|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is macroevolution a religion? Should we rename it evolutiontarianism? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: So what is the credible evidence that creationists have that proves life required supernatural origins?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
kendemyer,
No one knows how the universe began. So what? No one yet has a complete picture as to how life began. So what? We do have ample evidence that the earth has a long history, and that present species have evolved from earlier species, regardless where the very first life came from. Do you want to argue about evidence, or do you want to link to some more websites?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MisterOpus1 Inactive Member |
Ken-
Are we talking about abiogenesis or evolution? Surely an astute researcher such as yourself realizes that these are two separate subjects, right? Is it me, or is there an influx of creationists coming through knowingly/unknowingly mixing these 2 topics together?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kendemyer Inactive Member |
The materialist always run when abiogenesis comes up. I would be afraid of this issue too if I were a materialist who eventually is going to meet his Creator. The materialist often worship the god of science but that god cannot help them escape death. Is science close to solving the "death thing" yet.
Sincerely, Ken [This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-05-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
Ken,
You seem to be posting the same things on two different threads, verbatim. Why don't we get back to the topic at hand. Please identify the religious nature of evolutionary theories. Explain how it is only faith that allows one to accept the theory of evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
wj Inactive Member |
You initiated this thread on macroevolutin, cretin. Now, just for the record, describe the difference between abiogenesis and macrevolution. Then restrict you silliness to macroevolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
And document your claim:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MisterOpus1 Inactive Member |
If we are equating materialist = evolutionist, you are incorrect.
Since abiogenesis has little to do with evolutionary processes, perhaps the evolutionist/materialist chooses not to engage in a conversation that has little/nothing to do with their given field. So why are you continually referring to abiogenesis when it is clear it has no relation to evolution, but continue to address it as though it does? Furthermore, why are you willfully continuing to de-rail the original topic at hand? I believe you have some direct questions that require explanation on your part. Is this your normal practice of argumentation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kendemyer Inactive Member |
You can run from the abiogenesis issue but you cannot hide.
Sincerely, Ken
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kendemyer Inactive Member |
You can run from the abiogenesis issue but you cannot hide.
Sincerely, Ken
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Who's running from the abiogenesis issue? We all said we don't know how the first life developed. So what? Do you now want to talk about your claim about macroevolution being a religion?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kendemyer Inactive Member |
Usually when one builds a house he desires a firm foundation. The materialist have no foundation (e.g. origin of the univers's substance and abiogenesis) for their macroevolutionary hypothesis. In short, the are in a materialist tarpit. And the more they thrash in the tarpit the more evident it is that there is no hope available in the materialist philosophy.
Sincerely, Ken
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Kendemeyer, are you arguing against evolution, or against materialist philosophy? Considering that there are many Christians who accept evolution, the two are not the same.
Edited to add:Anyway, the huge amount of evidence for evolution of life over three and half billion years is plenty good foundation for the theory of evolution. The foundation of any science is the evidence in favor of it, not on any idea of origins. I don't need to know how life originated in order to be certain that life has evolved over the past few billion years; the history after the origin event is pretty well attested, especially during the last half billion years or so. Edited again to add:And you are one to talk about firm foundations, seeing how much faith you have in a religious text with very little scientific or archaeological evidence to back it up. [This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 03-05-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kendemyer Inactive Member |
To previous poster:
I view the macroevolutionary hypothesis as psuedoscience that serves as materialist philosophy window dressing. I realize that some Christians have made bad judgements regarding their decision in regards to this psuedoscience. I would believe there were Jews who decided to make a golden calf, however, and I do not think God was pleased. I do realize, however, that even some agnostics like Michael Denton are beginning to wake up. As you may recall Denton wrote: Evolution: A Theory in Crises. I have heard Denton has either renounced or semi- renounced that book but I I would ask, "Which time was he right? The time he wrote the book or the time he renounced it?" Whether or not Denton renounced or semi- renounced his book I do not know. Sincerely, Ken [This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-06-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
In what way is evolution a pseudoscience? Is there some inconsistency to it? Is there a whole set of phenomena that it does not explain (but should)? Is there an entire set of data that contradict it? Is it so malleable that it can explain any sort of data? Please try to present one or more concrete examples and explain how the example shows that evolution is a pseudoscience.
You may post a link to a website, of course, but please pick some example from it that supports your position and explain it in your own words. By the way, the beginning topic of this thread is that evolution is a religion headed by a Taliban. Is religion the same as pseudoscience? Are you changing your views?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024