 |
|
Lincoln
|
|
what "evolution" explains is adaptation to the environment and variation available in the genome. The "theory" of man evolving from a single cell is pure speculation. Those who call that a fact are indeed practicing a faith.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Yes evolution is scientific but there is a lot of speculation in science. Calling something 'science' is fine but I think that many people think that elevates speculation to reality. That is where the problem lies.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ethelred
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lincoln
Too bad our guests left so quickly. When I troll an atheist forum I generally stay until they either resort to the childish "where did God come from" argument or they slowly fade off into the sunset.
|
Who has faded? You did that in your threads. Where did god come from Lincoln? The question is fully legitamate when you ask where the Universe came from. If you don't ask that I won't ask where god came from since the both questions are equally valid.
quote:
There is certainly a fanatical element among evolutionists but I think most people believe it because it has been taught in school now for so long, just as it used to be taught that the Pope was the vicar of Christ in public schools. |
Since it isn't taught in our schools you are makeing that up. I learned it on my own. It fits all the evidence. The Bible fails to fit the evidence.
quote:
Evolution will eventually go away when people begin to think for themselves and not read the talkorigins website as if it was their Bible. Free thinking can be a good thing! |
Evolution is something that people that think for themselves understand. I think for myself and that should be very clear to you by now.
Talkorigins is merely one source of information. You don't like it because it tells the truth and the truth disturbs your beliefs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ethelred
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lincoln
what "evolution" explains is adaptation to the environment and variation available in the genome. The "theory" of man evolving from a single cell is pure speculation. Those who call that a fact are indeed practicing a faith. |
Since no has called it a fact why do you pretend that people have?
Its likely that it is true but its not a fact. Distorting the claims of your opponents shows that you don't have much real to say today. Perhaps tomorrow you will stick with reality.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wraith
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Aug 1999
time: 23:19
|
|
My gods... another one of these?
Let me start by saying that no, evolution is not a religion or a cult. It is science. It certainly can be treated as a religion, but so can anything. We've got Scientologists, after all. There is nothing too absurd (or too well proven) to become a religion to someone somewhere. That does not make the theory itself religion.
--"The question is: Can you disprove creation science?"
No, the question is can you prove it? The burden of proof is on the claimant.
--"But read the damn bible and you'll find the answer."
My question for you here is, have you read it in the original language? You are aware of translation errors, right? The Bible is not a perfect document.
It is also foolish to claim the Bible as literal truth. Doing so shows a profound ignorance of the mentality of the time it was written.
--"Theory = A belief, but not called that by anti-creationist scientists."
A theory is not a belief. It is an-accepted-until-disproven model. With active work on the attempts to disprove it. A belief is not even close to the same thing.
--"Sounds like evolutionists don't know the definition of proven."
No, it just sounds like you are completely unfamiliar with the scientific method.
--"I've always thought of science as a belief system."
That's a contradiction in terms. The definition of belief excludes such a conclusion.
--"They believe scientific "facts" in virtually the same way that they believe in god."
Well, I'd have to agree that a lot of people in the US fit this category. This is largely because of our horrendous public schools, however. Their inability to teach basics like critical thinking is a major problem.
Wraith
"The turtle moves."
-- Terry Pratchett ("Small Gods")
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Etheired,
"Who has faded? You did that in your threads."
You must be joking. My thread was over 400 posts long and my last post was alomost the last one. Also my thread was a contiuuation of another 500 post thread. And I was talking about posting on an 'atheist' forum anyway, not here. I have found that atheists only have one legitimate argument and that is where did God come from? They are then overcome by that which they do not understand so they pretend that God cannot exist. If you do not believe that way then that is good but other 'people' do so I am justified in using that generality as I clearly intended.
"Since it isn't taught in our schools you are makeing that up."
If it isn't taught in your school then does that mean I am making it up? It is widely taught in American schools and throughout the modern world.
"Talkorigins is merely one source of information. You don't like it because it tells the truth and the truth disturbs your beliefs."
There is no truth taught at talkorigins that disturbs my beliefs.
"Since no one has called it a fact why do you pretend that people have?"
Read this thread and you will see that evolution has been called a fact by some. If you are talking about micro evolution then there is no dispute with me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Example from page 1:
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
This has been gone over 1000 times in these forums.
Yes, evolution has been proven. It has been observed in nature. The exact nature of HOW evolution happens is what is subject of many theories, but evolution is scientific fact.
Creationists always start posting here, make circular arguments and then run away crying. So to save you time, just read this:
www.talkorigins.org
And there you will have it. No more posts here required. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
You are welcome to your beliefs in the "fact" of evolution Ranger. I wish I had the faith that you had. At least you proved the title of this thread.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Definition from American Heritage Dictionary:
religion: An organized system of beliefs etc. 2. Adherence to such a system. 3. A belief upheld or persued with zeal and devotion.
In other words: Urban Ranger= religious person.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Provost Harrison
|
 |
The farce is strong with this one.
Feb 2000
time: 05:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lincoln
"Who has faded? You did that in your threads."
