|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,473 Year: 3,730/9,624 Month: 601/974 Week: 214/276 Day: 54/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is Evolution a Radical Idea? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: They don't have to at all. There could have been a supernatural start to life and evolution took over. Or, abiogenesis could have occurred and there was a supernatural act to help things along.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
I see your point, but I am speaking of the answer to the question, "How did we get here?" quote: Actually, if there were no evolutionary ideas, another answer can be "We don't know".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: They don't seem to bother the Buddhists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: So?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: But your point was that scientific findings are devastating to religion. Buddhists don't have a problem with science. Buddhism is a religion (with many millions of adherents). Therefore, your premise is invalid. Perhaps you'd like to narrow your premise?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Scientific findings are not logically devastating to Buddhism. Buddhism is a religion. Therefore, your premise that scientific findings are logically devaststing to religion is false as stated. Perhaps you'd like to narrow your premise?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I care. It's really wonderful to understand how things work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: By that logic, we shouldn't ever bother trying to cure disease since people are just going to die eventually anyway. I often think that some Christians focus so much upon the next life they gamble on having that they completely squander the one they know for sure they are living right now.
quote: Meh. Philosophies and old myths are not that interesting to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: You are both right and wrong here. If you are calling Abiogenesis "using random chance as a first cause of life", then you are right to say that it isn't evolution and wrong to say that it isn't scientific.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: It's not devastating to Buddhism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Then you must conclude that thousands of scientists must then be either liars working furiously to perpetuate an enormous conspiracy against the rest of humanity, and/or the rest of them must be such imbecilic morons to have been constantly and continually making the same enormous mistakes when testing the ToE. That is the inevitable, logical conclusion of your claim.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: All current science, in any field, is always based upon past findings. If the findings of the scientists of the past are erroneous, then why don't current scientists notice that the predictions they make on the basis of that historical work constsntly fail to be borne out? Why do they instead find that using past findings as a basis for current work leads to successfully borne out predictions?
quote: So, thousands of scientists, according to you, are just really bad at doing science if they accept the ToE, is that correct?
quote: Er, maybe because toppling the ToE would instantly propel them into the scientific celebrity stratosphere and put them in such rarified company as Einstein, Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin. They would become internationally famous, and would certainly win the Nobel. Faith, what do you think scientists do all day? Do you imagine that they sit around agreeing with each other about every single thing? To be a scientist is to challenge and test theory. They do their best to falsify their own theories. They try to break them. Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given. Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given. "Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!" - Ned Flanders "Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024