Creation vs. Evolution page 24

763 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by TebowLover:

Please can I have a chocolate cake recipe?
Edit: Thank you! I will go and make it!

See, I told my quote is more usefull and relevant. Enjoy.

 
Flag Post

OK let’s go back to your theory that god made the universe to look old and al other parts have been added later. Now this conflicts on a specific point: the flood, if only between 7 and 2 of every species survived this would have caused a gigantic genetic bottle neck. We would see this by looking at genetics and finding the last common ancestor. This can be done relatively simple by looking at random mutations that do not have any effect on the chances of reproduction of the organism. These test have for example revealed that there is a common female ancestor about 200 000 years ago and a male ancestor about 60 000 years ago.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by somebody613:

An example that should shut you up – or at least I’ll STOP trying to explain something to a wall:
You register for an on-line RPG game and create a new LVL-1 character.
Then you start roaming the virtual world.
Soon you see a bunch of other guys, around LVL-10.
You talk and they say that they have played for a week.
You run for a while and meet a new guy, LVL-999.
Now, your FIRST ASSUMPTION:
A. This guy have played for a year!
You start talking to him, and he says nonchalantly that he’s a newly appointed game master, and this character is only an hour old.
Your next possible assumptions:
B. He said the truth.
C. He lied, and your A is true.
D. He is no game master but a hacker, and this character is not even his.
Now, SCIENTIFICALLY, only valid assumptions are:
A – according to Occam’s Razor and the evidence that you can obviously see.
C – evidence prevails over subjective opinions.
Whereas:
B – you have no evidence for it, only his word.
D – you have no evidence for it, only your opinion.

NOW!

Tell me, is ANY of the above assumptions ANY “more probable” (or “improbable”) than ANY other?
You do know, that the answer is NO!
Well, probability-wise, of course not all four are equal – A and B are most COMMON, C is pretty probable, while D is the least likely.
But REALITY-wise, can you REALLY tell, WHICH case it is?
NO, NO and NO!
(Hint: No additional info available – you must decide on the above given situation.)

NOW!

This is EXACTLY what I was talking about for the entire yesterday!
Look:
A. We first assume that the world is billions of years old, cause it LOOKS like it.
B. G-d says to us, that He is this world’s “admin”, so it’s NOT how it LOOKS (but He tells the true state).
C. We ignore Him and keep to the scientific approach.
D. Neither version is true / We live under a Matrix solipsist illusion.

NOW!

I chose the B, while some of you keep choosing the C.
Is ANY of us RIGHT?
Who knows, maybe there is a D that nobody ever thought of…
But to INSIST on ANY option, is purely SUBJECTIVE CHOICE, the same way you CHOOSE, whether to BELIEVE the LVL-999 guy OR NOT.
Yes, you CHOOSE it, no other way around it.
(Remember, you’re in a virtual world, and this example is bound to it, like we’re bound to our world. And while IN any of these worlds, we can’t go around these four options – simply impossible.)

I do hope it made it at least a little tiny bit CLEARER
Cheers!

i lol at that elaborate, creative analogy.

but it completely fails. adding a GM character that stats out at a very high level instead of having to level his way there is consistent with what we know is POSSIBLE. God having poofed reality into existence with his magic finger is not.

to make a fair comparison, you have to state that the high level player said he used his magic wand to enchant the game so as to give him a much higher level. and then it would still be a completely shaky analogy.

you’re equating an outrageous claim that throws out all evidence, with a totally credible claim that follows the evidence. horrible analogy. try again.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!!

Of course not, it was a bunch of people.

Wait, we’re not talking about Scientology, are we?

With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

And the only way this could be correct is assuming… That it is correct.

Yeah, not really a very good way to argue your way is factually correct.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!! With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

I think the same about Lord of the Rings…why would J. R. R. Tolkien write all of that if it was just fantasy? With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie!.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

I think the same about Lord of the Rings…why would J. R. R. Tolkien write all of that if it was just fantasy? With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie!.

And don’t even get me started on Piers Anthony.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

I think the same about Lord of the Rings…why would J. R. R. Tolkien write all of that if it was just fantasy? With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie!.

And don’t even get me started on Piers Anthony.

