[randrew379]

I've an idea. On some forums certain areas are restricted. What if GT required an IQ test before one could enter Religious Issues?

[void *]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Not sure how creation and evolution are mutually exclusive.

They're not. Read RI with that in mind, and keep mental track of both those that claim they are mutually exclusive, and those who have not claimed they're mutually exclusive. You'll find that the people claiming some sort of mutual exclusivity are the specific theists who believe in various literal interpretations of the creation stories in the Bible.

The deity that makes people through evolution is *not* the deity that makes a man-shape out of dust and breathes life into it. Thus, those who believe in the latter have to object to evolution. Those who don't believe in those literal interpretations are free to take it somewhat metaphorically and there is no conflict (which is, afaik, currently the position of, say, the Catholic church).

ETA: Or, to put it another way: Nobody that I know of on this board has made the claim that it is logically impossible for a deity to create man through evolution. There are, however, theists who have and do make the claim that the specific deity they believe in did not do so (and, to be perfectly clear, there are some theists who do not make that claim).

[Gunhaver]

Originally Posted by randrew379

I've an idea. On some forums certain areas are restricted. What if GT required an IQ test before one could enter Religious Issues?

An IQ test? They'd have to rename it the atheist issues forum.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ave-higher-iqs

Maybe since it is the Religious Issues forum a test of knowledge of religion would be more appropriate.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep...urvey-20100928

Nope. Still the atheist issues forum. But atheists don't have issues with anybody except the religious so we'll have to let them in or things will get boring.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by juggy4711

They're not unless of course one insists on insanities like man made from dust, women from a rib, and a 6000 yo Earth.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole 6000 year thing was derived by people estimating the time of certain occurrences. I
Don't know any, including the most Christian people I know that think the world is only 6000 years old.

I see that tossed around a lot.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Gunhaver

It would be so great if, when one put forth one of these fallacious arguments and it was promptly shot down as being anti science propaganda, that person would say something to the effect of, "Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Of course that's how bumblebees can fly. Why, they do it all the time and I was told it was magic. I've been duped."

Instead I suspect he'll tuck the bumblebee, platypus and woodpecker arguments back in the deck in his pocket for another day and another crowd to see if they will buy it.

Truth doesn't matter. Only lies that serve the cause and whatever truth they may stumble upon that might be useful to them.

Yeah, those examples weren't very good. But I have an answer for the bumble bee, they are like helicopters. They don't really fly, they beat the air into submission.

My problem with evolution is that an uncontrolled alteration led to by blind luck and imperfect copying would almost always lead to a blind alley. Why would an organism need to reproduce to prolong its own life? What motivates procreation. If there is no motivation, why had life not just blinked in and out.

Intermediate structures. Many very simple intermediate structures don't work. Even simple structures like flagella are very complex upon close examination.

The simple complexity of life, the millions of chemical reactions needed to sustain life, the symbiosis, virulence, parasites.

There is evidence of animals adapting. Some shaky evidence of adapting into another species, and no evidence about how it all began, what started it, was there manipulation or a template? Was life created, or did it just happen?

I don't know, and I'm ok with it.

[jbotstein1]

Originally Posted by Gunhaver

It would be so great if, when one put forth one of these fallacious arguments and it was promptly shot down as being anti science propaganda, that person would say something to the effect of, "Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Of course that's how bumblebees can fly. Why, they do it all the time and I was told it was magic. I've been duped."

Instead I suspect he'll tuck the bumblebee, platypus and woodpecker arguments back in the deck in his pocket for another day and another crowd to see if they will buy it.

Truth doesn't matter. Only lies that serve the cause and whatever truth they may stumble upon that might be useful to them.

Yea. I sometimes wonder if a creationist would ever say, "okay, I was wrong" even after we uncover some surveillance video tape that was shot in super fast motion that showed evolution occurring over millions of years. Being that this video tape will never surface, evidence will be the only prrof of evolution, and people will alwyas be able to say there is no proof because they haven't seen it occur and the bible says otherwise.

I never saw Mt. Vesuvius erupt, but I believe it happened because of the evidence that is left over. It is also possible that Jonathan 3:14 and a dragon flew over the mountain and breathed hot fire down upon it causing god's land to melt and bury the sinners of Pompeii alive...

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by jbotstein1

Yea. I sometimes wonder if a creationist would ever say, "okay, I was wrong" even after we uncover some surveillance video tape that was shot in super fast motion that showed evolution occurring over millions of years. Being that this video tape will never surface, evidence will be the only prrof of evolution, and people will alwyas be able to say there is no proof because they haven't seen it occur and the bible says otherwise.

