Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Is Evolution So Anti-religious?  
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7801 posts, RR: 52
Posted (4 years 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

I've been reading around in other forums, and it really got me thinking... and I wonder how my fellow a.netters think. Just like the Earth going around the Sun making such a big controversy, nowadays evolution and the big bang are hot topics amongst Christians (and maybe other relgions.) Why is that? I can see how if you are raised to think something for decades and someone says you are wrong, you will be upset and all, but for someone young like me who has seen both sides of the argument, I don't see how evolution and the big bang are incompatible with God. Couldn't God of made the universe in one "big bang" and made the animals through evolution?


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
99 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3196 times:

It's not a problem for the Catholic Church (as strange as it may seem). It's big in North America, basically (and where the US have an influence). Also, some Muslims are being inspired by this trend (Intelligent Design and all that nonsense).


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineavent From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3161 times:

Is God so inept He couldn't design evolution? It seems to me you're the one that's anti-religious  

User currently offlineKiwiinoz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2165 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3152 times:

Isn't it quite simple and obvious? The theory of evolution is quite contradictory no most religion's view of the forming of life on earth, (usually some sort of children's style, Santa Claus like fairytale)

Once a society accepts evolution, it basically rejects the founding principal of most religious thought.


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5416 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3136 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Why Is Evolution So Anti-religious?

It probably boils down to the fact that it contradicts what is written in religious texts. And there are many religions that require their followers to take their sacred religious texts verbatim as they are "the word of God". And since God is perfect His word can not be contradicted.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 days ago) and read 3136 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Why Is Evolution So Anti-religious?

Maybe because science has no room for nonsense such as life appearing *POOF* like magic out of nowhere?  


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5416 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 days ago) and read 3120 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 5):
Maybe because science has no room for nonsense such as life appearing *POOF* like magic out of nowhere?

Actually science does allow for that as science does not yet know how things went from "unliving" to living matter. And to extend that, science hasn't yet figured out when consciousness occurs in living beings, what the switch is that makes something aware of itself as an independent and unique being.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinerottenray From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 273 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 days ago) and read 3117 times:

In order for a person of (whatever) faith to accept the theory of evolution, that person must also accept certain parts of (whatever) faith as embellished, stylized story told for a motive.

To say that those who follow the theory of evolution are anti-religious is perhaps a bit premature, because not all of the history of the universe is known to us at this point.

Some "evolutionists" are anti-religious, others are not.

But when ideals collide, the evolutionists have tangible proof while the creationists do not, and the fur then flies.

Unfortunately, this flying fur usually belongs to zealots of both camps, and no real product is manufactured other than noise.




Quoting avent (Reply 2):
Is God so inept He couldn't design evolution? It seems to me you're the one that's anti-religious

Avent, Delta didn't say that - re-read his post and you'll see he asks the same question.



The thing I find distressing is how this battle is being waged in certain areas, especially in public school systems. This function of our society should be completely agenda-free, and all known knowledge should be made available to students, but increasingly this is not the case.

Evolutionists control a school board, and anything containing a reference to religion is wiped from the curriculum. Creationists control a school board, and anything containing a reference to evolution is wiped from the curriculum.

Utter hogwash - public schools should teach it all, with a caveat if needed, but give the kids the knowledge. Catering to one faction or the other simply results in a poorer level of education.

I was very lucky 30+ years ago, as my high school had a decent science curricula as well as a wide selection of non-denominational religion-oriented courses. Our library contained everything from King James v. to Origin of Species.




Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Couldn't God of made the universe

One final thing, young Delta. Watch this sort of bad grammar. You should have written "COULD god HAVE made..."

I'm not harping or trying to sling mud, simply making an observation. Based on reading a few of your posts, you write well and seem to be reasonably balanced. Improve upon this by paying closer attention to grammar.

You might consider writing in a word processor program and running the grammar-check, and then pasting the result in here.



RR


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7801 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 days ago) and read 3112 times:

Quoting avent (Reply 2):
Is God so inept He couldn't design evolution? It seems to me you're the one that's anti-religious

That's what I'm saying

Quoting Kiwiinoz (Reply 3):
The theory of evolution is quite contradictory no most religion's view of the forming of life on earth

You know, how so? I can see God making evolution

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 5):
*POOF* like magic out of nowhere?

