Evolution is NOT science: A challenge

since the universe is very, very large (near infinite for all intents and purposes), and there are an infinite number of other universe, the ridiculous probably of you existing, is in fact a certainty on at least one planet, in at least one universe. probably more.whether or not there is a god.that definition, therefore, does not fit creationism. nor does the belief that god created humans/the universe/etc, because many "evolutionists" believe in god.creationism, therefore, is something else, unrelated to simple belief in god, or the probability of human existance. instead, i offer the definition that creationism is the belief that bible is an accurate record of the history of the earth when read as a literal document.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Things also get created here and now, creation is a generally applicable principle, and not confined to biblehistory.The question is from which event on is it a certainty that people would exist. What event caused the existence of human beings, as an effect of that event. I have no clue what multiple or infinite universes have to do with answering that question.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Now I get to use a creationist arguement against one: How do you know? Were you there? (Yeehaw! )But seriously, we can't just take the event that would most likely create human beings and say it happened. We have to, again, look at the evidence. I don't know what event you're referring to, so I can't really say whether or not it fits actual scientific evidence. Same thing I've been saying the whole time: I think evolution happened as a fact but I still believe in God. Evolution is not my religion nor any other sane person's. When did I say that? I said evolution took its course; evolution does not deal with the origins of life on earth but how t moved along to what it is today. It is not the starting line(beginning of earthly life) nor the finish line(present), it is the race track(how everything got from 'start' to 'finish')!Now, as for the Big Bang and all that other stuff, that's not really the discussion, and my beliefs really aren't either. The point that the creationists in this thread are supposed to prove is that evolution is somehow a religion or belief system, and through all the topic drifts, misinformation, and queries on individual's beliefs, they really haven't done a good job at all.But let's continue: Not investigated it? I took biology last year, for one. The teacher was very open minded to the religious kids in the class, too. He even was kind enough to point out the gaps in the evidence for the theory even though they were miniscule and he himself knew evolution for a fact. Oh, and posting on here has been a little research in itself that probably complemented the book I checked out from the library on it a few months ago. Ugh, you got me off on a tangent. Please remember the original point of the thread. It's not "query the views of Born2Preach" It makes perfect sense. I don't care what atheists/social darwinists or whoever else agrees with me that evolution is a fact says. I contest that evolution is a fact and so far this thread and others have done nothing to convince me otherwise. On the other hand, I will contest that God is real, and so far all the posts that attempted to negate the existence of a higher power have been quite futile as well, so I will assert that both creationist and atheists are both terrible misinformed.There! I said it; can we please get back to the original point?

