Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,421 Year: 3,678/9,624 Month: 549/974 Week: 162/276 Day: 2/34 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Evolution Science?
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 55 (49804)
08-10-2003 8:26 PM


"Creation versus evolution.
God versus science.
Faith versus materialism.
Is one right and the other wrong? Must one be choosen over the other, or is it possible to combine faith and science?"
Opening to the Site...
Totally Wrong.
It names Evolution instead of an unproven theory, a SCIENCE. This is an outrage to me, may seem I am over exagerating but this is an incredible annoyance to me. You make it seem like all creationists have is faith... When Science is used to prove Creation every day. I mean look at the Picture of the Week. This is getting Stupid... Might as well just change the website to bashcreation.com " There's no way they can be right so let's bash em'"
------------------
The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by wj, posted 08-10-2003 9:27 PM joshua221 has replied
 Message 5 by Admin, posted 08-10-2003 10:17 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 7 by crashfrog, posted 08-11-2003 2:11 AM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 55 (49815)
08-10-2003 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by wj
08-10-2003 9:27 PM


Turned to a debate...
Exactly my problem with, the home on this site... No factual evidence for evolution, yet it says directly that evolution is a science! How??!? No substantial evidence here, he just says it... Science is OBSERVABLE. Evolution isn't!
You want an example for a young earth?
Check it out:
Human Population Dynamics
"If humanity is really about 2.5 million years old (as claimed by Dr. Louis Leakey), creationist calculate from conservative population estimates (2.4 children per family, average generation and life span of forty-three years) that the world population would have grown from a single family to 10 to the 2700th power of people over one million years. The present world population is about 2x10 to the 9th power, an infinitesimal part of the 10 to the 2700th power."
Radio Carbon in Atmosphere
"It now appears that the C14 decay rate in living organisms is about 30 per cent less than its production rate in the upper atmosphere. Since the amount of C14 is now increasing in the atmosphere, it may be assumed that the quantity of C14 was even lower in the past than at the present. This condition would lead to abnormally low C14/C12 ratios for the older fossils. Such a fossil would be interpreted as being much older than it really is. ... Creationists argue that since C14 has not yet reached its equilibrium rate, the age of the atmosphere must be less than 20,000 years old."
-Interactive Bible Home Page www.bible.ca By Anti-Creationist, William D. Stansfield
Just a tiny bit of info. This isn't about a debate which you turned the topic into, I merely am posting a complaint about the Home of this site!
Look here... How do you Explain the wood in the 110 million year old limestone? (Dating Really is effiecient isn't it?) Or the carbonized stick in the 110 million yr old limstone? Rocks known to have formed in historical times should not yield dates of millions of years.
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric.htm
------------------
The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by wj, posted 08-10-2003 9:27 PM wj has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 08-11-2003 2:13 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 9 by PaulK, posted 08-11-2003 4:16 AM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 55 (49841)
08-11-2003 12:40 AM


Creation versus evolution. (fine)
God versus science. (change science to man)
Faith versus materialism. (Ok I guess, I'm edgy about the faith part, you need faith to believe anything yet creation is singled out.)
Is one right and the other wrong? Must one be choosen over the other, or is it possible to combine faith and science?" (change science to something else...ie. theory, idea, man, evolution. Evolution is not observable, Not Science.)
my version of this part.

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Mammuthus, posted 08-11-2003 8:03 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 15 by Admin, posted 08-11-2003 10:12 AM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 55 (50151)
08-12-2003 1:31 PM


wow...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So I guess you don't believe in gravity either since it is not exactly observable?..only its effects...and the theory of gravity has quantitatively less support than the theory of evolution...and as others have pointed out, evolution is observable and has been observed...even in high school level experiments...or can you perform an experiment to demonstrat creation ex nihilo for us?
But if you want annoyances why is it evolution versus creation in the first place? It should be abiogenesis versus creation...or better yet, abiogenesis versus religious fundamentalist myths
wow...
"So I guess you don't believe in gravity either since it is not exactly observable?..only its effects..."
Did I say that? Did I? No, I said that evolution is not science! I never said that I didn't believe in gravity! You pointed it out yourself! You can observe gravity "in action" by watching a rock fall out of your hand. Evolution cannot be observed "in action" (happening.)
"and as others have pointed out, evolution is observable and has been observed...even in high school level experiments..."
It has never been observed! Adaptation is a real thing! That is observable! Adaptation is not Evolution! You must be confused... No experiment can show one species evolving into another species. You are giving me a lot of information that is simply idiotic.
"But if you want annoyances why is it evolution versus creation in the first place? It should be abiogenesis versus creation...or better yet, abiogenesis versus religious fundamentalist myths"
Don't get heated over this and keep your idiotic insults to yourself.
------------------
The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Dan Carroll, posted 08-12-2003 1:34 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 29 by nator, posted 08-12-2003 5:16 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 55 (50153)
08-12-2003 1:46 PM


