Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Foundations of the Debate
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 46 of 133 (348912)
09-13-2006 7:07 PM


The Real Reason
For the real reason for this site see Defeating "Dr" Kent Hovinds' claims..

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 47 of 133 (348935)
09-13-2006 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Righteous Skeptic
09-13-2006 3:23 PM


Re: The Reason
The reason is to reason with those that don't understand.
Maybe I should make a whole new thread based on the obviousness of creation, but if I tried to do it justice here, it would go completely off-topic ...
Two points:
(1) "creation" has many many meanings and can be anything from deist to hindu to northamerican indian etcetera, and when you get down to the deist level the evidence that the universe is created is that the universe exists - and how it was created was according to what science has discovered: there is no fundamental contradiction between creation (in a general sense) and science.
(2) BUT, because you are a biblical literalist you don't mean just any "creation" - you mean a specific literal biblical creation and a young earth yes? -- Your evidence must be for this level of specific creation and not that of (1) above or it is irrelevant to your argument.
Now, when you do present your evidence for this YEC biblical specific creation, consider that having evidence for a position is not sufficient to make that position credible or valid.
There is evidence you can observe every day that the sun orbits the earth and that the earth appears to be at the center of the universe, but few people believe this is so anymore due to the overwhelming evidence that it is NOT so. One would generally characterize a "flat-earther" or "geo-centrists" as being delusional or disturbed eh? Not because of their belief, but because of their denial of evidence to the contrary.
Thus a position that ignores contradictory evidence, evidence that invalidates and falsifies the position, is of questionable rationality, especially if it then engages in fantasy solutions to real contradictions between position and evidence.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-13-2006 3:23 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 48 of 133 (348978)
09-14-2006 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Righteous Skeptic
09-13-2006 3:43 PM


Re: The Reason
Righteous Skeptic
I am just
saying that the reason that there is a debate because Christians
have a very hard time accepting the TOE because it does not need God
to work. From a Biblical Christian's point of view, that is not an
option, God must have been necessary for the creation of the Earth.
That it is considered that God was necessary for the creation of the earth does no harm to the Theory of Evolution since TOE has nothing to say about creation and would work the same with or without that consideration. You will find many Christians here who do not have a problem with the TOE so I assume this statement is merely your personal point of view on the TOE.
Take your doubts about the validity of the Bible to The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy forum.
I will do so when you take assertions such as this
Theistic evolutionists and intelligent
design proponents have put God at the playwright's desk, where he is
merely starting the machine, but the Bible puts God at center stage.
According to the Bible, human instinct is to want to live in a world
where they are not responsible to God.
to the same place.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-13-2006 3:43 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 49 of 133 (348983)
09-14-2006 2:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Righteous Skeptic
09-12-2006 10:09 PM


because fundies who complain about evolution, think everything that isn't god-centric is god-denying and useless unless it includes god as the central basis for it
this site is here to keep lurkers from falling into the morass of thinking that creationism is a valid science or that ID is science
scienctists who do research and come up with new evidence do not bother to argue agenst anti-science people, they leave that to people not doing research

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-12-2006 10:09 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by mjfloresta, posted 09-14-2006 4:10 PM ReverendDG has replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 50 of 133 (348984)
09-14-2006 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Righteous Skeptic
09-13-2006 3:18 PM


Re: The Reason
Creating worlds is a poor choice of words on my part. The worldview evolution is a part of does not depend on God. That is all I meant.
as i said, creationists, at least christians fundies, do not think that a worldview that isn't based on giving all credit to the Christian god is valid
this includes any god but the christian god
Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.
Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-13-2006 3:18 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

  
fallacycop
Member (Idle past 5520 days)
Posts: 692
From: Fortaleza-CE Brazil
Joined: 02-18-2006


Message 51 of 133 (349089)
09-14-2006 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Righteous Skeptic
09-13-2006 3:52 PM


