Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,598 Year: 4,855/9,624 Month: 203/427 Week: 13/103 Day: 2/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If evolution is true, where did flying creatures come from?
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 27 of 225 (737611)
09-27-2014 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Bookworm7890
09-27-2014 10:27 AM


Re: Reply to subbie
I see you saying that i am asking easily answered questions, well then, by all means answer them. Really, link to the evidence please.
I see you're trying to start a new thread where everyone argues the other side of the issue. Seems like that might be a good excuse for you to get off your ass and do your own homework on this subject.
Edited by Capt Stormfield, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Bookworm7890, posted 09-27-2014 10:27 AM Bookworm7890 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Bookworm7890, posted 09-27-2014 10:06 PM Capt Stormfield has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 37 of 225 (737655)
09-28-2014 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Bookworm7890
09-27-2014 10:59 PM


Re: Reply to capt stormfield.
And to everyone: I know several children who act more mature than you lot! The least you could do is read what the other side has written, pay attention to what they say, and appreciate the effort they put into supporting what they believe!
You may be indulging in some projection here. Given the religious demographic of North America, the majority of people who understand and accept evolutionary theory were raised in creationist homes. I know I was. Unlike you, I do understand the subject from both sides.
It was an honest appraisal of just how little substance supported my efforts to cling to belief over evidence that led me to accept that I was wrong. You should understand that "the effort... put into supporting..." an idea is irrelevant. What matters is evidence. Creationists appear to have none.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Bookworm7890, posted 09-27-2014 10:59 PM Bookworm7890 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by mike the wiz, posted 09-28-2014 9:47 AM Capt Stormfield has replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(1)
Message 47 of 225 (737678)
09-28-2014 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by mike the wiz
09-28-2014 9:47 AM


Re: Reply to capt stormfield.
By implication you're saying that because you had set of reasons X, and you come to believe you were wrong, that that makes creation and creationists wrong.
In fact, I said or implied no such thing. I responded to a series of posts claiming that
...we say that others are wrong without even knowing what the other has to say.
by explaining why that claim is not true. Setting aside the incomprehensible hash you have concocted from stirring together your misunderstanding of logic and your misrepresentation of my words, I will address one important idea you inadvertently brushed up against.
...you are saying that because you personally came to the belief in Creation, and you think you are now wrong, that this means creation is wrong, creationists are wrong and there is no evidence for creation because we all believe and reason as you believed and reasoned. But it seems to me your abilities to reason are still the same.
What I came to realize as I became educated in both science and religion (at a religious college, BTW), was precisely that I had not "come to a belief" in creation. In reality, I had absorbed it from the culture around me as unconsciously, and as unthinkingly, as I had absorbed my language. When I assessed my creationist beliefs I discovered that I had not, in fact, applied my ability to reason to them. I came to understand the difference between the "believing" of my religious experience up to that point, and the tentative, always tested, acceptance of evidence that characterized a rational view of the world. So yes, my ability to reason is still the same, it simply had not been used in the development of my religious faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by mike the wiz, posted 09-28-2014 9:47 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 48 of 225 (737679)
09-28-2014 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by mike the wiz
09-28-2014 10:53 AM


Re: Probability is a pain
...with a sharing of 200 of the same genes...
Gosh! However could different species come to share the same genes?!?!? It's almost as if they had something in common, like... like... an ancestor or something!!!!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by mike the wiz, posted 09-28-2014 10:53 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(1)
Message 218 of 225 (758457)
05-26-2015 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by Belcher
05-26-2015 2:07 AM


Firm vs Accurate
...you will get firm answers from a true faith.
What do you mean when you say "firm"? Unchanging? Accurate? How would you differentiate between two firm answers that were in opposition to each other?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Belcher, posted 05-26-2015 2:07 AM Belcher has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 429
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 220 of 225 (758463)
05-26-2015 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by NoNukes
05-26-2015 11:41 AM


Luckily, I didn't need the answer for any real purpose.
Pretty much sums up the value of faith, that does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by NoNukes, posted 05-26-2015 11:41 AM NoNukes 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