lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar
View Poll Results: Do you believe in evolution?
"Yes." 15 50.00%
"Yes, but I believe divine intervention was involved" (ie. that God set off the Big Bang, or created Earth for life to evolve on it) 9 30.00%
"No. The Bible is the word of God and thus is true." 5 16.67%
"No, I don't believe in evolution, but neither do I believe in divine creation. I think something else happened." 1 3.33%
Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll


Thread: Evolution vs. Creation Myths/other scientific theories
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 05-25-2003, 07:21 PM   #41
Cosmos Jack
 
Cosmos Jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: In Europe.
Posts: 678
lol


-QUOTE------
Every cock fights best on his own dunghill.
Cosmos Jack is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-30-2003, 05:58 AM   #42
Homuncul
 
Homuncul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Russia
Posts: 383
Criteria for reality

I'd like to talk about subject that has a connection to evolution/creation conflict which I think is worth to mention. That's why I 've posted it here instead of starting a new thread.

Let's think about creationists first. While my thoughts may appear offensive I didn't mean to offend (or I did but that's not the point.)
I can understand why they by any means can't adopt evolution (faith is not to be questioned by logic) but what I can't get is why they don't want to understand it.

I think nowadays creationists are inconsistently dependent on theory of evolution. The most obvious evidence for that is that holy church has to accept some of its positions and I want to make some thought about that.

The common thought of creationist (but some even would not admit it) is: "World was created 6 thousand years ago but from the place where we're now it looks like millions of years of evolution took place". This point of view is futile and I can guess why and then lead to another thing I really ment to talk about

Any theory is basicly about questions what?, how? and then why? Also any theory is a problem solving process. And there was a problem in science before evolution was introduced - some unsuspected things that science could not answer what they are and why they are. At some point a new explanation for it appeared in opposition to a main theory of that time (divine): a theory of evolution through natural selection which explained why do we see these dinosaur fossils and how a single cell has evolved into us and many other major things. And church felt that somehow it needs to defend itself from a looking-like-better-explanious-theory of evolution. That's when it takes its fatal posittion. So the question with creationism and evolutionism is not merely barried by faith but also by the question what explanation is more satisfactory and better discribes reality at present moment. Creationism explains why world looks like evolution took place through god but it doesn't explain why god would want to do that in any way. The main point here is that creationism introduces itself through another theory and this is it's fatal weakness, it fails to solve the problem it was supposed to solve. It can not explain things now without using the complexity of evolution theory. And as I can see now it's just excessively complex to be taken as adequate by common sense which church accepts. In that manner faith barrier becomes nothing more than a justification and really it has nothing to do with not accepting logic (logic here I think is irrelevant).

The subject I wanted to discuss is hidden in the words "present moment". I guess creationists problem is also in their overwhelming perfectionism. It's like they long for something that can't yet get any explanation from. They try to jump over their heads.
Our explanations change from time (like Newtonian gravity was replaced by general relativity) and so change the criteria for what to consider real improving our understanding of it. If that is our main goal then we must find satisfactory to classify some things as real and others as illusory or imaginative? On the other hand as we do consider Newtonian gravity to be illusory we still use it sometimes not to waste time for example when high accuracy of predictions is not important.

Real is merely a word to discribe our external surroundings and not the matter of whether it exist at all like in solipsism theory. After all it's a theory that doesn't explain better than others do that's why it is abandoned. If it was otherwise it would probably overwhelm all others. That's why I prepose to consider evolution real and creation illusory and imaginary for now (but I prefer to think it to be for a very long time til a better explanation of god comes).

Maybe then I'm too hard on the creationism so I'd like to aologize and speak about evolution. At present moment I think there're some correctives to make there (or I'm wrong).