Obvious means obvious
The truth as uncovered by science is that it is not obvious that God made the Earth.
That depends on the opionion of the person you are talking to.
This is self-contradictory because obvious is, by definition, something that every (reasonable) person agrees to be true. If it depends in the person you are talking to, then it cannot be obvious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-13-2006 3:52 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

  
mjfloresta
Member (Idle past 5993 days)
Posts: 277
From: N.Y.
Joined: 06-08-2006


Message 52 of 133 (349092)
09-14-2006 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by ReverendDG
09-14-2006 2:13 AM


scienctists who do research and come up with new evidence do not bother to argue agenst anti-science people, they leave that to people not doing research
Well that explains Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, and a whole plethora of evo "scientists".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by ReverendDG, posted 09-14-2006 2:13 AM ReverendDG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by ReverendDG, posted 09-15-2006 12:18 AM mjfloresta has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 53 of 133 (349197)
09-15-2006 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by mjfloresta
09-14-2006 4:10 PM


Well that explains Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, and a whole plethora of evo "scientists".
yes because they can do both at the same time by bending space and time!
ok do you not see i was trying for a bit of humour? just to add my point was they don't bother with arguing with people who know as much about science as a rock does, they let people like me and jar and ringo, etc do it. what a thankless job that seems to be
and why do you put quotes around scientists? they are scientists, more so than anyone of the people DI claims are agenst evolution anyway
Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by mjfloresta, posted 09-14-2006 4:10 PM mjfloresta has not replied

  
suzy
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 133 (349541)
09-16-2006 2:48 AM


Evolution only has a toe hold in science, while (deceived?) Christians keep trying to make The Bible a middle eastern book written by middle eastern people.
It's impossible to make full sence of all it has to teach us, while we insist on restricting it's full scope.
It starts and ends with the whole world and all peoples.
Mizraim is NOT modern Egypt, the Euphrates is NOT the modern Euphrates, the radiant image of God we were created in, DIED, so God covered us in skin, to keep our rotting selves in, the continants didn't divide untill after the Flood, and assuming the earthquake Amos mentions, was only local, is way too arrogant to bed down with science.
Modern 'Israel' is NOT the Biblical Promised Land, but though The Bible describes it clearly, acceptance of the 'evolution' and the 'craddle of civilisation' Lies, keep blinding people to key passages they read as 'unimportant'.
Funny thing is, all the Christians I know, dumped the crock that evolution is, well before they found Christian Faith. Wouldn't that explain why evolutionists are sooo desperate to shove their flimsy "faith" down everyones throat?
Evolution THEORY was designed for the purpose of blinding people to the truth of Our Creator, through stroking their carnal pride and lusts.

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by subbie, posted 09-16-2006 9:06 AM suzy has replied
 Message 59 by Chiroptera, posted 09-16-2006 5:25 PM suzy has replied
 Message 61 by RAZD, posted 09-16-2006 5:39 PM suzy has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 55 of 133 (349556)
09-16-2006 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Righteous Skeptic
09-13-2006 3:32 PM


Re: The Wright Brothers meet The Talking Iguana
Archer Opterix:
If I showed you a story in which the Wright Brothers get their ideas about powered flight from a talking iguana that lives on the Cliffs of Insanity, would you understand the story as 'a type of writing which uses a lot of symbolism' or as a story 'entirely styled in the manner of historical narrative'?
Righteous Skeptic:
I'd like to see that story, it sound very intruiging. I don't mean that as a challenge to whether or not the story is true, by-the-way,
it really does sound like an interesting story. As for your
question, I really don't know how I would classify the analogy of
two geniuses to powered flight. What's your point?
My point is to get an answer to my question. I want to learn how you decide such matters.
Knowing only what I've told you about the story, what is your impression about the kind of story it would be? Do you expect it to be a historical narrative about something that actually happened in the lives of the Wright Brothers? Do you expect it to be some kind of symbolic story? Something else?
And how do you decide?