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

But it is on topic, because if you recognize both creation and evolution as facts, then evolution vs creation is more about politics/religion, the values associated to the facts, then about opposing factual claims. Therefore the assertion that evolution is a religion, is correct within the context of the controversy of evolution vs creation, if we assume that both creation and evolution are factually correct. Since the facts do not conflict, the conflict must be basicly political.Now don't go pointing at factual errors in creationism, because I can equally point at errors in evolutionism. That there are some errors does not deny that creation is basically true to fact.But you do not recognize creation as fact it seems. You recognize it as some kind of religious truth wholy beyond factual claims, or what?
You have not tried to find out what event caused human beings to exist, you have merely learned an evolutionist lineage sequence. It's still perfectly possible that all evolutionist history of man is predetermined by a single event somewhere in the earlier universe.Your disinterest in creation, in tracing back events like the appearnce of mankind to their root cause, is merely political isn't it?regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Not at all. Evolution says absolutely nothing about creation aand has nothing to do with creation.The fact that someone might believe in a God, or in Creation does nothing to show that Evolution is a religion.That would make about as much sense as saying that because I like hamburgers, turtles are birds.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Syamsu, Syamsu
I don't understand you, Syamsu.You've again rehashed the same old spam,
but I still don't want your creation and ham!I don't think that creation is true,
Or at least not the one described by you.Evolution is a fact, backed up by evidence
That's all it is, to it faith is irrelavent.I think this way because I know it's true,
That doesn't mean I like the facts, Syamsu Just 'cause evolution has flaws to you,
does not mean that creation is true.And I'm sorry to say that your statement I've booted,
For all attempts to show these flaws get refuted Creation could be true somehow, it's a possibility,
But not in the findings by our current ability.I believe in a God, who created mankind,
But if you look, he created quite elusively, you'll find!He Doesn't have to create like the Bible says, you know.
He can exist either way, he just took longer with the show! I'll tell you again for one last time,
Evolution doesn't care if our origins are divine!The theory deals with life long after the start,
I just said that last post; take a look at that part! Quite possibly indeed, and no one ever denied,
I think that myself, that idea's on my side!God has a plan, of that we're both sure.
Some point in that plan, Evolution occurs.That's what I believe: A Divine orchestration!
Although most people meet that idea with hesitation!And I don't see why; it agrees with science!
But creationists don't seem to want an alliance! I don't have disinterest, I find it facinating.
To learn how God first went about creating!I merely think, that earth's history is not
like the Bible describes, with Moses and Lot.But I truly believe that a God is behind this,
And that when we all die, we find endless bliss.I believe that Lord Jesus is our savior, Amen.
So can't we agree, and bring debate to an end?Syamsu, Syamsu.
Please be openminded, Syamsu.(Good gravy, that was fun!)This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 07-17-2004 05:24 PM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Well that's a nice rhyme, but it's just a restatement of preconceived opinions and not argument.First you say that creation is not a scientific fact now, then you say that it might become to be acknowledged as scientific fact. I somehow fail to have any confidence whatsoever that current science will investigate origins using creationist principles rather then evolutionist principles of description. It can't possibly become a scientific fact, regardless if it's true or not, if too many people support evolution in the evolution vs creation controversy, because it simply will not be investigated. Evolutionists will just note the previous ancestor in the lineage and that settles origins for them. They never try to trace back origins to a root cause, or causes of which the appearance of the organism was an effect.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Okay, sorry. Just wanted to have a little fun. Exactly. I meant that it is a very remote possibility that one day science may find evidence that would scream out the Biblical creation of life on earth. I didn't say they'd go to creationist methods. It's been investigated, and it's been falsified. People only support evolution because the theory fits the evidence, not because they have some preconcieved grudge against creation as literalists describe. That's because evolution doesn't deal with origins, as I've said three times now. Why don't they(biologists) do that? It's not because of any alledged ideals, it's because there are other scientists who deal with origins! And guess what? They have vocal chords like any other human being, and they can tell biologists what they've observed.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Where are those other scientists then, except for fundamentalist creationist scientist, who trace back origins to the events that caused their appearance, in stead of just tracing back lineage? Why would this have to come from outside of biology? It is biologists task to investigate it ofcourse, and their failure to so is suspect. What do you think the effect of the atheism, materialism and social darwinism is that is associated to the fact of evolution, in respect to this issue? It is to block investigation into creation of course.It would be no use to point out some Christian who believes in evolution, because it is a fact that the way things are, atheism, materialism and social darwinism are the main things associated to evolution, and not Christianity. That it is a mater of choice what to associate to evolution theory, doesn't deny that atheism etc. are in fact the main things associated to it.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Before I post anything, I want to apologize if I am simply restating something that has been previously said in this thread, as I have not read the entire thing. Now, with that said...

quote:

---

Where are those other scientists then, except for fundamentalist creationist scientist, who trace back origins to the events that caused their appearance, in stead of just tracing back lineage?

---

Look into the field of Cosmology. One of the main focuses of Cosmologists (I would argue, anyways) is to research the origins of the universe. Note that many of these scientists are highly qualified physicists, chemists, and mathematicians.

quote:

---

Why would this have to come from outside of biology? It is biologists task to investigate it ofcourse, and their failure to so is suspect.

---

I would say that it doesn't HAVE to come from outside of biology, but I would consider the origins of the universe to be more of a physical property than a biological property, thus leaving it in the hands of the physical sciences (physics, chemistry, geology, etc.). Thus, your claim that it is biologists' task to investigate it is HIGHLY suspect as a biased claim (or attack, as the case may be).

quote:

---

What do you think the effect of the atheism, materialism and social darwinism is that is associated to the fact of evolution, in respect to this issue? It is to block investigation into creation of course.

---

So, let me get this straight. You're saying there is some secret organization of atheists, materialists, and social darwinists running around in the scientific community with the sole aim of stopping research into the creation of the universe? Well I sure hope cosmologists are watching their backs, because I'm sure this organization will be sending assassins their way any time now .

quote:

---

It would be no use to point out some Christian who believes in evolution, because it is a fact that the way things are, atheism, materialism and social darwinism are the main things associated to evolution, and not Christianity. That it is a mater of choice what to associate to evolution theory, doesn't deny that atheism etc. are in fact the main things associated to it.

