Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Religious Nature of Evolution, or Lack Thereof
mark24
Member (Idle past 5185 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 121 of 212 (111442)
05-29-2004 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by almeyda
05-29-2004 7:09 AM


Almeyda,
Anyway creationists have showed me the flaws in dating methods, evidence against old earth etc.
Again, I ask, like what?
I don't talk to bare links, in any case it is against forum guidelines to post them.
In your own words what is wrong with the dating methods? Why do they agree so strongly?
For the umpteenth time of asking, please adress this post. If you no longer have any disagreement with point C/ , please note your assent in the thread linked to.
Thank you,
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by almeyda, posted 05-29-2004 7:09 AM almeyda has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5898 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 122 of 212 (111458)
05-29-2004 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by almeyda
05-29-2004 7:09 AM


almeyda
I have listened to the audio tape and I see now where the confusion you have is. This Ken Hamm is obviously unaware of how science works and what makes it such a powerful tool. Yes assumptions are made in science but Ken seems to think that that is a weakness. What he doesn't mention is that we all make assumptions all the time including him. As he mentions with dating methods no one was there in order to see things actually progress. This is not necessary since science is not,nor has ever been,about ascertaining absolute certainty.Science makes assumptions and then tests them against the world we are trying to understand.
Let me ask you a question. When you lift a heavy item how do you think this is possible? What process is involved in the body that allows you to do so? Now ask yourself how you came to that conclusion and tell me what assumptions you had to make in order to arrive at that conclusion.
We will continue this post by post and in the process I will show you how things are not always as they seem. Okay by you?
This message has been edited by sidelined, 05-29-2004 11:58 AM

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. "

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by almeyda, posted 05-29-2004 7:09 AM almeyda has not replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 212 (111527)
05-30-2004 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by jar
05-29-2004 11:06 AM


Re: almeyda
I dont know exactly how far they are. Millions of light years away?. Im not sure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 05-29-2004 11:06 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by jar, posted 05-30-2004 12:50 AM almeyda has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 124 of 212 (111528)
05-30-2004 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by almeyda
05-30-2004 12:46 AM


Re: almeyda
Okay, let's use your figure of millions of light years (actually the furtherest we've been able to see is a little over 13 billion light years away but let's stick right now to your millions).
If you can see the light from them then they had to be created at least millions of years ago. Right?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 12:46 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 5:08 AM jar has replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 212 (111541)
05-30-2004 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by jar
05-30-2004 12:50 AM


Re: almeyda
In an evolutionary world yes. But creationists like Dr Russell Humphreys & his Starlight & Time book has shown great models to answer the question of starlight and time in a young universe. But dont get too confident. As light travel has even caused problems for the big bang model.
Light-Travel Time: A Problem for the Big Bang | Answers in Genesis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by jar, posted 05-30-2004 12:50 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Unseul, posted 05-30-2004 7:05 AM almeyda has replied
 Message 130 by jar, posted 05-30-2004 10:27 AM almeyda has not replied

  
Unseul
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 212 (111542)
05-30-2004 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by almeyda
05-30-2004 5:08 AM


Re: almeyda
Erm, that article is quite amusing. Not being a physicist i cannot argue if its attack on the big bang is correct, however the article just sorta glosses over the fact that the bible doesnt fit either. It just says that Big Bang cant be right. This isnt a problem for science just means another theory is needed, however the bible is still going to be just as wrong.
Can we have a few basic ecerpts from the book you mentioned, just some of the basic theories, cheers.
Unseul

Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life....
Do unto others before they do unto you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 5:08 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 9:23 AM Unseul has not replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 212 (111545)
05-30-2004 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Unseul
05-30-2004 7:05 AM


IRe: almeyda
It was actually refering to evolutionists who try to criticise creation for their problem with starlight and that they cannot speak so much as a problem is evident also in their model. And you say the Bible will continue to be wrong, well no. Just as evolutionists need models, so can creationists. People think the Bible never changes well it doesnt but creation advances, new findings happen just as they happen for evolution. I have his book actually and am currently reading it. Its very hard to just say what the hypothesis is. Me not being a physicist either but he does a good job at making it as plain english as possible. But heres a quick link on Dr Humphreys book & its attacks from critics. (Not as relevant as i would want to show, but its something).
Missing Link | Answers in Genesis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Unseul, posted 05-30-2004 7:05 AM Unseul has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by JonF, posted 05-30-2004 9:43 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 131 by sidelined, posted 05-30-2004 2:37 PM almeyda has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2160 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 128 of 212 (111546)
05-30-2004 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by DarkStar
05-28-2004 9:46 PM