I haven't read the exact verbage of the Bible recently, but I don't think it actually says "out of no where," but may be implied

Quoting rottenray (Reply 7):
society should be completely agenda-free

     

Quoting rottenray (Reply 7):

One final thing, young Delta. Watch this sort of bad grammar. You should have written "COULD god HAVE made..."

Ha, if you only knew, I actually am a grammar Nazi (sorry if that analogy offends anyone.) I often write how I speak, and sometimes I change what I'm about to say/write after I've said part of the sentence so it comes out weird. Plus, I was on the phone when I wrote the post  
Point taken though, I often post stupid errors that confuse readers and throw my point out the window



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 days ago) and read 3100 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 6):

Actually science does allow for that as science does not yet know how things went from "unliving" to living matter.

Well put that way, then yes. However, abiogenesis (the spontaneous generation theory) has not been able to be physically proven, as much as the hypothesis make sense.

On the other hand, evolution has been proven. A multitude of times. Entirely new species of maggots have been created in labs in less than a decade. Many strains of formerly somewhat harmless diseases are now becoming immune to antibiotics. The evidence is there. Evolution is happening right in front of our eyes. Yet many still dismiss it   

Science has no way of explaining how Adam and Eve popped out of nowhere, and then somehow the whole human species was magically spared from genetic aberrations from inbreeding, necessary to populate the rest of the world at the time, which would have had to occur within Adam's and Eve's offspring, Makes sense   

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
I haven't read the exact verbage of the Bible recently, but I don't think it actually says "out of no where," but may be implied

Over the course of 7 days, earth is created. Then the next chapter jumps to Adam and Eve and a talking snake. Yeah I'd say that's pretty much pulled out of somebody's ass.

Please refer to this link, its a nice summary of the bible (NSFW) Big grinhttp://i.imgur.com/dqocd.png

[Edited 2010-07-22 17:58:04]

User currently offlineKiwiinoz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2165 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3067 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
You know, how so? I can see God making evolution

That's not the point. The point is, God initiating evolution is not the basis on which the creation of life is founded in religious tecahing. Evolution contradicts the accepted theory of religion, (Adam and Eve, all those other fairytales, etc). Therefore , in answering the thread starter's question, that is why the two theories are at odds with each other.


User currently offlineYellowstone From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3071 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
You know, how so? I can see God making evolution

Setting up, perhaps - evolution has nothing to say about the origin of life. But the process of evolution - the development from the first life form to the multitude of living species today - leaves no room for God. For a religious person, who tends to think that humans are cosmically special, the idea that we're the end product of 4 billion years of accidents and random development without divine influence is unacceptable.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 7):
This function of our society should be completely agenda-free, and all known knowledge should be made available to students, but increasingly this is not the case.

Evolutionists control a school board, and anything containing a reference to religion is wiped from the curriculum. Creationists control a school board, and anything containing a reference to evolution is wiped from the curriculum.

Point of clarification - do you have a problem with removing references to religion from the science curriculum? Because religion isn't science. Science classes should not mention creationism or ID, for the same reason they shouldn't mention astrology or psychic powers - they're not science. Keeping non-science out of the science class is hardly an agenda.



Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
User currently offlineiairallie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3055 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
nowadays evolution and the big bang are hot topics amongst Christians (and maybe other relgions.)

It's not.


User currently onlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6573 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3052 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Easy. If proven it shows that the Bible is not to be taken literally. That of course is a precursor of questioning other things. Some religious institutions would rather not give the chance to its followers to question.

Therefore, creationism must be protected!



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlinerottenray From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 273 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3036 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
I often write how I speak,

Most people can't do this, and therefore most people have a hard time understanding things written so. In a forum environment, you'll end up spending a lot of unproductive time trying to re-explain yourself.

Don't answer this, just think about it. Do you do any creative writing?

Years ago, I was a grammar Nazi as well. I've given up, except when I see the chance to nudge someone who has some potential. The rest? Meh. Let 'em write txtspk and look like idiots.




Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 9):
Science has no way of explaining how Adam and Eve popped out of nowhere, and then somehow the whole human species was magically spared from genetic aberrations from inbreeding, necessary to populate the rest of the world at the time, which would have had to occur within Adam's and Eve's offspring

Science doesn't really need to explain this, if the bible (any version) is kept in context and appreciated for what it is: A work of man, an interpretation. Stone tablets, burning bush, et cetera.

This holds true for all religious tomes.

The problems arise when either side becomes too self-righteous. There is much value in the bible, and there is much value in science, but these values are lost when strident arguments break out.




