Do You Believe in the Theory of Evolution?

[All Else Failed]

Main Entry:
the·o·ry
Pronunciation: \ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē\

1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another

2: abstract thought : speculation

3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>

4: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action.

I wasn't questioning if it was a belief. I was questioning him saying something along the lines that his "theory" has any real evidence.

 

[dt3]

He has not. Thanks for pointing that out.

I used the Advanced Search to double check before I said anything

 

[IntruderLS1]

But there is no evidence for your theory. You could just as easily say Santa Claus created it all. Seriously, its just a belief in a Supreme Being or Force. I could say my theory is that an Alien Race created the universe--there's no evidence for either.

That's not entirely true. You see Santa Clause and aliens are real (), i.e. they exist inside of our space time continuum. In my opinion, it would take a being outside the control of our space / time. Something we obviously are not equipped to understand at this point, but that doesn't really matter. We don't understand gravity or electromagnetism either. It just is, just because it fits the facts.

The fact that there exists anything, to me is evidence that something (intelligent or not) put in the time and effort to transform nothing into something. No natural phenomenon could account for this, because before there was anything, there was nothing, and nothing is by definition incapable of doing anything. (Boy, I hope that makes sense) There could have been no natural occurrence, as there was no nature. An empty space will always and forever remain empty unless somebody puts something into it. You would call me daft if I said otherwise.

There only exists one theory which addresses creation. It makes sense to me. I don't see any reason to shake it off because somebody who doesn't have a better idea tells me it's silly.

(Wow, all this, and not a single mention of the personal proof believers through the centuries can all boast of. )

 

[IntruderLS1]

Also, answer this:

let me ask you a question, scott. You say that the big bang, a lot of things in evolution and so on are "impossible". Don't you think if they were really "impossible" then scientists would absolutely discredit and abandon their theories? Are they playing a nasty trick on us, Scott?

Honestly Ron, I've talked to a lot of people about this. There are two main reactions to my questions. The first, and most prominent is "You must be one of those silly Christian types," which generally leads to anger, irritation, or simple abandonment of the conversation. I would say 8 in 10 times anger (like yours) is what I get back.

2 times in 10 you'll get a guy who is totally level headed and he'll say something along the lines of "Honestly it doesn't make much sense. Everything else is pretty strong though, so it's what we've got. As we figure it out more, hopefully the theory will become more defined, or will simply go by the wayside when somebody puts together a better model."

I'm only an amateur. I know more than most, but that isn't saying much when held up against the giants in the field (Hell, it's not even saying much when held up against the giants in my group!). I know a thing or two about people though, and I can tell you this with great conviction: When you hear a crazy person talking into the wind, you don't get angry at the gibberish they proclaim. Most feel sorry. Some poke fun. Many will simply move on. Anger isn't really on that normal reactions list. People get angry when their core value system is challenged in such a way that actually causes doubt. It's like touching fire, and the recoil is apparent.

I find it very interesting that the anti-God types are so quick to anger so often.

I don't think they're playing a nasty trick on us man. I just think that psychologically, they are so deeply against opposing ideas that they refuse to look at them objectively. When viewed objectively, there is no reason to use the word impossible when discussing intelligent design, but you'll have the most rational, scientifically oriented mind in the world look at you without hesitation or doubt and tell you it doesn't even merit a careful thought. :shrug:

People are people.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Let me ask you--do you believe the Bible is the word of God?

Yes.

.

 

[ssl]

Question: What is it about intelligent design and evolution theories that cannot allow them to coexist together?

Both stem prom prior designs. Both assume intelligence.

Let us skip that discussion, in favor of exploring a thought about all theories of the beginning of life. All theories assume some prior existence.

For example, the Big Bang theory assumes that God farted, and bang, here we are. The point is that it assumes the existence of the materials, but the origination of the spark that caused it is unknown. This could, in theory, make sense, due to the numerous observations of the science law of the conservation of mass (really, energies if you are Einsteinian).

