (rapture possibly??) then they need one man, to make peace treaties, and do some work, things like that, and hes on top of the world just about.... of coarse, none of this has happend yet, so we will just have to wait and see, and it might not happen like this, its my prediction, based on what the bible says.

 

not to mention, the bible says the end will be in babylon, which, suddamm was rebuilding, k, so hes out of power, some one else could finish the job, hes already invested billions of dollars to build it up.

 

then we need the temple of God to be rebuilt, so the antichrist can go in, and say hes god. Theres a group somewhere raising money to rebuild it.... dont think they have started yet though....

its prophecies like these, that if they come true, will prove the bible true right? if this happens, it will be hard to argue then wont it?

 

-lukeskywalker1

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Hmmm, but God doesnt keep on making stuff up to why you cant see him. ....

 

.... Im not sure if your saying it could, or couldnt happen, but even though, if a man had God's help, its possible.

 

.... All i can say is, all things are possible through God.

 

And that is one of my two main points.... That was the point with the hotrod story. "All things are possible with god." Meaning god is an unbounded idea. Whereas science is bounded. Theories in science must follow strict rules. Whenever religion can't answer a question, the reply is usually something along the lines of "it was god's will." Total poppycock for educated people... acceptable for a primative culture that has limited educational systems, however.

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Whats the prophecy? (i guess im slow...)

 

I was challenging you to describe a prophecy in the bible that has been considered fullfilled. There are several from the perspective of those that "believe," but none, in the opinion of many skeptics is valid or verifiable and all are open to interpretation. My "prophecy" is about the one I think you, or someone reading this will choose. I'll reveal it if someone suggests a fullfilled prophecy or two.

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Yeah, but the universe doesnt go on forever.

 

Why wouldn't it?

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Law of increasing entropy (Psalm 102:25-27)

I dont have a clue what that is.... but its there, i guess

 

My second point exactly. Not to come off as rude, but it would benefit your side of the argument to educate yourself in science. Then your arguments about why scientific explanations for our universe (local or as a whole) aren't as valid as christian. The same applies to those of other faiths that might be lurking this thread.

 

Actually, I'd like to hear what other faiths have to say about creation/evolution. One of the leading christian denominations, catholism, accepts the tenents of evolution. The pope made a statement years ago to that effect. Its fundamentalist christian groups who reject the idea.

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

... its prophecies like these, that if they come true, will prove the bible true right?

 

Doubtful... people have been claiming that Nostrodamus' claims have been coming true for hundreds of years.... same with revelations. In fact, there was a student who created a prophecy in the style of Nostrodamus and put it on the web as his "lost" prophecy and people bought it -hook, line and sinker. In fact, it was attributed to 9/11 as well as other events. You see, the "prophecies" are so vague as to be interpreted many, many ways to mean many things.

[lukeskywalker1]

And that is one of my two main points.... That was the point with the hotrod story. "All things are possible with god." Meaning god is an unbounded idea. Whereas science is bounded. Theories in science must follow strict rules. Whenever religion can't answer a question, the reply is usually something along the lines of "it was god's will." Total poppycock for educated people... acceptable for a primative culture that has limited educational systems, however.

 

True, ill think of something about this though.

 

 

I was challenging you to describe a prophecy in the bible that has been considered fullfilled. There are several from the perspective of those that "believe," but none, in the opinion of many skeptics is valid or verifiable and all are open to interpretation. My "prophecy" is about the one I think you, or someone reading this will choose. I'll reveal it if someone suggests a fullfilled prophecy or two.

 

ok, ok, heres 60 of em: (yeah, 60, and you only wanted 1 or 2...)

 

http://www.fehq.org/public/prophecy.htm

 

And ill find more hopefully as the day progresses, but i think you have read this link b4....

 

 

 

My second point exactly. Not to come off as rude, but it would benefit your side of the argument to educate yourself in science. Then your arguments about why scientific explanations for our universe (local or as a whole) aren't as valid as christian. The same applies to those of other faiths that might be lurking this thread.

 

Im just finishing up Earth Science, i have B or A average on a 6 point grading scale, although the teachers do comment on how i dont listen in any of there classes, mainly science and math, i play around and talk to people in science, and sleep in math.

 

Doubtful... people have been claiming that Nostrodamus' claims have been coming true for hundreds of years.... same with revelations. In fact, there was a student who created a prophecy in the style of Nostrodamus and put it on the web as his "lost" prophecy and people bought it -hook, line and sinker. In fact, it was attributed to 9/11 as well as other events. You see, the "prophecies" are so vague as to be interpreted many, many ways to mean many things.

 

i have no doubt 9-11 is in the bible....