---

In the immortal words of...well...anyone with decent debating skills, show me some statistics on that. Until you can back that claim up with some sort of data, it means gibberish to me. In fact, seeing how as Homepage - adherents claims that 33% of the world's population is Christian and only 14% is non-religious (which encompasses much more than just atheism, mind you!), intuition would tell me that there are more Christians that study evolution than Atheists. But then, if the invisible muskrat says that the study of evolution is dominated by atheists, well I suppose that it is...In short, I think you have some sort of preconceived notion that scientists (or at least evolutionists) are all atheist and out to falsify the creation theory. While I'm sure there are plenty that fit this description, it certainly isn't true of all or even the majority of them.What's worse, you're hashing the scientific method down into something it isn't. Scientists don't choose what evidence to accept or find! Sure, they have hypotheses, but they cannot alter evidence or data based on their own biases. You make it sound like it's some sort of conspiracy that the evidence they find supports evolution and not creation. The fact is, the theory of evolution was formulated OUT of the evidence, and not the other way around. Science isn't developed by making up things out of thin air.This message has been edited by Glordag, 07-18-2004 11:23 AM

---

Where has my heart gone
Trapped in the eyes of a stranger
I want to go back to
Believing in everything
-Evanescence, "Field of Innocence"

Well, if you mean the origin of life, then it is hardly biology is it? It is chemistry up to the point that you have something alive.There are, of course, people working on this problem. I don't know if they call themselves biologists, chemists or abiogenicists. Who cares it is working in an area that doesn't fall into a nice little cubby hole.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 07-18-2004 12:17 PM

Gee, my impression of intellectual climate of opinion surrounding evolution science is not of Christian or likewise belief, I don't see how you can get any other impression except by willing yourself to the impression convenient for your argument. That most people who study evolution are christian or likewise, doesn't mean that they all associate christianty to evolution theory. I'm pretty sure most christians view it as problematical to have for instance a Darwinist view of nature red in tooth and claw, in relation to their Christianity, which generally emphasizes the harmony and order in nature.There are some statistics which say that scientists in general are much atheist, and very atheist for the most influential scientists, and especially atheist in biology, and mathematics the least atheist. Something like more then 10 percent more atheists in biology then in science in general. I find this rather surprising, because I would have expected that there would be more theists in biology, because of being overawed by studying organisms, and the need to give thanks for it.It is appropiate for biology because biology is much linked to complexity and information, and creation is also much linked to that. Anyway, it's a bit absurd to say that for instance the question what event or events caused the existence of plants is not appropiate to biology. We do this every day in our every day lives, try to trace back the origin of something to it's root cause. Please don't make it out as if this is somehow only appropiate for super-expert scientists, although of course things can get very complicated...I wish the atheists / materialists / social darwinists were secret about it, that they didn't mix their ideology into their books, or at least provide formalized and abstract versions of their theories apart from their many times prosaic and ideological accounts.I don't think you have noted the distinction between evolutionist and creationist accounts of origins, so you are essentially arguing a strawman. In evolution the origin is the ancestor, in creation the events which caused it to exist is the origin. The point where evolution theory and creation theory tend to connect is randomness, because randomness is not an effect of a cause, and neither can a root cause be an effect of a cause.Maybe I not explain it so well here, but it is difficult to explain concepts of creation, choice, something not being an effect of what was before, to evolutionists, because they never much think about it for themselves.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

While you might believe that, it certainly is not the case.There is nothing in the TOE that is in anyway problematical with Christianity, nor is there anything in the TOE that reflects a view of nature "Red in tooth and claw". It would be just as reasonable to describe Evolution as "longer beaks to sip the nectar of the flowers".

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Gee, my impression of intellectual climate of opinion surrounding evolution science is not of Christian or likewise belief, I don't see how you can get any other impression except by willing yourself to the impression convenient for your argument.

---

Well, I'm not exactly sure how an "intellectual climate of opinion" is a belief, but I get this impression by discussing this with various people. If I had to sum up my experiences, I'd say about 4 out of 5 Christians I've met believe evolution is true. Now, assuming all non-religious folk believe it is true, and using the percentages from the website I cited in my last post, this still leaves 26.4% Christians that believe evolution to 14% non-religious folk. This works out even if you use 3 out of every 5 Christians. I'm sure you'll dismiss this all as nonsense, though.

quote:

---

That most people who study evolution are christian or likewise, doesn't mean that they all associate christianty to evolution theory. I'm pretty sure most christians view it as problematical to have for instance a Darwinist view of nature red in tooth and claw, in relation to their Christianity, which generally emphasizes the harmony and order in nature.

