Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christianity, Knowledge and Science
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 151 of 221 (387456)
02-28-2007 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by Chiroptera
02-28-2007 3:57 PM


Re: Is it religion?
And there in lies the problem, and the reason I am stopping this line of responses.
I do not have a list as of yet, as I did not think I would need to get one put together. But, even if the list is 10 people. If these 10 are honest scientists, who have looked at the evidence, and do not believe it shows the proof that others believe...How does that make them wrong?
As you said:
Chiroptera writes:
The Copernican model of the solar system is a case in point. Pre-Gallileo everyone was incredibly biased against a heliocentric solar system. Yet the evidence provided by Galileo and Brahe/Keplar convinced the vast majority of scientists (or proto-scientists) that the planets actually revolve around the sun.
Galileo, and Brahe/Kelpar, were a small minority at the time. yet, in the end, they were proved to be correct. There are scientists, like it or not, that have honestly looked at the evidence and disagree with the majority on this issue. In the long run, most likely, someone will be proven correct. But, those scientists who disagree with the majority are not morons, or delusional, they just see the evidence pointing in a different direction.
Truth is, I can argue til I am blue in the face. I can link to those who say what I believe. Nothing will help. You, and everyone who has responded to my posts, have already come to your conclusions. You believe I have been misled, or don't know enough, or am delusional.
And yes, I have made up my mind, as have you. I believe I am willing to change my view if shown evidence to the contrary. Are you? I have yet to see that evidence that can change my mind. Do I believe there is scientific evidence to prove evolution, yes, but only on a micro scale. Nothing I have seen proves it on a macro scale. It can be used to deduce macro evolution, if read in that direction, but it can not prove it. And many read it in a different direction. Oh sorry, I guess only 6 or 8 of us do.
Like it or not, most evolutionists are biased. They are just as biased about their views as creationists, or any others, are biased about theirs. You believe we are blinded. We believe you are blinded. Maybe one day those blinders can be pulled off of whomever they are on. Maybe one day we will have the proof that we were both blinded. This is not that day.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Chiroptera, posted 02-28-2007 3:57 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by ringo, posted 02-28-2007 4:29 PM bujitsu has replied
 Message 163 by Chiroptera, posted 02-28-2007 5:36 PM bujitsu has replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 152 of 221 (387457)
02-28-2007 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by jar
02-28-2007 4:17 PM


Re: Macro-Evolution?
Jar writes:
These are not matters of belief, they are facts. To try to pretend otherwise is simply to promote ignorance, an act of Hubris and Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Considering that biblically this is one of the worst sins a person can commit, the fact that you just accused me of Blaspheming the Holy-Spirit really makes me question where you are honestly coming from.
You are just as bad as those who led the inquisition. "I am right, you are wrong, and if you disagree you are are against God!"
Truly pathetic.
Edited by bujitsu, : Added quote. Did not want any misunderstanding.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by jar, posted 02-28-2007 4:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by jar, posted 02-28-2007 4:39 PM bujitsu has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 153 of 221 (387459)
02-28-2007 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 4:21 PM


Re: Is it religion?
bujitsu writes:
Like it or not, most evolutionists are biased. They are just as biased about their views as creationists, or any others, are biased about theirs.
That is false, as I have already told you.
A Muslim scientist and an atheist scientist and a Buddhist scientist and a Satanist scientist must all set aside their biases to look at the evidence objectively. If they can't see their own biases, somebody else will point them out. The only biases that can survive peer review are ones that nobody can see. (And if nobody can see it, how do you know it's there?)

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:21 PM bujitsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:43 PM ringo has replied

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


Message 154 of 221 (387462)
02-28-2007 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 4:25 PM


Re: Macro-Evolution?
Considering that biblically this is one of the worst sins a person can commit, the fact that you just accused me of Blaspheming the Holy-Spirit really makes me question where you are honestly coming from.
Not one of the worst, the worst.
I am coming from a position of Christian love in the hopes that you will see the errors of your ways and return to the worship of GOD.
You are just as bad as those who led the inquisition. "I am right, you are wrong, and if you disagree you are are against God!"
I am NOT questioning your beliefs. You are, of course, free to believe anything. I do question your acts and those of others who try to deny reality in God's Name. To teach children total falsehoods such as Biblical Creation or that there was some world-wide flood or that the Earth is young and to do so in God's name, is to not simply demeaning GOD, denying the very record that GOD left us, it is perpetuating ignorance in God's Name.
In the words again of the Clergy Project, currently endorsed by over 10,000 US Christian Clergy:
We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:25 PM bujitsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:57 PM jar has replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 155 of 221 (387464)
02-28-2007 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by ringo
02-28-2007 4:29 PM


