Buster Sword wrote:
Yeah I basically see creation as the why and evolution as the how.
I mean it is nice to have something to believe in, even if I have no way of proving that belief. And it’s cool if people don’t believe it, I mean we have as much right to believe in whatever as much as the next person. I’ve always had a passion for science and I’m a kinda...“geek” so it works quite well for me.
Ah, I thought about this for many days... Could it been a god? Aliens? A asteroid carrying life? A fluke in nature? Being from another dimension, maybe even aliens from another big bang somewhere outside our big bang.. I still think about different ways it might have happened...
But 1 thing is clear, from the big bang, to the formation the star that exploded and spawned our solarsystem, from the moon crashing into earth, and so on. All came about through natural processes, a rational mind would also assume that we must of too.. but it was also a rational mind who came to the conclusion that the earth was flat, or not moving... we will see in the years to come...
--- Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.
If you had a room or shelf full of fossils, you couldnt tell me that the earth was billions of years old or we were created by apes.
that’s basically how we know, there are so many fossils that have been accurately dated through processesthat are tried and true methods and show the stages of man and other animals through millions of years of evolution as well as other extinct species that it would be impossible to say like Creationists like to do that the earth is only 6000 years old.
The evidence just isn’t there and by the nature of our universe it isn’t possible for things to just randomly appear or be created that quickly. When a new galaxy/solar system is created there is a set amount of matter that starts out gaseous and is converted/fused into other elements slowly over millions of years gradually through a domino effect, eventually the new denser matter that is starting to be produced, aggregates and yields stars, then as a result over even more time, planets and the life that walks on them.
We also have the planets recorded history through it’s Geology, that allows us to have a sort of roadmap of the planet’s long turbulent history.
Just watched another show on the earth’s history tonight, was this like 8 part deal on the national geographic channel. Very intriguing and it really goes in depth and explains alot about all the hell our planet has been through and how it is able to support life and why we have all these forces like erosion and volcanic eruptions, and how they are vital to the continued existence of land animals on the planet. Very good show. I recommend it to anyone who is interested, jus check and see what was on the national geographic channel from like 4-11pm.
---
The REAL commandments and Why American Education sucks
Last edited 16 Jul 2008 03:28 am by Son Gohan The True SSJ2
Buster Sword wrote:
It’s kinda what makes life exciting, the not knowing part, lol we are so intelligent beings, but we are uncertain of our origin.
Yes and the tool that we use to discover those things would be science. Because the scientific method is very good at separating fact from fantasy.
--- Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.
Buster Sword wrote:
It’s kinda what makes life exciting, the not knowing part, lol we are so intelligent beings, but we are uncertain of our origin.
Yes and the tool that we use to discover those things would be science. Because the scientific method is very good at separating fact from fantasy.
You mean it’s good at providing evidence for how things work in the real world correct?
Yes as it gives us a better understanding of our world rather than having to make up myths to explain our surroudings.
Even so, myths and stories shouldn’t just be dismissed off-hand. Many of them have elements of truth to them.
For example - the Irish invasion “myths”. (There weren’t any creation stories). Many historians now believe that those stories may describe a very real influx of several different people groups into the area. Of course there’s no hard data to prove that one way or the other, unless some startling discovery is made.
Buster Sword wrote:
It’s kinda what makes life exciting, the not knowing part, lol we are so intelligent beings, but we are uncertain of our origin.
Yes and the tool that we use to discover those things would be science. Because the scientific method is very good at separating fact from fantasy.
You mean it’s good at providing evidence for how things work in the real world correct?
Yes as it gives us a better understanding of our world rather than having to make up myths to explain our surroudings.
Even so, myths and stories shouldn’t just be dismissed off-hand. Many of them have elements of truth to them.
For example - the Irish invasion “myths”. (There weren’t any creation stories). Many historians now believe that those stories may describe a very real influx of several different people groups into the area. Of course there’s no hard data to prove that one way or the other, unless some startling discovery is made.
All fiction is based on fact. :3
---
Skull_Kid wrote:
Cid is a really cool guy. eh eats out some skittles and doesnt afraid of anything.
Buster Sword wrote:
It’s kinda what makes life exciting, the not knowing part, lol we are so intelligent beings, but we are uncertain of our origin.
Yes and the tool that we use to discover those things would be science. Because the scientific method is very good at separating fact from fantasy.
You mean it’s good at providing evidence for how things work in the real world correct?
Testable evidence...
--- Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.
Buster Sword wrote:
It’s kinda what makes life exciting, the not knowing part, lol we are so intelligent beings, but we are uncertain of our origin.
Yes and the tool that we use to discover those things would be science. Because the scientific method is very good at separating fact from fantasy.
You mean it’s good at providing evidence for how things work in the real world correct?
Yes as it gives us a better understanding of our world rather than having to make up myths to explain our surroudings.
Even so, myths and stories shouldn’t just be dismissed off-hand. Many of them have elements of truth to them.
For example - the Irish invasion “myths”. (There weren’t any creation stories). Many historians now believe that those stories may describe a very real influx of several different people groups into the area. Of course there’s no hard data to prove that one way or the other, unless some startling discovery is made.
I total agree...
--- Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.
Crimson_Blade wrote:
All fiction is based on fact. :3
“Many of them have elements of truth to them” would be more accurate..
--- Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.
Interesting thing, creation vs. evolution........... . Evolutionists must believe there is empirical evidence for “evolution” having-
1. Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
2. Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
3. Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
4. Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
5. Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).
mmmmm possible. And I guess a big wind could blow through a junkyard and assemble a 747. Is that really more believable than the idea of intelligent creation.....
