- This topic has 1,340 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Stu @ Nov. 28 2007,18:11) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,16:51) Predictions of Predictions of Facts as Found in
Evolution Model Creation Model the Real WorldLife evolved from Life comes only (1) Life comes only
nonlife by chance from previous life; from previous life;
chemical evolution originally created (2) no way to form
(spontaneous by an intelligent complex genetic code
generation) Creator by chanceFossils should show: Fossils should show: Fossils show:
(1) simple life (1) complex forms (1) sudden appearance
forms originating suddenly appearing of complex life in
gradually; in great variety; great variety;
(2) transitional (2) gaps separating (2) each new kind
forms linking major kinds; no separate from
previous ones linking forms previous kinds;
no linking formsNew kinds arising No new kinds No new kinds
gradually; gradually appearing; gradually appearing,
beginnings of no incomplete bones although many
incomplete bones or organs, but all varieties; no
and organs in parts completely incompletely formed
various transitional formed bones or organs
stagesMutations: net Mutations harmful to Small mutations
result beneficial; complex life; do harmful, large ones
generate new not result in lethal; never result
features anything new in anything newOrigin of Civilization Civilization
civilization contemporaneous with appears with man;
gradual, arising out man; complex to any cave dwellers
of crude, brutish begin with were contemporary
beginnings with civilizationLanguage evolved Language Language
from simple animal contemporaneous with contemporaneous with
sounds into complex man; ancient man; ancient ones
modern languages languages complex often more complex
and complete than modernAppearance of man Appearance of man Oldest written
millions of years about 6,000 years records date back
ago ago only about 5,000
yearsI know the columns will be messed up.
There is a logical conclusion to what the actual facts reveal.
Another creationist strawman cut-and-paste…How about this:
The Jesus model The scientific model What we observe
A human was born 'Not possible' Never observed
of a virginA human walked on 'Not possible' Never observed
earth after his own
deathA human walked on Defies laws of gravity Never observed
the surface of water
unsupported('Not possible' = the models we have predict that this will never happen).
Stuart
It still suprises me when people can't argue with something, they sidestep it. It's clear that the evidence hasn't matched the predictions, as you had earlier said.In the back of my mind, I think your greatest evidence for evolution is your belief or desire that God does not exist. And if God doesn't exist, then evolution must be true.
Quote The same inverse-square law of gravity that makes stars form has allowed our human physique to evolve to the kind of height and weight humans are. Is it a coincidence? Good design? No, we evolved to cope with / benefit from gravity as it happens to be. I think you believe we could have evolved no matter what these numbers were. The truth is, if any of these numbers were different by relatively small amounts, the universe could not exist, much less us.
And it's not just the force of each of these, but how they relate to one another.
For example, some physicists figure this force to be 10,000,- 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (1040) times that of gravity. It might seem a small change to that number to add one more zero (1041). [Exponents don't work on] Yet that would mean that gravity is proportionally weaker, and Dr. Reinhard Breuer comments on the resulting situation: “With lower gravity the stars would be smaller, and the pressure of gravity in their interiors would not drive the temperature high enough for nuclear fusion reactions to get under way: the sun would be unable to shine.”
What if gravity were stronger proportionately, so that the number had only 39 zeros (1039)? “With just this tiny adjustment,” continues Breuer, “a star like the sun would find its life expectancy sharply reduced.” And other scientists consider the fine-tuning to be even more precise.Consider the strong nuclear force, which glues protons and neutrons together in the nucleus of the atom. Because of this bonding, various elements can form—light ones (such as helium and oxygen) and heavy ones (such as gold and lead). It seems that if this binding force were a mere 2-percent weaker, only hydrogen would exist. Conversely, if this force were slightly stronger, only heavier elements, but no hydrogen, could be found. Would our lives be affected? Well, if the universe lacked hydrogen, our sun would not have the fuel it needs to radiate life-giving energy. And, of course, we would have no water or food, since hydrogen is an essential ingredient of both.
the weak nuclear force, controls radioactive decay. It also affects thermonuclear activity in our sun. ‘Is this force fine-tuned?’ you might ask. Mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson explains: “The weak [force] is millions of times weaker than the nuclear force. It is just weak enough so that the hydrogen in the sun burns at a slow and steady rate. If the weak [force] were much stronger or much weaker, any forms of life dependent on sunlike stars would again be in difficulties.” Yes, this precise rate of burning keeps our earth warm—but not incinerated.
Scientists believe that the weak force plays a role in supernova explosions, which they give as the mechanism for producing and distributing most elements. “If those nuclear forces were in any way slightly different from the way they actually are, the stars would be incapable of making the elements of which you and I are composed,” explains physicist John Polkinghorne.
These forces are set and balanced so precisely that even slight changes could render the universe lifeless.
