Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/0 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Let us reason together.
Admin
Director
Posts: 13081
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 106 of 152 (34617)
03-18-2003 8:02 AM


Is there a central topic to this discussion?
------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by Adminnemooseus, posted 03-25-2003 12:25 AM Admin has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2250 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 107 of 152 (34666)
03-19-2003 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by drummachine
03-17-2003 9:28 PM


Drum, assure me that you understand what scientists say evolution is.
I have asked you at least 8 or 9 times now for a short explanation from you, in your own words, of what scientists say evolution is and how it works.
You refuse to do so.
I am about to ask you a question, and I want an answer. Please do not ignore the following question. Please answer it.
Why should I engage in an evolution discussion with you when it is not clear that you understand what scientists say evolution is?
For that matter, why should I engage in discussion with someone who pretty much ignores everything I write?
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-19-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by drummachine, posted 03-17-2003 9:28 PM drummachine has not replied

drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 152 (34702)
03-19-2003 3:17 PM


Schrafinator,
If you have been taught or believe evolution it says that everything was by time, death and chance. Evolution says the laws of the universe came together. Life is so complex(for example a living cell), but it was by time and chance. There is truly no evidence of the earth being billions of years old, ape-men and animals evolving into other animals. Thats why evolution is not science. We were not there in the past. You can have many variations in a kind but it is still the same kind. With evolution you need new information. Evolution says we came from a rock. God says we were made in His image. Look at DNA for example. By chance? Evolutionary theories change all the time. The Bible is concrete and it fits with the origins of life. The Bible is just a little speck of information God has given us. The same thing happens today. In the Garde of Eden Satan came to Eve and said you can be God. He offers the same fruit of sin that we all have eaten. People believe Christians are bumbling idiots but lets look at the facts. What you believe and what I believe. In the beginning was dirt or in the beginning God? What makes sense?
Q & A: Was this text written almost 2,000 years ago mans words?
2 Peter 3:3-9 Scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers(patriarchs of the Old Testament) fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation." For this they willfully forget(Greek: dumb on purpose) at by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then exsisted perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.(Not bound by time, not the age of earth) The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is LONGSUFFERING toward us, not willing that ANY SHOULD PERISH but that ALL should scome to repentance.
Now I don't write this to scoff at you but that maybe you will look at the seriousness of this. Are eternal destiny is in the balance!
Judgement or the eternal inheritance into the Kingdom. Evolution sounds more like a fairy tale than the Bible any day.
Have you looked at this page? Answers in Genesis

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by nator, posted 03-19-2003 3:35 PM drummachine has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2250 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 109 of 152 (34703)
03-19-2003 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by drummachine
03-19-2003 3:17 PM


Fine.
You have chosen to ignore me in this conversation, despite all of my very direct and very reasonable attempts at engagement.
As a result of you showing my efforts no respect whatsoever, I choose to completely ignore you.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-19-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by drummachine, posted 03-19-2003 3:17 PM drummachine has not replied

drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 152 (34716)
03-19-2003 7:58 PM


Schrafinator,
What do you want? I have already explained my belief about evolution. Please just simply post your questions that you think I am not answering. Do you want me to explain something like natural selection? Have I not explained evolution? Have I missed something? Please be descriptive. What do you want me to explain???
What about what the Admin said. Dont give links. Plain text. Schrafinator, will you please explain that page since I guest I dont understand?
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 03-19-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by greyline, posted 03-19-2003 10:28 PM drummachine has not replied
 Message 112 by Admin, posted 03-20-2003 8:18 AM drummachine has not replied
 Message 113 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-20-2003 8:52 AM drummachine has not replied
 Message 123 by Quetzal, posted 03-21-2003 1:57 AM drummachine has not replied
 Message 125 by nator, posted 03-21-2003 7:16 AM drummachine has not replied

greyline
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 152 (34724)
03-19-2003 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by drummachine
03-19-2003 7:58 PM


Have I not explained evolution?
Well you explained *something* I guess, but it sure as heck wasn't evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by drummachine, posted 03-19-2003 7:58 PM drummachine has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 13081
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 112 of 152 (34747)
03-20-2003 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by drummachine
03-19-2003 7:58 PM