I know! I mean, how could Death not exist? We’re told he rides a Pale Horse! Such a detail, so utterly pointless, merely supports my belief that Death is an actual person.

But yeah, the existence of fiction stories makes the argument that “there’s no way someone could have just written it just because” completely worthless. You might want to try a different justification, Theta Prime.

 
Flag Post

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!! With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

Have you ever visited the science-fiction section of your local library?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!! With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

Lord of The Rings called, it just mocked your argument.

Edit; Oh, that example was already used.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!! With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

oh, yeah. good point. i guess it doesn’t really make sense for this group of people writing some fantastical claims like thousands or tens of thousands in any culture with the capability to write have done, for any other reason than God somehow possessed them and guided their hands, to tell only the truth.

yes, that’s the one, the only explanation that makes any sense. *converts*

 
Flag Post

OD
…to AVI, for better compatibility. :DDD

(I also don’t use such EMOTIONAL “proofs”…)

 
Flag Post

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

By your same logic the Vedas are validated as proof for the gods of Hinduism. Half of India doesn’t believe in the Bible. They believe in Hinduism.

But regardless of any of that, your previous statement still remains invalid. Your logic is circular and full of erroneous assumptions.

 
Flag Post

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

It doesn’t matter how hard you believe in something, it doesn’t affect the truthfulness of that something.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Do all of you dumbshit non-believers ACTUALLY THINK that some guy was just sitting around, bored, with nothing to do, so he just got an idea “Oh! I will right a gigantic book, a couple thousand pages long, and it will all be fake. I’m just bored, so I’ll write a lie” Do you HONESTLY THINK THAT? COME ON!!! With all of the abstract names, places, events, how it was all thought out, come on! How could it be a lie?! You just don’t make some book like that for fun, so it can be a lie, and make people belive in a fake God. (who isn’t fake) He is God almighty, and thats it.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. -Jesus
It is by this all people shall know you follow me, that you love everyone. -Jesus
If you follow me, then keep my commandments. -Jesus
Love God with all your heart, mind, and strength. Love others as you would love yourself. This is the sum of The Law and all the prophets. -Jesus
.
My God is the God of creation, not creationism.
Evolution is hard science, only a charlatan would debate against it.

 
Flag Post

The problem I have with this is “vs”. I understand that either one or the other is true, but the question is irrelevant. People who believe in God, believe He is omnipotent. Anything is possible with Him. That means that presenting scientific evidence that light has been traveling for millions of years from far off stars is pointless, because God could have created the universe aged, so it could still be the Biblical 6K years old. The real question behind the questions is: Is God? These other topics of possibility vs omnipotence go nowhere. Christians shouldn’t be trying to explain the actions of God, and atheists shouldn’t be trying to present scientific evidence vs the ethereal. This is not a “vs”. It never has been. It never will be.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:

The problem I have with this is “vs”. I understand that either one or the other is true, but the question is irrelevant. People who believe in God, believe He is omnipotent. Anything is possible with Him. That means that presenting scientific evidence that light has been traveling for millions of years from far off stars is pointless, because God could have created the universe aged, so it could still be the Biblical 6K years old. The real question behind the questions is: Is God? These other topics of possibility vs omnipotence go nowhere. Christians shouldn’t be trying to explain the actions of God, and atheists shouldn’t be trying to present scientific evidence vs the ethereal. This is not a “vs”. It never has been. It never will be.

There are a large amount of Christians that accept that the theory of Evolution is more or less been proven. There are also many evolutionary scientists who are Christian also…they can clearly understand evolution and still believe in God.
But this debate is about those few not-so-scientifically-gifted regligious people that staunchly and without sarcasm in their voice denounce evolution as an evil plot designed by Satan himsef to fool and mislead humans. Those people are creationists, and their ‘scientific’ proof is what we want them to provide here.
Apparently ‘Creationsim’ is a science….and yet not one piece of scientific evidence has been shared.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:

The problem I have with this is “vs”. I understand that either one or the other is true,

Uhh, no, actually, they can both be true, just creationism would have to be taken a little less literally.

but the question is irrelevant. People who believe in God, believe He is omnipotent.

Kind of a given, isn’t it?

Anything is possible with Him.

Especially cheating at football.