John Polkinghorne, formerly a physicist at Cambridge University, concluded: “When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”
Australian physicist Paul Davies made a similar point: “There is no doubt that many scientists are . . . scornful of the notion that there might exist a God, or even an impersonal creative principle.” He added: “Personally I do not share their scorn. . . . I cannot believe that our existence in this universe is a mere quirk of fate, . . . an incidental blip in the great cosmic drama.”
The point, is that these numbers were not random. They had to be as they are.
The electromagnetic force is about 100 times weaker than the strong nuclear force that holds together the nucleus of atoms. What would happen if this ratio were changed? “If the relative strengths of the nuclear and electromagnetic forces were to be slightly different then carbon atoms could not exist,” explain scientists John Barrow and Frank Tipler. Without carbon, there would be no life. Carbon atoms represent 20 percent of the weight of all living organisms.“The most minute change in the relative strengths of gravitational and electromagnetic forces,” explains New Scientist magazine, “would turn stars like the Sun into blue giants [far too hot for life] or red dwarfs [not hot enough to sustain life].”
If these forces were random, it is beyond the miracles of the Bible.
The man Job was asked: “Did you proclaim the rules that govern the heavens, or determine the laws of nature on earth?” (Job 38:33, The New English Bible)
It seems that the rules (or laws) that govern the heavens were not accidental. The only answer that makes any sense is that they are what they are because they had to be.
Quote At my work, IT collapses about every two days…
The universe does? Where do you work? I'm curious.Quote “Being surprised at the fact that the universe is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being surprised at how well it fits its hole”
I understand what you're saying. It doesn't apply to what I'm saying.
The universe could exist no other way. I'm not saying that this universe fits us. I'm saying this is the only universe that could ever exist. Change the numbers and you don't have a universe. Change some of them and you have a universe, or at least, not for long.Quote (david @ Nov. 23 2007,13:23) Quote (david @ Nov. 22 2007,09:05) Why evolution attracts people: 2 TIMOTHY 4:3-4
“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories.”Although evolution if usually presented in scientific language, it is really a religious doctrine. It teaches a philosophy of life and an attitude toward God. Its beliefs are subtly attractive to mankind's selfish, independent tendencies. Many who believe in evolution say that they also believe in God.
However, they feel free to think of God as one who has not created things, does not intervene in man's affairs, and will not judge people. It is a creed that tickles people's ears.
Teachers of evolution are often motivated not by the facts, but by “their own desires,” perhaps a desire to be accepted by other scientists or the science community in which evolution is orthodox doctrine.There is no publication in the science holy books anywhere that explains how molecular evolution of any real biochemical system did occur. It is ALL BASED ON FAITH. Faith that there is no god, and that they are therefore not accountable for their actions.
Many well respected scientists just don't WANT their to be anything out there, beyond nature. The scientists are the gods of this world, (the “mighty ones,” the ones with the so called knowledge. But if it turns out they are wrong, then what happens to their position? Everyone knows how important position and prominence are. I believe that to be accepted by their peers, they must accept the orthodox doctrine of evolution–their holy grail, their “trinity doctrine.” If you do not accept this doctrine, you are not a true scientist, how could you be? So, what choice to any of them have, but to go on, perpetuating the idea of their faith, that there is evidence out there that molecular evolution happened, waiting to be found and understood, that their is a reason why the universe suddenly popped into being, and that those pictures of the horses with one extra toe really do prove evolution.The doctrine of evolution attracts many clergyman who want to appear wise. They are similar to those described in the apostle Paul's letter to the Christians in Rome:
ROMANS 1:19-22
“What may be known about God is manifest among them. . .His invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. Although asserting they were wise, they became foolish”The question, I suppose, is how can we avoid being deceived by false teachers?
First, I think it's important that we demand evidence.The Bible writer David wrote:
PSALM 139:14
“I shall laud you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made.
Besides the amazing design of our own bodies, we can consider the mathematical precision and order of our universe. David wrote:
PSALM 19:1
“The heavens are declaring the glory of God; And of the work of his hands the expanse is telling.”People have been studying the heavens for thousands of years. Half a century ago, they finally figured out the Bible truth of Gen 1:1: The universe had a beginning.
One day, I'm confident science will again catch up with the what else that scripture says: God was the one responsible for that beginning.david
Quote Hi,
Science is an inaccurate measuring tool.
Why do some regard it as the ultimate truth?–Nick
I believe the above is the basic answer to why people must accept the religous doctrine of evolution.
Hi David
Quote It still suprises me when people can't argue with something, they sidestep it. It's clear that the evidence hasn't matched the predictions, as you had earlier said. Sorry? Which of the 15 evolutionary “fulfilled prophecies” posted above are you disputing?
