Evolution vs creationism - Page 25

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
Aurel, the fossil record speaks for itself.

The scientists have the record and it does not support the idea that the earth was or is filled with species changing to new ones over time.

If this was the case, they would be on display in all the exhibits and walking among us.

KT

Wrong. Take a look at that:

Aurel

stevepaa · 08-03-2006, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
Aurel, the fossil record speaks for itself.

The scientists have the record and it does not support the idea that the earth was or is filled with species changing to new ones over time.

KT

"The scientists". Sorry, but the scientists do have the data that does support the theory of evolution.
So how long ago did the creation occur and all life sprang forth on this planet and we walked with dinosuars?

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

the plant work failed because it was directed mutations. That isn't the way it works.

Drug resistant bacteria and viruses. Examples of improvement of a species.

You made a sweeping statement. I'm showing it wrong. Just admit that.

trekkor · 08-03-2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by stevepaa

So how long ago did the creation occur and all life sprang forth on this planet and we walked with dinosuars?

The creation did not happen all at once.
The time span is not known by man.

We never walked with dinos.

Point is, fossils show a species suddenly appearing and in some cases, ( dinos ) suddenly disappearing.

Your fossil display looks like a lot of the people I've seen

Speculation, theory, wild guesses taken as fact, ready to be changed at will. That is what's going on.

No proof...

Adam walked about 6,000 years ago in the now Middle East.
All the variation we see in "modern" man was available in his DNA.

Why can't man just admit he has very few answers.
Some he may never understand.

KT

kang · 08-03-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor

Adam walked about 6,000 years ago in the now Middle East.

KT

Are you trying to say that the very earliest that humans ever appeared on the earth was 6,000 years ago? That’s absurd. Huge amounts of scientific research refute that. There are many different dating methods, and they all agree. There is nothing, not one thing, that would indicate that the earliest humans only appeared 6,000 years ago.

Moses · 08-03-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
The fossil record shows all the major groups of animals appeared suddenly and remained virtually unchanged.

Mutations have proved to be dangerous and fatal to life.
They do not lead to new species.

KT

Who are you, who is so wise in the ways of science?

trekkor · 08-03-2006, 10:28 AM

The world is amazing.
Look at all the variety and harmony within nature. Very complex.
It seems that if life started in chaos, it would remain in chaos.

Calming down would go against the "laws of nature" right?

Why are all the life systems and cycles perfect right now?

The only purpose the evolution theory promotes is dishonor to God.

Gotta go...

KT

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

If you look at C14 datation of the skulls in the series I just showed you, you will see that the older ones are 4.4 millions years old. C14 is a valid method of determinig the age of objects over long periods of time. It is based on the variation of the C14/C12 isotopes ratio over time. So here you have before your eyes, human skulls dating 4.4 millions years. What do you make of it?

Aurel

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

Gotta go...just when it became interesting...

Aurel

stevepaa · 08-03-2006, 10:42 AM

Better run than to question one's beliefs?

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

You guys do realize you're arguing with a JW, right? You'll never change his mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_regarding_Jehovah%27s_Witnesses

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatology_of_Jehovah%27s_Witnesses

You can also google Jehovah's Witness and cult and get some interesting reads...

stevepaa · 10:50 AM

Yeah, I knew that. They cut and run as soon as you use a Bible other than the King James version.

They have some good points from a Christian lifestyle POV, but like the Mormons, they are a recent cult.

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

In France, the JW are considered a sect, and do not have same recogntion are mainstream religions. No wonder why...

Aurel

kang · 08-03-2006, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by trekkor

Quote:

The world is amazing.
Look at all the variety and harmony within nature. Very complex.
It seems that if life started in chaos, it would remain in chaos.

Calming down would go against the "laws of nature" right?

You’re talking about the entropy, right? Perhaps you have been taught by another creationist that entropy disproves evolution. This is not true. Check this out: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html You will see that the creationist who told you that was wrong. If you have a brain, you will abandon the false logic that you’ve been taught and adopt the truth.

Quote:

Why are all the life systems and cycles perfect right now?

Perfect? Ever gotten sick? Tell the guy with cancer that his “life system” is perfect. What about low back pain, diabetes, arthritis, or even just headaches. Tell all the species that have become extinct that they are perfect. What about the new species that have not yet arrived. Are they going to be perfect? How could you possibly believe that “all life systems and cycles” are perfect?
Perhaps you think that everything is exactly as god would have it, therefore it is perfect. If this is the case, why do things keep changing?

Quote:

The only purpose the evolution theory promotes is dishonor to God.

