Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8913 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-24-2019 7:38 AM
24 online now:
candle2, Heathen, PaulK, vimesey (4 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,576 Year: 9,612/19,786 Month: 2,034/2,119 Week: 70/724 Day: 2/68 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
89101112
13
Author Topic:   Is Evolution a Radical Idea?
Faith
Member
Posts: 31775
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 181 of 195 (351713)
09-24-2006 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by Dr Adequate
09-24-2006 12:13 AM


I believe we're off topic here Dr. A. No place here for revisiting the entire Evo-Creo debate.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-24-2006 12:13 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-24-2006 12:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 182 of 195 (351714)
09-24-2006 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by Faith
09-24-2006 12:20 AM


Glenn Morton has been answered by creationists ...

And did the answer claim that anything I quoted was not true?

as you must know.

Why must I know that?

In any case, one man's opinion does not a rebuttal make.

Did you not read the quote?

"I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry."

And they were unanimous.

To these folk we may of course add all the geologists who never were YECs and whose lifetime of experience still persuades them not to be.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Faith, posted 09-24-2006 12:20 AM Faith has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 183 of 195 (351715)
09-24-2006 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by Faith
09-24-2006 12:22 AM


I believe we're off topic here Dr. A. No place here for revisiting the entire Evo-Creo debate.

Then there is no place here for a claim that the daily work of science is compatible with YEC.

The only way to answer that is to list all the sciences it would affect, or at least a large representative sample of them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Faith, posted 09-24-2006 12:22 AM Faith has not yet responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1768 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 184 of 195 (351722)
09-24-2006 2:12 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by Faith
09-23-2006 6:26 PM


Re: evolution and Christianity
Faith:

Well, of course, human originated science is naturally flawed, naturally likely to be at odds with the truth in some places, but most of it is not as fantastic as the ToE.

In the last generation YEC has eroded faster than a sand castle. No creationists in the 1980s spoke of 'speciation events' or conceded evolution of microorganisms and insects. They denied anyone could observe evolution in any form.

YEC has done some fast backpedaling in the years since.

You admit a good bit of evolution in your own scenarios. Sometimes you even require more of it to happen far faster than scientists have ever imagined--as when you need animals to hyperevolve into multiple forms after the Flood even as they lose their genetic potential to do so.

It's obvious the idea of evolution does not really strike you as 'fantastic' at all. You invoke it for your own purposes anytime you need it. You only say it is 'fantastic' because your religious teachers have taught you this theory represents some special kind of bugaboo you have a moral duty to oppose.

The ToE does contradict the written word of God

It does contradict a naive interpretation of it, yes.

and so do the time factors in the rest of what you list, but the practical sciences in general do not contradict it.

Much of the practice of medicine is based on evolution.

A Bible believing Christian has no problem with most of it. Astronomy is a problem

You bet.

great ages are a problem

For YEC 'great ages' represent a far bigger problem than the theory of evolution. It is the evident age of the earth and the universe, not the theory of evolution, that keeps YEC believers busiest inventing far-fetched scenarios.

but all the practical sciences are not.

Medicine and the theory of evolution are intricately linked. Only ignorance allows so many YEC believers to cast evolutionary science as evil and take their prescribed antibiotics at the same time.

Archaeology is not a problem though we may dispute some of its dates.

Archaeology knows of entire civilizations that came and went before YEC admits a planet existed for them to live on.

If you can think this is 'not a problem' for YEC the difference can only be one of scale. YEC has big problems indeed.

Neurology is no problem

The primitive brain and fight-or-flight mechanism corresponds to the physiology of many creatures outside our species. It is studied that way.

germ theory is no problem

Contradicts the biblical teaching that disease is caused by demons. Effects cures by attacking germs while making no effort at all to deal with demons.

genetics is no problem

Genetics dispelled for good the creationist premise that species existed in unique genetic boxes that did not change or overlap. It showed how all organisms are related to each other, more closely or more distantly as predicted by the theory.

Nowhere is this more plain than in the relationship of humans to animals. YEC believers said humans were utterly distinct. The theory of evolution said that Homo sapiens was related to all organisms and most closely related to apes.

Which idea won the genetic sweepstakes?

Evolution. You are 96% chimpanzee.

and 99% of geology is not a problem

So where do YEC believers put Pangea, the Tethys Sea, and Gondwanaland on their personal maps?

and most of astronomy too. Only the time factor.

Aside from that one little problem, Mrs Lincoln, how did you like the play?

Some day we'll understand how to put it all together, but we don't yet.

_

Edited by Archer Opterix, : HTML.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : HTML.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : Typo repair.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Faith, posted 09-23-2006 6:26 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Faith, posted 09-24-2006 4:28 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 31775
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 185 of 195 (351735)
09-24-2006 4:28 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by Archer Opteryx
09-24-2006 2:12 AM


Re: evolution and Christianity
Sometimes you even require more of it to happen far faster than scientists have ever imagined--as when you need animals to hyperevolve into multiple forms after the Flood even as they lose their genetic potential to do so.

I just want to explain this one thing. They had to have started with a LOT more genetic potential than we see in anything living today, whatever form that might have taken. Enough to produce all the amazing varieties in the fossil record before the Flood wiped them out.

It doesn't take much time to get dramatically new breeds of dogs and cats, very little, so evolutionists are just wrong that it takes a lot of time to evolve new variations. All it takes is isolation of portions of any population, geographic isolation through migration, selection-caused isolation, gene drift being one way that happens and so on. Isolation alone will bring about new phenotypes. Isolation causes a change in allele frequencies, and a change in allele frequencies brings about new phenotypes.

Diversity is built into the original genome, and gets played out when selecting processes divide the population, sometimes leaving alleles behind as others combine to bring about new traits.

