Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Use of Science to Support Creationism
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 61 of 122 (107617)
05-11-2004 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by almeyda
05-10-2004 1:05 AM


Re: ...
almeyda
But at the beginning there was nothing. How did the nothing become something?
This statement and the rest of your post is the central question that science is trying to pin down.We do not know whether there there was nothing to begin with anymore than we know how the universe we do observe came to be.Science is not totally in the dark,though.We an use good theories {not just opinions mind you} and make predictions about what the nature of phenomena that should be present but have never been observed will be when we search for them.
If the phenomena match one of the theories it lends credence to the theory and if it does not match the theory we still learn from the failure.That science cannot say how the universe came to be is no more a failing than you being unable to say how God came to be.Where you merely have to say that it does not matter to you how God came to be is easy since you need only believe and no more need be said.Science does not have that luxury nor is it intellectually lazy in that sense.
This message has been edited by sidelined, 05-11-2004 08:28 PM

"We cannot define anything precisely! If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers, who sit opposite each other, one saying to the other, 'You don't know what you are talking about!' The second one says 'What do you mean by know? What do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you?', and so on."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by almeyda, posted 05-10-2004 1:05 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by almeyda, posted 05-11-2004 11:29 PM sidelined has replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 122 (107638)
05-11-2004 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by sidelined
05-11-2004 9:27 PM


Re: ...
Time is linked to matter and space therefore if there is no matter or space then there is no time dimension. Since God be definition is the creator of matter and space. He is not restricted by a time dimension. Also you must realise that the creator is not limited by the limitations of mans mind. Us being trapped in time its hard to imagine something with no beginning or end. But we must realise that he is God and 1 million PhDs we could have but compared to God we know next to nothing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by sidelined, posted 05-11-2004 9:27 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Bonobojones, posted 05-12-2004 8:10 PM almeyda has replied
 Message 64 by sidelined, posted 05-12-2004 10:18 PM almeyda has not replied

  
Bonobojones
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 122 (107791)
05-12-2004 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by almeyda
05-11-2004 11:29 PM


Re: ...
Almeyda. Does the name Cliff Clavin ring a bell?

Reunite Gondwana!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by almeyda, posted 05-11-2004 11:29 PM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Parasomnium, posted 05-13-2004 4:34 AM Bonobojones has replied
 Message 68 by almeyda, posted 05-13-2004 12:28 PM Bonobojones has replied

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


Message 64 of 122 (107801)
05-12-2004 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by almeyda
05-11-2004 11:29 PM


Re: ...
almeyda
Since God be definition is the creator of matter and space. He is not restricted by a time dimension
These are statements of supposition that have no evidence to support them.You define God as creator but need give no propostition as to how he can create and manipulate a physical world.You state he is not restricted by a time dimension and give us no evidence to back up this claim.You do not even propose a means by which this could be so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by almeyda, posted 05-11-2004 11:29 PM almeyda has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 65 of 122 (107831)
05-13-2004 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Bonobojones
05-12-2004 8:10 PM


Re: dot dot dot
Almeyda. Does the name Cliff Clavin ring a bell?
Spot on, Bonobojones! Here's a bell that rang:
quote:
(from "Cheers")
Cliff: Interesting little article here. It says that, uh... the average human being only uses seventeen percent of his brain. Boy, you realize what that means? We don't use a full, uh... sixty-four percent.
Norm: Some don't use even more.

"It's amazing what you can learn from DNA." - Desdamona.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Bonobojones, posted 05-12-2004 8:10 PM Bonobojones has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Bonobojones, posted 05-13-2004 9:22 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
Bonobojones
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 122 (107858)
05-13-2004 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Parasomnium
05-13-2004 4:34 AM


Re: dot dot dot
I've found there are three types of people that get involved with the whole Creo/Evo thing.
Evolutionists- well, you know who they are.
Creationists-some can,on occasion, actually carry on a discussion intelligently
Clavinists-ah, like your quote. Know all and see no reason to learn.
This message has been edited by Bonobojones, 05-13-2004 08:24 AM

Reunite Gondwana!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Parasomnium, posted 05-13-2004 4:34 AM Parasomnium has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by NosyNed, posted 05-13-2004 12:18 PM Bonobojones has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 67 of 122 (107925)
05-13-2004 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Bonobojones
05-13-2004 9:22 AM