Quoting Kiwiinoz (Reply 10):
The point is, God initiating evolution is not the basis on which the creation of life is founded in religious tecahing.

  

This is because religion predates known scientific method. Religion is ancient, arcane, and in my opinion, is an attempt to explain the natural universe by those lacking the technology or understanding required to do so accurately.

Religion is also interesting from another perspective, in that nearly all gods (and certainly those recognized by mainstream religions) happen to be males based loosely on the powerful, demanding, potent tribal leader figure.

"Do this, don't do that, and don't ask questions - I'll tell you what to do and how to feel about it."

In the grand scheme of biology, males are more aggressive in most species. Not all, most. Don't y'all go replying with "refudiations" to this statement. (Thanks, Sarah!)

So, does god imitate life, or does life imitate god?



Eventually - if we survive as a species - we will learn the answer.



RR


User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3011 times:

Quoting rottenray (Reply 14):

The problems arise when either side becomes too self-righteous.

Case in point, the thread title. I think it's pretty safe to say religion is much more anti-evolution than vice versa.


User currently offlinerottenray From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 273 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2994 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 15):
Case in point, the thread title. I think it's pretty safe to say religion is much more anti-evolution than vice versa.

I'll agree, with the caveat that I'm not accusing Delta of trying to    .

It's the nature of the beast.

Religion is uplifting, glorious, full of epiphanies of one sort or another. And singing.

Science is mostly boring and low-key. Things grow in dishes, or they don't, and in either case it takes hours and a microscope to tell.



RR


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4488 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2995 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 15):
Quoting rottenray (Reply 14):

The problems arise when either side becomes too self-righteous.

Case in point, the thread title. I think it's pretty safe to say religion is much more anti-evolution than vice versa.

I'm glad the mysteries of faith have finally been debunked--by an cocky, unemployed, low-time pilot, nonetheless. Congratulations.



There's lots of hubristic holier-than-thou BS being spread on this thread, as others. What modern Christian denies evolution or theories like the Big Bang? Really? It's a straw man argument. "Christians believe in denying evidence of no 'divine intervention' right under their noses! See! They think the world was created in seven days! They're idiots!"

Total straw man. There really aren't any mainstream "evolution deniers." Where are they? Show me some mainstream preachers teaching against evolution. It's a convenient ploy to discredit the Christians.

Religion and science can coexist peaceably--and do.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19374 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2945 times:

It's anti-religion because it's an "us vs them" sort of thing.

"We" are Christians. "We" are believers. "They" are unholy heathens. Evolution is just one of many divisive wedges that extremist religious leaders like to use.


User currently offlinedragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2895 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
I haven't read the exact verbage of the Bible recently, but I don't think it actually says "out of no where," but may be implied
Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 5):
Maybe because science has no room for nonsense such as life appearing *POOF* like magic out of nowhere?

Would love to see that written in one of those 500 dollar college texts.... "and then 'POOF', life!"

Quoting rottenray (Reply 14):
This is because religion predates known scientific method. Religion is ancient, arcane, and in my opinion, is an attempt to explain the natural universe by those lacking the technology or understanding required to do so accurately.

I share your opinion as well. I go as far as to think that some stories involving Jesus are similiar to what an ancient Penn and Teller would be. Slight of hand and illusions.... blasphemous I'm sure, but it is another way of explaining the stories in the bible.

Ultimately I think religion (or lack of religion) is irrelevant if a person lives their life with good, sound morals and values.



Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2884 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 17):
What modern Christian denies evolution or theories like the Big Bang?

I almost have more respect for Christians who do deny evolution. Modifying your religious texts to suit your interpretation is pretty pathetic. If you claim to be Christian either believe it all or do not bother. What is the point in following a religion if you are going to change the bits you do not like or which don't add up?


User currently offlineDoona From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 3764 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2880 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Why Is Evolution So Anti-religious?

Evolution is not anti anything. It doesn't have an opinion. That's like asking why your pencil hates coffeemakers. Evolution and intelligent design/creationism are not equal theories, as one is based on scientific method and one is based on faith.

Cheers
Mats



Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2829 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 17):
Total straw man. There really aren't any mainstream "evolution deniers." Where are they? Show me some mainstream preachers teaching against evolution. It's a convenient ploy to discredit the Christians.

Mainstream or not, they sure make a lot of noise across the pond ! If they're not Christians, maybe "mainstream Christians" should say so more vehemently ? A little like some here ask "mainstream Muslims" to spend their time denouncing extremists.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3866 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2826 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Why is that?

