quote:
Originally posted by Hanno:
I agree. Personnally, I'd rather tend more to the Creationists point of view, but, although I would probably never accept evolution, I do hold the posibility that I might be wrong. All that can be determined from a fossil is what it looked like (If they're lucky enough to find the entire skeleton), and how old it is. It is up to personal interpretation if it were created that way, or if it evolved into that. Evolusionists often says that evolution is purely based of facts. However,if you do not believe in a God, you have to believe in evolution, how else would everything have come about? The assumption that there is no creator, is just as unproven that the believe that there is.
JM: Ok, let's put paid to this poor assertion. It is constantly claimed that if one finds evolution a satisfactory explanation of how changes in organisms come about, then that person cannot believe in God. Now, you left some wriggle room and can claim that you did not say exactly that, but the implication is clear. There are scientists who accept evolution based on data and those scientists range in their religious beliefs from atheists to fundamentalist Christians so I don't buy the false dichotomy. As for your assertion that all we can know is what it looked like, that too is false. We can estimate brain size, document activities and life style in some cases, we can analyze social aspects and behavior of the organisms. I don't mind if you disagree with the conclusions, but at least take the time to find out what science has discovered and stop portraying it in cartoon fashion.
quote:
Ofcause, science is based on that which you can detect, and thus cannot be used in this religious discusion: You cannot learn much about the creator when studying the creation, accept, perhaps, that he must have been very wise.
JM: Why? If there is a possibility for one creator, then there is a possibility for many creators! Furthermore, from a purely engineering perspective, our backs, feet and knees were poorly designed (if they were designed at all).
quote:
You cannot proof Picaso had lived by studing his work, can you? Evolution theory is therefore a necesary result of the believe that there is no God. (Ofcause, once the theory is there, nothing stops religious people to adopt it as well.)
JM: Baloney. Now you've made the claim. I personally know dozens of scientists who are both strong in their faith and also find evolution a perfectly acceptable theory. What you do, on the other hand, is limit your God based on your incomplete knowledge of science. You are basically concluding that God could not create via evolution because YOU can't fathom God creating that way. Who has the strongest faith? One who artificially decides what God can and cannot do or one who accepts that God is all-powerful and chose evolution as his creative tool?
quote:
But if animals did evolve, there is no telling who is who's ancestor. It's pure speculation and educated guess work.
JM: This is a naive view of science. Show that this statement is true.
quote:
There is no way of knowing how may animals really existed, no way of telling how many were never fossilized. How, for instance, can they pinpoint for sure the ancestor of the dinosaurs? It might just as well have been some other species. Just like "ape men" that were previously concidered an ancestor of man, which is now believed to have lived side by side with our "real" ancestor. And this is then tought as "facts" in schools, not theories.
JM: What are you talking about? I teach in the schools and I teach evolution is both a fact and a theory. You can close your eyes and pretend that evolution (or gravity or heat) doesn't exist, but it's gonna happen anyway! You can stand on the top of a building, rebuke gravity and jump off. Do you think gravity will care? Evolution is a theory because we don't know all the mechanisms for why evolution occurs. Gravity is also a theory because we do not know why gravity exists and how it relates to the other fundamental forces. Stop protesting so hard and try learning what evolution and science really says rather than repeating some ill-prepared cartoon version of it. You might be pleasantly surprised at how your faith and science are not at odds.
quote:
The evolusionists need to realize they are building a puzzle, without knowing how many pieces there is, and how many are missing. If 99.99999% of the pieces are missing (And we do not know the percentage, this is purely hipothetical), the picture we will have would be greatly obscured.
JM: The government must realize that they are building a puzzle without knowing how many pieces there are. If 99% of the pieces are missing (also HYPOTHETICAL), the picture of who was responsible for the deaths of Nicole Simpson and Ron Brown is greatly obscured. Do you see the problem? You eschew the fact that evolution happens, is observable and repeatable. You forget that evolution has both predictive and retrodictive power. In short, you have been spoon fed some cartoon version of science and are mercilessly beating it into your head. Learn what science says, then attack it.
quote:
And if you try and explain everything from what we have, even more so. The last thing you need then, is a preconcieved idea where the pieces you do have, should fit. You can make educated guesses, but when educated guesses are made, it should not be presented as facts.
JM: You've yet to support your case that this is true.
quote:
Ofcause, this goes for the Creationists as well. It is not for us to know EXACTLY how God made the universe. God gave us a very rough idea in Genesis 1, but for all we know, the details of "..and there was light..." can fill encyclopedias. Besides, we as Christians have a have a comforting assurance from our Father that we will be with Him after we die. We do not need proof of this, because God Himself planted this faith in our harts.
JM: The remainder of your post is a personal statement of faith (good for you) and a personal statement of incredulity. You can't imagine that your God could create via evolution (because someone told you that) and have therefore turned your back on science in favor of your own creation of God. It is your privelege to do so, but stop pretending that everyone else must also follow your lead. As I said, there are many Christian scientists who have examined the evidence and found that God's creative tool was evolution. This view does not conflict with their beliefs nor does it lessen their God.
I would be happy to discuss real science with you at any time, but you need to present real science in your posts rather than this caricature.
Cheers
Joe Meert
™ Version 4.2