why I hate evolution..

reply to post by Tbrooks76

Do you really think the sun revolves around the earth??

Originally posted by Tbrooks76

Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
After reading the debates between science and religion I must take the stand that creationists believe the Sun revolves around the Earth and all disease is caused by the devil. This is because creationist want to ignore any empirical evidence that does not agree with their views.

Since science cannot prove everything right here, right now, it must be defective. If it is defective can it be believed at all? Wasn't the Earth not being the center of the Universe a religious heresy at one time? What was it that changed our views on this? Oh, that's right, science.

So, what do you believe in science or God? Science = Earth around Sun. God = Sun around Earth. Or is it God, until I am forced to believe otherwise?

The bible say Earth is center of the known universe, and 1 day is 1000 years….Yeah sounds stupid when you think of it in non relativistic motions…but one theory has both these concepts. Consider when you get into physics, Einstein’s theory of relativity teaches, because all things in the universe are in motion we can never know where the center is, thus your prospective point can be considered the center of the universe, and where are you…Earth. Earth, more specifily you on earth, can be consider the center of your universe. Also relativity teaches that space/time are variables and not fixed.

Please don't let this gentlemen sully forever your image of Christianity.

As somebody who has actually read the Bible, I am unaware of where his facts are coming from....

The image of a white bearded God on a cloud is a creation of man and does not truly reflect the nature of God. I would argue that "God", as in a creator of matter and life, is real. But a God that created DNA and atoms down to the quantum state is beyond our comprehension as of now.

The Bible doesn't say anything but God created the universe, life and man. It does not go into detail on HOW these were achieved. To make assertions otherwise isn't based on the Bible but on human-influenced religion.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

prove to me humans are so called "intelligent" and not just random self organizing chaotic math problems

whatever reason you give for why humans are "intelligent"

my response will be,,,,,, no it is just random,,,,,, given enough time anything can happen......

Humans are "intelligent" because the design of our brain is very complex, and that design is a result of evolution. The brain activity which takes place inside our brains is a chaotic process, and it is governed by mathematics like everything else in this reality. The activity is just so complex it produces what we call "consciousnesses". But this is where we will get into the debate of whether it's real sentient consciousness or just the illusion of sentient consciousness produced by complex brain activity, which is to say, do we really have free will? And honestly I don't have a conclusive answer to that, it may just be complex activity producing the self-aware illusion.

However I like to explain this problem using chaos theory also. From order comes chaos and from chaos comes order. From simplicity comes complexity and from complexity comes simplicity. When a system becomes too complex it breaks into a state of chaos where the outcomes are unpredictable. The brain is a classic example of a complex system. I believe it's this inherit unpredictable chaos which is utilized by the brain to produce unpredictable frames of consciousness which allow us to act in unpredictable ways and essentially free us from a determined fate, giving us free will to act beyond the equations governing our brain activity, because those equations themselves produce unpredictable chaotic results.

edit on 18/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

thanks that is a nice reply......... I just have a problem with the assumption that nature and the construction of mathematical formulas is a given..... why should these things be obvious and "just exist"

""You need to provide a reason why it's not possible for such simple organisms to be formed in natural random occurrences, because I don't see a reason why it couldn't happen... ""

you said this to TBROOKS......

and my problem is it is not impossible for organisms to be formed in natural random occurrences.......

my problem is with why are they able to do this,.,.. what is the nature of nature,,, that it gives even the slightest potential for anything to happen,,, let alone everything....

my problem is with..... the universe begins to form,,,, and what its made out of can become randomly self replicating life..... you can .... but you cant assume that this is normal,,,, that these things just happen because they can,,,,,,,,,, why can it happen,,,,, what causes this to happen,,,,,,

and if you believe that life started naturally on earth,,,, and this life utilizes the natural energies of the universe via the sun,,,,,,, then you must believe that leading back to the big bang was the beginning of biological evolution,,, that all energy shares a common ancestor,,, and that as the universe physically evolved,,,, along with this and during this,,, biological life sprouted on the earth, and began to evolve according to the terms of near infinite time and potential allowed them too.

biological life would just be another version of the dynamics between energy and force.... everything in the universe would be related and possible,,,, there would be no such thing as unnatural or super natural,,,, because anything that is possible,,, would naturally be possible,,, there for,,,,,, natural..


so even when we create robots,,,,, this is all natural,,,,, they cannot have artificial intelligence,,,, it will only be intelligence,,,,,, since the birth of the universe with no "supernatural" interruption,,, the natural way of things,,, would be that life would form on this planet,,, and this life would create robotic life,,,, same idea as our biologic life,,, just out of different elements,,,, all the elements are related,, and everything is only energy...... these intelligent robots would be just as natural as ourselves,,,, because everything that happens is natural.....