Inherently, it's not anti-religious--just like any other scientific theory.
The issue is how literally you take the bible. If you sincerely believe that the world was created in seven days (as in the 24 hour days), then yes, I can understand how a process that takes more than a week to occur (aka evolution) would contradict your mindset.
Now, if you don't take the bible stories verbatim, then there is no reason why you can't be religious and also acknowledge and recognize evolution's validity as a scientific theory that is on the same level as the theory of gravity (the best response to someone who claims that evolution is "only" a theory is that gravity is "only" a theory as well, so why don't you walk off a ten story building and test it out?).

Of course, people who also take the bible literally and see it as the word of god fail to remember that when the bible was written, it wasn't originally written in modern english. The bible that we know today has gone through several translations--and the "original" document has yet to be found. Anybody who has studied foreign languages (or even fooled around on Babelfish) realizes that translations are never exact and that you always lose something in the translation process.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
Couldn't God of made the universe in one "big bang" and made the animals through evolution?

Of course. Again, these concepts aren't inherently anti-religious, and I've read plenty of stories of research scientists who are also devoutly religious and see no contradiction between their work and their religious beliefs.


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1362 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2814 times:

To begin with, I am an atheist and accept evolution as a fact.

But has everyone beside me ever noticed that the Genesis and evolution basically tell the same thing? Just leave out the words "God created" and substitute "days" by a couple of billions of years and you're there:

Quoting Genesis:
1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. 3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.

The beginning of the cycle of life according to science was the formation of the sun and the planets out of interstellar matter and the sun getting enough energy through gravitational contraction to ignite the fusion process in the center. So there was light.

Quoting Genesis:
9 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

First, the Earth was a ball of hot magma which slowly solidified and H2O vapors started to condense in the early atmosphere. Clouds were formed and rain fell for the first times. So seas were formed.

Quoting Genesis:
12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Plants were the first multicellular lifeforms found in fossile form on Earth, predating complex animals.

Quoting Genesis:
20 And God said, "Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. 24 And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the cattle according to their kinds, and everything that creeps upon the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Again - at least partly - right. The first complex animals appeared in the water. Not so right with the birds, though. Only later, animals living on the land masses appeared.

Quoting Genesis:
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

And last of them all, men evolved from early primates. Again, they got it right.

Now, one can interpret that in different directions:
First, coincidence.
Second, an early high culture had some knowledge of evolution, which the writers of the bible didn't quite get and so Genesis was written as creational story.
Third, the bible is right and fossiles more or less prove that.

Being an atheist, I'm tending towards possibilities one or two  .