Re: Evolution a Religion?
Here you go, darkstar:
http://www.cesame-nm.org/...ontributions/bible/position.html
CHURCHES THAT SPECIFICALLY DISCOURAGE A LITERAL READING OF THE GENESIS ACCOUNT:
Unitarian Universalist Church. "Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and science"
CHURCHES THAT IMPLICITLY OR EXPLICITLY ENCOURAGE OR PERMIT A NONLITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE, OR THAT RECOGNIZE THE TRUTH OF EVOLUTION:
The Catholic Church. "Today, more than a half century after this encyclical, new knowledge leads us to recognize in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis. ... The convergence, neither sought nor induced, of results of work done independently one from the other, constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory."
Most Protestant churches hold the Bible to be the sole source of doctrine, but generally do not imply that the entire Bible is to be accepted as dogma.
Disciples of Christ. "Faith with understanding; rationality and faithfulness in action, approaching the scriptures with reverent intelligence." This church strongly supports congregational and individual autonomy, and the position of individual churches may vary from this statement.
The Episcopal Church USA. "The Bible, interpreted in accordance with the findings of modern biblical scholarship, is the sole criterion in matters of dogma."
United Church of Christ. "The right of private judgment and the liberty of conscience are rights and privileges for all." This church strongly supports congregational and individual autonomy, and the position of individual churches may vary somewhat,
United Methodist Church. "Methodists acknowledge that scriptural reflection is influenced by the processes of reason, tradition and experience, while aware that Scripture is the primary source and criterion of Christian doctrine."
Greek Orthodox. "While the Bible is the written testimony of God's revelation, Holy Tradition is the all-encompassing experience of the Church under the abiding guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit." Other Orthodox Churches hold similar positions.
CHURCHES THAT STRESS THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE, BUT MAKE NO CLEAR JUDGMENT ON INERRANCY:
Presbyterian Church USA. "For Presbyterians and others of the Reformed tradition the Bible is the means by which Christian believers come to understand how God has been present with humanity since the beginning of time and is present in our world today."
Reformed Church USA. "We believe the Bible is God's Word for every person, made understandable and alive through the Holy Spirit's ministry. It is more than a textbook; it is the living Word of God, the source of all revelation of God's will, and the norm by which all teaching must be checked."
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. "The canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the written Word of God. Inspired by God's Spirit speaking through their authors, they record and announce God's revelation centering in Jesus Christ. Through them God's Spirit speaks to us to create and sustain Christian faith and fellowship for service in the world."
American Baptist Church, USA. "The Bible, interpreted by the individual, is regarded as the ultimate religious authority in matters of faith and practice."
Latter Day Saints (Mormons): "The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is divinely inspired scripture, as is the Holy Bible." This church receives interpretation of the Bible from church leaders; interpretation is subject to change.
Please also note at this website the chart at the bottom of the page which lists the number of millions of people who are members of the various denominations.
The number of people belonging to denominations that claim inerrancy in the Bible is just over 41 million, while those belonging to denominations which do not profess inerrancy is just over 100 million.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 05-30-2004 08:26 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by DarkStar, posted 05-28-2004 9:46 PM DarkStar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by DarkStar, posted 06-04-2004 9:10 PM nator has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 158 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 129 of 212 (111548)
05-30-2004 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by almeyda
05-30-2004 9:23 AM


Re: IRe: almeyda
But heres a quick link on Dr Humphreys book & its attacks from critics. (Not as relevant as i would want to show, but its something).
Missing Link | Answers in Genesis
That's pretty funny. It remindds me of Nixon declaring vitory in Vietnam.
Of course, Humphrys' claims to have answered his critics, but he hasn't; he's just waffled and waved his arms. The fundamental (but far from the only) problem with his hypothesis is that it is contradicted by the eveidence and he jsut won't admit that. His refusal to engage Ross's criticisms in an appropriate forum is also telling. He insists on a formal debate, which is not how science is carried out. Science is carried out by written discussion with time for research and reflection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 9:23 AM almeyda has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 130 of 212 (111555)
05-30-2004 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by almeyda
05-30-2004 5:08 AM


Re: almeyda
Once again they are just trying slight of hand and you need to watch the magician.
First, the Big Bang has absolutely NOTHING to do with what you and I are talking about. If GOD placed the stars in their present locations and if they are simply sitting there instead of rushing away or towards us, the distances would still be the same.
Sorry Almeyda, but Mr. Newton is way off in left field.
Let me ask you yet another question.
If, regardless of which mechanism you choose to use to create your Universe, when you can look at stars that are more than 6000 light years away, then how can the Universe be younger?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 5:08 AM almeyda has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5898 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 131 of 212 (111581)
05-30-2004 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by almeyda
05-30-2004 9:23 AM


