Evolutionism and Creationism?

[docdru]

Originally posted by Om

No, sir.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html

This is what I mean by too loosely defining our terms. And it's why it's so hard to have any kind of meaningful dialogue about this kind of subject in this kind of format.

Yes,

simply put

Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of NATURAL SELECTION acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evolution

[flashback]

At this point, Creationism and Evolutionism are far too dogmatic to be called "theories". While their not mutually exclusive, I think it really comes down to a choice between scientific method and faith.

Evolution should be taugh in science class. Creationism should be taught in parochial schools.

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by pez

You forgot this part:

Charles Darwin himself realized that it seemed incredible that evolutionary processes had to explain human vision. He said:

'To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.'1

Yet, later on in the same chapter of his book, he explained how he believed it evolved anyway and that the ‘absurdity’ was illusory. Had Darwin had the knowledge about the eye and its associated systems that man has today (which is a great deal more than what it was in his time), he may have given up his naturalistic theory on the origin of living things.

That still doesn't negate the incredible complexity of the eye, and the amazing improbability that it could have evolved. That's a mix that never took place. There is so much hypocrisy in this debate. The evolutionists throw out their theory as a fact, but it flies in the face of the laws of probability, but they believe it anyway (that's called faith, BTW). But they want the creationist to bring nothing less than Adam himself to the debate table or they won't believe it. Amazing!

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by flashback

At this point, Creationism and Evolutionism are far too dogmatic to be called "theories". While their not mutually exclusive, I think it really comes down to a choice between scientific method and faith.

Evolution should be taugh in science class. Creationism should be taught in parochial schools.

No, no. Evolution is a faith-based belief, too. You don't have all the facts (I would say "any") but you believe it anyway. That's, by definition, "faith."

[MrWill]

Originally posted by skinsfan51

The evidence for the design theory is all around you. Even Darwin said that it was crazy to think that the human eye evolved because of its amazing design. All of creation is FILLED with such examples. To think otherwise borders on lunacy, to be quite honest.

Answer this. The eye hasn't always been around. But according to you it "evolved." Why? Nothing had ever seen anything and lived quite happily without an eye. So why did the eye just "evolve." (Be careful how you choose your words your you'll hang yourself )

Eyes, huh? Ever dissect a Lamprey? Lampreys have one of the most primitive eyes. It is a spot on their head that is basically just a light sensor. How about a shark? Ever seen the inside of one of those (you would know it if you smelled it). They have vestigal components of this organ called pineal bodies. From this, we can loosely assume that the shark evolved to include more useful eyes on the sides of the head (a more efficient place for a predator species). If you want harder evidence than this, you will be disappointed, because there was NO observer for the entire span of life's existence. This is called using LOGIC and REASONING to come to conclusions. Now, this is in no way hard fact......but, it beats the hell out of the fairy tales. And, before you go on about God doesn't lie.....realize that neither God nor Jesus wrote that entertaining and grandiose account of how things came about.

[smsmith40]

Show me a wolf turning into a whale (fossil evidence, anyone???) and I'll believe it. I'll throw out my Bible and believe it. That's what our children are told in public school, but with ZERO evidence.

51

The point I was making is that it is spurious to suggest that evloution is flawed because there is no evidence that wolves evolved into whales. That is not what the theory of evolution suggests or predicts. What Evolution does suggests is that they have common ancestors.

It doesn't matter what I or anyones argues. You are Christian, you have decided that your belief system is based on faith not fact.

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by SkinsFan2456

Eyes, huh? Ever dissect a Lamprey? Lampreys have one of the most primitive eyes. It is a spot on their head that is basically just a light sensor. How about a shark? Ever seen the inside of one of those (you would know it if you smelled it). They have vestigal components of this organ called pineal bodies. From this, we can loosely assume that the shark evolved to include more useful eyes on the sides of the head (a more efficient place for a predator species). If you want harder evidence than this, you will be disappointed, because there was NO observer for the entire span of life's existence. This is called using LOGIC and REASONING to come to conclusions. Now, this is in no way hard fact......but, it beats the hell out of the fairy tales. And, before you go on about God doesn't lie.....realize that neither God nor Jesus wrote that entertaining and grandiose account of how things came about.