Re: Is it religion?
No Ringo, you told me that it was false. That does not mean you are correct.
Now, let me write this slowly so everyone can understand. When I make a statement like; "most evolutionsists are biased", it means a portion of them, not ALL. Are there those on either side that might truly be unbiased, yes. But, we are human, few of us are completely, 100% unbiased. If you honestly think all are, you are more deluded then most. Most people, scientist, evolutionist, christian, or anyone else, goes into a situation with their own beliefs or views, and weighs the evidence, WITH those views somewhere in their mind. Now, I can agree that 'some' of those can look at the evidence, and see that it disagrees with their view, and come to a new conclusion. Maybe a lot of them, actually, but not all.
My point was, a large number of scientists that support macro-evolution, do so because they studied the evidence (already having the belief in evolution) and they believed that the evidence supported their view. VERY FEW people are honestly able to completely throw out all of thier beliefs and views on a given subject, especially while studying that subject.
I was in no way trying to imply that every evolutionist looks at the evidence, and KNOWS the evidence disproves evolution, and then supports evolution anyway. I was just saying that as a scientist, you can take the evidence, and because of your personal views, believe it supports your views.
A group of scientists can look at the evidence, objectively, and come to different conclusions. It happens quite often. I would hope I would not have to go into history to show this to be true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by ringo, posted 02-28-2007 4:29 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by ringo, posted 02-28-2007 4:54 PM bujitsu has replied

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 156 of 221 (387467)
02-28-2007 4:53 PM


Topic reminder
A confession: I haven't read most of this thread. However, I want to nip any digressions from the topic before they get entirely off topic. Recent postings could easily result in a general all purpose evolution discussion. From the OP
My position is largely in the realm of theory, but I believe it is important to consider whether religion itself is causing humanity to stagnate at a time when anything BUT stagnation is what we need.
This arguement thus asks the question: "Does religion make good people do bad things?" In this case "bad things" refers to standing in the way of progress.
Such things as 'Is macroevolution a fact', may well be tangentially on topic though very tangentially. The topic should be about whether Christianity's teachings are anti-knowledge-gained-through-our-senses (such as physical evidence), not what the evidence is and how it is interpreted.
Any replies should be directed to the relevant posts in my signature below. That isn't a suggestion.

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Observations about Evolution and This could be interesting....

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 157 of 221 (387468)
02-28-2007 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 4:43 PM


Re: Is it religion?
bujitsu writes:
When I make a statement like; "most evolutionsists are biased", it means a portion of them, not ALL. Are there those on either side that might truly be unbiased, yes.
No, you're still missing the point: the peer review process cancels out the biases. It doesn't matter if there is one bias or one million biases going into the process. Somebody will point out each bias (if only to further his own bias).
VERY FEW people are honestly able to completely throw out all of thier beliefs and views on a given subject, especially while studying that subject.
And that is not a problem, because somebody else will throw them out for them. Science is not an individual effort, it's a community effort. A scientific theory is not the product of one set of biases, it has all known biases removed.
A group of scientists can look at the evidence, objectively, and come to different conclusions. It happens quite often. I would hope I would not have to go into history to show this to be true.
Yes, you most certainly do. Show us any examples you have.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:43 PM bujitsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 5:07 PM ringo has replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 158 of 221 (387471)
02-28-2007 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by jar
02-28-2007 4:39 PM