I have yet to see any need for mutation in this entire process, let alone evidence that it in fact makes any contribution to it.

Yes, when these processes continue to act, dividing, selecting, isolating for many many generations, a particular breed may get to the point that it has so little diversity it cannot change any further and in fact is on the verge of distinction, but that takes a LOT of reduction in the service of producing a new breed or "species." What evos call speciation is simply this process taken to the point of inability to interbreed into the original population. To a creationist this is simply how a variety is made distinctive, unique. It is only threatened with extinction only because of the Fall, which brings in disease, genetic diseases, and death. Otherwise it is merely an expression of the great creative possibilities of the genetic system God designed into all creatures.

All that has happened with my use of a term like speciation is that it makes communication easier. It's been a terminological problem because of the way it is used by evolutionists, which creationists naturally try to avoid. But when it's understood that it's only describing what creationists observe happening all the time then it helps to use it for the sake of better communication. Nothing has changed in creationist thinking in reality.

OK, I JUST REALIZED THIS IS OFF TOPIC TOO. THIS IS NOT WHAT THE OP WAS LOOKING FOR.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by AdminFaith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Archer Opteryx, posted 09-24-2006 2:12 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-24-2006 9:10 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 186 of 195 (351761)
09-24-2006 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by Faith
09-24-2006 4:28 AM


Re: evolution and Christianity
It's also damn silly, but, as you say, it's off topic. Why don't you post something similar in one of the threads on genetics and see what happens?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Faith, posted 09-24-2006 4:28 AM Faith has not yet responded

Woodsy
Member (Idle past 1544 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 187 of 195 (351790)
09-24-2006 12:25 PM


Not sure if this is really on topic; it occurred to me while reading the posts.
Faith, if there really was no God, would you want to know?

Sorry Woodsy, although a very interesting question, it really is Off-Topic.

Edited by AdminQuetzal, : Off topic notice


Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Woodsy, posted 09-24-2006 3:00 PM Woodsy has not yet responded

Woodsy
Member (Idle past 1544 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 188 of 195 (351817)
09-24-2006 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by Woodsy
09-24-2006 12:25 PM


Right-ho! Apologies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Woodsy, posted 09-24-2006 12:25 PM Woodsy has not yet responded

anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 189 of 195 (351845)
09-24-2006 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Faith
09-23-2006 11:51 PM


Still Awaiting Response
Faith writes:

YECs don't deny "real geology" just certain theories.

Please see: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=191&m=1#1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=191&m=1#1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=191&m=1#1

Here is your opportunity to show us how your understanding of "real geology" is so superior to virtually everyone else's who have actually studied and/or worked in the field. Also, you can address the impracticalities of finding oil, water, and minerals using that evil science compared to the great successes in discovering and utilizing the Earth's resources involving your interpretation of the Bible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Faith, posted 09-23-2006 11:51 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by iano, posted 09-24-2006 6:14 PM anglagard has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 111 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 190 of 195 (351870)
09-24-2006 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by anglagard
09-24-2006 5:38 PM


Re: Still Awaiting Response
utilizing the Earth's resources

Now THAT is an amusing way to look at it!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by anglagard, posted 09-24-2006 5:38 PM anglagard has not yet responded

Ben!
Member (Idle past 1792 days)
Posts: 1154
From: San Diego, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 191 of 195 (351904)
09-24-2006 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by robinrohan
09-19-2006 9:53 AM


The issue here is whether evolution is the same sort of thing as heliocentrism.

My own view is that evolution leads quite naturally to evolutionism and is devastating to religious belief.

I think what Tusko said was really interesting and very applicable:

Tusko writes:

Those who didn't want to admit that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe saw heliocentrism as a challenge to their notion of the Almighty. Now as our notion of God has adapted, heliocentrism is largely an irrelevance.

When an accepted idea conflicts with a religious idea, you'll naturally be led away from religion. As religious ideas adapt, the conflict disappears.

I do see this happening over time with evolution, for better or for worse. There will always be those who don't like the adaptation; they will die out. Their protege will be more and more a minority, and soon enough there will be no seam between the accepted idea and the religion.

Seems religious thought is no different than any other type of human thought--it changes and adapts over time. Not necessarily in an individual, but in our societies. I didn't really think about this until I read what Tusko write. So, thanks Tusko!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by robinrohan, posted 09-19-2006 9:53 AM robinrohan has not yet responded

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 192 of 195 (352081)
09-25-2006 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by robinrohan
09-21-2006 12:55 PM


the term "evolutionism"
Evolutionism isn't a term you got from a science book.

Actually, I made it up.

I realize now that I didn't make this term up. It came from the Pope's speech. I had forgotten that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by robinrohan, posted 09-21-2006 12:55 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Faith, posted 09-25-2006 2:55 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 31775
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 193 of 195 (352152)
09-25-2006 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by robinrohan
09-25-2006 11:37 AM


Re: the term "evolutionism"
Evolutionism isn't a term you got from a science book.
Actually, I made it up.

I realize now that I didn't make this term up. It came from the Pope's speech. I had forgotten that.

You could have heard it for years at EvC. Creationists use it all the time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by robinrohan, posted 09-25-2006 11:37 AM robinrohan has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by iano, posted 09-25-2006 3:03 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 111 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 194 of 195 (352155)
09-25-2006 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Faith
09-25-2006 2:55 PM


Re: the term "evolutionism"
Yeah, like scientism.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Faith, posted 09-25-2006 2:55 PM Faith has not yet responded

AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1911
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 195 of 195 (356107)
10-12-2006 9:01 AM


Folks, we have drifted off topic and I want to close this topic, out of respect for Robin.
  
RewPrev1
...
89101112
13
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019