Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 1/2


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Creation/Evolution Miscellany ⇒

Why do people believe what they believe?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why do people believe what they believe?
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 11 of 51 (95924)
03-30-2004 10:10 AM 		Reply to: Message 8 by secondlaw
03-30-2004 9:53 AM

Re: as a side note
For a born-again Christian, then evolution (macro) is completely incompatible.
​
This is also false. I know born-again Christians who have no problem with evolution.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by secondlaw, posted 03-30-2004 9:53 AM secondlaw has not replied
  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 39 of 51 (96267)
03-31-2004 7:30 AM 		Reply to: Message 38 by secondlaw
03-31-2004 7:26 AM

Re: mathematical impossibility
Which is a fabuluous demonstration that the a cell consisting of 60,000 proteins couldn't occur by chance, not why life cannot come from non-life.
​
No-one thinks the first cell popped, fully-formed, into existence by random chance.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by secondlaw, posted 03-31-2004 7:26 AM secondlaw has not replied
  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 43 of 51 (96301)
03-31-2004 10:13 AM 		Reply to: Message 41 by secondlaw
03-31-2004 9:51 AM

Re: mathematical impossibility
We know this: at one point there was no life. Now there is. Somewhere between these two points life came to be. We do not know how. We could throw up our hands and go "must be magic!". But why would we? Every single time anyone has ever accredited anything to a supernatural process before they have been wrong. Why should we take the assumption that it is now?
​
We have no evidence either way, however one form of explanation has a track record of success, and the other a track record of failure. Which form then is most rational to assume?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by secondlaw, posted 03-31-2004 9:51 AM secondlaw has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024