drum writes:
What about what the Admin said. Dont give links.
That's not what I said. I just posted this in Message 14 of the The Bible 2003 Edition by God et al thread:
Did you read the message you're replying to? Did you notice that it said:
The intention is that discussion of issues take place here, rather than merely enumerate bibliographic references. Rule 5 of the Forum Guidelines states:
  1. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided.
This explains why it doesn't matter whether the facts are on that site or not. As I just explained to Judge in Message 17 of the The Bible Unearthed - Exodus thread:
As the Forum Guidelines clearly state, links should be accompanied with some explanation or discussion. This serves several purposes. It indicates you understood the link and have read it yourself, it allows people to understand how you're using the information in the link to make your point, and if the content of the link is lengthy it can make clear the relevant portion.
Combined with the fact that you posted the exact same link as your only reply in Message 96 of the Let us reason together thread, and that I cautioned you about it in that thread in Message 98, your response provides more evidence for the possibility that you are not reading messages addressed to you, at least not very carefully.
When you registered you were presented the Forum Guidelines, and I presume you clicked "I agree". All I'm asking is that you live up to what you already agreed to.
In your just previous message you posted this:
Have you looked at this page? answersingenesis.org
This is not a webpage - it's an entire website. Almost every evolutionist here has visited that site. If there is some information there you think relevant to your argument then you'll have to be much more specific and reference a single webpage, plus provide some accompanying explanation to tie it in with your own point.
------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by drummachine, posted 03-19-2003 7:58 PM drummachine has not replied

Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3297 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 113 of 152 (34749)
03-20-2003 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by drummachine
03-19-2003 7:58 PM


'Splainin vs Understanding
Drummachine, to answer your question
quote:
have I not explained evolution
The answer is no, you have not. For example, your constant use of non-biological events to attempt to denigrate biological evolution (ie: your dishonest or ignorant linking of cosmology, the start and evolution of the universe with biological evolution, which only depends on the presence of lifeforms and an environment) demonstrate a lack of any firm, or even shaky to be honest, grasp of what biological evolution means. Ditto w.r.t. the concept of randomness. Your claims that evolution is random is completely unfounded; IMO you are confusing random with non-directed, they are not the same. As has been explained to you and to other repeatedly evolution follows natural laws, both w.r.t. physics and chemistry as well as having "biological laws" of its own although these laws are more based on probability and are just not being understood and defined. Your attempts to make statements concerning 2LOT are even more ludicrous and display a complete lack of understanding of how thermodynamics works, both in simpler chemical systems as well as in living systems. As has been repeatedly explained the entropy of systems does increase but this says nothing about the individual components of those systems. Even when organisms/species or environments increase in complexity the overall entropy of the system still goes up due to the conversion of energy to more useable forms by the organisms, and the loss of useable energy which occurs during the conversion process. As to the "links" comment. You really need to understand your links before you post them. It is just a better approach.
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by drummachine, posted 03-19-2003 7:58 PM drummachine has not replied

drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 152 (34773)
03-20-2003 11:28 AM


Evolution: It is a humanist philosophy that says apart from an infinite creator God man determines truth. Even though man was not there in the past. Man believes he can explain the past. Man believes the incredible beauty of the ocean, mountains and the heavens are by chance. Man believes the machine of the human life system came together by chance. Man believes the air we breath came from nothing for example. Man believes he can age date the earth even though he cannot accurately. There just assumptions. Man believes everything came together by chance so there is no accountability to a creator who has clearly shown Himself. Man believes the blessings he has are from himself and cannot be from the hand of the Lord God. Man looks at an ape and believes that is his ancestor. He believes in the beginning everything came from nothing. Man believes he is wise even though he is not. Actually he understands nothing because all things have to come from a creator.
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 03-20-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by edge, posted 03-20-2003 12:41 PM drummachine has not replied
 Message 116 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-20-2003 12:51 PM drummachine has not replied
 Message 127 by nator, posted 03-21-2003 7:31 AM drummachine has not replied

edge
Member (Idle past 1786 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 115 of 152 (34778)
03-20-2003 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by drummachine
03-20-2003 11:28 AM


quote:
Evolution: It is a humanist philosophy that says apart from an infinite creator God man determines truth. Even though man was not there in the past. Man believes he can explain the past. Man believes the incredible beauty of the ocean, mountains and the heavens are by chance. Man believes the machine of the human life system came together by chance. Man believes the air we breath came from nothing for example. Man believes he can age date the earth even though he cannot accurately. There just assumptions. Man believes everything came together by chance so there is no accountability to a creator who has clearly shown Himself. Man believes the blessings he has are from himself and cannot be from the hand of the Lord God. Man looks at an ape and believes that is his ancestor. He believes in the beginning everything came from nothing. Man believes he is wise even though he is not. Actually he understands nothing because all things have to come from a creator.
Fine, but I think we knew your position before the sermon. Do you have any particular point from above that you would like to discuss?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by drummachine, posted 03-20-2003 11:28 AM drummachine has not replied

Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3297 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 116 of 152 (34779)
03-20-2003 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by drummachine
03-20-2003 11:28 AM