The overwhelming understanding among scientists about evolution now is this: We have one biological language on earth that apparently every lifeform speaks. We can see it's alphabet in so called genetic adapters. But there could exist many other languages at the dawn of life. The main point of evolution was that the fittest overwhelmed the others and so it's the most adequate and maybe I can even assert why these theories about aliens looking morhically alike us in every part of our universe appeared. But it looks like this position now is abandoning. The main purpose of a cell: consume and multiply. And late researches tell us that actually any language and not the fittest one could survive but the one which accidentally outnumbered and consumed all the others and that evolution bagan not with natural selection but by natural election. What do you think about that?
Homuncul is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-03-2003, 10:10 PM   #43
Solbe M'ko
 
Solbe M'ko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Igloo in Canada, eh?
Posts: 510
I'm sorry I don't have time to read every post in this thread.


I think that evolution is perfectly plausible, given the information we have right now. However, religion gives us some great clues as to our past. Many religions make reference to floods and many make reference to regular people being communicated with by things that are not explained by any scientific theory. I think of most religions as a type of science/history that developed to explain things that couldn't be explained otherwise.

I, for one, don't accept arguments that are made by people about, say, the Bible, who didn't learn of the Bible on their own. If you go to church every week since your childhood and someone tells you that God created everything, you won't learn to question it. If you don't compare theories, you will never be able to grow out of what you believe to be "fact" (whatever that is).
I recommend that you read "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking, no matter what your belief system. I also recommend "Chariots of the Gods", although you really should be critical of some of the evidence in that one...

And yes, predictions only eliminate possibilities, they don't make definitive conclusions. We can't do that until we understand every possible outcome, which, as we have seen with things like evolution, are far beyond human capacity, and therefore considered "endless" in number.
Solbe M'ko is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-04-2003, 04:16 AM   #44
Homuncul
 
Homuncul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Russia
Posts: 383
Quote:
I recommend that you read "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking, no matter what your belief system. I also recommend "Chariots of the Gods", although you really should be critical of some of the evidence in that one...
I read them already a long time ago. Maube you mean I must reread them. Perhaps I'll do but it doesn't change my opinion about evolution as I had nothing rather then these mass culture, pop books to compare with the ideas I picked up in other books.


Quote:
And yes, predictions only eliminate possibilities, they don't make definitive conclusions. We can't do that until we understand every possible outcome, which, as we have seen with things like evolution, are far beyond human capacity, and therefore considered "endless" in number.
Not necessarily we need every possible outcome to be justified with prediction to say evolution is right. It's a instrumentalistic thought which I always try to fight with. We don't need to know and understand every possible outcome and observe it factual truth through prediction. Although I do not like the word, we have to extrapolate intentively explanation of a theory on all of it's possible predictions. Of course there may be mistakes, than a theory is abandoned. But sometimes even the most competent theories give us a pig. Sometimes we get right predictions from a wrong theory (for a not very long time).

Of course we may want to make predictions to see a theory is proven, to make a research and the capacity of that theory but these are all finite numbers. And we're finite and work by finite means.
Homuncul is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-04-2003, 04:42 AM   #45
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by Solbe M'ko
I also recommend "Chariots of the Gods", although you really should be critical of some of the evidence in that one...
... because that one is utter rubbish. I read Von Daniken when I was a mere child and, unfortunately, very immpressionable. I actually bought into his nonsense about UFO's and, if I recall, that Earth once orbited the Sun in 288 days as recorded by some ancient civilization. Kepler's third law was fortunate enough to enlighten me, since it dictates that for this to be possible, the Earth would have to have been much closer to the Sun... around the vicinity of Venus.

A better choice for you would be A Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan. I consider this to be my bible, and it sets a very sensible foundation for anyone interested in expressing their intellect or examining the intellect of others.

