|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The evolution of religion? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
As noted to you before: you need to watch the topic.
You're going to run out of warnings soon.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5827 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
there is no evo proof writes
quote:See, this is a strawman as I tried to point out to you in the other thread. In science there is no such thing as "proof" when it comes to theories. Demanding absolute proof in science is like asking "which way is south?" when you're standing exactly on the south pole. The question makes no sense. You know, someone could turn this around at you and ask for "one real fact of proof" for God. By the way, the computer keyboard is an amazing device. It allows you to compose strings of letters communicate with people all over the world. My favorite part of the keyboard is the shift button that allows me to change from little letters to big letters. Some other keys I really like are the ones that give you apostrophe, period, comma, etc. Of course you could be just an atheist troll who's only trying to make Christians look like idiots. In which case, you are succeeding. "look at all them christians ma"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
please state just one real fact of proof for macro evolution I like the pattern of nested hierachies found in the taxonomy of the species myself. Unfortunately, it's off-topic for this forum. But what luck! There's already a thread open for this very topic! See you there! Speaking personally, I find few things more awesome than contemplating this vast and majestic process of evolution, the ebb and flow of successive biotas through geological time. Creationists and others who cannot for ideological or religious reasons accept the fact of evolution miss out a great deal, and are left with a claustrophobic little universe in which nothing happens and nothing changes. -- M. Alan Kazlev
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
there is no evo proof Member (Idle past 5845 days) Posts: 8 Joined: |
Well then i guess nothing is a fact and facts don't exist.
oh but the evolutionists can claim theres as a proven fact. and teen4christ you should know better than taking shots at people. I would love to say heres the proof there is no other option. the list goes on of the theories and each one can be easily dismissed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2725 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hey, TINEF, it really isn't my place to police the forum, but I'd like to offer some friendly advice.
There has already been a moderator warning on this thread about staying on-topic. When debating on EvC, your posts have to relate directly back to the topic, which, in the case of this thread, is the "evolution of religion," or whether or not religion is a product of evolution. Facts, proof and whether or not evolution can be dismissed are not on-topic here, and, since you're now discussing it in direct violation of a moderator warning, you could get suspended for it. Please open up a topic about the nature of facts and proof, or about how you can dismiss certain "proof" for evolution, if you want to discuss it (as you seem to). But please read some of the threads from the "Biological Evolution" forum that discuss the various things scientists consider proof of evolution before you open your new thread: nobody wants to re-discuss something that gave them a headache when they discussed at length a month ago. I'm Thylacosmilus. Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13038 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Hi 'no proof',
I'm issuing an 8 hour suspension for general unwillingness to constructively engage the topic of discussion. Please read the Forum Guidelines. We don't coddle people here. Those who can't or won't follow the Forum Guidelines get suspended for longer and longer periods, finally permanently.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5827 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
I wrote
quote: To which you responded
quote: You failed to understand what I meant. In science, theories are models that attempt to describe how nature works. All such models are subject to change as we learn new things about the natural world. This is why, ideally, theories can only be disproven. The best we could do with a theory is see how accurate it portrays the real world. In other words, the best we could do is show how much the evidence support the theory. Try to think of it this way. In a trial, a lawyer could question a witness with "are you absolutely 100% sure that...?" This is not a fair question. You could never be absolutely 100% sure of anything. That's also not the point of the trial. The point is is the witness sure beyond a reasonable doubt of whatever it is he is testifying. If you intend to "get scientific", then please learn the formal way to speak in these matters. Again, your question surmounted to "which way is south?" when you're standing on the south pole. The question doesn't deserve an answer.
quote:Evolution is both theory and fact. Do you deny that you are genetically different to a certain degree than your parents? If you do not deny this, then you just agreed that evolution is a fact. quote:Have you ever been to a wedding? Did you go there in rags or did you at least try to dress up a bit? The reason we dress up on occasions like that is to tell the world we have certain respect for the people there. When we go to work, school, or wherever, we typically try to look presentable as a respect to the people we are presenting ourselves to. Why should it be any different for an online conversation? It takes a fraction of a second to press the shift key. It's not like I'm asking you to do a dance or jump through hoops. The other thing is when you are here you are representing what being a Christian is like. Basically, your style of writing tells the world that you don't care about other people or how you are representing Christ.
quote:Oh yeah? Would you like to start a new thread on this? I'd be interested to see what you have to say about this issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3696 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: I have seen two factors impacting here. 1. Science has culminated in the same brick walls it accuses others of. What does anyone know of the origins of anything? This question is the deciding factor between science and belief systems, and we find both have the same result. Non-conclusive. 2. A belief in a Creator is very easily exploitable - which has resulted in many belief stsyetms, all contradictory to each other. The correct view is to distinguish before throwing it all in one green bag. We find here that the contradictions between religions is on two premises: one between the three middle-east religions, and breaking down this further, we find that the two groups which assumed themselves the continuation of the first, namely the OT which predated both by 2000 years, are the cause and possessor of these contradictions. If we remove both those groups from the picture for a moment, we will see that the OT is infact one premise about creation. The other, independent religious group can be that of a nature type deity/ties, which is polytheism. When we further examine this, it will be seen that here too it is monotheistically based, and all the dieties are transitory agents or bridges. So all religions subscribe to a monotheist Creator. The other side of the coin is science, which incorporates atheism. Both those two faculties have no answers of the fulcrum issues. When it is further examined, we find all the basic, plaform paradigms of science is taken from the OT, science emerging from genesis very clearly, including the premises of finity [v1], entropy [v2], light as a primodial force [v3], critical seperations of elements as an anticipation for life, dual-gendered origins for life, evolution [chronological emergence of species], resting [ceasing] of creation. The standout factor in all of this is not the validity of science or religion, as both these cannot answer beyond basic, simple workings of items. One must not be fooled that we can make a PC today and fly to the moon - and this was impossible 3000 years ago; we equally could not do what was done and thought of 3000 years ago - thus the relativity factor rules here. The true mysterious factor is that both these faculties, religion and science, are equally in balance from the pov of answerring fulcrum questions of origins: neigher can. And to maintain this critical balance, has to be a purposeful and intentional construct, as opposed a fluke. Both faculties are only privy to the B to Z, with the A factor being ever elusive. Strangely, this prevailing situation was first declared in Genesis. The A factor is barred, and it does not signify a lacking in human mind power. Science can only be said to prevail, if it can show and prove origins, as opposed making a car go faster or telling us why we are sick and what will cure us - these are automatically accumulated knowledge conclusions which emerge only in its due time - we cannot stop this knowledge accumulation if we tried very hard to do so; but these answer nothing of fulcrum issues - thus the finger pointing at religion or creationism and monotheism cannot be dented by science. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3696 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Why is there even a doubt evolution came from Genesis? Here, the telling factors are: 1. The first recording of the chronological emergence of species, from vegetation to water/air/land based life. 2. The premise of Adaptation also comes from Genesis. The only variance with ToE is that Genesis says this is via the occurence of the seed, which is able to transmit all data, including skeletal, dna and biological imprints. The variance in speciation is that ToE directs all life's diversity as originating from one cell, while genesis limits this whithin its kind, meaning veg/water/air/land/human based. IOW, humans, teddy bears and pineapples never inter-cross for speciation, not even via turns and events accumulated over millions of years. The variations in the two modes of evolution does not negate where science's version of evolution comes from. Darwin started out as a religious man, and became obsessed with Genesis. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024