So, I'll use my LOGIC and REASONING to call your lack of "hard facts" <B>FAITH.</b> You believe something you don't have all the answers for. In other words, you HOPE it's true. That is faith.

In spite of your answer, you still didn't answer my question.

Again...

Answer this. The eye hasn't always been around. But according to you it "evolved." Why? Nothing had ever seen anything and lived quite happily without an eye. So why did the eye just "evolve."

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by smsmith40

51

The point I was making is that it is spurious to suggest that evloution is flawed because there is no evidence that wolves evolved into whales. That is not what the theory of evolution suggests or predicts. What Evolution does suggests is that they have common ancestors.

It doesn't matter what I or anyones argues. You are Christian, you have decided that your belief system is based on faith not fact.

My belief system is based on faith and fact. Just like yours is. You have to admit this. If you don't you're being totally biased.

faith: [ fth ]

n.

Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

You have a confident belief in evolution. That is faith.

So do you agree that it's wrong to say as a fact that wolves evolved into whales? Should an apology be given to all the children who were told that "spurious evidence"? If not, why not?

[Om]

51, are you a believer in the scientific method?

1. Observe some aspect of the universe.

2. Invent a theory that is consistent with what you have observed.

3. Use the theory to make predictions.

4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations.

5 .Modify the theory in the light of your results.

6. Go to step 3.

If not, can you tell me why? And if so ... can you help me understand how you reconcile anything beyond #2 in the context of humanity's ruminations on the existence of God?

At least the evolutionists recognize it's a THEORY, and that a better THEORY may well come along to replace it. In the stead ot Absolute Truth, it's the best way humanity has yet come up with to try to give structure to the unknown.

You, sir, on the other hand, seem to offer only Truth as handed down to you via Christian Doctrine. It is Perfect, it is The Word From On High, it is Immutable.

Do you really not appreciate the difference?

[drumcop]

Originally posted by flashback

At this point, Creationism and Evolutionism are far too dogmatic to be called "theories". While their not mutually exclusive, I think it really comes down to a choice between scientific method and faith.

Evolution should be taugh in science class. Creationism should be taught in parochial schools.

Evolution is an afront to the Second Law of Thermodynamics (entropy).

Teach both in public schoools and teach our children "how to think" not "what to think". Let them do their own research, debate, investigate and discover how to utilize their minds in a manner that gives them the ability to have their own beliefs; as well as learning for themselves just how to to stand behind that belief (via the research they complied and investigated).

What a concept...make us learn how to do our own research - not simply rely on another's ideas or thoughts (a newspaper article, magazine articles, or even the bully who yells louder over the subject at dinner).

[skinsfan51]

This is my last post for now because I need to actually do some work today. LOL.

TIME is not the savior for you evolutionary believers. No one has ever observed macroevolution, but you hope that TIME will prove it to be true. That HOPE is called FAITH.

You hope that TIME will produce the "missing links" that make gaping holes in your theory, but for now you just HOPE. That's called FAITH.

You hope that TIME will somehow vindicate evolution's claims that fly into the face of the laws of probability, thermodynamics, logic and common sense. That's called FAITH.

In the end, you have a whole lot of FAITH and not many FACTS. I know you don't like that, but those are the REAL FACTS here. Evolution never happened.

"In the beginning God created..." -Genesis 1:1

[Om]

Cool. When you come back, maybe you'll answer my questions.

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by drumcop

Evolution is an afront to the Second Law of Thermodynamics (entropy).

Teach both in public schoools and teach our children "how to think" not "what to think". Let them do their own research, debate, investigate and discover how to utilize their minds in a manner that gives them the ability to have their own beliefs; as well as learning for themselves just how to to stand behind that belief (via the research they complied and investigated).

What a concept...make us learn how to do our own research - not simply rely on another's ideas or thoughts (a newspaper article, magazine articles, or even the bully who yells louder over the subject at dinner).