Homuncul, I've got your book about three down this list I've some other ideas to slide past you, perhaps in this thread or maybe I'll dig up the "parallel universes" thread.... keep looking.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-04-2003, 07:32 AM   #46
Homuncul
 
Homuncul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Russia
Posts: 383
Quote:
Homuncul, I've got your book about three down this list I've some other ideas to slide past you, perhaps in this thread or maybe I'll dig up the "parallel universes" thread.... keep looking.
I'd like to call it "my" but unfortunately these are not at all my ideas I always annoy people about. I make a mixture of what I prefer and I always welcome healthy criticism as it is also a problem solving component of a theory development process. And it's really encouraging me that people try to think differently and even question their world view. Thanks Skin

About "some other ideas"... I'm looking
Homuncul is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-06-2003, 03:23 PM   #47
Wanderer
 
Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 303
Exactly the the second point goes for me. Evolution with divine influence.
Look at all what is on earth...humans...animals...trees....
See how they develop...that there are rules for evolution...rules for having children (natural rules I mean).
Look at all this...
And then tell me this all is caused by random and we are the only people in the wide wide universe.
My point-> everything is made of divine energy in the end.
Evolution is real....that what science find out how life and things are developing needn't to interfere with the believing of divine influence....in my opinion both go hand in hand.
Wanderer is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-06-2003, 07:28 PM   #48
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
Sorry i havnt posted in a while, ive been busy.


A man went to a barber shop to have his hair and his beard cut as always. He started to have a good conversation with the barber who attended him. They talked about so many things and various subjects. Suddenly, they touched the subject of God. The barber said: "Look man, I don't believe that God exists as you say."

"Why do you say that?" asked the client.

"Well, it's so easy, you just have to go out in the street to realize that God does not exist. Oh, tell me, if God existed, would there be so many sick people? Would there be abandoned children? If God existed, there would be no suffering nor pain. I can't think of loving a God who permits all of these things."

The client stopped for a moment thinking, but he didn't want to respond so as to cause an argument. The barber finished his job and the client went out of the shop. Just after he left the barber shop he saw a man in the street with a long hair and beard (it seems that it had been a long time since he had his cut and he looked so untidy).

Then the client again entered the barber shop and he said to the barber:
"You know what? Barbers do not exist."

"How can you say they don't exist?" asked the barber. "Well, I am here and I am a barber."
"No!" the client exclaimed. "They don't exist because if they did there would be no people with long hair and beard like that man who walks in the street."


"Ah, barbers do exist, what happens is that people do not come to me."

"Exactly!"- affirmed the client. "That's the point. God does exist. What happens is people don't go to Him and do not look for Him. That's why there's so much pain and suffering in the world."



K, lets say I walked down the street yesterday, no one saw me. Theres no proof that I was there or not. Does that mean it didnt happen, just cause I cant prove I walked down the street?



BTW, i wasnt talking about leap year when i posted about a missing day, it was something else.... I read it at church, maybe I can find a link somewhere.


Quote:
I, for one, don't accept arguments that are made by people about, say, the Bible, who didn't learn of the Bible on their own. If you go to church every week since your childhood and someone tells you that God created everything, you won't learn to question it. If you don't compare theories, you will never be able to grow out of what you believe to be "fact" (whatever that is).

Didnt grow up in a church. Ive only been going to church for 2 years. And anyways, how much of the bible is taught in a normal public school? We are not told anything about it, only about evolution. In all my books, if they mention something about christianity, they leave stuff out, mainly the basis for christianity, that Jesus died, and rose again so we could be forgiven. So if you dont have any knowledge of christianity, even in school, your not told the "whole story" about it, basically, we are only given 1 belief, which is evolution.


Just a thought, couldnt you consider evolution as a religion. I mean, not all religions have gods or a god. None of them can be really proven (no, evolution cant be completly proven, if it is at all) Look at Athiesm.

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?

-lukeskywalker1
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-06-2003, 08:04 PM   #49
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by Wanderer
Exactly the the second point goes for me. Evolution with divine influence.
Look at all what is on earth...humans...animals...trees....
See how they develop...that there are rules for evolution...rules for having children (natural rules I mean).
Look at all this...
Natural selection.

There are billions of billions of galaxies in the known universe. This is true because we can observe it. Each of these galaxies has billions of stars and billions of planets. Mathematically speaking, our small bubble of existance isn't the only one!