A useful distintion
I find the distinction between creationists nad clavinists useful. I have been guilty of taring all with the same black brush.
We have had a number of thinking creationists here and I'm glad we do. We also, of course, get a steady stream of clavinists.
I like it a lot!
(added by edit)
Can we split the "evolutionists" too?
There are those who are interested in the controversy and don't have much interest in matters of faith other than the direct effect of it. I include the believers that aren't creationists there too.
Then there are a few who seem more interested in attacking religion itself independent of the creationism issue. They are Dawkinists.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 05-13-2004 11:27 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Bonobojones, posted 05-13-2004 9:22 AM Bonobojones has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Bonobojones, posted 05-13-2004 5:32 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 72 by MeganC, posted 10-25-2004 11:22 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 122 (107933)
05-13-2004 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Bonobojones
05-12-2004 8:10 PM


Re: ...
No it does not ring a bell..Plz explain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Bonobojones, posted 05-12-2004 8:10 PM Bonobojones has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by NosyNed, posted 05-13-2004 12:34 PM almeyda has not replied
 Message 71 by Bonobojones, posted 05-13-2004 7:30 PM almeyda has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 69 of 122 (107937)
05-13-2004 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by almeyda
05-13-2004 12:28 PM


Cheers
Have you ever watched the TV show "Cheers"? Cliff is one of the patrons of the bar. You'd probably have to watch a few to understand the reference.
Cliff thinks he knows it all. His every word demonstrates that he doesn't.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 05-13-2004 01:54 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by almeyda, posted 05-13-2004 12:28 PM almeyda has not replied

  
Bonobojones
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 122 (108011)
05-13-2004 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by NosyNed
05-13-2004 12:18 PM


Re: A useful distintion
Ned. I like it! You are right, though. Both sides have their rabid followers. Let's add dawkinist and clavinist to the lexicon.

Reunite Gondwana!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by NosyNed, posted 05-13-2004 12:18 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Bonobojones
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 122 (108038)
05-13-2004 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by almeyda
05-13-2004 12:28 PM


Re: ...
Almeyda. Here's a bit about old Cliffie.
Cheers Characters - Cliff Clavin
Clifford Clavin was the know-it-all mailman who was best known as being Norm’s sidekick. Cliff may have been the biggest fountain of useless information to ever walk the face of the earth. What Cliff didn’t know, he made up. He was notoriously the butt of Carla’s jokes but always managed to come out on top. Other than Norm, his best friend would have to be his mother who he still lives with.
Cheers - 404 | Page Not Found

Reunite Gondwana!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by almeyda, posted 05-13-2004 12:28 PM almeyda has not replied

  
MeganC
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 122 (152939)
10-25-2004 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by NosyNed
05-13-2004 12:18 PM


Re: A useful distintion
Ok, so I'm new here and was surfing around in some older threads when I found this one. After reading all of it, I realized I'd forgotten what the original question was anyway; then I looked up in the corner of this nifty page and found the topic name again.
I was drawn to this thread because I am a creationist and an evolutionist. I have a bachelor's degree in biology, and it is through biology that I finally came to understand. I was raised in a Christian home, but by the time I hit college, I was through with God. Half-way through my sophomore year, I changed my major to biology. It was in those classes that I decided there HAD to be a God. I can't bring myself to believe that everything just spontaneously happened one day. I find the human body and the workings of nature too complex to rely purely on evolution as reasoning. Likewise, though, I find it impossible to believe that God would stick us on this earth and give us no ability to adapt. That makes no sense. To me, to accept one requires the acceptance of the other. It also requires discernment. There is some crap science out there just like there is some crap Christianity out there. I accept both science and Christianity, but there are some things I have to take on faith. I know that's anti-science right there, but I'm certainly not your average biologist and I never claimed to know everything. Some things I just know are right.
I don't really care how old the earth is. I mean, does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? So the world's old--it doesn't matter WHOSE standards you're using, the world is OLD. But the scientist in me WANTS to know how old the earth is. And sometimes people think of things I've never thought of and that's why I'm here.
The real question in this forum is this: Do you want to believe Creationism or not? If you want to believe, the evidence is out there, though you're never going to see a journal article written on the wonders of the human body, or on how truly intelligent plants must be. You have to take some of it on faith, and some of it you have to dig for to find the answers. I have very little difficulties reconciling my religious beliefs with my scientific beliefs. To me, science is a mechanism to understanding God.
Boy! Richard Dawkins would spin in his grave if he could read this! He'd probably jump up out of his grave and start debating with me if he could.:-) Richard Dawkins--the man we all loved to hate in my Science and Religion course in college.
And to some of you I'm probably the biggest kook in the world. What? A biologist who doesn't back evolution 100%? Come on, guys, you have to admit that there's some stuff involved in evolution that sounds just as far-fetched as a Divine Creator. We're really only given the option of choosing one over the other. But, because I believe in said Devine Creator, it makes it easier to say that I also believe that birds evolved from reptiles. Why not? Who says that God didn't stick the animals here and let them evolve as necessary for their survival? (I'm sure I'm about to get a verse from Genesis thrown at me over that one, but I contend that the week that God took to create the earth wasn't a traditional week in the way that we know it anyway). Besides, if we're going to say that there is a God (and some of us do), let's start treating him like the God that he is. If he basically created all forms of science and scientific laws as we know them, he can break them as he likes. If we take the creation of man as it says in Genesis, then man came from dirt. I think if God can do that, he can turn any reptile into a bird that he wants (and he can even use our lovable Archeopteryx lithographica to do that with if he so desires).
Anyway, I've rambled on enough and this post probably belongs elsewhere and I'm either the next Einstein to some or the biggest idiot in the world to others. Meh, it doesn't really matter. I'm not the first person to think of this, I'm sure. And at the end of the day, the only person I have to answer to is myself.
So, go ahead and rip me to shreds. I'm sure it's coming. But I don't really care.
Thanks!
Megan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by NosyNed, posted 05-13-2004 12:18 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by pink sasquatch, posted 10-25-2004 11:53 PM MeganC has not replied
 Message 74 by sidelined, posted 10-25-2004 11:59 PM MeganC has replied
 Message 82 by 1.61803, posted 10-26-2004 11:44 AM MeganC has replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 73 of 122 (152949)
10-25-2004 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by MeganC
10-25-2004 11:22 PM