I never saw Mt. Vesuvius erupt, but I believe it happened because of the evidence that is left over. It is also possible that Jonathan 3:14 and a dragon flew over the mountain and breathed hot fire down upon it causing god's land to melt and bury the sinners of Pompeii alive...

Good analogy of the video tape and evolution. But who would have pressed the record button? Why?

Evolution and creation are not necessarily opposing viewpoints. Evolution is often used to conclude that creation didn't happen. A leap of faith on their part.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by randrew379

I've an idea. On some forums certain areas are restricted. What if GT required an IQ test before one could enter Religious Issues?

There's a good joke in there somewhere.

Probably something about how monstrously bad an idea that is in a discussion forum, and you're locked out because of it, but I didn't want to say anything offensive.

I respectfully disagree. The response you received from the other poster (Post # 28) explains why, people on opposite sides of the issue naturally think they are the smart ones. The forum quickly becomes an echo chamber.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Gunhaver

An IQ test? They'd have to rename it the atheist issues forum.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ave-higher-iqs

Maybe since it is the Religious Issues forum a test of knowledge of religion would be more appropriate.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep...urvey-20100928

Nope. Still the atheist issues forum. But atheists don't have issues with anybody except the religious so we'll have to let them in or things will get boring.

[Vic Hays]

Originally Posted by Gunhaver

I'm the opposite. I wanted the answers that made sense and "god did it" and "the bible says so" were proving to be more and more inadequate from the happy ignorants. The truth fills way more than one book.

I graduated with honors. Not quite the top of my class but close.

Do you know the world is full of propaganda?

By your own admission you have chosen to believe only the things that make sense to you that you can see and feel as if that is the acid test for truth.

We know so little of what there is to know. It is pretty narcissistic to think that we are smarter than the one who made us.

John 20:27 Then said he to Thomas, Reach here your finger, and behold my hands; and reach here your hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
20:28 And Thomas answered and said to him, My LORD and my God.
20:29 Jesus said to him, Thomas, because you have seen me, you have believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

[GreenDrake]

Even more arrogant to doubt proofs and yet believe 100% in a bible full of impossible to prove prophecies.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by GreenDrake

Even more arrogant to doubt proofs and yet believe 100% in a bible full of impossible to prove prophecies.

Last I heard, Evolution was a theory, not a scientific law. It does not negate the possibility of an intelligent designer.

But I do get your problems with a literal translation of certain texts. I see that it would be hard to make a girl from a mans rib. It's much too cheap a cut of meat. However, we are talking about a time that was a long long time ago. Stories, even copied from text to text are changed a little here and there, especially in translating from one text to another.

Who knows, maybe "rib" in their language was slang for DNA.

[steveksux]

Time is almost up? Time will never be up as as result of more facts coming to light regarding evolution. There's more evidence, from wildly divergent sources and disciplines, that all confirm evolution. More so than possibly any other theory out there. Pretty much nothing we know about the biological sciences makes sense if evolution is false. Evolution is the foundation of all of that, as much as mathematics is the foundation of engineering.

Facts have no effect against faith. So more facts are irrelevant to the issue of changing creationist beliefs, any more than throwing more scripture at evolutionists is going to persuade them to abandon evolution.

The author is making the mistake of thinking both sides are speaking the same language.

Mathematics and numerology. Chemistry and alchemy. Evolution and creationism.

Randy

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Last I heard, Evolution was a theory, not a scientific law.

Evolution is a fact. It has been observed. The exact process of evolution is still a theory, but then so is gravity.

It does not negate the possibility of an intelligent designer.

No, it doesn't. Produce evidence that such a designer exists and it will become part of the discussion. Until that happens it makes no more sense to talk about intelligent design than it does to talk about pixies being responsible for gravity.

But I do get your problems with a literal translation of certain texts. I see that it would be hard to make a girl from a mans rib. It's much too cheap a cut of meat. However, we are talking about a time that was a long long time ago. Stories, even copied from text to text are changed a little here and there, especially in translating from one text to another.

Not according to those who believe their scripture to be not only literally true, but also inerrant.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

Evolution is a fact. It has been observed. The exact process of evolution is still a theory, but then so is gravity.
No, it doesn't. Produce evidence that such a designer exists and it will become part of the discussion. Until that happens it makes no more sense to talk about intelligent design than it does to talk about pixies being responsible for gravity.
Not according to those who believe their scripture to be not only literally true, but also inerrant.

I'm playing devil's advocate. Sorry about the pun.