It also amazes me how quickly people are to accept the idea that time will go on into the future infinitly, but not consider that it may also go on into the past with the same infinity. If we had more advance propulsion systems, I would not be surprised to find that for life NOT to exist elsewhere in the universe is rare indeed.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 05:40 AM   #50
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
"How can you say they don't exist?" asked the barber. "Well, I am here and I am a barber."
"No!" the client exclaimed. "They don't exist because if they did there would be no people with long hair and beard like that man who walks in the street."
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.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
K, lets say I walked down the street yesterday, no one saw me. Theres no proof that I was there or not. Does that mean it didnt happen, just cause I cant prove I walked down the street?
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.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
And anyways, how much of the bible is taught in a normal public school?
Hopefully, none. Except as it relates to a discussion about the world's many religions. There is a separation of church and state in our country (he and I are both in the U.S.). As much to protect the religious freedoms of minority religions as anything else.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
We are not told anything about it, only about evolution.
This is because the preponderance of evidence is in favor of evolution rather than "other claims."

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
... basically, we are only given 1 belief, which is evolution.
"belief" would be an inappropriate word. Hypothesis would be better. Evolution is but one hypothesis for how the world as we know it came to be. It just happens to be the most likely based on the evidence. Creation ideas of fundamentalists in many religions are other hypothesis, but they are extremely weak as they often are based upon oral and written traditions that fail to take into account new information. They are also based upon unbounded concepts of supernatural sources.


Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Just a thought, couldnt you consider evolution as a religion.
No. Religions involve rituals, worship, etc. of unbounded concepts. Scientific theories involve bounded concepts, meaning that there are certain rules and constraints that cannot be violated without rewriting the rules. Constants such as gravity, light, nuclear bonds of atoms, etc.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
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.
You do if you spend the time and effort to educate yourself rather than buy into fundamental aspects of a religion without questioning the world around you.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
They are human, and can also lie.
They would be caught in very short order, and have been. I have many examples of poor science that was debunked if you are ever interested. Scientists are peer reviewed and question EVERYthing. Before a theory is published, it goes through a thourogh and rigorous examination and testing by the postulator. Scientists and intellectuals who are successful in debunking, correcting, disproving, etc. the claims of another scientiest gain nearly as much prestige as the scientist whos claims survive such strict peer review.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
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?
It would be beyond the scope of this thread, even this forum, to provide a physics or chemistry class. I suggest involving yourself in both if you are still in High School. Also, be sure to take trigonometry. If nothing else, take these so you can more thouroughly debunk the claims of those who tout science above religion. It would help to understand the basis for their arguments in order to structure your own efficiently.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 08:05 PM   #51
Solbe M'ko
 
Solbe M'ko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Igloo in Canada, eh?
Posts: 510
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.
Solbe M'ko is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 08:56 PM   #52
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
What from christianity came from science?
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 09:05 PM   #53
Solbe M'ko
 
Solbe M'ko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Igloo in Canada, eh?
Posts: 510
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...
Solbe M'ko is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 09:16 PM   #54
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
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.

Quote:
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.




Quote:
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
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-07-2003, 10:24 PM   #55
Breton
Ta deg en bolle
 
Breton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,398
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


Penger er for kapitalister
kun papir for meg
så lenge jeg har penger til tippefrister
kan gjerne karl johan bli motorvei for meg


Postgirobygget, "Sløv uten dop"
Breton is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 12:37 AM   #56
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
1st off, in another thread somewhere, some one said about there being more than one god, let me clear that up



Quote:

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.


Quote:
"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.

Quote:
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


Quote:
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.



Quote:

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:






Quote:

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:

Quote:


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:

Quote:


Ecclesiastes (1:7)

All the rivers flo to the sea,
but the sea never becomes full.


Law of conservation of mass and energy:

Quote:

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:

Quote:

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:

Quote:

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:
Quote:

Job (26:7)

God stretches the northern sky out over
empty space
and hangs the earth on nothing.