Re: Macro-Evolution?
And yet again, you stoop lower then I thought was possible.
Jar writes:
I am coming from a position of Christian love in the hopes that you will see the errors of your ways and return to the worship of GOD.
How dare you. Because I see things differently then you. Because I, and many others believe the evidence points in a different direction. I am NOT worshiping God. That is total hypocrisy.
Many years ago people were put to death by the church because they believed in something that was not held to be true my science and modern belief. They believed that earth was NOT the center of the universe. In time, they were proven correct. Yet, they still died.
You might not be wanting me put to deaht, but you are doing the modern equivilant. You are preaching that we should not be allowed to tell what we believe. There are plenty that believe the evidence does NOT prove macro-evolution. Believe the media hype all you want.
There are scientists that believe the evidence does show that creationis, the flood, and a young earth are not only possible, but happened. The fact that you have sided with society, because its the easy thing to do, is pathetic. If you have researched the evidence, and honestly come to your belief because of that, congrats. You are entitled to that. But, when you start claiming that those of us who believe the evidence points elsewhere are not even true believers in God...you are coming across as bad a the Pharisees. You demean God by the mere mention of His name in that context. You claim Christian love, and then accuse me of not even worshipping God? That is not only legalistic in nature, it is on the verge of hypocrytical.
You claim we do not look at the record God left us because we do not support macro-evolution. Well, the same can be, and has been, claimed about you and your ilk.
I want to know why you started getting so venomous, when I was trying to be open to discussion?
And don't claim you did not. Accusing me of blasphemy of the Holy-Spirit is about as venomous as a person can get. I admit, I am honestly trying to not come back in kind.
On another note, just because, as you said, 10,000 clergy support something...does not make it right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by jar, posted 02-28-2007 4:39 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by jar, posted 02-28-2007 5:08 PM bujitsu has replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 159 of 221 (387473)
02-28-2007 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by ringo
02-28-2007 4:54 PM


Re: Is it religion?
Ringo writes:
Yes, you most certainly do. Show us any examples you have.
Are you serious?
Heck, just look at health sciences in the past decade. Oat bran was at one time thought to be one of the best things you could eat. Now, ehh, it's not that special. Eggs were thought to be almost a death sentence to some people because of the cholesterol. Again, this was found to not be true.
Cigarettes were originally good for you. Duh, not so much now.
And yes, those were all done with science. And no, I am not going to go find the studies just to show you what you and I and most people already know from history.
Science and history are ripe with situations where people read the evidence, came to a conclusion, and were proven WRONG in time. It happens. I am not going to go through history just to prove to you what you already know is true.
The fact that so many evolutionists get venomous, and accuse those who disagree with them of being idiots, or delusional, or any other derogatory word you can think of, makes one wonder about what they are really all about.
And no, I am NOT missing your point. I agree, that in a large group, biases are usually rooted out. Except when everyone in that group has the same bias. Which can, for arguments sake, be said about both the creationist, and the evolutionist, camps. There have been scientists that have left both sides for the other.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by ringo, posted 02-28-2007 4:54 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by ringo, posted 02-28-2007 5:23 PM bujitsu has not replied

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


Message 160 of 221 (387474)
02-28-2007 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 4:57 PM


Re: Macro-Evolution?
How dare you. Because I see things differently then you. Because I, and many others believe the evidence points in a different direction. I am NOT worshiping God. That is total hypocrisy.
No, it is that I simply point out that you demean and belittle GOD. Sorry but that is fact.
You might not be wanting me put to deaht, but you are doing the modern equivilant. You are preaching that we should not be allowed to tell what we believe. There are plenty that believe the evidence does NOT prove macro-evolution. Believe the media hype all you want.
You and others are free to believe anything. I have said that many times. However the fact that you and others believe things which are simply false, has nothing to do with reality. Reality is as it is regardless of what you believe.
There are scientists that believe the evidence does show that creationis, the flood, and a young earth are not only possible, but happened.
They either lie, are willfully ignorant or delusional.
The fact that you have sided with society, because its the easy thing to do, is pathetic.
Too funny. What else can I say about a statement that silly.
I want to know why you started getting so venomous, when I was trying to be open to discussion?
And don't claim you did not. Accusing me of blasphemy of the Holy-Spirit is about as venomous as a person can get. I admit, I am honestly trying to not come back in kind.
Sorry if the facts offend you.
On another note, just because, as you said, 10,000 clergy support something...does not make it right.
Of course not. What it does prove is that it is not an issue of Evolution versus Christianity. The debate between those who support Evolution and those who promote the Biblical Myths as fact is one of Knowledge versus Ignorance.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:57 PM bujitsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 5:34 PM jar has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 161 of 221 (387478)
02-28-2007 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 5:07 PM


