billvon 2,417
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Recommended Posts
QuoteI read daily of new things coming out that prove that the earth is older and older(which supports evolution), but I have yet to read of anything coming out that talks about a discovery that botches the old earth support of evolution. Typical liberal media.
I've yet to read about anything that "botches the old earth support of evolution" as you put it, that wasn't written by pseudo scientists with mail order degrees and/or a willfull ignorance of the scientific method.
QuoteThink Evolution is correct? Think Creation is correct?Polls taken in the late 1400's would overwhelmingly show that the average human thought the earth was flat, until C Columbus blew that theory.
You are onto something with this line of reasoning:
A flat earth was suggested by the bible, not to mention the earth as the center of the universe, and other long since debunked ideas.
The reality of a round earth that orbits the sun, which is in turn but one of oodles of stars in our galaxy, and so on, is due to increasing use of the scientific method to understand our world.
So to answer your question:
I've little doubt that future generations will look back and marvel at how stupid some of us were to doggedly hang on to the idea of creationism in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
-Josh
If you have time to panic, you have time to do something more productive. -Me*
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
nanook 1
QuoteYou can't prove either. For me personally, it takes less faith to believe that someone did all this on purpose than a hundred trillion coincidences happened at precisely the right time.
When you think of chance of our evolution in terms of a hundred trillion coincidences at the right time, its easy to see why it isn't plausible. Think of it as looking at the wrong part of the tree. When you look at the individual leaf, you are lookin at a one chance in a (whatever amount of leaves in the tree) leaf. If you look at the trunk, you see all the leaves (chances). It's easier to fathom chance if you realize that the other 99 trillion chances are all around co-existing with you and you are just one of the 1/100 trillionth chances.
_____________________________
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln
I understand you guy's arguments, I just don't get it. Sorry, I'm thick like that. When you have someone who believes in a Biblical version of Creation, I don't think its possible to convince them otherwise. Faith. Strong word. The evidence of things not seen or measureable. It comes down to that. Thanks for the info, though.
Hopefully we can agree to disagree on this one. I'm sure I would be just burning up my keyboard to try to convince you otherwise.
The one thing that I do find very ironic is that Darwin even started to doubt his theories in the end before his death. I quote from his autobiography that he wrote in 1876. "Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason, and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man, with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into the future, as the result of blind chance. When thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a first cause, having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man, I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as a I can remember, when I wrote the ‘Origin of Species’, and it is since that time that it has, gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the thought-- Can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been fully developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusion."
Hopefully we can agree to disagree on this one. I'm sure I would be just burning up my keyboard to try to convince you otherwise.
The one thing that I do find very ironic is that Darwin even started to doubt his theories in the end before his death. I quote from his autobiography that he wrote in 1876. "Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason, and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man, with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into the future, as the result of blind chance. When thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a first cause, having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man, I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as a I can remember, when I wrote the ‘Origin of Species’, and it is since that time that it has, gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the thought-- Can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been fully developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusion."
jakee 1,257
QuoteThe one thing that I do find very ironic is that Darwin even started to doubt his theories in the end before his death.
Are you sure about that, reading just that passage (and obviously I'm not seeing it in context) I would come to the opposite conclusion, that it is his faith in God that has become weaker over time.
QuoteCan the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been fully developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals
Doesn't sound like much doubt in his work there, however
QuoteWhen thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a first cause, having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man, I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as a I can remember, when I wrote the ‘Origin of Species’, and it is since that time that it has, gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker
Sounds like it is his faith in a 'first cause' that is failing, not his commitment to the accuracy of his work.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
jakee 1,257
Quotebut I have yet to read of anything coming out that talks about a discovery that botches the old earth support of evolution. Typical liberal media.
Or, maybe there are no credible discoveries being made that 'botch' evolution.
Have a look at these 15 answers to creationism, particularly number 4.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
tommo 0
To believe in a god and hence the creation theory is the same as believing in fairy tales. Why? A storry written in an old book with absolutely no scientific basis to back it up, Covers both fairy tales and bible.
The really scary thing about this is, that 55% of the population, of, arguably the most powerful nation on earth believe in fairies.
The really scary thing about this is, that 55% of the population, of, arguably the most powerful nation on earth believe in fairies.
QuoteThe really scary thing about this is, that 55% of the population, of, arguably the most powerful nation on earth believe in fairies.
Just as long as they don't get married
tommo 0
I dont care about the marriage just don't let them breed
I meant the fairies....but I guess it would be hard for them to breed, too. 
jcd11235 0
QuoteFront page of one of the local Sunday papers the other day said that schools would begin teaching 'Intelligent Design', or whatever that mix of creation and evolution is.
I thought intelligent design was the politically correct way to say creationism in the public schools. I don't think it has anything to do with evolution.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
jcd11235 0
QuoteThis reminds me of some Bill Hicks (of blessed memory) standup comedy I heard on itunes one time.
"I've got one word for you. Dinosaurs." --Bill Hicks (RIP)
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
jcd11235 0
We must also consider that the King James version of the Bible was not the first place these stories appeared. They have been changed from earlier versions that appear in the Torah.
The idea of Creationism, as set forth by the King James Bible, is, in itself, a product of Evolution.
The idea of Creationism, as set forth by the King James Bible, is, in itself, a product of Evolution.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
> this on purpose than a hundred trillion coincidences happened at
> precisely the right time.
Why? There are a hundred trillion planets out there. It only took one case where they all happened this way. And they didn't _have_ to happen this way - make one of those hundred trillion coincidences happen a different way and we'd have green skin, or radial symmetry, or compound eyes. Or there would be even more fundamental differences, like distributed instead of mitochondrial ATP production in our cells, or use of magnesium instead of sodium levels to drive nerve polarization. And we'd be arguing about the same thing.
>Polls taken in the late 1400's would overwhelmingly show that the
> average human thought the earth was flat, until C Columbus blew
> that theory.
Some believed the world was flat for long after that. I have no doubt that creationism will persist for long after the fossil record is complete - and it's getting more complete every day.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites