Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8751 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-27-2017 12:26 AM
123 online now:
Coyote, Dredge, DrJones*, ramoss (4 members, 119 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Roshankumar1234
Post Volume:
Total: 809,075 Year: 13,681/21,208 Month: 3,163/3,605 Week: 505/933 Day: 3/40 Hour: 3/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
Author Topic:   Questions on Evolution.
jar
Member
Posts: 28838
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 31 of 43 (168374)
12-15-2004 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:08 AM


Re: improbablity of what
I think my mind is trying desperately to hold on to the beliefs that I've had my whole life. Ugh, the funny thing is that I thought that I was open minded about this whole thing. The problem that we as fundamentalists have with the whole Evolution side of things is that almost all of us see it as a direct attack on our faith,

Please understand that Evolution and the TOE are NOT an attack on Christianity. Many of what have been called evos here are infact devout Christians. And almost every single major Christian and Jewish organization and Church have come out in support of teaching the Theory of Evolution and opposing creationism.

No one here wants to see you lose your faith. But as Bishop Sims (Atlanta dioces of the Episcopal Church) said in reference to the Genesis stories,

Insistence upon dated and partially contradictory statements of how as conditions for true belief in the why of creation cannot qualify either as faithful religion or as intelligent science.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:08 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

Lammy
Member (Idle past 68 days)
Posts: 3575
From: Chicago Suburbs
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 32 of 43 (168377)
12-15-2004 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:08 AM


Re: improbablity of what
CT writes:

The problem that we as fundamentalists have with the whole Evolution side of things is that almost all of us see it as a direct attack on our faith, that God didn't create the universe, an idea reinforced by the fact that evolution has been a secular institution for a very long time, and most of the proponents of it are athiests or agnostics, or whatever people say when they don't believe in God.


It's simply not true that evolution is completely a secular thing. The vast majority of the scientists that came up with the principles of evolution were christians. Darwin himself was a christian. Mendel, the father of genetics, was a priest.

Also, have you ever considered that because god is all powerful and all knowing that he might have created the universe with more complex principles than what is said in the bible?

If god is all powerful and all knowing, why shouldn't it be the case that he created the universe with the natural laws? What is wrong with an all powerful and all knowing god to create the universe in such a complex way that we still don't know most of the things about it?

My personal opinion is that the fundy view of god is too simplistic.

Say that I am a a world famous inventor. I then invent a super computer that could solve all of the world's problems. Then comes along the fundies who argue that the computer isn't complex at all, that it is only made of some simple material and me snapping my fingers to make it the way it is. How do you think I would feel? After all the efforts I put into building this super computer, how do you think I would feel if the fundies claim that it's really not that complicated?

The fact of the matter is that evolution, along with all the other natural laws, are very complex and take much more than a life time to learn and investigate. Creation is a very simple idea that any 10 year old can memorize and repeat, "goddunit."

Which one more accurately portray an all powerful and all knowing being? A set of very complex laws or a very simple idea came up by primitives thousands of years ago? You decide.

Added by edit.

Do you ever want to have children? Would you like your children to go to school and learn as much knowledge that is available out there as possible or would you rather have them sit in the dark and know nothing but the phrase "goddunit" to explain everything that happens in their lives?

If we are all god's children, do you think that he would rather us trying to investigate and find out all the wonders of the universe that he had put out there or do you think he would rather have us remain ignorant and never truly know about the true scale of his creation?

Simply say "goddunit" all the time isn't going to help you learn the laws of electromagnetism, or the germ theory of disease, or the drag forces, etc...

This message has been edited by Lam, 12-15-2004 01:32 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:08 AM CreepingTerror has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:28 AM Lammy has responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8776
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 33 of 43 (168379)
12-15-2004 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:08 AM


Difficult for you
Apologies, I read to much into that. I think my mind is trying desperately to hold on to the beliefs that I've had my whole life. Ugh, the funny thing is that I thought that I was open minded about this whole thing. The problem that we as fundamentalists have with the whole Evolution side of things is that almost all of us see it as a direct attack on our faith, that God didn't create the universe, an idea reinforced by the fact that evolution has been a secular institution for a very long time, and most of the proponents of it are athiests or agnostics, or whatever people say when they don't believe in God.

We begin to run off topic but .....

Not having been a believer (but many here have been) it is hard for me to totally understand how difficult it is for you. However, I do think I can understand a bit and sympathise.

Many Christians (some of my best friends are you know ) are very much against the literalists "cults" (as some call them) because of the damage they can do to a person's faith.

The literalists paint this simplistic view of both the world and God and then (just to top it off) lie about much of it. When a reasonably intelligent individual is subject to this for their whole life there is a danger they will lose their faith when they gain more knowledge.

Evolution is not a secular institution. It may be less than half of biologist, geolgists and the like that are believers but it is still a largish minority. Reasonably sophiticated believers, theologins and church leaders have no problem with it. Thus a majority of believers accept the science behind biology, geology and cosmology.

It is the few that cower in fear of the light of knowledge. It maybe that some had their faith damaged by the discovery that the Earth is not the center of the solar system. A very weak faith indeed. It maybe that some would have their faith damaged by an understanding of physics and/or biology and/or geology. A very weak faith indeed.

Don't blame the atheist or the scientists for this problem. Don't blame the enlightened theologians or believers for this problem. Put the blame where it belongs. It belongs with those who are unable to grasp the true scale of the creation. The blame belongs with those who worship a book rather then God and wish to believe in the simple story told there rather than the grand story written into the creation itself. It is the fault of those who cower in the dark and run from the light of knowledge. It is the fault of those who lie about our understanding of the natural world and set up children entrusted to them for a possible loss of faith when exposed to the truth.

This message has been edited by NosyNed, 12-15-2004 01:26 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:08 AM CreepingTerror has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:55 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

CreepingTerror
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 43 (168382)
12-15-2004 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Lammy
12-15-2004 1:23 AM


Re: improbablity of what
WOAH WOAH WOAH. Easy there. I was not saying that Evolution is against christianity, nor was I saying that It was a completely secular thing. It is a secular institution though, not a christian one, and if my most was to all encompassing for you I apologize. But I was saying that, and I quote "almost all of us see it as a direct attack on our faith" we see it as, not that it is. Sorry if I didn't communicate that.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Lammy, posted 12-15-2004 1:23 AM Lammy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by NosyNed, posted 12-15-2004 1:35 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded
 Message 36 by Lammy, posted 12-15-2004 1:41 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded
 Message 40 by Dr Jack, posted 12-15-2004 8:37 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8776
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 35 of 43 (168384)
12-15-2004 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:28 AM


Sorry
Remember we have heard the line about "evilution" being the cause of all of societies ills over and over and over.

I (even as an atheist) agree that something is lost from the community when the gathering together that a church can be is weakened. Myself, I don't want belief in the supernatural to be the basis for this sinew of the community but I don't know what else we have to replace it as yet. For this reason I (somewhat) encouraged my daughter to go to church when she wanted to look into it. I also tried, actively, to get my son to go to church groups. However, it didn't "take" at all.

My daughter, especially, spends far too much time on the internet (as I do ) and her exposure to Christianity has been way too much of the fundy sort. I have to remind her not to judge all by the totally nonsensical things that are put forward by those that she is exposed to.

If the devil is at work against Christianity the most powerful of his minions aren't the atheists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:28 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

Lammy
Member (Idle past 68 days)
Posts: 3575
From: Chicago Suburbs
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 36 of 43 (168385)
12-15-2004 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:28 AM


Re: improbablity of what
CT writes:

It is a secular institution though,


It has become secularized for a very simple reason, the enlightened people that were involved, most of which were christians, saw the problem with christian fundamentalism interfering with finding truths.

Here is an example. Before Copernicus, Kepler, and, most notably, Galileo figured out the heliocentric model of the solar system through empiricle data, everyone was forced to accept the geocentric model because of (1) since god created the universe that the universe must be perfect, (2) we are god's children therefore we are special, and (3) therefore we must be in the center of the universe and that the universe is unchanging. All of these were doctrines with no objective evidence whatsoever.

Now, imagine the scientific community approaching and trying to solve the various mysteries of the universe and having the christian fundamentalists tell them what they can and can't do or can say and can't say? It would significantly handicap the intellectual minds that are out there.

Secularizing science is perhaps the greatest achievement we ever made. We are no longer handicapped by unfounded doctrines that are based on ignorance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:28 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

  
CreepingTerror
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 43 (168387)
12-15-2004 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by NosyNed
12-15-2004 1:25 AM


Re: Difficult for you
I guess I should say that I believe in the book and I worship God. My faith in God has not yet been shaken, even though I am re-assessing creation. I have never believed that Genesis was a literal story, and I have NEVER cowered in fear from knowledge. You imply that every Fundamentalist that disagrees with evolution knows the facts, but refuses to accept them. I'd say that all most people know is that Evolution is the antithesis (Most certainly not saying that it is) of Creation and God, and having faith in God, and possibly not caring so much how we got here, accept it.