Archer
All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Righteous Skeptic, posted 09-13-2006 3:32 PM Righteous Skeptic has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by arachnophilia, posted 09-16-2006 6:51 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 56 of 133 (349559)
09-16-2006 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Archer Opteryx
09-16-2006 6:34 AM


Re: The Wright Brothers meet The Talking Iguana
cliffs of insanity?
inconceivable!
...sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Archer Opteryx, posted 09-16-2006 6:34 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by RAZD, posted 09-16-2006 8:46 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 57 of 133 (349564)
09-16-2006 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by arachnophilia
09-16-2006 6:51 AM


Re: The Wright Brothers meet The Talking Iguana
cliffs of insanity?
Don't you know where that is?
Right next to the Bluffs of Righteousness
http://www.qsl.net/ws8g/cliffsofinsanity.htm
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by arachnophilia, posted 09-16-2006 6:51 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 58 of 133 (349568)
09-16-2006 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by suzy
09-16-2006 2:48 AM


Evolution THEORY was designed for the purpose of blinding people to the truth of Our Creator, through stroking their carnal pride and lusts.
It's a well-known fact that every adolescent boy has a dog-eared copy of The Origin of Species hidden under his pillow.
:rme:

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by suzy, posted 09-16-2006 2:48 AM suzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by suzy, posted 09-16-2006 5:36 PM subbie has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 133 (349638)
09-16-2006 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by suzy
09-16-2006 2:48 AM


Welcome to EvC, suzy. I hope that you find your participation here educational and fun.
-
quote:
Funny thing is, all the Christians I know, dumped the crock that evolution is, well before they found Christian Faith.
Interesting. I was wondering about this. Because all the creationists I know of all rejected evolution as a result of their conversion to a literalist religious sect. I was not aware of anyone that anyone rejected evolution prior to such a conversion; are you sure about this? Maybe these Christians that you know were exaggerating to make a point?
-
quote:
Wouldn't that explain why evolutionists are sooo desperate to shove their flimsy "faith" down everyones throat?
No. Even if the statement were accurate, it doesn't follow from the previous statement. At any rate, evolutionists are not trying to shove a flimsy faith down anyone's throats. They are merely trying to explain the facts about reality and the reasonable and logical inferences that may be deduced from those facts.
-
quote:
Evolution THEORY was designed for the purpose of blinding people to the truth of Our Creator, through stroking their carnal pride and lusts.
I doubt it. As far as I know, neither Darwin nor Wallace nor any of the other early workers in evolutionary theory had any intentions of "blinding people" or any truth of a creator; in fact, many of the early workers in evolutionary biology and many current evolutionary scientists are practicing Christians -- some are even conservative evangelicals. So, even if it were designed to blind people to a creator, it seems poorly suited to that task.
At any rate, even if that were the intention of the theory of evolution, I don't see how "stroking carnal pride and lusts" is the working mechanism to that effect.

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." -- George Bernard Shaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by suzy, posted 09-16-2006 2:48 AM suzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by suzy, posted 09-16-2006 7:02 PM Chiroptera has replied

  
suzy
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 133 (349641)
09-16-2006 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by subbie
09-16-2006 9:06 AM


Lust and Pride sans Sex
It's a cute reply, and made me chuckle, but added to my point; every boy and girl since the Scopes trial, HAS grown up with Evolution THEORY, "Drip Fed" as FACT, into EVERY aspect of life, particularly, " "They" just 'invented' a god to control everything you do, and stop you having 'fun'!"
People do 'lust' after "doing great things for humanity" and their 'pride' does stop them admitting they were mistaken, fooled or deceived.
Just once, I'd like to see Evolutionists admit that the THEORY they have so much "faith" in, has been sold to the world as FACT, BEFORE PROOF, which in every other walk of life, is a sign of being swindled.
I know I've been swindled out of every archeological "anomoly" DIS-proving evolution, hitting the international mainstream media on first speculation, as FACT, like 'hobbit' and 'mars life on rock' ANTI-science does for the Anti-Creator crowd.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by subbie, posted 09-16-2006 9:06 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by nator, posted 09-16-2006 5:52 PM suzy has not replied
 Message 63 by subbie, posted 09-16-2006 6:10 PM suzy has not replied
 Message 64 by Chiroptera, posted 09-16-2006 6:10 PM suzy has not replied
 Message 65 by ringo, posted 09-16-2006 7:01 PM suzy has replied
 Message 72 by dwise1, posted 09-16-2006 8:53 PM suzy 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