Quote In the back of my mind, I think your greatest evidence for evolution is your belief or desire that God does not exist. And if God doesn't exist, then evolution must be true. Well in all parts of my mind I think you are wrong. Does either of us actually have a valid argument in saying this?
I don’t happen to subscribe to the converse of the creationist illogical canard that if evolution is demonstrated to be an incorrect account, we can give up on evidence and just herald in creationism as the new ‘theory’ (of which there isn’t one anyway). Doing the impossible of disproving the existence of Zeus is not further evidence for evolution, I’m sure you would agree.
Stuart
Hi again David
Stu: The same inverse-square law of gravity that makes stars form has allowed our human physique to evolve to the kind of height and weight humans are. Is it a coincidence? Good design? No, we evolved to cope with / benefit from gravity as it happens to be.
Quote I think you believe we could have evolved no matter what these numbers were. Then you didn’t read what I wrote.
Quote The truth is, if any of these numbers were different by relatively small amounts, the universe could not exist, much less us. And it's not just the force of each of these, but how they relate to one another.
For example, some physicists figure this force to be 10,000,- 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (1040) times that of gravity. It might seem a small change to that number to add one more zero (1041).I’ve snipped the next little bit and will ignore it unless you can tell us to what force these figure above refer.
Quote Consider the strong nuclear force, which glues protons and neutrons together in the nucleus of the atom. Because of this bonding, various elements can form—light ones (such as helium and oxygen) and heavy ones (such as gold and lead). It seems that if this binding force were a mere 2-percent weaker, only hydrogen would exist. Conversely, if this force were slightly stronger, only heavier elements, but no hydrogen, could be found. Would our lives be affected? Well, if the universe lacked hydrogen, our sun would not have the fuel it needs to radiate life-giving energy. And, of course, we would have no water or food, since hydrogen is an essential ingredient of both. This ignores the only known mechanism for producing heavier elements. Are you proposing an alternative one?
Quote the weak nuclear force, controls radioactive decay. It also affects thermonuclear activity in our sun. ‘Is this force fine-tuned?’ you might ask. Mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson explains: “The weak [force] is millions of times weaker than the nuclear force. It is just weak enough so that the hydrogen in the sun burns at a slow and steady rate. If the weak [force] were much stronger or much weaker, any forms of life dependent on sunlike stars would again be in difficulties.” Yes, this precise rate of burning keeps our earth warm—but not incinerated. So what? We would not be here on earth, then. See Douglas Adams for the details.
Quote Scientists believe that the weak force plays a role in supernova explosions, which they give as the mechanism for producing and distributing most elements. “If those nuclear forces were in any way slightly different from the way they actually are, the stars would be incapable of making the elements of which you and I are composed,” explains physicist John Polkinghorne. Nearly lost the will to live reading the brain-dead apologetics of John Polkinghorne. Note that he is a former physicist and has effectively renounced the impartiality of the noble occupation that formerly occupied him. Here he is providing a personal testimony, not a physical argument.
Quote It seems that the rules (or laws) that govern the heavens were not accidental. The only answer that makes any sense is that they are what they are because they had to be. It seems… but not to me.
Quote
At my work, IT collapses about every two days…Quote The universe does? No, IT does. You know, the people who ‘fix’ the computers?
Quote
“Being surprised at the fact that the universe is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being surprised at how well it fits its hole”Quote I understand what you're saying. It doesn't apply to what I'm saying.
The universe could exist no other way. I'm not saying that this universe fits us. I'm saying this is the only universe that could ever exist. Change the numbers and you don't have a universe. Change some of them and you have a universe, or at least, not for long.I think this is a flawed hypothesis. We don’t know that there have not been countless events of the kind that began this universe, most of them failing but this one succeeding. That may be flawed too, but it has at least as much merit as the anthropomorphic argument for creationism.
Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 29 2007,16:22) Hi,
Science is an inaccurate measuring tool.
Why do some regard it as the ultimate truth?
Hi NickOnly those who don't understand science regard it as an ultimate truth. I see it as the method that gives us the best explanation. I'm not sure what you mean by “inaccurate”.
Stuart
Hi Stu,
So science compares measurements of what we see
with other measurements we have come to trust
building understanding from human observations.We fail to be amazed at expressed order
as we have come to expect it, and we know that
without order there would be no continuity.Along with all life we graze on what is
but humans alone can ask why
and should.Quote (Not3in1 @ Nov. 28 2007,06:24) Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 28 2007,01:37) THAT'S TWO t8! HEY I MAY HANG AROUND AND COUNT THEM FOR YOU!
t8 is no more responsible for my salvation than you are, Ken.I appreciate your drive to protect your little sister in the Lord – but you have to give me some credit. Right?