However, like on a different face of a tetrahedron, we have other angles to which view our system. If the intelligent design theory is observably correct over the extension of many decades, then arises the question: who designed them?; which brings us back to the same disposition we are currently at. Enter in a supreme being, whose existence is irrefutable only in the holy texts of that particular beliefs. However, if this entity (or entities, if your particular set of ideologies lead you to this path) exists, and they are intelligent; who created them? Guess were we are again at this point.

So, just using both theories, we can see that there has some sort of material existence before the inception of the life we know it, either the Big Bang or Intelligent Design theories; if not those, some complex and inexorably difficult to perceive theory or set of theories will try to combine both Big Bang and Intelligent Design, if not others, into a very interesting package; remember you this: it is a theory, an opinion.

And you cannot prove/disprove an opinion.

 

[All Else Failed]

That's not entirely true. You see Santa Clause and aliens are real (), i.e. they exist inside of our space time continuum. In my opinion, it would take a being outside the control of our space / time. Something we obviously are not equipped to understand at this point, but that doesn't really matter. We don't understand gravity or electromagnetism either. It just is, just because it fits the facts.

The fact that there exists anything, to me is evidence that something (intelligent or not) put in the time and effort to transform nothing into something. No natural phenomenon could account for this, because before there was anything, there was nothing, and nothing is by definition incapable of doing anything. (Boy, I hope that makes sense) There could have been no natural occurrence, as there was no nature. An empty space will always and forever remain empty unless somebody puts something into it. You would call me daft if I said otherwise.

There only exists one theory which addresses creation. It makes sense to me. I don't see any reason to shake it off because somebody who doesn't have a better idea tells me it's silly.

(Wow, all this, and not a single mention of the personal proof believers through the centuries can all boast of. )

*facepalm*

why do you always go back to "we don't understand it so gawd did it" :yuk

Its hurting your cause.


And again, creationism isn't a theory.

 

[All Else Failed]

Honestly Ron, I've talked to a lot of people about this. There are two main reactions to my questions. The first, and most prominent is "You must be one of those silly Christian types," which generally leads to anger, irritation, or simple abandonment of the conversation. I would say 8 in 10 times anger (like yours) is what I get back.

2 times in 10 you'll get a guy who is totally level headed and he'll say something along the lines of "Honestly it doesn't make much sense. Everything else is pretty strong though, so it's what we've got. As we figure it out more, hopefully the theory will become more defined, or will simply go by the wayside when somebody puts together a better model."

I'm only an amateur. I know more than most, but that isn't saying much when held up against the giants in the field (Hell, it's not even saying much when held up against the giants in my group!). I know a thing or two about people though, and I can tell you this with great conviction: When you hear a crazy person talking into the wind, you don't get angry at the gibberish they proclaim. Most feel sorry. Some poke fun. Many will simply move on. Anger isn't really on that normal reactions list. People get angry when their core value system is challenged in such a way that actually causes doubt. It's like touching fire, and the recoil is apparent.

I find it very interesting that the anti-God types are so quick to anger so often.

I don't think they're playing a nasty trick on us man. I just think that psychologically, they are so deeply against opposing ideas that they refuse to look at them objectively. When viewed objectively, there is no reason to use the word impossible when discussing intelligent design, but you'll have the most rational, scientifically oriented mind in the world look at you without hesitation or doubt and tell you it doesn't even merit a careful thought. :shrug:

People are people.

I'm not angry with you, just a bit frustrated because you keep using the same old creationist arguments that lead back to "the magic man done it". thats not scientific thinking. Thats un-scientific.


I'll admit it as well, we don't know how everything started, but I do not think this does any damage to thinks like evolution, and it doesn't point to any sort of creator. We simply just don't know yet 100%.


I find it very interesting that the God types are so quick to illogical ideas so often.

^^^^ See I can make stupid generalizations too!