But it's proven, and been observed?? Adaptation has been observed, but have humans even been here long enough to observe evolution from one species to another?

Religious people are so intolerant. If you believe there is no god, why let it upset you if other people do?

Yeah, I think literalistic interpretation of any human copied text or story over a few days old is standing on shaky ground. But even if someone wanted to believe jonah was swallowed by a whale, why care?

There is some reason you care, any chance you want to share?

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

I'm playing devil's advocate. Sorry about the pun.

But it's proven, and been observed?? Adaptation has been observed, but have humans even been here long enough to observe evolution from one species to another?

Yes.

Religious people are so intolerant. If you believe there is no god, why let it upset you if other people do?

Because they do things like try to teach their religion as science.

Yeah, I think literalistic interpretation of any human copied text or story over a few days old is standing on shaky ground. But even if someone wanted to believe jonah was swallowed by a whale, why care?

If they believe it? I don't care in the least. If they try to teach it as a fact in a marine biology class? I care very much.

There is some reason you care, any chance you want to share?

I don't want to live in a world where "scripture says" takes the place of observation, investigation, and understanding of the universe we inhabit.

[packsaddle]

the theory of evolution appeals to the unobserved past.

the article cited above appeals to future discoveries.

whole lot of appealin' goin' on.

yet, only 4 in 10 believe the hype.

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/da...evolution.aspx)

regardless, snake oil sales have been steady among parishoner's of the Church of Charlie, ever since Pope Darwin began preaching from his pulpit in the 1800's.

pick your religion wisely.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

Yes.
Because they do things like try to teach their religion as science.
If they believe it? I don't care in the least. If they try to teach it as a fact in a marine biology class? I care very much.
I don't want to live in a world where "scripture says" takes the place of observation, investigation, and understanding of the universe we inhabit.

That's interesting. Didn't know that. What species has man witnessed evolve into another species.

[randrew379]

Wolves/dogs.

[Lone Wolf8634]

Originally Posted by packsaddle

the theory of evolution appeals to the unobserved past.

the article cited above appeals to future discoveries.

whole lot of appealin' goin' on.

yet, only 4 in 10 believe the hype.

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/da...evolution.aspx)

regardless, snake oil sales have been steady among parishoner's of the Church of Charlie, ever since Pope Darwin began preaching from his pulpit in the 1800's.

pick your religion wisely.

Very interesting article.

[Gunhaver]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Good analogy of the video tape and evolution. But who would have pressed the record button? Why?

Evolution and creation are not necessarily opposing viewpoints. Evolution is often used to conclude that creation didn't happen. A leap of faith on their part.

I know you don't flat out deny evolution so this comment isn't directed at you, just sparked by your comment of who would push the record button.

Nature/physics whatever you want to call it has pushed the recording button in many different record medias and we're always in the process of developing the film.

The geological strata and the way the fossil evidence is consistently laid out to show the progression of change over time, the genetic information stored in living and not long dead creatures that shows the links between them, the distribution of various species around the earth, even the shift of the earth's magnetic field in a roughly 300,000 year cycle is well recorded in iron rich igneous rock all over the earth. They all come together to show a big picture if you don't have preconceived notions that demand that you deny that evidence.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by randrew379

Wolves/dogs.

Same species.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

That's interesting. Didn't know that. What species has man witnessed evolve into another species.

[Gunhaver]

Originally Posted by packsaddle

the theory of evolution appeals to the unobserved past.

the article cited above appeals to future discoveries.

whole lot of appealin' goin' on.

yet, only 4 in 10 believe the hype.

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/da...evolution.aspx)

regardless, snake oil sales have been steady among parishoner's of the Church of Charlie, ever since Pope Darwin began preaching from his pulpit in the 1800's.

pick your religion wisely.

Did you not notice the astounding correlation between education levels and belief in evolution? Every study shows that the more educated a person is the more likely they will understand and accept evolution.

You will now claim that they are being brainwashed by the liberal education system. I ask, why would a business, mathematics, engineering, or sociology major be getting brainwashed about evolution? This isn't a field specific increase in acceptance. It happens across the board. Could it be that these people are learning better and better critical thinking skills and applying them to their beliefs?

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Gunhaver

Did you not notice the astounding correlation between education levels and belief in evolution? Every study shows that the more educated a person is the more likely they will understand and accept evolution.

Big deal, the electorate that brought Hitler to power was the most educated in the world. Our president is a perfect example, degrees out the wazoo but has the common sense of a gnat. I'm sure he also thinks nothing times nobody equals everything.