That means that presenting scientific evidence that light has been traveling for millions of years from far off stars is pointless, because God could have created the universe aged, so it could still be the Biblical 6K years old.

It could, but there isn’t a single shred of evidence that points to that, and then there’s the logical inconsistency about why it would be made like that.

Christians shouldn’t be trying to explain the actions of God,

Yet they do.

and atheists shouldn’t be trying to present scientific evidence vs the ethereal.

Why?

This is not a “vs”. It never has been. It never will be.

… Why?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

By your same logic the Vedas are validated as proof for the gods of Hinduism. Half of India doesn’t believe in the Bible. They believe in Hinduism.

But regardless of any of that, your previous statement still remains invalid. Your logic is circular and full of erroneous assumptions.

India has nothing to do with this. They also don’t believe in the lord of the rings.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

India has nothing to do with this.

Why?

They also don’t believe in the lord of the rings.

Tell that to Scientologists.

And you’re also avoiding his point.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by emirPatehT:
Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:
Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

By your same logic the Vedas are validated as proof for the gods of Hinduism. Half of India doesn’t believe in the Bible. They believe in Hinduism.

But regardless of any of that, your previous statement still remains invalid. Your logic is circular and full of erroneous assumptions.

India has nothing to do with this. They also don’t believe in the lord of the rings.

If India has nothing to do with this, then USA has nothing to do with this which means your previous argument is invalid.

So for the record we can safely establish:
your first point (the bible must be real because it’s so complicated): Invalid.
your second poind (The bible must be real because over half of the USA believe in it): Invalid.

You’re going to have to do a lot better than this if you seriously want to argue ‘creationism’ against ‘evolution’…you haven’t even been able to prove that the Bible can be accepted as reliable evidence.
Now try again and think logically.

 
Flag Post

Creation vs. Evolution is just the same age old question… What came first, the chicken, or the egg??

Why can’t creation and evolution co-exist? From what I know about The Big Bang, space was empty. There was nothing. Then all of a sudden, an atom comes out of nowhere, then it explodes in a burst of millions of other atoms, and then over a long period of time, the atoms stick together and form the universe we know today.

Does this sound familiar? Like a certain Biblical quote? Let there be light…

I still don’t understand whats holding these tiny atoms together. Why isn’t everything just one big mass of particuls?

Besides, Jesus says "Love thy “Neighbor”. I love scientists, even non-believers, and I hope that no atheist or scientist would wish ill will on a creationist, like me. :)

Thank you for listening, praise Jesus.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by createdforprayer:

Creation vs. Evolution is just the same age old question… What came first, the chicken, or the egg??

Why can’t creation and evolution co-exist? From what I know about The Big Bang, space was empty. There was nothing. Then all of a sudden, an atom comes out of nowhere, then it explodes in a burst of millions of other atoms, and then over a long period of time, the atoms stick together and form the universe we know today.

Does this sound familiar? Like a certain Biblical quote? Let there be light…

I still don’t understand whats holding these tiny atoms together. Why isn’t everything just one big mass of particuls?

Besides, Jesus says "Love thy “Neighbor”. I love scientists, even non-believers, and I hope that no atheist or scientist would wish ill will on a creationist, like me. :)

Thank you for listening, praise Jesus.

Because you don’t get compare unsupported beliefs next to scientifically supported fact, it’s not two sides of the same coin.

Science is not about faith, it’s not a belief and it has actual scientific evidence. It’s every expert on the subject vs. you.

“You don’t get to put your unreason up on the same shelf as my reason, your stuff has to go over there, with Zeus and Thor and the Kraken” -Bill maher

Originally posted by emirPatehT:

Hmm, last time I recalled, half of the USA dosen’t believe in the Lord if The Rings. They belive in the Bible.

Argumentum ad populum.

 
Flag Post

Creationism and evolution are compatible if the creationists claim that God set the whole big bang in motion…I have heard another version where God set everything in motion, starting from the Big Bang…but he created humans separately. In this version, humans have no lineage to Homo erectus or others. So while the world follows the evolutionary process, Humans are not a product of it. This version is still as illogical as the young earth creationist story.

I bring up this because I am interested if anyone else has heard different creation stories? And do you think any of them are compatible with evolution?