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

-lukeskywalker1
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 01:59 AM   #57
Solbe M'ko
 
Solbe M'ko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Igloo in Canada, eh?
Posts: 510
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.
Solbe M'ko is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 05:07 AM   #58
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
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

Quote:
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....

Quote:
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....

Quote:
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!


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 05:36 AM   #59
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 03:31 PM   #60
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
(IBHTTVP) <--- a prophecy of my own....
Whats the prophecy? (i guess im slow...)



Quote:
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...

Quote:
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?

Quote:
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.

Quote:
-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?



Quote:
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.

Quote:
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....




Quote:
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.



Quote:
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.




Quote:
The next passage makes no reference to an infinity, so I'll leave it at that.
Yeah, but the universe doesnt go on forever.

Quote:
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







Quote:
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....




Quote:
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.

Quote:
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
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 04:02 PM   #61
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Yeah, but the universe doesnt go on forever.
Why wouldn't it?

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 04:38 PM   #62
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
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.


Quote:
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....



Quote:
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.

Quote:
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 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000
bigger than that atom??


-lukeskywalker1
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 06:18 PM   #63
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
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


Quote:
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:

Quote:
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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 08:49 PM   #64
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
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
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-08-2003, 11:34 PM   #65
ShadowTemplar
Heathen
 
ShadowTemplar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,068
No, I do not believe in Evolution, because I see no need to believe in fact.

Quote:
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


Last edited by ShadowTemplar; 06-08-2003 at 11:45 PM.
ShadowTemplar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-09-2003, 12:10 AM   #66
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
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
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-09-2003, 12:26 AM   #67
ShadowTemplar
Heathen
 
ShadowTemplar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,068
Quote:
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

ShadowTemplar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-09-2003, 01:57 AM   #68
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-09-2003, 06:43 AM   #69
Homuncul
 
Homuncul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Russia
Posts: 383
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

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.

Quote:
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
Homuncul is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-09-2003, 05:03 PM   #70
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
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.


Quote:
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
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-15-2003, 05:10 PM   #71
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
A Prime Example of Evolution

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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-15-2003, 05:46 PM   #72
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
The Problem with the "Bible Code"

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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice

Last edited by SkinWalker; 06-17-2003 at 03:09 AM.
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-18-2003, 03:57 AM   #73
Psydan
 
Psydan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 47
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.


~Dan
Psydan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-18-2003, 04:40 AM   #74
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
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.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-21-2003, 09:31 PM   #75
TheWhiteRaider
White as Snow.
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere in Idaho
Posts: 1,065
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


Just because I don't know something doesn't mean I'm stupid. It means you failed to tell me.
TheWhiteRaider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-21-2003, 11:38 PM   #76
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
Well I see this is still goiong on even though I have been away from this forum for who know how long.
Personally, I like this topic... it helps me re-enforce my educational pursuits.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
Something I have found for all you Neo-Darwinist (People who believe that Evolution came about by mutations)
Well, mutations are but one, very small, aspect of the theory of evolution, but it is a basic tenet if you consider its role in natural selection. It's also important to note, that, while many of Darwins theories and ideas have been revised or even abandoned by science, the basic tenents he suggested are still valid.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
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.
Interesting.... I just searched the peer reviewed literature of at least 20 of the "top 150" scientists who are currently researching aspects of evolution. I noticed no counter-evolutionary claims. I did, however, note several revisions in various theories. But if anything, these continue to support the idea of evolution more than ever.

Perhaps you could post a few of their names? Newsweek apparently doesn't have this article archived, nor does Lexis-Nexis, or Ebsco.


Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
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'm always fascinated by claims from creationist / religious zealots that "scientists are more and more siding against evolution." The evidence doesn't support this. In fact, in my quick search for that Newsweek article, I noticed that no counter-evolution articles appeared in the peer reviewed lists (I searched here for peer-reviewed articles that might have cited the Newsweek article or "chicago conference"). It appears that there are literally thousands of peer-reviewed (that's research papers by those "leading scientists" for those that do not know) articles each year on the subject of evolution.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
I got a site for you guys to check out. It isn't the best, but it does have some useful info.
Admittidly, I didn't spend more than 30 minutes on this site, but I found nothing useful. In fact, I noted time and again the misuse of scientific theories, laws, and out-right lies. Nearly every single point that was made on that site is either completely false or otherwise invalid based on the "science" that it's trying to use against the idea of evolution. It definately demonstrates the ignorance and/or partial education of its webmaster.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-22-2003, 01:32 AM   #77
Jubatus
 
Jubatus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: In your head
Posts: 406
It's now 4:55am here and I'm tired, but I've read about 90% of what's been written in this thread. If I picked things out here and there from the whole thread I don't think there will be anything left for me to add, and that is not really the reason I'm writing this.

The reason is this: I want, in my grumpy state of being, utter what many here must surely be thinking, but dare not say.

Lukeskywalker1.....Watching you flaunt your naive and most likely indoctrinated narrowmindedness (could also be the result of a reaction to some kinda trauma you've experienced) actually hurts physically at times. Your ignorance is astounding and more so your lacking to realize that it would be immensily wiser to just keep your thoughts to yourself instead of disclosing your foggy little wondrous lala-land point of view to the public.

Deep down a defiance stirs within me, a defiance that demands you're actually right, that God actually does exist. And this defiance demands that come Judgement Day I will be flung into the bowels of fiery Hell and you will ascend to angelhood. This defiance is sooo demanding that you will look down upon me from up high and pity my unfortune, and then you'll see my defiance in the form of a single finger to you and your God.

Emotion and logic are one another's greatest adversaries, but should Christianity be right, I will be on Satan's side, defiant and hating with all my being. I can't deny that all this science against the Bible isn't some elaborate scheme construed by the Devil (as part of his brilliant act of making us believe he doesn't exist). I do not believe in guilt, as I do not believe in free will, not even in God, so I won't blame him, I won't hate him, but I will hate existence for being what it is should there actually be something after death, and then I will let emotion rage, for eternity, in any state of being - Hell or Heaven can offer but 2 roads; total enlightenment or insanity. My sole purpose in eternity will be the annihilation of All, and I hope Satan is with me on this one - if not then he's as loathsome as God.

All this is besides (not entirely) the point of this thread, and I can only pardon myself with me being tired. But let no man say I can't offer to the topic of a thread!: I am a fan of evolution - it might take one hell of a time, but eventually we will either fade away or reach total enlightenment...Either way, go us!


-]H-P[-Jubatus - All bow down to TROGDOR the BURNINATOR!

Ode to a

Hey, you there! What we count in numbers we lack in wit.
Hey, you there! I take orders from an imperial git.
Hey, you there! I can't shot for sh*t.
Hey, you there!....Is there a bottom to this pit?
Jubatus is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-22-2003, 04:22 AM   #78
TheWhiteRaider
White as Snow.
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere in Idaho
Posts: 1,065
Quote:
Admittidly, I didn't spend more than 30 minutes on this site, but I found nothing useful. In fact, I noted time and again the misuse of scientific theories, laws, and out-right lies. Nearly every single point that was made on that site is either completely false or otherwise invalid based on the "science" that it's trying to use against the idea of evolution. It definately demonstrates the ignorance and/or partial education of its webmaster. [/B]
First Few chapters I could realy care less. This isn't my choice of info anyways.

The book Tornado in a Junkyard is one of the best. It is Writen by James Perloff who was once a evolutionist.


Quote:
Interesting.... I just searched the peer reviewed literature of at least 20 of the "top 150" scientists who are currently researching aspects of evolution. I noticed no counter-evolutionary claims. I did, however, note several revisions in various theories. But if anything, these continue to support the idea of evolution more than ever.
Did I say they don't believe evolution is true? No I said they don't prefer neo-Darwinist views. I notice though that some of the older scientist are moving from neo-Darwinism. I know Steven J. Gould(Spelling?) has alreay dumped it.

