- This topic has 1,340 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi A4,
I'm in sympathy with your position, but I think you need to research your facts.
Quote things only evolve if they have too
you obviously do not understand, I'm sorry but you can not de-evolve… you just simply evolve to survive in your environment… thats it
This is classic Darwinism, but it certainly isn't what current evolutionary theory suggests – animals don't evolve in order to survive, they evolve (for want of a better term), and those changes that are secured through reproduction survive (and those that can't compete reproductively, tend to die out).Quote Premise 2: if anything at all exists it must have laws that govern it *as observed in this universe there is nothing that can do anything or that qualifies for everything* Premise 3: the moment anything existed, it becomes everything and all the laws of the universe that exist along with the beginning of time
Premise 4: the laws of physics do not and cannot change.
Premise 5: the first thing to exist must apply to all the laws of physics that ever has existed in this universe at once.
I don't wish to offend you, but this shows a complete lack of understanding of physics (and wider scientific disciplines). The “Laws” of physics aren't like civil laws, that must be obeyed, but are rather observations. To say that something must obey the laws of physics, is to suppose that these “laws” are inherent in the universe, but the physicist would be the first to tell you that these are just the best observations on hand.As you (or perhaps it was Stu) said, science is always trying to update and modify itself, test theories, and where necessary develop new ones. To say that there is an “observable” law, to which everything in the universe must comply, is to defeat this assertion that science must continually test its theories. It is no better than saying, God did it because the Bible tells me so!
A good example of science updating and modifying itself is touched upon inadvertantly by yourself:
Quote Science isn't what just is visible… i mean i obviously believe in gravity and radio waves…
but if its not detectable or predicted in anyway, and seems impossible after everything is considered, its not real!
Gravitation is a “law” of physics – it is the attractive influence that all objects exert on each other. This is observable, though not therefore proven. But gravity specifically refers to a force which all objects (with mass) exert on each other to cause gravitation. Gravity is a Newtonian theory, but not an observable law – in fact, most modern physicists believe that gravitation is caused by factors other than gravity.Like I said, I'm in sympathy with your position – but you would present a stronger case if you used current data, and didn't really so much on Propaganda. The best evolutionary theorists are those who present what is observable, suggest possible implications, and don't try to assert “proofs” based on these observation (though I also understand that it is impossible to argue logically with, “The Bible says…”).
++”Man who creates sophisticated cameras using his intelligence to do so, was completely outwitted by nothing that made the human eye.
++”Man who creates robots as the result of thousands of years of accumulated knowledge including the microchip revolution and billions of dollars is outwitted by just about every species with a brain and skeleton of similar size that was supposedly created by no one.
In fact you understate the case. In The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins describes in vivid detail the fantastic use made by bats of echolocation, not only for navigation but finding prey and other uses. Bats have, by natural selection, “invented” long ago their own versions of modern devices that we humans feel pretty clever to have designed ourselves, even if our versions are pale imitations.
Both bat sonar and the human brain are products of natural selection working on chance variations in the respective populations.
You illustrate very well natural selection's power to accumulate advantage.Stuart
Hi Casiphus
++”This is classic Darwinism, but it certainly isn't what current evolutionary theory suggests – animals don't evolve in order to survive, they evolve (for want of a better term), and those changes that are secured through reproduction survive (and those that can't compete reproductively, tend to die out).
As you might be suggesting, the way the hunter-gatherer brain works makes it easy to end up putting the cart before the horse, constantly looking as we are for patterns, real or imagined, thinking there is a designer with a forward-looking purpose, or that evolution somhow has some kind of “goal”. Looking backwards in time, we are the descendants of living things that were good at surviving and reproducing in their contemporary environments. As those environments changed, the individuals best suited to survival and reproduction passed on their genes, including advantageous mutations, more often than the others. It really is that simple, obvious and powerful as an explanation.
Stuart
Isaiah 1:18
18 “Come now, let us reason together,”
says the LORD.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
A while ago, Stu wrote:
Revelation reads like the ravings of someone on hallucinogenic drugs. I think this might be a better explanation.
And Nick replied:
Hmmm I expected a MAN OF SCIENCE to be more considered in their responses.Some selections from just the first half of the Book of Revelation:
1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
4:6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.
4:8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within:
5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
6:14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
8:7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up. (8:7-13)
8:8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!
9:7 And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men. (9:7-10)
9:8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.
9:9 And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.
9:10 And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months.
10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
“ rocking horse people”, “newspaper taxis” and “marshmallow pies” were lyrical phrases written by John Lennon while high on LSD. Revelation is much weirder even than this.
Stuart
Quote As you might be suggesting, the way the hunter-gatherer brain works makes it easy to end up putting the cart before the horse, constantly looking as we are for patterns, real or imagined, thinking there is a designer with a forward-looking purpose, or that evolution somhow has some kind of “goal”. Looking backwards in time, we are the descendants of living things that were good at surviving and reproducing in their contemporary environments. As those environments changed, the individuals best suited to survival and reproduction passed on their genes, including advantageous mutations, more often than the others. It really is that simple, obvious and powerful as an explanation.
Yes, that I believe is the current scientific understanding.Hi Stu,
Quote “ rocking horse people”, “newspaper taxis” and “marshmallow pies” were lyrical phrases written by John Lennon while high on LSD. Revelation is much weirder even than this.