 

 

 

about the big bang, i thought this up:

 

it started with one single atom right? with some fission and big explosions all of this appeared over time....

 

but heres what i dont get, theres a law somewhere, that says matter cannot be created or destroyed, but then how did one atom, become a universe..... which is at least 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

bigger than that atom??

 

 

-lukeskywalker1

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

.. although the teachers do comment on how i dont listen in any of there classes, mainly science and math, i play around and talk to people in science, and sleep in math.

 

It's showing

 

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

i have no doubt 9-11 is in the bible....

 

Not possible... but feel free to look it up and share with us.

 

 

 

about the big bang, i thought this up:

 

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

it started with one single atom right?

 

Doubtful.

 

Don't misunderstand what some of us are saying here..... science cannot, and likely will not, be able to explain everything. New understandings create new questions, and so forth. That's the nature of science. Still, it is better than simply assigning an unproven, supernatural causation.

[lukeskywalker1]

Ever heard of the bible code?

 

http://www.grapho.net/codes/slide17.html#Eng

 

 

i dont know how true it is, nor do i know a lot about it, but hey if its true....

 

its some kind of mathmatical equation in the bible, something to do with the verses, or the number of letters... but anyways, theres the link, ill do more research later, gtg to church.

 

-lukeskywalker1

[ShadowTemplar]

No, I do not believe in Evolution, because I see no need to believe in fact.

 

Why wouldn't it?

 

It would not if the universe had less than a certain critical mass. However, it seems that it is pretty much exactly at the critical mass (you fiddle a little with the numbers on the right, fiddle with the numbers on the left, insert a Cosmic Constant, and they come out zero: That means that we can do Math with i, which in turn means that we are happy). Since we're so close to the critical mass, it is hard to determine wether we are above, below, or on target. Still, however, it might not be a one-shot affair: We could be living in an oscilliating universe, which would cycle in a Big Bang->Big Crunch->Big Bang-> -cycle forever. It is, however, not as yet acertained which of the aforementioned three scenarioes is correct (maybe they all are - in a wierd quantum-mechanical sense).

 

Asking, however, what came before/will come after the Universe is without meaning. When you measure, you basically ask the Universe a question. So asking what came before/will come after is like asking what you remember from before you were born/will remember after you die.

 

Hope that made sense, I'm a little tired.

 

Sincerely, ShadowTemplar - Templar of No God, Champion of No Cause

[lukeskywalker1]

well anyways, i did some research and heres what i found.

 

 

http://www.csicop.org/si/9711/bible-code.html

 

http://www.biblecodedigest.com/

 

http://www.biblecodedigest.com/page.php/9

 

its worth just taking a look at, even if you dont believe, its interesting.

 

-lukeskywalker1

[ShadowTemplar]

31:28 And hast not suffered me to kiss my sons and my daughters? thou hast now done foolishly in so doing.

 

If you start at the R in "daughters," and skip over three letters to the O in "thou," and three more to the S in "hast," and so on, the hidden message "Roswell" is revealed! This message has a step value of 4, as shown in Figure 1.

 

When Drosnin finds a name or word match for a given step value n, he then rearranges the letters into a huge matrix

 

All of these are arbitrarily chosen, which means that any random order of letters, no matter how much gibberish it is, will yield some result if this method is applied to it.

 

BS, that's what I call it.

 

ShadowTemplar - Templar of No God, Champion of No Cause

[SkinWalker]

A better explanation of the bible code fallacy is at this website.

 

But you must understand, that your willingness to "believe" in superstitious things such as this says something. Drosnin was interested in selling books and making a dollar. Not in revealing anything new about god or religion.

 

Skepticism doesn not come at near as high a price as fallibility.

[Homuncul]

Wow... I've been off for a few days and I thought this debate was over but it seems that both camps are in fire again. Evolutionists keep answering the same questions and creationists still stick with their divine arguments.

 

I only wanted to give argument on what shot deeply in to my artificial soul and resonated with whole spectrum of emotion. I only apologize here for not naming the originators of a quote

 

You guys say, that some people could have just wrote stuff down. It goes both ways, how do you know some scientists dont just make stuff up? You dont. They are human, and can also lie. Just like gravity and things like that on other planets, how do they know? No one has been there. They could just make up numbers, couldnt they. What makes them so believable?

 

So what makes it so believable is it's explanation. For some reason the explanation of life through evolution is accepted because of this:

1. Evolution discribed more and necessarily deeper than any other theory before it

2. Evolution leaves fewer unexplained things than bible or Aristotle's animated life does

3. Evolution survives criticism (and not just criticism with logic) while bible does not by any means

4. And not the last argument. Evolution (today version of it) describes our REALITY with great dependency on all consistent, competent and nonquestionable theories humanity have developed through it's existence.