A note as well is that I have found 4 different sources that quote the same part from NewsWeek. So now I am curious. I will look for this copy of NewsWeek as well. I think the CDA library has every copy of NewsWeek so I will make a point of going there. If I should find it I will give it to you. I do have a scanner so all I would need is an e-mail address.

Here is a quote. The man is an evolutionist at the meeting btw.

"[Evolution] is undergoing its broadest and deepest revolution in nearly 50 years . . Exactly how evolution happened is now a matter of great controversy among biologists . . No clear resolution of the controversies was in sight [at the meeting]."—*Boyce Rensberger, Macroevolution Theory Stirs Hottest Debate Since Darwin,' "

Quote:
Personally, I like this topic... it helps me re-enforce my educational pursuits
I do like the topic. Just wish I had a little more info to give.

Quote:
I'm always fascinated by claims from creationist / religious zealots that "scientists are more and more siding against evolution." The evidence doesn't support this. In fact, in my quick search for that Newsweek article, I noticed that no counter-evolution articles appeared in the peer reviewed lists (I searched here for peer-reviewed articles that might have cited the Newsweek article or "Chicago conference"). It appears that there are literally thousands of peer-reviewed (that's research papers by those "leading scientists" for those that do not know) articles each year on the subject of evolution.
You assume that they would come out and tell you. I know someone who over heard their biology professor talking in his office and I quote him "All that stuff I said out there was complete crap. I know it wasn't true. I only teach it because that is what they want to hear." For legal reasons I can say his name here. Some people care more about their reputation than the truth I noticed anyone who tries to look from some other answer besides evolution is often discredited and bashed upon. You forget that they are human and they can lie. I mean who knew President Clinton was in bed with another woman. Almost no one! So did that mean it wasn't true? My point is don't take everything at face value there may be more under the surface.

I think someone was planning on running the monkey on the type writer experiment using a supercomputer. I remember seeing it somewhere I will have to look for it. *sigh* So much to look for so little time.

Quote:
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.
I read it and not once did they tell you how they dated it. Only that it has been dated at 160,000 years old. So how did they do it? Not even as much as listing a RA dating method. Even in the original news report. Just pointing that out.


Here is one question I want answered. How could amino acids form in an oxygen rich atmosphere? Oxygen destroys lone amino acids. Only when it is in protein form is it safe. By the way this has been known since 1950's so don't go off on how I know that. I can pull up some literature on it later, but now it is 11:00 PM and I can't keep my eyes open so I am off to bed.

I am also sorry for any spelling errors. I know there are most likely some in there, but my brain isn't working and I can't fix them as of now.


Just because I don't know something doesn't mean I'm stupid. It means you failed to tell me.
TheWhiteRaider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-22-2003, 05:29 AM   #79
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
I know Steven J. Gould(Spelling?) has alreay dumped it.
The late Steven Gould (1941 - 2002) only revised his theories about some of the nuances in "evolution." Until the day he died, he still accepted the basic tenents of Darwin's theories, only in a modified format. Space/time limitations (it's really late ) preclude me from going into more details at this time.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
Here is a quote. The man is an evolutionist at the meeting btw.

"[Evolution] is undergoing its broadest and deepest revolution in nearly 50 years . . Exactly how evolution happened is now a matter of great controversy among biologists . . No clear resolution of the controversies was in sight [at the meeting]."—*Boyce Rensberger, Macroevolution Theory Stirs Hottest Debate Since Darwin,' "
That doesn't sound like it in any way supports creationism! You have to understand how science works: we constantly revise, update, and (at times) toss out hypotheses and theories that don't work. Scientists debate each other endlessly over many of the nuances within theories and disciplines.


Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
You assume that they would come out and tell you.
It appears that it may not be a moot point after all. I suspect that the "controversy" 20 years ago in Chicago was typical scientist competition and debate. This is hard for creationists to understand, since the idea of their basic doctrine undergoing revision as new data comes in is heresy.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
I know someone who over heard their biology professor talking in his office and I quote him "All that stuff I said out there was complete crap. I know it wasn't true. I only teach it because that is what they want to hear."
"I know someone who over heard" someone? Come on, man, you know me better than that! That kind of annecdotal account means very little. If you make a claim about "x number of people" you should be able to support that with some sort of evidence... a statistical source, a signed petition, etc. Otherwise, what's the point? I could easily (perhaps rightfully) claim that many former creationists have now accepted the common sense of evolution.


Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
I think someone was planning on running the monkey on the type writer experiment using a supercomputer.
The formula for that kind of probability isn't that complicated to need a supercomputer.... anyway, typewriting monkies have little to do with anything, right?


Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
I read it and not once did they tell you how they dated it. Only that it has been dated at 160,000 years old. So how did they do it? Not even as much as listing a RA dating method. Even in the original news report. Just pointing that out.
I would suggest that you read this LINK . This is the original paper submitted by Tim White, the lead researcher. It points out that two primary methods were used to date the find: stratigraphy and radioisotopy. Specifically, the remains were found in the Upper Herto Member of the Bouri Formation of geologic strata. The radioisotopic dating method was 40^Ar/39^Ar and both methods placed the remains at between 160, 000 to 154, 000 years ago. Methods of this sort are usually not included in secondary and tertiary literature (such as newspaper and magazines).


Quote:
Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider
Here is one question I want answered. How could amino acids form in an oxygen rich atmosphere?
I'll have to get back to you on that... sleep is calling me.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 06-22-2003, 06:30 PM   #80
shukrallah
White Dragon
 
shukrallah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,250
sorry i havnt been checking this latley...
and by the way, i completly forgot to do that bible thing... ill just ake your word on it, doesnt matter much to me, maybe ill research it more later on.

Quote:
Lukeskywalker1.....Watching you flaunt your naive and most likely indoctrinated narrowmindedness (could also be the result of a reaction to some kinda trauma you've experienced) actually hurts physically at times. Your ignorance is astounding and more so your lacking to realize that it would be immensily wiser to just keep your thoughts to yourself instead of disclosing your foggy little wondrous lala-land point of view to the public.


?


heh, in the end, it all depends on your point of veiw. my thoughts? half of this i got from other websites, and rewrote it, or cut and pasted it.... cause i thought it true, or most of it..... well, anyways, thanks for the tip! it means nothing to me....


Quote:
Deep down a defiance stirs within me, a defiance that demands you're actually right, that God actually does exist. And this defiance demands that come Judgement Day I will be flung into the bowels of fiery Hell and you will ascend to angelhood. This defiance is sooo demanding that you will look down upon me from up high and pity my unfortune, and then you'll see my defiance in the form of a single finger to you and your God.
hmmm, many people say thats God tugging on your heart. heh, the only way to find out is too try it and c.... your choice. And ive said be4, it doesnt matter if your right, and im wrong, we all die, big deal right? but if im right, well... you know. Is it worth the chance?


Quote:
You assume that they would come out and tell you. I know someone who over heard their biology professor talking in his office and I quote him "All that stuff I said out there was complete crap. I know it wasn't true. I only teach it because that is what they want to hear." For legal reasons I can say his name here. Some people care more about their reputation than the truth I noticed anyone who tries to look from some other answer besides evolution is often discredited and bashed upon. You forget that they are human and they can lie. I mean who knew President Clinton was in bed with another woman. Almost no one! So did that mean it wasn't true? My point is don't take everything at face value there may be more under the surface.
i agree with this.... i said something like it be4, but you seem to have said it better....

****

Either way, with dating methods, there are millions of possibilities, i mean, erosion, earthquakes, and even humans (not knowing it) could effect whatever dates they think theve found. They dont know everything... and werent around back then to really know, its a "best guess" based on what they think they know.

-lukeskywalker1
shukrallah is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > Evolution vs. Creation Myths/other scientific theories

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:51 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.