So you're basically saying that scientists, millions of them, are all in a conspiracy to not let any sort of new idea surface...because they themselves disagree with it...so you do believe they are playing nasty trick on you then. They're intentionally keeping YOUR idea suppressed for some reason or another, and every scientist thinks the same and believes the same thing.

 

[Minor Axis]

I find it very interesting that the anti-God types are so quick to anger so often.

I'm not angry. Besides I don't think that's a fair statement as I don't think either side has cornered the market on cool headed people.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Yes, and maybe.

 

[All Else Failed]

To say yes and maybe to those is to suspend all reason and logic.

 

[IntruderLS1]

^^^^ See I can make stupid generalizations too!

I'm not trying to make generalizations Ron. I'm speaking specifically about my experiences, and have said specifically that there are not only exceptions, but exceptions at a fairly stable rate. No offense implied or intended. :dunno:

So you're basically saying that scientists, millions of them, are all in a conspiracy to not let any sort of new idea surface...because they themselves disagree with it...so you do believe they are playing nasty trick on you then. They're intentionally keeping YOUR idea suppressed for some reason or another, and every scientist thinks the same and believes the same thing.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think there is a conspiracy in the least. I was trying to explain that I think it is natural for one to defend their personal belief system, and I believe that is why creationists and naturalists are constantly mixing like oil and water.

*facepalm*

LMAO!! I know exactly how you feel mate.

why do you always go back to "we don't understand it so gawd did it" :yuk

Like I've said a hundred times; it's the only thing that makes sense IMO. It's not a matter of "we don't understand and therefore...." It's a matter of we have an excellant grasp of physical laws, and because they can't explain it, God is the more logical choice.

*
And again, creationism isn't a theory.

You keep saying that, and I still don't know why.... What do you consider theory??

And do you also believe in Adam and Eve and Genesis--that man has been around some 6,000 years or so?

Yes, I believe Adam and Eve were the first two humans. Created by God in the Garden of Eden. Fully developed. The 6,000 year thing I've not put a lot of time or effort into understanding. Some say yes for good reason, some say no for good reason. I just shrug and soldier on, as I find no relevance in my life for this particular piece of the pie. :shrug:

I've considered digging deeper into it several times, but I keep coming to the realization that no matter which answer I come to, there will still be the other half who have good reason to say I'm wrong. The Bible teaches us not to fight over the things that don't matter, so I normally drop my study of the subject shortly after beginning. To me it's a purely academic question.

 

[IntruderLS1]

To say yes and maybe to those is to suspend all reason and logic.

What ever happened to Vichy anyway? It's weird seeing you type her sentences.

 

[All Else Failed]

Scott, you can't possibly say with a straight face that Adam and Eve possibly existed.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Scott, you can't possibly say with a straight face that Adam and Eve possibly existed.

<striaght face>
Adam and Eve possibly existed.
</ straight face>

 

[All Else Failed]

And let me guess, your justification is the bible, and that alone

*waits for you to post various pseudo science*

 

[IntruderLS1]

You can wait for the science all you want. We have no physical evidence to confirm or deny, so the only thing I have to go on is what is written in the Bible. :nod:

 

[All Else Failed]

oh for fuck's sakes scott

even St. Agustine said to not take the bible literally. ST. AUGUSTINE SCOTT.

 

[IntruderLS1]

oh for fuck's sakes scott

even St. Agustine said to not take the bible literally. ST. AUGUSTINE SCOTT.

The Bible is a complex work. Some of it is written as story, some as history, some as suggestion, some as example, etc.... I've never met St. Augustine, but I'm sure this is what he was talking about. And if not, then.... oh well.

 

[All Else Failed]

Yeah but its SO DAMN OBVIOUS that genesis is simply creation myth. Like every other culture's creation story.

I like the one where the earth was founded upon an otter grabbing some mud off the bottom of a lake, setting it on a turtle's back and PRESTO, earth! Know why? Because that one has otters in it, and otters are kick ass.