How the universe came in to existence has nothing to do with evolution...but please check this lecture by Lawrence Krauss, " A Universe From Nothing"

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by john_bmth


Straight from Wikipedia...
Special relativity...

It generalizes Galileo's principle of relativity—that all uniform motion is relative, and that there is no absolute and well-defined state of rest (no privileged reference frames)

Basically there is no center of universe, thus its from your frame of reference. Goes against most peoples common thoughts for motions but there you have it.

reply to post by Tbrooks76


I ask my question again: do you believe the sun revolves around the Earth?

Originally posted by Shane

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

His stones?

Dinosaurs with testicles?

The only reason to hate evolution is the face that it didn't treat you very well genetically.

I find that people who deny evolution have a hard time reading and understanding its intricacies.

reply to post by Tbrooks76

Ok, the big-bang, rather it is officially part of the theory is required; it provides the environment for which evolution is to take place. So though they consider separate it can’t really be excluded from one another.

So according to you, the theory of gravity can't be proven either...just like all of medicine can't be proven either. Why? Because the big bang creates the "environment". That makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER!

Evolution states… "Life on Earth originated and then evolved from a universal common ancestor " Unless your willing to admit that ancestor is some type of God then you are saying that ancestor is self-created life. If there is some other option what is it?

No, what I'm saying is that there are various hypothesis regarding how life started (abiogenesis, god, etc.), and once life started (no matter how it happened), evolution took over and resulted in the biodiversity we see today.

It doesn't matter how life started, biodiversity is still proven to happen through evolution. I say proven because we have objective evidence backing it up, and we're actively applying the theory in modern medicine.

1, this depends on what fossil record you look at, creationist have been using the same fossil records to prove their points. You can always make evidence fit your theory’s needs. As evolution you can find a fossil and say see this a transitional state, I creationist look and pull up a fossil of a fish that looks the same then as today and say I don’t see any transitions, where the evolution?

That's simply not true. A creationist is simply not educated enough to see the difference in those fossils. Show me one fossil that looks exactly like an animal alive today

2. A creationist has no problem with DNA being similar between different animals, you say common ancestor, and we say common creator. We make up words every other day in English, we don’t rewrite the whole alphabet for every new word, why would God. In fact we could say he might have used the same materials in animals as us so that we have a working food chain. We can’t really process not biologic stuff too well and get all the things out of we need to stay living.

There is ZERO objective evidence suggesting a creator was involved. But yeah, DNA proves common ancestry.

3. Migratory trends….not to sure what your talking about, but population trends are in favor of creation.

No, it really doesn't "favor creationism"...please tell me how it does.

And that's what I mean with migratory trends...they are crucial for gene dispersement: LINk

4. Spices….a word made to muddy the waters to provide something in favor of evolution that will contradict the word “kind” which the bible uses. Use to be science used the family interchangeable with work kind and things were categorized in manner for long time. Like all dogs were k9, cats were felines, birds were…birds, and flies were flys or insects. We always categorized things into kinds, unless we are talking about evolution. In lab a fly can be mated with a different type of fly and produce a fly as baby yet using the word spices it can be completely something other than a fly. Two fly mate and had a fly, see the evolution? Where the horn growing out its head, or something new that wasn't there before.

I haven't made this up...speciation is the official term for what creationists call "macroevolution". And the word "species" is as old as Plato for crying out loud

Oh, and evolution doesn't work like you seem to believe. There won't be a horn growing from one generation to the next. Evolution is a gradual change over many many generations. Again...please...read the introduction article about evolution on Wiki. If you make posts like this it's abundantly clear you don't really understand the theory in the first place.

5. We could have all the same knowledge, that is like saying I have to believe in big-bang to learn physics to be an electrical engineer.

Knowing the big bang theory in detail isn't a requirement for working in physics...but knowing the theory of evolution and applying it IS a requirement for the development of some modern medicine. Big difference.

You wrote:
Actually, it's a theory...because it's backed up by objective evidence that hasn't been debunked in over 150 years

It will never be debunked because any evidence provided outside the theory is not accepted. Only evidence that supports the theory is accepted as evidence at all.

What evidence against it? List some examples...

And yet the eye is not evolving to its environment, but devolving.

It's not

So you hate evolution?
But if you deny that it is real, are you not in fact hating something imaginary?
How can you hate something that you refuse to believe exists ?