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
25 Aesma : About the translation part, I find it interesting that the King James bible is still in use in the US. It was already in old English when it was made
26 GDB : It's a myth largely put about by religious zealots, that there is some grand conspiracy against faiths. No, science is about investigation, experiment
27 zrs70 : When it comes down to it, science and religion both embrace the concept of Infinite.
28 zrs70 : Also, keep in mind that there are two totally different creation stories in Genesis!
29 Post contains links Fly2HMO : http://creation.com/famous-preacher-creation-not-evolution http://www.higherpraise.com/preachers/norris.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Rice
30 Slider : You're going on the premise that these are mutually exclusive.
31 signol : I'm almost the opposite - I have more respect for people who critically think about everything they believe, reject those things they see as nonsense
32 mt99 : In a pure sense they are. If something in the Bible is proven wrong.. what does that to the credibility of rest of it?
33 signol : What about it? The Bible comes from many different sources, ancient writings from old Israelites, accounts of Jesus' life from the gospels, and lette
34 Maverick623 : Simple: Most religions want people to accept what they teach without giving any hard physical evidence to support them. Science is based on empirical
35 mt99 : I agree with you 100% - but you cant deny that there are groups of people who do not think that way.
36 DocLightning : Look, there are religions that attempt to answer questions that cannot otherwise be answered. There are other religions that demand that followers rej
37 Post contains images Fly2HMO : ...it's pretty sure they're wrong to this date on everything else [Edited 2010-07-23 15:15:11]
38 BMI727 : Exactly. Evolution does happen. We know for example, that the average person has gotten taller over the years. You'd have to be an idiot to think evo
39 Post contains images Fly2HMO : I'm assuming you meant BEFORE the Big Bang and now? I hope large hadron collide gets going again soon because I really want to know what made the Big
40 Kiwiinoz : Actually, I have noticed the tension brewing
41 NASCARAirforce : I agree, I don't see why Evolution couldn't be caused by God. However, I think it is the Religious fundamentalists that are making religion anti evol
42 NASCARAirforce : I know plenty of Christians today who take the Creation very literally as how it says in the Bible, just about any Fundamentalist Christian (those wh
43 Post contains links merlot : GREAT POINT! You say you're an atheiest, yet you've obviously read the Bible - outstanding.... Comments like this: ...are just as laughable as the ra
44 Kiwiinoz : I think you'll find that most Atheists have. By the nature of their position, (ie rationalising the non-existence of God), they prefer to make inform
45 Maverick623 : A minor technicality, but strictly speaking the theory of evolution deals with biological life forms. Geology is the study of Earth and it's history.
46 DocLightning : That ain't evolution. That's nutrition and a lack of parasites and other illnesses. However, an example of evolution is that an increasing percentage
47 dragon6172 : I do not understand how humans creating Cesarian births and thus increasing the percentage of women unable to deliver vaginally is different from hum
48 Baroque : It is different because it affects survival rates. But then again, diets can also do that so you probably have PART of a point. However, you could al
49 Post contains links rottenray : Not necessarily preachers, just their political minions... Tennesse - Scopes Monkey Trial Kansas Maine - Paul LePage for Governor Many things in the
50 Post contains links merlot : Really? This sounds to me like laziness from a point of view unfamiliar with the Bible. It scares those who have pre-decided the Bible is nonsense to
51 Maverick623 : Chill out, man. I didn't say that the stories are necessarily false. But it's a fact (supported by the links you've posted) that even scientists who
52 NASCARAirforce : Although I claim to be Agnostic rather than Atheist, I would think that an Atheist would read the bible to be well informed when debating against a F
53 MoltenRock : This is only an issue in the USA. Anyone else educated, experienced, and divorced from uber-Christian backgrounds "get it". The USA spends so much on
54 DocLightning : Nutriton doesn't fundamentally alter genes. But if you have a lady who is structurally unable to reproduce, then she would die in a "natural" setting
55 Yellowstone : If you took modern humans and teleported them back to the 1700s, their kids would be as tall as average 1700s people. Likewise, if you teleported a b
56 777way : Where do the Pleiadians figure in all this?
57 Post contains links rottenray : These Pleiadians? I'd say they can figure in wherever and whenever they want! RR
58 Post contains links signol : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Greco-Roman_sources Yes it's Wikipedia, but the quotes from other classical documents stand. signol
59 DocLightning : The elephant in the room is that an intelligent force can use evolution by forcing an artificial selection, rather than natural selection. There are
60 Yellowstone : That's a fair point, but then you've just pushed the question back one link in the chain. How did that ancient civilization arise? At some point, you
61 Post contains images DocLightning : They wound up on a Casey Kasem countdown. The man is older than time itself. [Edited 2010-07-25 23:36:53]
62 NASCARAirforce : I was basically saying something other than "the earth being created in 6 days 6,000 years ago". There are plenty of Fundies dead set on the Literal
63 Slider : Good post... Casey Kasem and jokes aside, it's an interesting question. That's where the root of the divergence in opinion comes from.
64 AustrianZRH : Well, you give me more credit than I deserve because I'm far from being able to quote from all books of the Bible, but they are essentially right. Pl