 

Thats the kind of reasoning that most creation myths go by, because when they were being told, we didn't know about microbes and quasars. Conversely, our theory of evolution will seem very ignorant if we somehow found a way to observe God directly. I take the side of evolution, mostly because it makes more sense to my situation, but if someone says that supernatural forces designed the natural world, I will have a hard time convincing them otherwise.

 

Arthur C. Clarke said: "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". This can work both ways. Furthermore I can replace magic with divine (if it's really needed).

 

If we would've find some supernatural anomaly as biblical god we would search an explanation for it. The common questions for it would be why didn't we see it before?. why laws of physics doesn't discribe it?. Why laws that bible theory prepose contradict with laws of physics? why our most competent theories describe our reality with such autonomity and complexity and they predict with such an accuracy some things and can't resolve the problem of god anomaly? Why laws of physics don't need biblical god? Can we measure god with methods we possess? If we made a mistake than does bible discribes our reality with god better than our theories did? Why bible explanations is full of so many unexplained things and maybe we should try to explain them? Do we still have right than to call anything rational instead of faithfully and trust everything god says through it's prophets? Why were we so mistaken before? Do in the end fundamental laws fail before god anomaly?

This simple criticism of an idea through many leads will lead to a simple conclution: that as god anomaly exists but we see that none of the fundamental laws of universe fails if not "kicked back" by god anomaly iself (something like magic or miracles) then we must leave both bible and today science for better understanding and it's inevitable that biblical conception of god would be unsatisfactory and too simple which would probably lead to an all new theory of god/physics universe that would discribe better.

 

But it's all fiction. None of our scientific theories yet needed god and explained better with god than without one. Then many devoted scientists still look for observing God but it looks like none of our scientific methods gives us such opportunity and as for now our fundamental theories (evolution) don't need god and and all of it's rivals are criticised and theory itself survived criticism, then for the present moment we MUST consider evolution to be REAL while god anomaly would only create unadequate complication to what we have. Is this still so hard to believe.

 

In the End of the Universe (cauze I know my words are stil no argument) I would very much like that people hear a prey of a poor dispair Homuncul and try to read at least these books not to stay ignorant to the world we live and die in:

 

1. Dummies guide to biolody, evolution, genetics, religion, esotery, metaphysics, quantum theory, epistemology, phylosophy or anything of that kind

2. Darwin all works

3. Richard Dawkins "The Selfish Gene", "Blind Watchmaker"

4. David Deutsch's "Fabric of reality" and not for the sake of multiverse , just something to correct your world view and help you solve your debate problems

5. Karl Popper, all works you can find. Extremely necessary. It's about epistemology

6. Frank Tipler "The anthropic cosmological principle", "Physics of Immortality"!!! Just cool

7. Hawking, all works

8. Umberto Eco "Il Pendolo di Foucault". It's a bit large and heavy, but it contains everything an average user of esotery must know. + it's a facinating story

That's for the start... the list is endless as is our knowledge...

 

 

P.S. I'm in love with esoteric sciences and it's almost divine knowledge to me. The Bible code is just small portion of what you can get when start esotery. And it's so hypnotic that at some point i felt I could not perceive anything without numbers of Tritemi and sacred words of Kabbalah. And everything is so Hermetic

[lukeskywalker1]

Originally posted by SkinWalker

A better explanation of the bible code fallacy is at this website.

 

But you must understand, that your willingness to "believe" in superstitious things such as this says something. Drosnin was interested in selling books and making a dollar. Not in revealing anything new about god or religion.

 

Skepticism doesn not come at near as high a price as fallibility.

 

 

I didnt say i believed it.

 

 

All of these are arbitrarily chosen, which means that any random order of letters, no matter how much gibberish it is, will yield some result if this method is applied to it.

 

 

 

You dont seem to get it, they didnt just pick letters, its a pattern, like every 5 letters, say theres a book, and you go through and take every 5th letter, and it makes a word. now as to how true the bible code is, i dont know.

 

If your going to randomly pick letters, i could do that with the sentence I just wrote.

 

EX:

 

men

me

stupid

those are all words, with letter randomly chosen out of my sentence.

 

now ill skip 2 letters (because im in school, and really bored... and dont have anything else to do....)

 

IOGNONMPKTRCLOAITSTCISRE k, if i misscounted, its because i rushed....and after reviewing that, theres nothing that resembles a word, ill keep going with 3 letters

 

IUIODYKTILTWTSEITT

 

4:

 

 

IRTDPESLHTSNUO

 

still nothing.... ill try it with my bible when i get home, and c what happens....