Revelations isn't science but literature. You can't approach it in the way you'd approach a mathematical problem (for instance). To say that, Revelation reads like the ravings of someone on hallucinogenic drugs, is to take a completely superficial view – it is to miss the point entirely!To use your last example:
Quote 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
To start with you have taken one part of a longer passage, abstracted it from its context, and therefore deprived it of meaning. In its proper context it reads:
Then the voice which I heard from heaven, I heard again speaking with me, and saying, “Go, take the book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on the land.” So I went to the angel, telling him to give me the little book. And he said to me, “Take it and eat it; it will make your stomach bitter, but in your mouth it will be sweet as honey.” I took the little book out of the angel’s hand and ate it, and in my mouth it was sweet as honey; and when I had eaten it, my stomach was made bitter. And they said to me, “You must prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.”
In this context then it begins to make more sense. The book is a prophecy concerning many peoples, etc. It is sweet to the mouth, in that it is a divine prophecy, but it is bitter to the stomach, because of the message that it contains.In addition, this passage is a reference to Ezekiel Chapter 3: Then He said to me, “Son of man, eat what you find; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” So I opened my mouth, and He fed me this scroll. He said to me, “Son of man, feed your stomach and fill your body with this scroll which I am giving you.” Then I ate it, and it was sweet as honey in my mouth. Again, the scroll is a prophecy that the prophet is to deliver to the people (this time the people of Israel). Once again it is sweet to the mouth, but the words of the prophecy are a warning – bitter by implication.
So you see that there is far more to this verse than just “wierd hallucinations”. I really think that you need to give the so-called “sacred” literature as much of a chance as you would expect others to give scientific literature – in order to consider and enjoy every thing that life has to offer.
Any atheist:
A few posts back I asked a simple question. Perhaps the atheist cannot answer simple questions because I have received NO answer.
What scientist named the animals? OR what human named the animals? Someone had to name the animals.
The bible says Adam named all the animals. This must be true simply because you have NO answer or do you?
DID Adam name the animals? That's what the BOOK says, but what do the atheist say? Cat got your tongue?
Quote The bible says Adam named all the animals. This must be true simply because you have NO answer or do you? using this logic god must be real because we can not disprove him?
same with the bigfoot, flying spaghetti monster, and of course my favorite kind of cereal oooglyMcJaggarpuffprove those don't exist and ill tell you who named the animals
oh hey but you know theres still that problem with the languages right? like… the animals are not named the same in every place in the world..
Quote “The fool has said there is no God”. Who ever quoted this from the bible is about as right as it comes! watch this video.. It is rather interesting how many more atheist's are in jail then Christians maybe we are bad people?
Oh yeah, back to the topic of what this is titled. is it agreed that evolution is entirely possible, there are facts such as DNA, fossils, and proof that animals are still evolving, with ring species that evolution is a logical conclusion?
also that deceases evolve and hence they get immunities to antibiotics
But everyone agrees that there is some form of evolution correct?
I agree that we are all still evolving, to some degree. But to what degree? If we came from the fishes, then became apes, then became human……..what will we become next? To a very large degree I am showing my ignorance here (but I don't mind if you don't mind
).Quote (A4J @ July 31 2007,17:35) we do know laws of the universe however… making us sure that when the sun sets, the warm water and the cooling land will cause wind, and so on
if of course it all stopped, we would have to change are theory's and so on
A “theory” is nothing more than a guess or opinion.
Quote (A4J @ Aug. 01 2007,03:29) Quote The bible says Adam named all the animals. This must be true simply because you have NO answer or do you? using this logic god must be real because we can not disprove him?
same with the bigfoot, flying spaghetti monster, and of course my favorite kind of cereal oooglyMcJaggarpuffprove those don't exist and ill tell you who named the animals
oh hey but you know theres still that problem with the languages right? like… the animals are not named the same in every place in the world..
Quote “The fool has said there is no God”. Who ever quoted this from the bible is about as right as it comes! watch this video.. It is rather interesting how many more atheist's are in jail then Christians maybe we are bad people?
I already know who named the animals. But it is obvious you don't even have a guess
Where did the names come from? Can't scientist answer a simple question it's in a book
If you have no answer just deny everything
Your finished good bye!
Kenrck
++”A few posts back I asked a simple question. Perhaps the atheist cannot answer simple questions because I have received NO answer.
I'm not sure what your question means. Do you literally mean who was the first person to use the English word “dog”?
Stuart
Hi Casiphus
++”Revelations isn't science but literature.
Where in Revelation does it actually tell you that these are allegorical stories not to be taken literally? Isn't Genesis literature as well? It reads like poorly written science fiction.
Rev 6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;
6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
6:14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
So these events did not actually accur?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 31 2007,23:21) Hi Nick, ++”You forgot to mention atheists. They are religious too and have faith in nothing.
According to atheists, supernatural believers have faith in nothing.
In my dictionary a religious atheist is an oxymoron. How do you define “religious”, Nick?
Stuart
Faith is trust.People who have faith in God trust in God.
If you don't believe in God, then you trust that there is no God.
Therefore you have faith that there is no God because you cannot scientifically prove that God doesn't exist.Your tooth ferrie argument doesn't work because a tooth ferrie gives you money for your teeth and we all know that it is parents who do this, but God is the creator and designer of all things.
Design implies a designer and creation implies a creator.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