65 avent : This is grossly oversimplifying things, if only from the perspective the bible was selectively assembled from a collection of texts. You might as wel
66 ME AVN FAN : - No, they are NOT hot topics among Christians .... just among US-American Christians - the Biblical story of the beginning of it all uses the term "
67 avent : Lacking specificity and being scientifically correct are not the same. The best claim you can make is it is so vaguely defined it can be made to matc
68 iairallie : Not even. Mainstream Christians don't have conflicts with this issue. It is such a non-issue.
69 Post contains links Yellowstone : Not really, no. Even ancient Middle Easterners had some basic grasp of the idea that simple things build up into complex things, hence the ordering o
70 DocLightning : Some of those guidelines make sense today (don't kill, don't steal, don't lie, take at least one day off work per week) and some of them don't (isola
71 DocLightning : One thing is that a lot of people don't really understand evolution. It's driven by randomness, but it's not random. There is a huge amount of researc
72 iairallie : The wording and choice limitations may have something to do with the results. Although I believe in intelligent design I don't believe we evolved fro
73 avent : There is the increasing number of species present in the geological record, and plants before animals and so on; there is plenty of evidence.
74 Yellowstone : What, pray tell, is that option D?
75 AustrianZRH : You're absolutely right there.
76 lh526 : And here is where certain aspects of religion are incompatible with todays life. Like religion telling you to "go wherever you want", you cross the s
77 iairallie : Um I said it earlier in the same post you quoted... Intelligent design possibly including evolution but not from a less advanced form of life.
78 avent : What evidence (scientific) do you have for this?
79 DocLightning : There's a ton of evidence to support speciation. It's even been observed in plants. For animals, we have to turn to the fossil record because animals
80 iairallie : I don't. I'm not an evolutionary biologist. You are clearly being argumentative without reading fully what I've posted. You seem to think that I'm so
81 Fly2HMO : That's an extremely important point very few people seem to realize. Yet the more radical religious groups have a major issue with humanity being put
82 MSPNWA : "evolution denialists" is too broad. Don't lump Creationists in that group since Creationists can't move goalposts. Last I checked, the writings in G
83 avent : So, you state you are not a specialist, but you are absolutist in asserting we did not evolve from a lesser form of life and also you asserted earlie
84 avent : How so? As our scientific understanding changes, our assumptions and theories will also. What's so sad about that?
85 DocLightning : ""evolution denialists" is too broad. Don't lump Creationists in that group since Creationists can't move goalposts. Last I checked, the writings in G
86 Tugger : Who created God? Or where did God evolved from? Or does God just exists for all time, never beginning nor terminating? If the earth is less than 10,00
87 Post contains images Fly2HMO : You forgot yet another paradox that really makes Christians cringe: Can God create a boulder so large that not even he can lift it?
88 Post contains images czbbflier : Very interestingly, the father of a friend of mine in San Francisco who was a lead researcher at Palo Alto in California, received a call from the Va
89 Post contains images mirrodie : Last I heard, the Catholic Church's Pope issued a statement that evolution does indeed exist. But it all had to begin with a single cell and God plac
90 Post contains links speedygonzales : Science is agnostic, not atheist, but sadly most fundamentalists, both religious and atheist, fail to get that. A good, but lengthy, explanation of wh
91 Yellowstone : Here's a really cool one. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, but chimps, gorillas, and orangutans - our closest cousins, according to evolutionary
92 Post contains links Baroque : Nice point from Y about the chromosomes, but for the best part of 100 years there has been an abundant literature about evolution of forms such as am
93 Maverick623 : Oh, yes. God (no pun intended) forbid we use new found knowledge to further our understanding of the world. So then don't go claiming: When you have
94 AustrianZRH : The writings in Genesis have changed with probably every translation, from ancient Hebrew to Greek, from Greek to Latin, from Latin to middle or old
95 BN747 : That's simply not true. For Religion to embrace the 'Infinite' or 'the concept of Infinity'...would be to embrace themselves right out of existence.
96 Tugger : Well, I would assume that if God exists outside of "normal" time or controls the laws of the universe then mass and things like do not apply. I agree
97 iairallie : so what new species did the ammonites evolve into?
98 Post contains images Fly2HMO : Hmm, I could picture this guy as God:
99 BN747 : Not only 'it does NOT'.... it CAN NOT .. that very explanation/analogy that you laid out shows exactly why it can't even if it wanted to as Creationi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Is Still So Hot Over Here *rant* posted Fri Oct 5 2007 06:07:01 by UTA_flyinghigh
Why Is It So Rhaaaaingly Hot? posted Mon Apr 23 2007 12:32:39 by UTA_flyinghigh
Why Is Caddyshack So Funny? posted Sun Mar 19 2006 07:02:13 by AeroWesty
Why Is Alcohol So Expensive In Scandinavia? posted Sun Nov 6 2005 21:11:33 by Sabena332
Why Is Fuel So Cheap In The USA? posted Thu Oct 6 2005 21:04:21 by TheSonntag
Why Is Mandela So Popular? posted Sat Jul 2 2005 22:01:10 by Bofredrik
Why Is Everyone So "fascinated" With The US? posted Tue Mar 15 2005 18:17:05 by UAL747
Why Is Diesel So Expensive? posted Thu Feb 10 2005 06:35:34 by Douglas DC-9
Why Is Church So Boring? posted Wed Dec 22 2004 04:24:50 by Thecoz
Orlando FL, Why Is It So Great? posted Tue Jul 13 2004 05:22:36 by Flymia