Re: Is it religion?
bujitsu writes:
Oat bran was at one time thought to be one of the best things you could eat.
Cigarettes were originally good for you.
What does any of that have to do with scientific theories?
Science and history are ripe with situations where people read the evidence, came to a conclusion, and were proven WRONG in time.
But that isn't what you claimed. You claimed that people looked at the evidence with different biases and came to different conclusions. In the examples you cited, new evidence changed the conclusions. Where are the biases that you've been going on about?
The fact that so many evolutionists get venomous, and accuse those who disagree with them of being idiots, or delusional, or any other derogatory word you can think of, makes one wonder about what they are really all about.
Where have I done that?
I agree, that in a large group, biases are usually rooted out. Except when everyone in that group has the same bias.
The "creationist camp" is more than welcome to point out any biases in the "evolutionist camp". Why don't they do that? So far, all they have done is show that they are more interested in selling videos than in doing real science.
There have been scientists that have left both sides for the other.
So, give us some examples of scientists who have honestly looked at the evidence and turned from evolution to Biblical Creationism.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 5:07 PM bujitsu has not replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 162 of 221 (387481)
02-28-2007 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by jar
02-28-2007 5:08 PM


Re: Macro-Evolution?
And this just shows the errogance of those of your ilk.
Jar writes:
No, it is that I simply point out that you demean and belittle GOD. Sorry but that is fact.
That us PURELY opinion. NOT fact. It is your opinion that I demean God. And, because it is your opinion, you profess it to be fact. This has, and always will be the problem with arrogance.
Jar writes:
You and others are free to believe anything. I have said that many times. However the fact that you and others believe things which are simply false, has nothing to do with reality. Reality is as it is regardless of what you believe.
The first sentence, and the last sentence I can agree with. The middle one is, yet again, arrogance unbound. These things are simply false in YOUR view of the evidence. But, because we do not see it the same as you do, we are not in touch with reality? That is so arrogant, it's actually funny.
Jar writes:
They either lie, are willfully ignorant or delusional.
And again...arrogance. Because they do not believe the evidence as you do, they must either lie, be ignorant, or delusional. How truly pathetic.
Jar writes:
Sorry if the facts offend you.
Again, how is this a FACT? You quoted my statement about you saying I was Blaspheming the Holy-Spirit. This was, nor is, NOT a fact. It is YOUR opinion. Yet, because it is your opinion, you arrogantly claim it to be fact. This is the whole problem I and many have with the whole evolutionist movement.
Jar writes:
What it does prove is that it is not an issue of Evolution versus Christianity. The debate between those who support Evolution and those who promote the Biblical Myths as fact is one of Knowledge versus Ignorance.
One more time..arrogance. If we don't support your view, we are ignorant. If we don't agree with you, we are ignorant. Sad.
I am not saying you have to change you views on evolution, I truly don't care what those are. The fact that you could accuse me of what you did without actually discussing with me enough to know me, shows me you are farther from God then you could imagine. You are so focused on science, that you have lost faith, or at least that is how you are coming across. You accuse a fellow christian of blaspheming God, which in itself could be accused of doing the same thing. Notice that in this whole argument, I never accused you of not truly following God. That is because I am not so arrogant as to assume I know everything. Please, don't attack my relationship with God without first discussing it with me. That is in no way Christ-like.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by jar, posted 02-28-2007 5:08 PM jar has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 163 of 221 (387483)
02-28-2007 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by bujitsu
02-28-2007 4:21 PM


Damn! Off-topic.
I would like to respond to your post, bujitsu, but one of the moderators has ruled us off-topic for this thread.
If you want to discuss this further, we should take it to another thread. Do you want to start one, or should someone else do it?

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 4:21 PM bujitsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by bujitsu, posted 02-28-2007 5:44 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
bujitsu
Junior Member (Idle past 6237 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 02-28-2007


Message 164 of 221 (387484)
02-28-2007 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Chiroptera
02-28-2007 5:36 PM


Re: Damn! Off-topic.
I agree.
I would start a new thread...just not sure what the new topic should be titled.
Any suggestions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Chiroptera, posted 02-28-2007 5:36 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by AdminPhat, posted 03-01-2007 8:15 AM bujitsu has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 165 of 221 (387500)
02-28-2007 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Straggler
02-28-2007 8:51 AM


Re: Is it religion?
Straggler, I want to apologize for missing the replies from you, Woodsy, and AZ Paul3. Since the posts were over a month ago, I will not reply directly to them unless you wish.
At times, if I have many replies, I jump right to the site and look through my recent topics. This topic was far down the list, and it is embaressing that I missed 3 posts, so, my apologies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Straggler, posted 02-28-2007 8:51 AM Straggler has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024