Also, do you think you can protect me from all other's in the world that may be “anti-Christ's”? t8 can't protect me either. He shouldn't even try! The Lord is the one who will help me to stand. He will keep me safe, brother.
I know you care about me. I also care about you. But you'll have to give me some room here to explore. I'm not signing-up for any kind of evolution committee or anything – I'm researching. And my son is also being exposed to some great world views so that he can be informed. There is nothing wrong with this. Being informed is a great thing! Had I not been informed about the Trinity……I would still be a Trinitarian. I cannot reinforce this enough, Ken. You must let me learn and find out things for myself. OK?
Love ya bro,
Mandy
Mat 18:6 But whoso shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it is profitable for him that a great millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk in the depth of the sea.You do what you want of course!
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 29 2007,16:22) Hi,
Science is an inaccurate measuring tool.
Why do some regard it as the ultimate truth?
Hi Nick nice to see youThinking…
Why do christans go to the doctor, regerding them as the truth?
Hi C,
The doctor's ministry, as with that of many others, is of the mercy of God expressed to all in the world.
Lk 5.31Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 30 2007,10:01) Quote (Not3in1 @ Nov. 28 2007,06:24) Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 28 2007,01:37) THAT'S TWO t8! HEY I MAY HANG AROUND AND COUNT THEM FOR YOU!
t8 is no more responsible for my salvation than you are, Ken.I appreciate your drive to protect your little sister in the Lord – but you have to give me some credit. Right?
Also, do you think you can protect me from all other's in the world that may be “anti-Christ's”? t8 can't protect me either. He shouldn't even try! The Lord is the one who will help me to stand. He will keep me safe, brother.
I know you care about me. I also care about you. But you'll have to give me some room here to explore. I'm not signing-up for any kind of evolution committee or anything – I'm researching. And my son is also being exposed to some great world views so that he can be informed. There is nothing wrong with this. Being informed is a great thing! Had I not been informed about the Trinity……I would still be a Trinitarian. I cannot reinforce this enough, Ken. You must let me learn and find out things for myself. OK?
Love ya bro,
Mandy
Mat 18:6 But whoso shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it is profitable for him that a great millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk in the depth of the sea.You do what you want of course!
I think you should repost this in the “Why All the Killing?” thread!Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 30 2007,13:53) Hi C,
The doctor's ministry, as with that of many others, is of the mercy of God expressed to all in the world.
Lk 5.31
Except that faith healing and prayer don't work, and science-based medicine does. Importantly, doctors don't give glib answers like “god did answer your prayer and the answer is no”.Stuart
Hi Nick
Quote So science compares measurements of what we see with other measurements we have come to trust building understanding from human observations. Yes.
We fail to be amazed at expressed order as we have come to expect it, and we know that without order there would be no continuity.
Not sure what you mean by ‘without order there would be no continuity’. Continuity of what?
Along with all life we graze on what is but humans alone can ask why and should.
Exactly what ‘why’ question do you think humans should ask?
Stuart
Let's try that again…
Hi Nick
Quote So science compares measurements of what we see with other measurements we have come to trust building understanding from human observations. Yes.
Quote We fail to be amazed at expressed order as we have come to expect it, and we know that without order there would be no continuity. Not sure what you mean by ‘without order there would be no continuity’. Continuity of what?
Quote Along with all life we graze on what is but humans alone can ask why and should. Exactly what ‘why’ question do you think humans should ask?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Nov. 30 2007,19:52) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 30 2007,13:53) Hi C,
The doctor's ministry, as with that of many others, is of the mercy of God expressed to all in the world.
Lk 5.31
Except that faith healing and prayer don't work, and science-based medicine does. Importantly, doctors don't give glib answers like “god did answer your prayer and the answer is no”.Stuart
Hi Stu,
Did Jesus not heal?
Did the Apostles not heal and raise the dead in his name?Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 30 2007,20:18) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 30 2007,19:52) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 30 2007,13:53) Hi C,
The doctor's ministry, as with that of many others, is of the mercy of God expressed to all in the world.
Lk 5.31
Except that faith healing and prayer don't work, and science-based medicine does. Importantly, doctors don't give glib answers like “god did answer your prayer and the answer is no”.Stuart
Hi Stu,
Did Jesus not heal?
Did the Apostles not heal and raise the dead in his name?
I don't believe so, and there is no verifiable eyewitness account of there things, either.As half of all the people who have ever lived are alive today, there is the biggest sample of humans yet available in history to observe, and yet there is not a single recorded case of anyone walking again after death.
Prayer has no better than a placebo effect, faith healers time and again have been shown to be the fraudsters that they are, and no drug makes it to market without a significant demonstrated efficacy to cure or control symptoms.
Conventional medicine works. Faith is a placebo. That does not mean faith is irrelevant to healing in all cases, it just means that it does not in itself do any direct healing.
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