---

Who said anybody associates Christianity to evolution? Indeed, it is bad practice to associate religion with science of any type. Data must be obtained without any bias whatsoever! Just because you have a problem with Darwinist views doesn't mean all Christians do (see my previous statement). I'm sure you'll meet plenty of Christians that have a problem with it in your church (assuming you go to church, which might be a bad one, I wouldn't know), seeing how as they probably share similar beliefs.

quote:

---

There are some statistics which say that scientists in general are much atheist, and very atheist for the most influential scientists, and especially atheist in biology, and mathematics the least atheist. Something like more then 10 percent more atheists in biology then in science in general. I find this rather surprising, because I would have expected that there would be more theists in biology, because of being overawed by studying organisms, and the need to give thanks for it.

---

Until you can show me "some statistics", then I am forced to dismiss every last bit of this. I, too, would expect more theists in biology than the physical sciences.

quote:

---

It is appropiate for biology because biology is much linked to complexity and information, and creation is also much linked to that. Anyway, it's a bit absurd to say that for instance the question what event or events caused the existence of plants is not appropiate to biology. We do this every day in our every day lives, try to trace back the origin of something to it's root cause. Please don't make it out as if this is somehow only appropiate for super-expert scientists, although of course things can get very complicated...

---

And the physical sciences AREN'T linked to complexity and information?! As a physics major, I must disagree (;. Actually, it's a bit absurd to say that the question of what event or events CAUSED the existence of plants is not appropriate to the physical sciences, especially chemistry. Sure, biology plays a part, but I would argue not nearly as much so as chemistry until there actually IS life. I'm not attempting to make this out as if only super-expert scientists can study this, though I would say they understand it much better than any of us. Besides, there are super-expert scientists in every field, including biology.

quote:

---

I wish the atheists / materialists / social darwinists were secret about it, that they didn't mix their ideology into their books, or at least provide formalized and abstract versions of their theories apart from their many times prosaic and ideological accounts.

---

Why yes, it is so wrong for people to state their opinions on the matter. Even worse, the "Darwinists" actually went about proposing and proving their theory in the correct manner! Oh, the agony! Oh, and if you can't find "formalized and abstract" versions of their theories, then you are most certainly not looking hard enough.

quote:

---

I don't think you have noted the distinction between evolutionist and creationist accounts of origins, so you are essentially arguing a strawman. In evolution the origin is the ancestor, in creation the events which caused it to exist is the origin. The point where evolution theory and creation theory tend to connect is randomness, because randomness is not an effect of a cause, and neither can a root cause be an effect of a cause.

---

If I didn't note the distinction between the two, why would I even be debating this? First, I was raised Christian, and I could still very well be Christian for all you know (although I am not), as I never said otherwise. You can still believe in a creationist beginning and believe in evolution. In fact, there IS no evolutionist account of the origin of the universe. Evolution simply states how organisms evolve/evolved. So, in fact, I think YOU are arguing a straw man by claiming that I failed to note a distinction and by claiming something of evolution that isn't really there. This talk of randomness and cause means nothing to me, perhaps you can clarify?

quote:

---

Maybe I not explain it so well here, but it is difficult to explain concepts of creation, choice, something not being an effect of what was before, to evolutionists, because they never much think about it for themselves.

---

Well, it's true that I have a hard time understanding how things magically appear out of nowhere. If I had proof, however, I most certainly wouldn't deny it (especially if this proof went through the scientific process of peer-review and whatnot). But I'd again like to bring up the Christians that also believe in evolution. Clearly, they are evolutionists that "think about it for themselves". I'd also like to add that I think about it, I just don't give any credit to it at this point.

Doesn't matter, doesn't make it any less right. And I am Christian because I believe in God and Jesus etc., so are you sure about that statement? A few months ago you would've been right; wouldn't it be easier on all of us if the evidence screamed Biblical creation? Yeah, but it doesn't. So I'm going to accept that and try to understand why God made it that way, how about you?Like I said before, the complexity throughout the past up until now and into the future is incredible; this God of reality could be the same one as the Bible described, but much more powerful. And mysterious, and it's common Christian knowledge that God works in mysterious ways. So you discount the indisputable facts that biology has come up with simply because atheists are the ones that find it? That's horribly biased; I hope that's not what you're saying. Syamsu, I've said this a million times and you still haven't apparently understood it : They(biologists) are just recording the facts they observe; they ARE NOT indoctrinating any of their facts with ideology. Period. I understand the difference very well. With all due respect, it's you attacking the strawman of 'conspiring, materialist-plugging atheist' biologists just because the honest reports about the facts they observe don't agree with your predetermined beliefs. Not their fault.
Not at all. Never much think about it for themselves? How about you think about this, and I ask you to do this as a fellow Christian:Think for a minute what if your views were wrong. Just for a little bit.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)