Re: IRe: almeyda
almeyda
From the AIG website.
The problem is this: even assuming the big bang timescale, there has not been enough time for light to travel between widely separated regions of space.
Now that we have effectively eliminated the big bang,{not really, I know} we now must ask what do creationists do since if this is correct then their model of 6000 years is also eliminated.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. "

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by almeyda, posted 05-30-2004 9:23 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by almeyda, posted 05-31-2004 12:14 AM sidelined has replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 132 of 212 (111689)
05-31-2004 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by sidelined
05-30-2004 2:37 PM


Re: IRe: almeyda
Well they are both forms of science. Trying to find truth. The truth is neither is fact and neither is more fact. Evolution has become the only accepted answer to the origins in the mainstream world therefore evolution seems to be the only true science. But this is by far not the case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by sidelined, posted 05-30-2004 2:37 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by jar, posted 05-31-2004 12:16 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 134 by sidelined, posted 05-31-2004 12:50 AM almeyda has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 133 of 212 (111690)
05-31-2004 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by almeyda
05-31-2004 12:14 AM


Re: IRe: almeyda
We've been over this many, many times. Evolution is NOT a religion. Creationism is NOT a science.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by almeyda, posted 05-31-2004 12:14 AM almeyda has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5898 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 134 of 212 (111694)
05-31-2004 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by almeyda
05-31-2004 12:14 AM


Re: IRe: almeyda
almeyda
Evolution has become the only accepted answer to the origins in the mainstream world therefore evolution seems to be the only true science.
Evolution is accepted because it not only explains the evidence we collect and observe it also allows us to show what we could find that would allow us to disprove it. Try as we might we have not yet been successful.This is what allows science to triumph in explaining the natural world. Do not accept the arguement presented, try to find the chink in its armour. Scientists do that to theories all the time. They question,they experiment,they test a theory's predictions and this is why science is so succesful.
The best mind's in their fields scrutinize it on a daily and even hourly basis.If you think creationists are tough on models of nature put together by scientists that is NOTHING compared to the barrage of withering criticism that scientists heap upon their fellow scientists.It is not simply a matter of weeding out the poor ideas but it also sharpens up the rigour that goes into scientific investigation.
You can take any science and spend years upon years of painstakingly hard mental work and it can all be blown to hell with one simple experiment that falsifies the conclusion it presented.Take physics, the science that has the greatest level of actual understanding and check out the cutting edge of its investigations.
If you do not have a HUGE command of mathematics as well as an great dose of imagination AND understand the leading edge research AND can present a new way of viewing the world that is groundbreaking ,holds up under scrutiny AND is consistent with everything that is already known to be factual you have no business being there. These are mental giants not run of the mill science educators.
I guarantee you can take a year of your life and just begin to scratch the surface of modern scientific knowledge and be humbled BIG TIME.However I highly recommend it for it gives a level of satisfaction that is not matched by many other human activities. If you want a quick taste try this website:
http://www.explorepdx.com/feynman.html
That is 2 websites I have recommended you to check. The choice is yours.I guarantee you it is a source of wonder and beauty.Take care big guy. May the road rise to meet your feet.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. "

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by almeyda, posted 05-31-2004 12:14 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by almeyda, posted 05-31-2004 7:38 AM sidelined has replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 212 (111758)
05-31-2004 7:38 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by sidelined
05-31-2004 12:50 AM


Re: IRe: almeyda
Evolution is accepted because it explains God away and the need of a deity. People want God out the picture so they can then live the way they want to live. Man wants to determine truth. If evolutionists agree with creation, then they must also believe the Bible is right therefore there is a God that will judge each and every one of us according. Of course evolutionists, humanists especially, and other views of people do not want this at all. Thats why evolutionists like Dr Dawkins speak on topics as "the necessity of Darwinism" etc. They cannot let a creator in the door at all costs. The only way to rid the world of this so called alternative is to rid the world of it. This includes christian influence on society, and society being heavily influenced upon secular views. Which by nature eventually win. To win the battle of course society from an early age must be indoctrinated into athiestic evolutionary philosophy (Evolution taught in schools, media, and anything mainstream). And making sure those who educate them have passed through the same indoctrination process. Evolutionary theories will always continually change. What was fact in the past now is discarded by evolutionists themselves. And so on and so on it goes. Creation scientist are like the alternative media. Kinda like whatreallyhappened.com, telling you the real truth of origins. This creation propaganda must be stoped! the humanist yell.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by sidelined, posted 05-31-2004 12:50 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by crashfrog, posted 05-31-2004 7:43 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 137 by JonF, posted 05-31-2004 9:19 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 138 by sidelined, posted 05-31-2004 9:40 AM almeyda has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024