Like I said.....
You have not explained evolution. What you are describing is a largely erroneous creationist view of evolution or a mixed up combination of certian humanist philosophical concepts with pieces of cosmology and biology thrown in without regard for their proper meaning or context.
For example,
quote:
Evolution: It is a humanist philosophy that says apart from an infinite creator God man determines truth.
False, evolution pre-dates humanist philosophy (unless you include the Enlightonment philosophers as humanist, most do not and with good reason) and does not attempt to determine Truth, although is does attempt to determine both cause and fact.
quote:
Man believes the machine of the human life system came together by chance.
False, people who understand evolution consider humans to be a part of a long chain of evolved organisms, the evolution of which follows natural laws which can be found in chemistry, physics and probability. The sole "random" components are in fact really undetermined and non-predetermined mutational and environmental effects.
quote:
Man believes he can age date the earth even though he cannot accurately.
Error here as well; however, for the sake of debate many on these boards have posted the proofs of dating techniques, please post your refutation based on chemistry and physics.
quote:
Man believes everything came together by chance so there is no accountability to a creator who has clearly shown Himself.
False on two fronts, the first part is explained above in refuting your spurious claims concerning percieved randomness. The second is in that your "God" has never clearly shown him or herself. A book is not proof. Although that leads to an area of debate curently in another thread.
Drum, the only thing which you ave shown is a willingness to propogate a spurious and erroneous perception of what you think that evolution is, but not what it is in fact.
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by drummachine, posted 03-20-2003 11:28 AM drummachine has not replied

drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 152 (34815)
03-20-2003 7:14 PM


Admin,
All I was saying was that it seemed like you said we should not post links so why not let Schrafinator or any of you explain evolution to me since I don't understand without the link? Please correct me if I'm wrong. The very question I would have is this, "Do you believe everything came together out of nothing without a designer?" Lets look at this one question first if you don't mind. Lets look at this question and then I will talk to you about micro evolution, macro evolution and natural selection. Does that seem fair? Don't we want to look at the evidence, the facts? Rather then are belief or what we assume about the origins of life? So if you would please comment on that question I would appreciate it. Lets look at both sides together. In the beginning God or in the beginning dirt. Thank you.
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 03-20-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-20-2003 9:40 PM drummachine has not replied

Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3297 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 118 of 152 (34822)
03-20-2003 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by drummachine
03-20-2003 7:14 PM


Answers (sort of)
Drum and Admin, hope that you don't mind me replying to this one.
quote:
explain evolution
(Q1)...The very question I would have is this, "Do you believe everything came together out of nothing without a designer?"
.(Q2)..Rather then are belief or what we assume about the origins of life?
(Q3)...In the beginning God or in the beginning dirt. Thank you.
OK, sorry if it looks like I have chopped your question up but it is actually several in one. I would like to stick to evolution, your three actually involve more about cosmology and/or abiogenesis. I am sorry to harp about this but you will not find the beginning of either the cosmos or of life in any part of evolution via natural selection (or related mechanistic explainations of how evolution occurs). It is kind of like asking a catholic when they are going on Haj, or asking a Buddist to explain their belief in the trinity, it is a meaningless question from the get go. Now, on to evolution w.r.t. biology.
Evolution: Changes in the life forms which make up the biosphere.
Theory of evolution: a partial or total theory of HOW evolution occurs.
Natural Selection: the common term given to the mechanistic theory of descent with modification, also called Darwinian evolution. The initial factual basis for this is a combination of the geochronological and geographical distribution of fossilized and living species, as well as studies on general morphology. Later studies in genetics and molecular biology give further support to the broad general thesis, despite what Peter Borger and TB say, Hi Guys.
Now, this says nothing about a diety, what it does say is that the life forms on this planet, based on the above reasons, have a, or a group of common ancestors. That they have changed through time to the forms observed now. And that all of this can be explained without requireing overt action from a supernatural being.
How is that for a general start. Hey, maybe we can get this debate back on track in this thread . If you want to discuss abiogenesis or cosmology maybe we should split this tread into three, one per area.
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by drummachine, posted 03-20-2003 7:14 PM drummachine has not replied

drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 152 (34827)
03-20-2003 10:07 PM


So you believe that life has changed? So do you believe man has evolved from a lower organism? If you do, would you please give me an sample? Thank you.
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 03-20-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by greyline, posted 03-20-2003 10:56 PM drummachine has not replied

greyline
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 152 (34832)
03-20-2003 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by drummachine
03-20-2003 10:07 PM


I don't like the term "lower organism" - it implies that values are placed on different organisms, whereas Nature makes no such judgements. I know that lower and higher are terms used in evolution all the time, but I wish that wasn't the case - it confuses the issue, especially when trying to explain things to a creationist.
Just thought I'd set that straight.
My answer to drummachine is: the evidence shows that man has evolved from an organism that wasn't man, and furthermore that man and other organisms have a common ancestor. Some organisms have a more recent common ancestor than others - for example, man and apes have a more recent common ancestor than man and bumble bees.
------------------
o--greyline--o

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by drummachine, posted 03-20-2003 10:07 PM drummachine 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