Watchman wrote:
Interesting thing, creation vs. evolution........... . Evolutionists must believe there is empirical evidence for “evolution” having-
1. Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
WRONG. Thats the big bang if anything. Your wrong on the nothing part too. Read up on the Big bang.
2. Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
Cosmology /=evolution. Fail yet again.
3. Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
Theory of abiogenesis, evolution does not explain the orgin of life. Fail yet again.
4. Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
And? Maybe they were like that to begin with. You know instincts and all.
5. Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).
Thats the first thing you’ve said right and I believe Ameba’s could do just that
mmmmm possible. And I guess a big wind could blow through a junkyard and assemble a 747. Is that really more believable than the idea of intelligent creation.....
I guess god can make a rock even he can’t lift either.
Watchman wrote:
Interesting thing, creation vs. evolution........... . Evolutionists must believe there is empirical evidence for “evolution” having-
1. Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
WRONG. Thats the big bang if anything. Your wrong on the nothing part too. Read up on the Big bang.
2. Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
Cosmology /=evolution. Fail yet again.
3. Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
Theory of abiogenesis, evolution does not explain the orgin of life. Fail yet again.
4. Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
And? Maybe they were like that to begin with. You know instincts and all.
5. Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).
Thats the first thing you’ve said right and I believe Ameba’s could do just that
mmmmm possible. And I guess a big wind could blow through a junkyard and assemble a 747. Is that really more believable than the idea of intelligent creation.....
I guess god can make a rock even he can’t lift either.
“sigh”.....
you seem to think questions like, “Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?", “Can God will Himself out of existence?" are perfect examples of how to disprove God’s omnipotence and ultimately how to disprove God. cant you see the false logic behind the such questions (i.e. pitting God’s omnipotence against itself),?....anyways at creationism explains how and why life exists. It has a beginning point! Evolution doesn’t, It starts with the assumption the life was always there. Do we really need to prove what doesn’t make sense here? Sciencs has proven that the OLDEST fossil of a living orginism is ONLY a couple Billion years old! Even the micoorganisms we know of have an approxamate age. It is a matter of fact that nothing is of infinte age. Every living orginism or fossalized orginsm has a difinitive age to it. Ok, It is proven that for evolution to be possible, orginisms need to breed and create new living orginisms....
so any of you atheist care to tell me where the first living orginism came from?
Watchman wrote:
Interesting thing, creation vs. evolution........... . Evolutionists must believe there is empirical evidence for “evolution” having-
1. Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
WRONG. Thats the big bang if anything. Your wrong on the nothing part too. Read up on the Big bang.
2. Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
Cosmology /=evolution. Fail yet again.
3. Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
Theory of abiogenesis, evolution does not explain the orgin of life. Fail yet again.
4. Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
And? Maybe they were like that to begin with. You know instincts and all.
5. Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).
Thats the first thing you’ve said right and I believe Ameba’s could do just that
mmmmm possible. And I guess a big wind could blow through a junkyard and assemble a 747. Is that really more believable than the idea of intelligent creation.....
I guess god can make a rock even he can’t lift either.
“sigh”.....
you seem to think questions like, “Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?", “Can God will Himself out of existence?" are perfect examples of how to disprove God’s omnipotence and ultimately how to disprove God. cant you see the false logic behind the such questions (i.e. pitting God’s omnipotence against itself),?....anyways at creationism explains how and why life exists. It has a beginning point! Evolution doesn’t, It starts with the assumption the life was always there. Do we really need to prove what doesn’t make sense here? Sciencs has proven that the OLDEST fossil of a living orginism is ONLY a couple Billion years old! Even the micoorganisms we know of have an approxamate age. It is a matter of fact that nothing is of infinte age. Every living orginism or fossalized orginsm has a difinitive age to it. Ok, It is proven that for evolution to be possible, orginisms need to breed and create new living orginisms....
so any of you atheist care to tell me where the first living orginism came from?
We don’t know that yet. But we don’t pretend to know.
oi.....from you last post, you (and other atheist) seem/claim that evolution and the big bang are two entirely separate theories that explain different aspects of the universe, yet, in what school of learning can you find any real separation or distinction between the two?...... moreover how do you believe that planes, computers, calculators, compasses, etc, were “all obviously designed," yet the human body, being intricately more complex is “obviously a product of biological evolution."?
It seems the more complex the apparatus, the more obvious the “fact” that it was not designed.
Watchman wrote:
oi.....from you last post, you (and other atheist) seem/claim that evolution and the big bang are two entirely separate theories that explain different aspects of the universe, yet, in what school of learning can you find any real separation or distinction between the two?...... moreover how do you believe that planes, computers, calculators, compasses, etc, were “all obviously designed," yet the human body, being intricately more complex is “obviously a product of biological evolution."?
It seems the more complex the apparatus, the more obvious the “fact” that it was not designed.
you are on precarious ground...ne?
No. Just no. Your comparing nonliving things to living things. Fail.
Watchman wrote:
oi.....from you last post, you (and other atheist) seem/claim that evolution and the big bang are two entirely separate theories that explain different aspects of the universe, yet, in what school of learning can you find any real separation or distinction between the two?...... moreover how do you believe that planes, computers, calculators, compasses, etc, were “all obviously designed," yet the human body, being intricately more complex is “obviously a product of biological evolution."?
It seems the more complex the apparatus, the more obvious the “fact” that it was not designed.
you are on precarious ground...ne?
No. Just no. Your comparing nonliving things to living things. Fail.
urm,.. since you are a person who absolutely believes that life came from nonlife, so what is the difference....you atheists also believe that there is no God. Hence, either matter was not created, but was eternal, or came by chance. which?
»
Religion
» Creation vs. Evolution Debate topic