You must be joking. My thread was over 400 posts long and my last post was alomost the last one. Also my thread was a contiuuation of another 500 post thread. And I was talking about posting on an 'atheist' forum anyway, not here. I have found that atheists only have one legitimate argument and that is where did God come from? They are then overcome by that which they do not understand so they pretend that God cannot exist. If you do not believe that way then that is good but other 'people' do so I am justified in using that generality as I clearly intended. |
People didn't fade, they got bored by your constant sillyness and thickheadedness. It wasn't a debate, it was more akin to smashing ones head on a brick wall.
And the 'where does God come from?' is a quite legitimate argument. But only one of many. This is the crux of the issue on the God argument, the one thing that you will staunchly defend in the face of all reason. Even if creationism and the bible are shown for the nonsense they are, you still cling to your God. So the 'where does God come from?' is a damn good way of challenging the Christian on his own turf, after all, they seem to have little comprehension or respect of science and the scientific method, claiming that fossil records and the like are just 'concocted to test mans faith in God'. You can't argue against someone like that, because they have put up a brick wall.
quote:
"Since it isn't taught in our schools you are makeing that up."
If it isn't taught in your school then does that mean I am making it up? It is widely taught in American schools and throughout the modern world. |
No, it means that it hasn't been drummed into him since an early age. Yours has, your very perception is changed since a young child, that what you are taught is correct and everything else has to fit around. You didn't make it up, but someone in the past certainly did.
quote:
"Talkorigins is merely one source of information. You don't like it because it tells the truth and the truth disturbs your beliefs."
There is no truth taught at talkorigins that disturbs my beliefs. |
Excellent, because I never use talkorigins for my arguments myself. I just use what I know, my education and my experience. I am dismayed by the response of Christians on this thread because they demonstrate such a lack of understanding of science and Neodarwinian evolution. If only you knew the evidence stacked against you, especially how well it falls together.
quote:
"Since no one has called it a fact why do you pretend that people have?"
Read this thread and you will see that evolution has been called a fact by some. If you are talking about micro evolution then there is no dispute with me. |
The evolutionary path to our state is always a debatable issue, but there is no debate over the mechanisms of evolution. What applies in microevolution applies in macroevolution. There isn't some vast difference in how these organisms work on the basic level. A mutation still has the basic same effect, to change the structure of DNA and thus the structure/expression patterns of a protein. Whether a bacterium or a human, the consequences are far-reaching.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Provost Harrison
|
|
The farce is strong with this one.
Feb 2000
time: 05:19
|
|
Cogito Ergo Sum...I think therefore I am...the field of where all matter came from is a completely different field to what I am in, and there are scientists working very hard on this conundrum. But let us apply Ocham's Razor...we have a set of unknown circumstances that created God who created the universe, or a set of unknown circumstances that created the universe. Which one is the most plausible. We cut out the infeasible omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient middleman who just adds unnecessary complexity. So all efforts should be directed at looking at what the true cause of the universe is, not distracted with these little philosophies.
And I know what I see. And the simple fact is, evolution fits the facts completely...there is no lying or trying to tuck in the loose edges, it fits completely, the genetics, natural selection, how the principle works. Just that we learn new details every day, especially in terms of the fossil record. Where is the place for creation in this grand scheme of science? Nowhere I say...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aeson
|
 |
orangesoda
Nov 2001
time: 22:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wraith
--"I've always thought of science as a belief system."
That's a contradiction in terms. The definition of belief excludes such a conclusion. |
quote:
be·lief
n.
1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever.
2. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.
3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons. |
I think 3 allows for science to be viewed as a belief system. Nowhere in the definition for belief is a disallowance for questioning that belief, it doesn't have to be an absolute acceptance. There are measures of belief, just as there are measures of knowlege. It's an inverse relationship. Until there is a complete knowlege, there is always belief.
When we use a theory for practical purposes, we place a measure of trust or faith in it's usefulness. Scientific theory doesn't allow for absolute knowlege, and as such requires a measure of belief to be useful. In some cases that measure is extremely small, but it is still there, even in our scientific laws.
Religion and science both can lead to zealotry when there is no personal questioning of belief. To the individual these beliefs become fact, indisputable truth. This mindset shouldn't occur within the scientific method, but it doesn't stop some people from taking it that far.
For me science/logic is my religion. It constantly changes as I learn, but it is what I believe in. This shouldn't be a difficult view for someone who understands the nature of theory, and accepts that it is not absolute truth. Probably just confusion on the term belief and what it implies.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Aeson seems to be honest. I have no dispute with that type of honesty. As for Occam and his razor I think that brother Occam who was a theist did not intend for God to be shaved off. That is kind of like shaving off the programmer from a software program. It is rather absurd. In order to shave off God it must first be proved that he does not exist. Until then he must be considered as a viable option in science as well as religion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
There is evidence for God. You just do not fit that evidence into your belief system. On the other hand I consider both evolution and creation as valid options. One of us is discarding evidence.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
27-05-2002 18:34
(not accusing ALL of course)
|