evidence and faith
Welcome, Megan,
You wrote:
If you want to believe, the evidence is out there... You have to take some of it on faith, and some of it you have to dig for to find the answers.
If evidence relies on faith, it is no longer objective, and no longer scientific. I wonder, do you have any "evidence" for God or Creationism that doesn't rely on faith?
Come on, guys, you have to admit that there's some stuff involved in evolution that sounds just as far-fetched as a Divine Creator.
What about the theory of evolution do you think is "far-fetched"?
More far-fetched than an undetectable, infinite, omnipotent, omniscient being?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by MeganC, posted 10-25-2004 11:22 PM MeganC has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by jar, posted 10-26-2004 12:17 AM pink sasquatch has replied

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


Message 74 of 122 (152951)
10-25-2004 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by MeganC
10-25-2004 11:22 PM


Re: A useful distintion
MeganC
Welcome to the jungle oh new one. I will begin with your statement
I can't bring myself to believe that everything just spontaneously happened one day.
May I ask where in all your studies you ever came across information that warrants this statement? In other words what reference can you show us where anyone thought this to be the case?
There is some crap science out there just like there is some crap Christianity out there.
Absolutely. However there is a huge amount of misinformation applied to some of the concepts of science as well as christianity.Please express what it is specifically that you disagree with.
Some things I just know are right.
Hmm.. Where have I heard that before?
Boy! Richard Dawkins would spin in his grave if he could read this! He'd probably jump up out of his grave and start debating with me if he could.:-) Richard Dawkins--the man we all loved to hate in my Science and Religion course in college.
You really must have been sucking back on the dream weed in college since Richard Dawkins is still in the land of the living.Perhaps you should get on a land line and see if you can straighten out this misconception with Richard himself..Reports of his demise are greatly exagerrated.Perhaps this is one of those things you "just know is right" eh?
I will tear some more flesh from your bones at a later date as I must sleep soon.Take care and again welcome to the madhouse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by MeganC, posted 10-25-2004 11:22 PM MeganC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by MeganC, posted 10-26-2004 10:37 AM sidelined has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 75 of 122 (152953)
10-26-2004 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by pink sasquatch
10-25-2004 11:53 PM


Re: evidence and faith
IMHO, and in the opinion of most Christian Churches, the two are not mutually exclusive.
The TOE deals with HOW. That is not the provence or orientation of religion. Religion deals with WHY.
Science is great at helping us understand the HOWs of the universe. And most Christian Churches, as I have said, have no problems with the TOE and actually oppose the teaching of classic Genesis based creationism.
But as a Christian, when I look at the order found at the most basic level, when I look at evolution, when I look at the way everything works together at the most basic level, I and many others see the hand of GOD.
Is this Creationism? I'm not sure.
Does it mean that I and others believe that GOD created the Universe? Well, yes.
But it also does not exclude any of the things we've learned through science, or that we will learn in the future.
So IMHO, all that we have learned and will learn using science simply helps support Creation, if not Creationism.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by pink sasquatch, posted 10-25-2004 11:53 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by pink sasquatch, posted 10-26-2004 12:34 AM jar 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