Since when does using your brain dishonor god? NOT using your brain is what would dishonor god, if there were a god. What makes you think your bible and evolution are mutually exclusive? Where does your bible say that evolution never happened? Why can’t you see the genesis story for what it is, a metaphor, and not for what it isn’t, a scientific explanation of events.

Quote:

Gotta go...

You’re already gone, long gone...

RPKESQ · 08-03-2006, 11:33 AM

KT wrote:
The world is amazing.
Look at all the variety and harmony within nature. Very complex.
It seems that if life started in chaos, it would remain in chaos.
Calming down would go against the "laws of nature" right?
Why are all the life systems and cycles perfect right now?
The only purpose the evolution theory promotes is dishonor to God.
Gotta go...

Trekkor you use name calling all the time. Nonbeliever, Christian basher, etc., these are all name calling. So quit whining when someone calls you on blatant lies. You have already admitted to a lack of higher education, no science training, no nonreligious bias study of science; so what in hell makes you think you know this evidence to be false. Only one thing, it undermines your belief. Well welcome to the world of science, buddy. We question and try to disprove everything. That’s the way to real knowledge.

You might be used to a gentile” no thank you” when you come calling, spouting your religious lies. But I was raised to only state what I can back up; And to point out falsehoods. Religion is one lie after another. No evidence, no repeatable results (except lies, hatred, bigotry, violence); But no real verifiable facts.

I will always label my opinion, as just that, my opinion. This thread started out with the religious people trying to “prove” god with the most outlandish lies, falsehoods, partial quotes, circular arguments, and hiding behind the “you should respect my beliefs” crap (I wonder if we should respect Hitler’s and Mao’s beliefs too?). If you want to belief in myths and fairytales, fine. But don’t expect people to blindly accept such garbage. I respect those that seek real knowledge and work towards that goal. The rest are just leeches, preying upon man’s insecurities and ignorance. Just like con-artists and no better in my book.

Gotta go…. More religious based ignorance to stamp out.

Moneyguy1 · 08-03-2006, 11:51 AM

The "Do you mean that man has only been on earth for 6,000 years?" argument is valid when many Biblical scholars believe that the Adam/Eve story represents (at best) the first "recorded" antics of man?.

I cannot understand the narrow minded views that would limit the method of life's journey from the onset to present day. Assuming an intelligence behind the process, who is to say what timetable or process was decided upon? Would the creator not be capable, for example, of starting the process and just seeing how it developed? And, if the creation process is so perfect, explain the existence of the appendix or other unnecessary parts? How any rational person can exclude one possibility for another without factual data is a foreign concept to me.

I have no problem believing that I cannot read the mind or purposes of a creator since, in comparison, I would be as ignorant as an ant is of a human's motives, probably even moreso.

I take no sides. Is there a creator? That is a personal matter. Is it possible there is a creator? Absolutely. Nothing is truly impossible in a universe of apparently contradictory events.

RPKESQ · 08-03-2006, 11:59 AM

Written recorded history goes back at leat 10,000 years. Why would anyone consider Adam and Eve the first recorded event unless you are proposing the bible as fact 9which is completly unsupportable).

jluetjen · jluetjen's Garage

Gee RPKESQ, you'd be so much more effective if you just said "No". Going on a rampage every time someone you disagree with sticks their head up just doesn't do justice to your cause of logic and rationality. ( Imagine Spock having a tantrum.

) I would think that by now in human kind's evolution people like you would have mastered the art of civil discourse. Besides, if you varied your tone and epithets a bit, it would be far more interesting reading.

Personally, I don't have a dog in this fight (JW's versus science).

Moneyguy1 · 08-03-2006, 12:42 PM

RPK..

I give up.....Perhaps I should have said "One area's recorded history". And, the difference between 6k years and 10k is not even a drop in the bucket of the age of the earth. Nit picking is not your (usual) style!!

John....It is indeed difficult to understand how continual protestation (not the branch of Xtanianity) about something unprovable is thought to change people's mind. They either "believe" or they do not.

jluetjen · jluetjen's Garage

A person's beliefs are a person's beliefs. They're entitled to theirs. I'm entitled to mine. Since a belief is something internal to a person (kind of like experiences or dreams), to berate someone over their beliefs just strikes me lacking any sort of empithy or compassion. Besides, in many cases it's just "flogging a dead horse" which exhibits traits of sadism, beastiality and necrophilia.

That being said, I don't have a problem with honest questioning with the aim of better understanding (in both directions). At the end of the day you have to be willing to walk away, otherwise we're no different from the radical immams in some parts of the world.