Diversity remains a one way street

Status
Not open for further replies.
And since there is far more proof for evolution than creationism I'd have to agree,
that there is too much faith placed in unproven things.
 
Gonz said:
Winky, you realize that theory, until proven, is belief.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's a hypothesis if we're working within the bounds of a scientific methodology. [/anal]

hy·poth·e·sis ** *P***Pronunciation Key**(h-pth-ss)
n. pl. hy·poth·e·ses (-sz)
A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.

Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.

The antecedent of a conditional statement.
 
Gonz said:
Creationism has 5000+ years of belief. The Theory of Evolution is maybe a century.
Click to expand...
Gravity has only been about for a few centuries in its own right.

I would put forth that evolution has only been a laid out theory for 180 years because the creationist/religious constrainsts were heavy enough to quash the opposition.
 
BeardofPants said:
Actually, it's a hypothesis if we're working within the bounds of a scientific methodology. [/anal]

an assumption.
Click to expand...

Awfully anal aren't we? :D

I assume folks like Postcode assume there's a God ;)
 
Gonz said:
Creationism has 5000+ years of belief. The Theory of Evolution is maybe a century.
Click to expand...

Actually, Greek and Roman scientists had a pretty good understanding of evolution. There were books in the library at Alexandria about it. Darwin's theory is not that we evolved, Darwin's theory (the theory of natural selection) involves how we evolved. This is exactly what I mean when I say that most people who want to argue Darwin don't really understand what the theory means. :shrug:

Try this
 
If I may...

As most of you could likely guess, I am a creationist.

I have little problem with evolution theories to a point. To deny that creatures evolve to adapt to their climate etc is folly. My question is this:

If evolution answers all these questions, how did the first being come to exist that everything else evolved FROM?

Granted, I have done virtually zero study into Darwin's or anyone else's ideas about evolution, as I am a creationist proponent. Hence, I never saw the need to study other theories too much. As I said, I don't doubt that creatures do evolve over time to become stronger. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc....all valid. But I have yet to hear these ideas explain in an acceptable way how that first being came to be at all. Trace any organism back far enough...that's fine with me. But something had to start it all.

For the record, my mind won't be changed on the issue. I'm also not trying to start/propogate holy war here. Simply curious is all I am. Creation explains everything I need explaining, I'm satisfied with it, and that's that. To me creation and evolution are not competing notions; they are both valid and coexist wonderfully. Evolution of species is undeniable, but something or someone had to create them in the first place, right?
 
PostCode said:
Eh? Greek scientists? I hope you are referring to Greek thinkers here.
Click to expand...
Scientists, philosophers, historians, etc. were all referred to as "thinkers." So in answer to your question, yes and no. :D

SnP said:
If evolution answers all these questions, how did the first being come to exist that everything else evolved FROM?
Click to expand...
It answers that one too.
 
I'd just like to remind everyone, the argument at hand isn't wether creation or evolution is right. It's a person's right to have his own belief, and state that belief, even if it conflicts with what he'd being made to teach by the state.
 
chcr said:
Scientists, philosophers, historians, etc. were all referred to as "thinkers." So in answer to your question, yes and no. :D


It answers that one too.
Click to expand...

National Geographic Channel. Last week. New show. Can't remember the name of it, but they're showing the 4.6 billion year history of the earth as a 24 hours clock. They admit that the newest science shows that a solid surface, water, and the earliest life forms occurred much earlier that perviously thought possible. So, actually, the newest theories of evolution had had to be rewritten within the last couple of years. Odd that noone's out there shouting about that, eh?
 
Yes you have a right to hold false beliefs.
That is a good thing, it means those who
have correct knowledge won't be bullied into
having to believe as you do.

Whereas you might not commit adultery because it’s
in your widdle book it sez thou shall not
others don’t because they can see the lack of efficacy
in such an action.

What if an alien race cruised up in near earth orbit
and landed a shuttle on the White house lawn and
revealed ALL the Cosmos’s secrets. The true nature
of things, where time began where it will end and a little
factoid that there really ain’t no Gods. Proof positive
there ain’t no Gods, nada one?

Would ya still believe?

I knew you would as would hundreds of millions of
other human beans. Sad really, just sad but WTH?
 
Winky said:
Yes you have a right to hold false beliefs.
That is a good thing, it means those who
have correct knowledge won't be bullied into
having to believe as you do.

Whereas you might not commit adultery because it’s
in your widdle book it sez thou shall not
others don’t because they can see the lack of efficacy
in such an action.

What if an alien race cruised up in near earth orbit
and landed a shuttle on the White house lawn and
revealed ALL the Cosmos’s secrets. The true nature
of things, where time began where it will end and a little
factoid that there really ain’t no Gods. Proof positive
there ain’t no Gods, nada one?

Would ya still believe?

I knew you would as would hundreds of millions of
other human beans. Sad really, just sad but WTH?
Click to expand...

Sad? Let me show you sad.

a thousand years ago, people believed that they were made for a purpose. That something greater than the mud and filth and toil that they endured day after day existed. That they had a grain of that greatness in their blood, that they could nurture. They believed that they were more than just animals, and they strove for that greatness.

Today, people believe that they're nothing more than advanced animals, and they strive to wallow in the mud and filth with them. No aspirations of glory, or greatness. Animal greed, animal rutting, and animal sloth.
 
There is indeed something profound in what you say.
I git's yer meaning rally I do. Existence simply for existence’s
sake gets old after a while. I guess if people
need to serve a massa then it's good if they serve a good
massa. Rock on Prof!


DR. EVIL: Austin, I am your father.
AUSTIN: Really?
DR. EVIL: No. I have no evidence to back that up.
 
Professur said:
National Geographic Channel. Last week. New show. Can't remember the name of it, but they're showing the 4.6 billion year history of the earth as a 24 hours clock. They admit that the newest science shows that a solid surface, water, and the earliest life forms occurred much earlier that perviously thought possible. So, actually, the newest theories of evolution had had to be rewritten within the last couple of years. Odd that noone's out there shouting about that, eh?
Click to expand...

Sure they are, Prof. One of the biggest problems with natural seletion has always been the time frame. Creationists point this out all the time, that there wasn't enough time for all the "natural selection" to occur. Science Magazine had an article on this over a year ago. This actually makes natural selection more rather than less likely. :shrug: It also gives a boost to the cometary organic seeding theory, although I still consider that one a litte far-fetched myself. This information in no way affects the creation vs evolution debate.

P.S. I have a purpose.
 
Winky said:
There is indeed something profound in what you say.
I git's yer meaning rally I do. Existence simply for existence’s
sake gets old after a while. I guess if people
need to serve a massa then it's good if they serve a good
massa. Rock on Prof!


DR. EVIL: Austin, I am your father.
AUSTIN: Really?
DR. EVIL: No. I have no evidence to back that up.
Click to expand...



:rofl4:
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
How? Maybe I'm missing the forest because of all the trees, but how did that first being come to be if it had nothing to evolve from? :confused:
Click to expand...
I'm at work and to lazy to type this all out in any case, so here . The first "being?" Well, that would certainly be subject to debate. First self-aware organism? First multicellular organism? First organism able to reproduce certain crystals reproduce but are not considered "alive")? The line between not-life and life is debated constantly by smarter folks than I.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top