"And the best thing, it doesn't cost a lot of money.
Take a single E. coli bacterium of the wild, K-type. This type of bacteria is susceptible to a type of virus called T4 phage. So you take this single bacterium and let it reproduce to form a lawn. Then, infect the lawn with T4 phage.
What should we expect to happen?
That's right, plaques of dead bacteria start to form. The phage is infecting them and, since they are susceptible to T4 phage, they start to die.
But we also see some colonies within the plaques merrily living without a care in the world, surrounded by live, active phage.
How can this be? Remember, all the bacteria are descended from a single ancestor whom we knew to be susceptible.
That's right...the bacteria evolved. In fact, they are now called K4-type because they are resistant to T4 phage.
But wait. Let's continue. Take one of the K4 bacteria and again, let it reproduce to form a lawn. Now, infect the lawn with T4 phage.
What should we expect to happen?
That's right: Absolutely nothing. These bacteria are resistant to T4 phage and thus, the phage should have no way to establish itself.
But what do we actually see? Instead, we see plaques starting to form again. How can this be? Remember, all the bacteria are descended from a single ancestor that was resistant to T4 phage. So how could any of them be dying?
We now have to figure out which one evolved. A little thought will show that it has to be the phage that evolved, not the bacteria. See, if a bacterium experienced a reversion mutation such that it would be susceptible to T4 phage, it would immediately be infected and killed, leaving it surrounded by K4 bacteria which would immediately take over the space just vacated. In short, K-type bacteria could never take hold."
Instead, it necessarily must be the phage that evolved. And, in fact, we call these phage T4h because they have experienced a "host" shift.
So there you go. Evolution right before your eyes. And it doesn't take that long to do. Many high schools do this experiment."
This isn't evolution this is call immunities.
Ever hear of the Native Americans? If not listen to this: When the Europeans came to America they brought disease that they were already immuned to from being around it and being infected with it and dying from it. Now the Indians were new to these diseases and they started dying and dying... More of them died of these new diseases then war, famine, or any other cause of death. Now soon the Indians gained immunities for the diseases but sadly enough it was too late for the Native Americans, they were almost entirely wiped out.
Ever hear of vaccinations? Same concept. Don't give me that, I know the difference between gaining immunities from disease and Evolution!
For the bacteria starting to die again, the answer is this: they weren't strong enough, their immunities gave in. Not Evolution!
------------------
The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Admin, posted 08-12-2003 2:05 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 28 by zephyr, posted 08-12-2003 2:08 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 30 by nator, posted 08-12-2003 5:24 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 31 by Parasomnium, posted 08-12-2003 5:52 PM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 32 by Rrhain, posted 08-12-2003 10:16 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 55 (50157)
08-12-2003 1:54 PM


Reply to Re: wow...
"No. What you can observe by watching a rock fall out of your hand is that things fall down. This does not allow you to observe the fundamental force that attracts bodies of mass to one another.
There's a difference."
Then how would we know about gravity? Remember Newton dropped apples out of his and and discovered that there was a force. He named it gravity. Now how would that have happened if we hadn't known that a force made the apple or in my case rock fall? Yes you observe that things fall down, but if you go deeper then you realize that there is a force, a force today known as gravity.
------------------
The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Dan Carroll, posted 08-12-2003 1:57 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 55 (50287)
08-13-2003 12:18 AM


ok
OK I give up, some of this stuff I do not understand at all, maybe I don't belong here. I guess I should get some more knowledge on the subject. I know where I stand but I don't know how to argue these things or if some things are acceptable or not I need to figure it out. When your talking about that experiment (RRhain) I just get lost quick, and need some step by step explanations (sadly enough.) I'll probably not get into this stuff for a while just because most of you guys are way over my level and I am getting overcrowded as it is. So thanks for the Debates but I have to back up a bit right now, I'm sure you guys realized this a while ago. So hopefully I'll be back with some decent arguments. Cya guys.
------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by John, posted 08-13-2003 1:16 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 37 by roxrkool, posted 08-13-2003 1:41 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 48 by Loudmouth, posted 08-19-2003 5:25 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 55 (50290)
08-13-2003 12:20 AM


If you do not want to look an utter fool, you'd better start explaining this. I am going to love hearing you explain how the immune system of bacteria works. Everybody, sit back and enjoy the show.
Guess now I do look like an utter fool... Oh well I least I stood up for myself . later
------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Parasomnium, posted 08-13-2003 3:19 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 39 by Mammuthus, posted 08-13-2003 4:27 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 40 by Percy, posted 08-13-2003 6:29 AM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 55 (50374)
08-13-2003 12:45 PM


Thanks a lot, and will do percipent.
------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by DC85, posted 08-13-2003 11:48 PM joshua221 has replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 55 (50488)
08-14-2003 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by DC85
08-13-2003 11:48 PM


Believe me that won't be happening. Haha
------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by DC85, posted 08-13-2003 11:48 PM DC85 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Karl, posted 08-15-2003 8:46 AM joshua221 has not replied
 Message 47 by DC85, posted 08-16-2003 3:51 PM joshua221 has replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 55 (51657)
08-21-2003 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by DC85
08-16-2003 3:51 PM


No I was Saying that I wont be turning my beliefs into an athiest perspective! PLEASE READ IT AGAIN BEFORE YOU CALL ME IGNORANT!
If you know what I meant then you are the ignorant one my friend. So if I keep my beliefs as a Creationist then I am ignorant. No I am sorry but you should not be able to respond to me. I need an ignore list or something anything you say is and insult please discontinue the insults!
------------------
Psalm 14:1
The Fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by DC85, posted 08-16-2003 3:51 PM DC85 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Admin, posted 08-22-2003 4:21 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 55 (51658)
08-21-2003 7:12 PM


ABOVE in reply to DC85's remarks.
------------------
Psalm 14:1
The Fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024