Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-19-2019 2:53 AM
20 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume:
Total: 851,600 Year: 6,637/19,786 Month: 1,178/1,581 Week: 0/393 Day: 0/30 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution: Science or Religion?
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 41 (46526)
07-19-2003 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by EndocytosisSynthesis
07-19-2003 5:22 PM


It's not the actual truth its just our best understanding which has been wrong before and will be in the future.

No, science is a process of continually getting less wrong. Wouldn't you rather be close to the truth, and getting continually closer; than eternally, unchangingly wrong?

That's what religion offers, basically. Eternal error. I'll take science any day. Being wrong for now - but assured of greater correctness in the future - is much more attractive to me than continual error.

As for observing evolution, we observe the mechanisms of evolution every day. We even use them to design microchips and jet airplanes. What more observation do you require? The actual history itself? If so, why do you accept that the Civil War happened, and not evolution? There's as much evidence for both.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-19-2003 5:22 PM EndocytosisSynthesis has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 41 (46562)
07-20-2003 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by EndocytosisSynthesis
07-20-2003 12:50 PM


We can observe gravity every day, evolution from ape to man cannot be observed everyday.

Not so, We observe the same mechanism that got us from ape-like ancestor to Homo Sapiens generating new species every day. Did you miss my other post? The one where I said we use natural selection + random mutation to generate circuit designs and jet airplanes? How much more observation do you need?

the Universe itself and why life exists instead of nothing is evidence by itself.

Why do you think there was ever nothing? How do you know the universe ever didn't exist? Maybe all this "something" exists because it's not possible for it not to exist.

Existence is not evidence for a Creator, because you don't always need a creator to get something. It's just evidence for existence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-20-2003 12:50 PM EndocytosisSynthesis has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-20-2003 4:29 PM crashfrog has responded
 Message 27 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-20-2003 4:31 PM crashfrog has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 41 (46580)
07-20-2003 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by EndocytosisSynthesis
07-20-2003 4:29 PM


True, But Those circuit designs in jet airplanes would not have occured if an intelligent creator/designer didn't actually design the airplane and all of its components and the circuit boards and everything else first. It can't just appear out of nothing.

No, that's exactly what happened. It's called "genetic programming", and it's a process of generating functional circuits or jet planes in a computer simulation, through processes of natural selection and random mutation. At no point is a circuit design actually designed by a human. Natural selection and random mutation - evolution - does all the designing.

You can read about it here:

www-personal.si.umich.edu/~rfrost/courses/SI110/readings/EvoInventions.pdf

New species are generating everyday? I don't think so

You think wrong. It's very well documented. Look through a biological journal and you'll see new species arising through reproductive isolation. It's a very well-understood phenomenon. There isn't a creationist group today who argues that new species don't arise.

you're taking a giant leap of faith right there and making too many assumptions.

The only assumption I'm making is that natural processes can account for all natural phenomenon - the same assumption used by all the sciences.

Now, believing in a Creator God - that's a leap of faith, and that's making too many assumptions. If you compare you'll find I'm actually making a lot less untestable assumptions than you.

Evolution hasn't been proven 100%, therefore I'm not going to believe it until it has,

It's been proven as well as anything else in the sciences. Perhaps that's what you mean by "100%". Why else would it have near-universal acceptance in the biological community?

which wouldn't have happened anyway unless there was an intelligent designer making it all possible, and actually designing the circuit board first.

Like I said, there's no intervention in the GP process except to set inital conditions. The circuits are designed through the same process that gives rise to new species.

If evolution can make circuits and jet airplanes, why can't it turn an ape-like ancestor into two populations of men and apes?

[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 07-20-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-20-2003 4:29 PM EndocytosisSynthesis has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 41 (46581)
07-20-2003 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by EndocytosisSynthesis
07-20-2003 4:31 PM


Not possible for it not to exist? Explain that.

I just meant, there's no evidence that the universe has ever not existed, is all. The idea that it arose out of nothing ("ex nihilo") is just your assumption.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by EndocytosisSynthesis, posted 07-20-2003 4:31 PM EndocytosisSynthesis has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019