I mean look at the title of this web site. "Creation vs Evolution" A creationist comes in here under the immediate assumption that he will have to defend his views that God created everything against evolutionists. It's saying things like fundamentalists are afraid of the truth that make them come in here and defend their faith. You may not think it, but you are attacking a vast majority of christians directly when you say that kind of stuff.

If you wouldn't mind, Ned, when you say you are an Atheist, what do you mean. If you'd rather not get into it, then fair enough.

And to Lam, I'd have to say that there were deeper issues involved in the whole "the earth is the center and we're right thing". Myself, I'm Pentacostal, and my roots come from people that split off from the church of that time, mainly due to tranlation problems with the . The root problem is that the Catholic church of the time saw their interpretation of scripture was right, that they should be the only ones to have access to the bible(hence the latin bible, very few people could read latin).

And just in case I am getting this horribly wrong, would someone toss out a definition of a fundamentalist please.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by NosyNed, posted 12-15-2004 1:25 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Lammy, posted 12-15-2004 1:59 AM CreepingTerror has responded

Lammy
Member (Idle past 68 days)
Posts: 3575
From: Chicago Suburbs
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 38 of 43 (168388)
12-15-2004 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:55 AM


Re: Difficult for you
CT writes:

...would someone toss out a definition of a fundamentalist please.

Haha. Been waiting all night to say this. Like pornography, I'll know a fundy when I see one


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:55 AM CreepingTerror has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 9:39 AM Lammy has not yet responded

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6096
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 39 of 43 (168402)
12-15-2004 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 12:29 AM


Re: improbablity of what
CreepingTerror responds to me:

quote:
Good post, except for the part where you told me to shut up because I'm not as smart as you.

No, I was not saying you're not as smart as me. I was saying that it seems you may not be as experienced. Just because people are brilliant doesn't mean they are capable. Stephen Hawking is a genius, no doubt, but I would doubt if he understood the deep complexities of open heart surgery. While a good grounding in investigative pursuits can help a person figure out how one might go about solving a problem, it doesn't really help in the actual solving. Experience and familiarity with a subject count for something and when we're dealing with fields that are as wide-reaching and all-encompassing as evolution, it requires a tremendous amount of work and effort to effectively discuss it.

I am not a biologist. I'm a mathematician. However, in the process of getting my math degree I took a fair amount of biology (population bio is very math-centric). I wouldn't dream of claiming I understand it all, but I do have some experience. I've read the books, done the homework, and spent some time in the lab.

Now, I don't want to get into a fight over credentialing. That's the logical fallacy of the argument from authority. People aren't right because they're important or have sheepskins out the wazoo. They're right because they have the evidence and analysis to back up their claims. But in order to get the evidence and do the analysis, you have to get your hands a little bit dirty. The wonderful thing about science is that anybody can do it.

Take astronomy, for example. It doesn't take a lot of equipment to become an amateur stargazer and if you're willing to spend hours in the cold, dark night far away from civilization in order to get away from the light pollution, you can do an amazing amount of work. Many new celestial objects are discovered by amateur astronomers. The sky is so big and events happen so quickly that no one person or group can possibly see all of it. The professional astronomers find the amateur ones quite helpful because they are looking where the professionals aren't. While you won't be able to get data as detailed or far reaching as the Hubble, every comet and asteroid we find is more information about how the solar system came to be and how it functions. By all means, go out and look up.

My comment was a challenge, though. Consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you're wrong. If (and mind you, I said, "if") that were the case, what would you do to find out how things really functioned? You'd have to go out and look at things, fiddle with them, ask others for their experiences, share your results, and try to replicate theirs, right?

My question was asked to find out just how much of that you have done. It isn't a crime not to have done much. Nobody can be an expert on everything. And even the experts weren't always so and had to start somewhere. Everybody has ideas about how things ought to be, but hopefully you will approach this subject with the open mind you said and I hope you have.

quote:
What are some examples of speciation in a laboratory, not saying it can't happen mind you, just I'd like to know what they are.