I'll end my post for now by saying THANK YOU, DRUMCOP, FOR SAYING THIS. I'd love nothing more than to see our public school kids become better rational thinkers, instead of being told how to think.

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by Om

51, are you a believer in the scientific method?

1. Observe some aspect of the universe.

2. Invent a theory that is consistent with what you have observed.

3. Use the theory to make predictions.

4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations.

5 .Modify the theory in the light of your results.

6. Go to step 3.

If not, can you tell me why? And if so ... can you help me understand how you reconcile anything beyond #2 in the context of humanity's ruminations on the existence of God?

At least the evolutionists recognize it's a THEORY, and that a better THEORY may well come along to replace it. In the stead ot Absolute Truth, it's the best way humanity has yet come up with to try to give structure to the unknown.

You, sir, on the other hand, seem to offer only Truth as handed down to you via Christian Doctrine. It is Perfect, it is The Word From On High, it is Immutable.

Do you really not appreciate the difference?

I'll post one more time because I was asked a question.

I believe in the scientific method, and I also believe that creationists can apply the same principles to what we believe and form the same theories. But what you are smart enough to know is that evolution is no longer taught as a theory in our society, and especially in the public schools. It's taught as an absolute fact. Just look as some of the posts in this very form (see panel's replies, for example). Will you please tell me how it went from a theory to a fact, and in your opinion should it go back to adhering to the scientific method and be treated as just a theory? If you do, then you must admit that the scientific community is deceiving people by saying that evolution is a fact. Right?

Please read this for further info: http://www.icr.org/bible/bhta34.html

[panel]

Originally posted by Om

No, sir.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html

This is what I mean by too loosely defining our terms. And it's why it's so hard to have any kind of meaningful dialogue about this kind of subject in this kind of format.

I didn't mean their definitons are the same, I ment they go hand in hand. And when it come right down to it, it doesn't really matter that much what the exact definition is, even the scientist agrue what the definition should include..

[Om]

51,

I haven't been talking about this in context of what is taught in schools. I've been talking in context of the actual concepts themselves.

Yes, I'd like to see schools teach the theory of evolution.

And I'd like to see them teach the myriad different religious theories for the creation of life and universe espoused by humanity for the last 10,000 years.

And absolutely, I'd like them to teach Critical Thinking.

That established ... when you get back, I'd still like to hear your thoughts on reconciling religious doctrine with the scientific method.

[pez]

In my textbook it WAS theory... that was only in '92

[MrWill]

Originally posted by skinsfan51

So, I'll use my LOGIC and REASONING to call your lack of "hard facts" <B>FAITH.</b> You believe something you don't have all the answers for. In other words, you HOPE it's true. That is faith.

In spite of your answer, you still didn't answer my question.

Again...

Answer this. The eye hasn't always been around. But according to you it "evolved." Why? Nothing had ever seen anything and lived quite happily without an eye. So why did the eye just "evolve."

Nope....you're wrong. Don't mistake my desire to bring you out of your box as steadfast evolutionism. All I have said is that it has more support than creationism with respect to observation only.

OK....on to your question......how the eye evolved. I started to explain....but you clearly don't have the background to take it further for yourself. I mentioned the Lamprey's primitive light sensing eye. It is an example of how organs as complex as the eye get their beginning. It started as an organ that was very simple, and, over time natural selection is the reward given to organisms for their positively functioning adaptive mutations (that is what the first eye likely was...a mutation that carried its owner to the gene pool, thereby creating a 'new' organism that has an advantage).

If you haven't been able to guess by living in this world (and even society), mother nature can be very harsh.....and in her harshness, she gives life to adaptive changes (i.e. the 'selective' pressures she exhibits force life to adapt, and therefore create change).

What do you think we would look like if we lived on the moon? You could probably guess by knowing the conditions present at that location. Lower gravity, meaning less pressure on the bones, possibly leading to lower muscle mass, taller individuals, etc. If you can think like this, you can see the possibilities (which, I will state again, are not yet fact.....and may never be).

One last point for this post. If God gave you the ability to reason, think for yourself, etc......and it is found that it is not associated with the neopallium ('newer' part of the brain, found also in birds) or any other scientific mumbo jumbo......don't you think he would want you to use it with respect to the seemingly unanswerable questions we have about why we are here? Or, do you think he would want this spectacular ability to be tossed aside so we can all follow each other like lemmings?

[MrWill]

This conversation is one that will never go anywhere. This is because both sides will end up saying, 'I will never get through to these people'. Let me finish (provided there are no additional questions for me) by saying......if all you know is the bible, then maybe that should be your belief system. However, if you are educated beyond that you have no excuse to bury your head in antiquated information that is, in its simplest sense, heresay.

[Mister Happy]

Let me define Evolutionism and Creationsim as I believe they pertain to this thread.

Evolutionism means all the events, that occured to cause the earth to be the way it is now, happened without any influence of a higher power. Man, and all the animals for that matter, evolved out of the primordial soup.

Creationism means that a higher power was involved.

[ntotoro]

Now, wouldn't that be a b1tch if, in the end, we found out God created evolution...

Nick

[MrWill]

Originally posted by Zero Cool

Let me define Evolutionism and Creationsim as I believe they pertain to this thread.

Evolutionism means all the events, that occured to cause the earth to be the way it is now, happened without any influence of a higher power. Man, and all the animals for that matter, evolved out of the primordial soup.

Creationism means that a higher power was involved.

Thank you......so, very simply, it COULD be true that both concepts come into play at the same time. I don't think that is the arguement from my perspective. I am just disputing that people lived for 1000 years at a clip not too long ago.......and that Adam and Eve were the first two humans.....and that there was a giant named Goliath that was beaten down by little David......and that Moses parted the Red Sea......etc.......etc. I have no issue with saying that God IS mother nature....causing the adaptive changes that we are observing. Clearly, though, there is someone here who WON'T see it that way. Some fanatics want to discount the theory of evolution entirely. It IS just a theory....but, it is worth investigating.....which is more than I can say for the biblical version.

[Mister Happy]

Well, from reading this thread, I have failed to see conclusive scientific proof of either Evolutionism or Creationsim.

As Om said, natural selection is different than Evolutionism. We can observe natural selection, but I don't believe we have observed apes evolving.

Does anybody have any proof of an ape evolving into even just a higher form of ape, let alone a human?

Does anybody have any proof that there is a God?

Unless someone can prove otherwise, the answer clearly must be "Not sure."

[Mister Happy]

One of the unanswered questions that I see with Evolutionism (or apes evolving into humans) is that it was a one time thing.

We don't see any cavemen nowadays. A long time ago, a group of apes evolved into cavemen, which evolved into humans. Since then apes have ceased to evolve into cavemen.

None of the cavemen or apes in that group were significantly slower in evolving. Either that or the humans killed all the cavemen.

Wouldn't you think that somewhere, sometime we could observe a creature in the evolutionary chain between humans and apes?

[Mister Happy]

Originally posted by skinsfan51

The Bible was written at FACE VALUE. There is no reason to think that God meant it otherwise. Someone mentioned the Hebrew word for "day." Well, they should well know that it can mean a 24 hour period. Someone said it could mean thousands of years. There is no reason to believe that God meant anything else in the early chapters of Genesis other than 24 hour days. (That is trying to fit the "facts" [supposed] into the theory, but it doesn't work.) It says, "The EVENING and the MORNING were the first day, "etc., etc. Even today we know that "evening and morning" constitute a full, 24 hour day. For further study on this 24 day issue, click here: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-184.htm

Unfortunately according to Genesis, the sun and moon were not created until the fourth day. How does one measure a day if there is no sun and moon?

Also I would point out that a day, as we know it, can only be observed in the earth. It is due to the rotation of the earth. If you are outside of that rotation, the sun is always in the same spot relative to where you are.

Really, you cannot assume that a day signifies 24 hours according to the Bible.