 

 

but then again, i guess it would depend on the version you are using, the NCV, and the NIV have different words than the KJV, same meaning, just in normal english, like we write (just so you know what im talking about since some of you dont read it)

 

-lukeskywalker1

[SkinWalker]

Here's a link to a story about three 160,000 year-old skulls found that support the Out-of-Africa theory of human evolution.

 

"The fossilized skulls of two adults and one child discovered in the Afar region of eastern Ethiopia have been dated at 160,000 years, making them the oldest known fossils of modern humans, or Homo sapiens. "

 

Also unearthed were bone fragments of other, similar, hominids, over 600 stone tools, and hippopotamus bones with tool marks: all from the same geologic strata, which clearly indicates that they're from the same era.

 

One of the scientists involved stated that the Out of Africa hypothesis is now tested, proving that we did not evolve from Neandertals, which merely went extinct. This also provides a more intermediate find between pre-humans and modern humans. Pre-human species have been located that dated back to 300, 000 years and the oldest modern human find was, until now, 100,000 years.

 

Clearly, the Earth is a bit older than 8, 000 to 10, 000 years.

[SkinWalker]

Michael Drosnin, who wrote The Bible Code, has a new book out called, not surprisingly, the Bible Code II.

 

The problem with both books is that they're bunk.

 

The process relies on pure random chance to predict events....which include assassinations of Sadat, Rabin, and Kennedy as well as events such as the Holocaust, Watergate, and Hiroshima. The first book predicted the end of the world in 2000, so I suppose he's able to print Bible Code II since the publishing industry survived this armegedden.

 

In the new version, Drosnin predicts the WTC disaster, the Bush-Gore election conflict and the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The main problem with all of his predictions is that he made them after they already happened, claiming that they were there in the bible all along. The only predictions that he made before they happened, never came to pass, such as the end of the world in 2000.

 

A Danish physicist named Niels Bohr disputed Drosnin's work (as did other skeptics) and Drosnin replied with, "When my critics find a message about the assassination of a prime minister encrypted in Moby Dick, I'll believe them." So that's what Brenden McKay , an Australian mathematician did. and was able to predict the assassinations of Ghandi, Rabin, Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, Jr. among others.

 

An American physicist, David E. Thomas, discovered the phrase, "the Bible code is a silly, dumb, fake, false, evil, nasty, dismal fraud and snake-oil hoax" within the excerpt of the Bible Code II found on Amazon.com by applying a little math.

 

While being interviewed on CrossFire on CNN , Drosnin stated "Let me start by telling you I'm only a reporter. I didn't figure it all out. A very famous mathematician in Israel is the man who discovered the Bible code. I'm only the reporter who is telling his story and who is using the code that he created to see what is predicted. And it is indeed very frightening."

 

Yep... very profitable too. That quote is about two-thirds down the transcript if you care to click the link. Just search for "Drosnin." Drosnin defends his work (or I should say this "very famous mathemetician's" work) without much convincing testimony.

 

Cheers. :cool:

[Psydan]

Ok, just to add my 2 cents to the growing pile of change (which we still can't use to buy anything useful) has anyone here read "Darwin on trial" by Phillip E. Johnson? well, in it are very good arguments against "evolution" as people refer to the modern scientific theory of how we came to be at this stage of "advancement". So though you can fling mud at the "Christian" theory of Creation, your theory of "evolution" is already very very grimy.

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by Psydan

... has anyone here read "Darwin on trial" by Phillip E. Johnson? well, in it are very good arguments against "evolution" as people refer to the modern scientific theory of how we came to be at this stage of "advancement".

 

Never read it. But please, feel free to provide us with examples that we might discuss.

[TheWhiteRaider]

Well I see this is still goiong on even though I have been away from this forum for who know how long.

 

Something I have found for all you Neo-Darwinist (People who believe that Evolution came about by mutations) Have any of you heard of the 1980 Evolution Conference held in Chicago? That is when 150 of the top evolutionist from all over the world got together to hear about the evidence against evolution. The outcome of this was that over 65% said,

 

"...that the neo-Darwinian mechanism could no longer be regarded as scientifically valid or tenable..."

 

Newsweek (November 3, 1980)

 

So while it does not disprove Evolution completely it does say that the popular view of evolution is not upheld by the P.H.D. guys.

 

I got a site for you guys to check out. It isn't the best, but it does have some useful info. You might have alot of reading to do though(About 1000 pages worth) I gets better in some of the later chapters.

 

http://www.evolution-facts.org/c01a.htm