Here are a few...and even some at higher levels of taxa:

Observed Instances of Speciation
Some More Observed Speciation Events

Ishikawa M, Ishizaki S, Yamamoto Y, Yamasato K.
Paraliobacillus ryukyuensis gen. nov., sp. nov., a new Gram-positive, slightly halophilic, extremely halotolerant, facultative anaerobe isolated from a decomposing marine alga.
J Gen Appl Microbiol. 2002 Oct;48(5):269-79.
PMID: 12501437 [PubMed - in process]

Kanamori T, Rashid N, Morikawa M, Atomi H, Imanaka T.
Oleomonas sagaranensis gen. nov., sp. nov., represents a novel genus in the alpha-Proteobacteria.
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2002 Dec 17;217(2):255-261.
PMID: 12480113 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Fudou R, Jojima Y, Iizuka T, Yamanaka S.
Haliangium ochraceum gen. nov., sp. nov. and Haliangium tepidum sp. nov.: Novel moderately halophilic myxobacteria isolated from coastal saline environments.
J Gen Appl Microbiol. 2002 Apr;48(2):109-16.
PMID: 12469307 [PubMed - in process]

Golyshin PN, Chernikova TN, Abraham WR, Lunsdorf H, Timmis KN, Yakimov MM.
Oleiphilaceae fam. nov., to include Oleiphilus messinensis gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel marine bacterium that obligately utilizes hydrocarbons.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2002 May;52(Pt 3):901-11.
PMID: 12054256 [PubMed - in process]

Ivanova EP, Mikhailov VV.
[A new family of Alteromonadaceae fam. nov., including the marine proteobacteria species Alteromonas, Pseudoalteromonas, Idiomarina i Colwellia.]
Mikrobiologiia. 2001 Jan-Feb;70(1):15-23. Review. Russian.
PMID: 11338830 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Stackebrandt E, Schumann P.
Description of Bogoriellaceae fam. nov., Dermacoccaceae fam. nov., Rarobacteraceae fam. nov. and Sanguibacteraceae fam. nov. and emendation of some families of the suborder Micrococcineae.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2000 May;50 Pt 3:1279-85.
PMID: 10843073 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 12:29 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 40 of 43 (168432)
12-15-2004 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 1:28 AM


Re: improbablity of what
Truth is secular.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 1:28 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

CreepingTerror
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 43 (168437)
12-15-2004 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Lammy
12-15-2004 1:59 AM


Re: Difficult for you
Fine, be that way. From what I've gathered, "fundies" are any, and I'll stay within Christianity here, who have a greater belief in their faith than in the Theory that they see as a direct attack on them. Also most likely the ones that participate in main stream, conservative christianity.

I find it amusing that you guys call "religious people who argue against Evo" fundies. I mean, since when is the literal God created the world in 6 days a fundamental belief of Christianity. I wouldn't get kicked out of my denomination if I started saying that God used Evo to create the world.

It's comments like "Like pornography, I'll know a fundy when I see one", "Truth is secular"(Read: all religion is a lie) and the general, undercurrent that fundies are evil, dishonest, stupid people that represent all that is wrong in the world, that make them rail against you.

I'm sure you hate it when "fundies" bring up darwin, and use him to argue against your theory. It's no different than characterising the fundamentalists that come in here as Dark Ages religious dictators.

and Rrhain, please read the subsequant posts before you decide to argue what I've said. You'll notice that I said that I misread what you said, and apologised.
Edit: Which, on looking back, would be hard to notice, now that the admin post that I replied to is gone.

This message has been edited by CreepingTerror, 12-15-2004 09:39 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Lammy, posted 12-15-2004 1:59 AM Lammy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Dr Jack, posted 12-15-2004 9:42 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3500
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 42 of 43 (168439)
12-15-2004 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by CreepingTerror
12-15-2004 9:39 AM


Re: Difficult for you
It's comments like "Like pornography, I'll know a fundy when I see one", "Truth is secular"(Read: all religion is a lie) and the general, undercurrent that fundies are evil, dishonest, stupid people that represent all that is wrong in the world, that make them rail against you.

(Emphasis mine)

All religion is a lie, but that is not my point. The Truth is, in that is a brute fact about the world, it matters not what religion you hold, the truth is the same and, in that, the Truth is secular.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by CreepingTerror, posted 12-15-2004 9:39 AM CreepingTerror has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3784
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 43 of 43 (168455)
12-15-2004 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Adminnemooseus
12-14-2004 1:43 PM


Closing time
Quoting myself from message 2:
quote:
Kind of a hodge-podge topic.

Going to plug it into the "Short Subjects" forum. Let us get the questions answered, and then close the thing down.


Closing Time.

Adminnemooseus


Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

General discussion of moderation procedures
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-14-2004 1:43 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Prev12
3
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017