Originally posted by Tbrooks76

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Tbrooks76

 

Yes, a common ancestor...you know...first life!! It doesn't make any statements regarding how that first life came to be

You only have two options, it created itself or it was created it. That it's what other option do you have

And no matter the outcome of this, evolution would still be the proven theory it is

Either way, we DON'T KNOW how first life started, that's why abiogenesis is a hypothesis and a belief in god(s) is purely faith based due to the lack of objective evidence.

Originally posted by Tbrooks76

Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
After reading the debates between science and religion I must take the stand that creationists believe the Sun revolves around the Earth and all disease is caused by the devil. This is because creationist want to ignore any empirical evidence that does not agree with their views.

Since science cannot prove everything right here, right now, it must be defective. If it is defective can it be believed at all? Wasn't the Earth not being the center of the Universe a religious heresy at one time? What was it that changed our views on this? Oh, that's right, science.

So, what do you believe in science or God? Science = Earth around Sun. God = Sun around Earth. Or is it God, until I am forced to believe otherwise?

The bible say Earth is center of the known universe, and 1 day is 1000 years….Yeah sounds stupid when you think of it in non relativistic motions…but one theory has both these concepts. Consider when you get into physics, Einstein’s theory of relativity teaches, because all things in the universe are in motion we can never know where the center is, thus your prospective point can be considered the center of the universe, and where are you…Earth. Earth, more specifily you on earth, can be consider the center of your universe. Also relativity teaches that space/time are variables and not fixed.

That's complete and utter nonsense...and a gross misinterpretation of Einstein's theory

Modern cosmology (and that includes Einstein and Hubble) state that there is no centre, and it just seems as if things in the distance move faster because of Hubble's law. So sure, you can consider earth the centre...but then you also have to believe the illusion you see in the desert is real water

LINK

Also...passed 10k stars

And all thanks to threads like this one.

They're all the bloody same and equal to me writing:

"Christians are wrong because it says humans have elephant heads in the bible."

I wish some people would at least do some basic research before criticising science. At least read the Wiki article for crying out loud

Anyway...g'night:

S&F my friend. I hope English is not your first language, by the way. Please say it isn't.

_________________

There is just as much proof to say that humans
evolved from mermaids, Poseidon and dolphins; after all we eat
seafood, swim, and are smoothed skinned, no tails/claws, unlike
tree dwelling monkeys.

I becha that the monarchy was the first to start these theories.

__________________

Originally posted by ToneDeaf
_________________

There is just as much proof to say that humans
evolved from mermaids, Poseidon and dolphins
__________________

Fair enough, mermaids eh? Could you provide any of this "proof"? I'd like to see that.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Also...passed 10k stars

And all thanks to threads like this one.

They're all the bloody same and equal to me writing:

"Christians are wrong because it says humans have elephant heads in the bible."

I wish some people would at least do some basic research before criticising science. At least read the Wiki article for crying out loud

Anyway...g'night:

edit on 18-6-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

He looks like a charlatan himself. Believing in evolution is ok if you haven't researched deeply in ancient civilizations (christians and muslims are not ancient by the way and have been murdering for a single "truth" throughout their short history)

THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES A LA DARWIN

"An ape with a pliable thumb and big brain,
when the gift of gab he managed to gain,
as lord of creation established his reign,
which nobody can deny!"

Lord Neaves 1871, Red lions, Edinburgh

The guy is still laughing in his grave.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Tbrooks76

 

I suggest you go learn a little about the theory of evolution before you waste anymore time trying to prove it wrong, and I stress waste and trying heavily....

As well...

The big bang isn't part of the theory of evolution. at all. in any way what so ever... no matter how hard you want it to.

Oh snap!!!!! Op, you just got virtually bitch slapped

I don't like some natural phenomena either, e.g. I'm not a big fan of rain. Nonetheless, I can't really say that I hate any natural phenomena (rain is very important), except maybe gravity since it makes it impossible for me to fly on my own, but then, without gravity there probably wouldn't be any matter. Also, - 9,000 points for OP because of confusing the theory of evolution with abiogenesis, origin of the Universe, etc. Even in this forum, this incorrect belief has been debunked probably over 1,000 times. Why is this so difficult for most creationists here to understand? I'm sure the synthesis of the theory of evolution, and theories and hypotheses on abiogenesis, origin of the Universe, etc., has a name too, but it's not called evolution. Deal with it.

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
There are SIX different types of "evolution" and only one is proven fact.

Please watch this video I uploaded to my youtube:

That's a really good video man, thanks for posting it. It really helps to distinguish between what is accepted, by science, as evolution and what is compromised of educated guesses.

This thread, however, is a shambles