Evolution

PolkThug

cmy330go wrote:

But to say that humans or animals evolve by growing extra limbs or the like in order to adapt to environment, or even grow into other species I would have to disagree. Even many "scientists" have acknowledge that changes that happened within a species over time rarely ever helped them.

Why do birds have feet like lizards?
Google "walking fish"

mrbigbluelight

Something to consider is how limited our brain capacity is.

Took HUNDREDS of years for mathematicians to figure out the solution to Fermat's Enigma. Hundreds !
And, in the Grand Scheme of Things, Fermat's Enigma was child's play.
(If an integer n is greater than 2, then an + bn = cn has no solutions in non-zero integers a, b, and c.)

We have to truly realize our limited our ability is to "think outside the box".

One very simple science experiment performed by scientists who deal with light is the "slit" experiment.
Here's an EXCELLENT link that deals with the experiment.
It's in cartoon form, but it is AN EXTREMELY informative piece of work. Concise and brilliant.
Simple, yet complex. What is, isn't. What isn't is.
Do yourself a favor, and watch it (it's only a couple of minutes).

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4237751840526284618



Than realize that just by discussing this topic, we alter the reality of it.
How ? Don't ask me, I'm not God.

PolkThug

Good vid bluelight. They need to launch cats through the slits and see what happens. j/k

cmy330go

PolkThug wrote:

Why do birds have feet like lizards?
Google "walking fish"

Genesis talks about land, flying, and sea creatures all coming from their "kind". Besides that where has their ever been even a shred of proof of birds evolving from lizards? I've never heard of a bird half covered in scales with 4 legs, or a lizard growing feathers. I've also never heard of any fossils, or other evidence, of the like being found.

And, of the millions and millions of fossils uncovered they have yet to come up with anything that even remotely closes the gaps.

One last thing before I call it a night. Isn't it possible that God when creating, may have used certain ideas from one species when creating another? Take for example professional song writers. Many will write in multiple genres, but to the trained ear there are almost always apparent similarities in their work. The same could be said of any type of artist.

OK. Gotta get some sleep.:rolleyes:

Demiurge

unc2701 wrote:

Well, here's how I look at it: I don't do any of those things, without any hope of reward, simply 'cause I'm a good person. You, on the other hand, are just kissing god's **** so you can cash in at bonus time. Now, if god exists and he/she/it is omniscient, the moral atheist's **** is pretty well covered. The brown noser? Who knows.

Wow...

What is a 'good' person? Everything is equal in the land of disbelief, remember? You've got no frame of reference. 'Good' can only be defined by you, and even then 'good' is meaningless. Kissing God's ****? No, more or less following the moral structure laid out by Him. That, I can openly say, is a good thing! Oddly enough all of our laws are centered around it, but I guess if pretending that it's not the origin of our laws makes you sleep better at night.

Humans have been barbaric in archaic times. Were those people 'bad'? Says who, you? Why? Good is a man made word, and is meaningless without a frame of reference.

The point is that you mean absolutely jack squat to this world without knowing there is something greater than yourself out there. Your life is essentially worthless, and so is everything you do.

If you believe people of faith are all sheep, why do you continue to live in your own flock away from religion, but still within the grasp of law and order?

Moral atheist? God doesn't exist, remember? That's what being atheist means. You have faith that God doesn't exist, not facts that say God doesn't exist. That puts you at odds with God. That's why evolutionists are so arrogant because their faith in nothing is passed off as factual when it's merely a belief without salvation.

I'd say you have quite a bit to worry about.

Airplay355

Here's the bird covered in scales. Earliest creature with actual feathers I think. All of the other flying creatures at the time had skin like bads to generate lift. http://www.exn.ca/dinosaurs/story.asp?id=1997052102&name=archives

No one answered the dinosaur question. If the earth was created 7 or even 8 thousand years ago, where the hell did the dinosaur fossils come from? Never seen a dinosaur? Take a trip to NYC and check out tha natural history museum exhibit.

Dinosaurs are what, 92 million years old? That comes from carbon dating the bones, let's not argue that as it's just chemistry and math.

So I confused, where do dinosaurs fall in with the bible?

I'm not saying dinosaurs disprove a God, that's pretty dumb.

I'd also like to agree that it's cool no1 has blown a gasket yet and started throwing heavy objects.

unc2701

1)I had three wisdom teeth, go figure
2)To AB: My last remark was little harsh, I apologize... To clarify: one of the major tenents of Martin Luther was the idea of salvation through faith alone. This was in opposition to the catholic idea of salvation through works. The commandments I listed are the ones that christians rolled with till abot 1500 and are all more or less "works"... the ones you list ("fervent prayer life ..to walk by His side") are related to faith. However, quite a lot has happened since the protestent reformation, and a lot of protestent religions have backed off the faith sola. Regardless, I think it's important to know the history of your faith, whatever it might be.
3)To demi: to clarify, I use atheist in the general sense of one without religion, rather than one who denys the existence of God. Feel free to swap it with agnostic/ whatever. Anyhow, you seem to be positing that someone who lives perfectly the christian moral of "love thy neighbor as thyself" for whatever reason, but doesn't believe in god will still burn in hell, should it turn out that god exists. I'm positing that should god exist, he probably has a set of rules and could give a rats **** whether or not you believe in him, so long as you follow the rules.
4)Airplay: When god was putting the fossils on earth he carfully scaled their carbon 14 ratios across a few million years. He did this because he loves scientists and wanted them to have jobs. Ahhhh, god, you're one willey dude.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

2)To AB: My last remark was little harsh, I apologize... To clarify: one of the major tenents of Martin Luther was the idea of salvation through faith alone. This was in opposition to the catholic idea of salvation through works. The commandments I listed are the ones that christians rolled with till abot 1500 and are all more or less "works"... the ones you list ("fervent prayer life ..to walk by His side") are related to faith. However, quite a lot has happened since the protestent reformation, and a lot of protestent religions have backed off the faith sola. Regardless, I think it's important to know the history of your faith, whatever it might be.

Thanks. I had (another!) brain ****. When I saw 'by faith alone', for some stupid reason I immediately thought of 'once saved always saved'. Personally, I say faith without works is dead, but you can never earn the salvation God has graciously layed within everyone's grasp. I also believe that while no one, no person, no spirit, no demon can take your faith away from you, you can throw it away yourself.

unc2701 wrote:

3)To demi: to clarify, I use atheist in the general sense of one without religion, rather than one who denys the existence of God. Feel free to swap it with agnostic/ whatever. Anyhow, you seem to be positing that someone who lives perfectly the christian moral of "love thy neighbor as thyself" for whatever reason, but doesn't believe in god will still burn in hell, should it turn out that god exists. I'm positing that should god exist, he probably has a set of rules and could give a rats **** whether or not you believe in him, so long as you follow the rules.
4)Airplay: When god was putting the fossils on earth he carfully scaled their carbon 14 ratios across a few million years. He did this because he loves scientists and wanted them to have jobs. Ahhhh, god, you're one willey dude.

Almost sounds like you haven't read the Bible. I mean, how in the world do you get off thinking that God doesn't care what you believe?!

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

Almost sounds like you haven't read the Bible. I mean, how in the world do you get off thinking that God doesn't care what you believe?!

That wasn't with respect to christianity- Nearly all christian religions ascribe to the idea that god cares what we believe. Which is odd since the new testament is a bit lacking in guidance there as evidenced by, well, everything from the death of christ through the year 325.

jdhdiggs

AB- You made a faulty assumption that they read and understood the bible as opposed to searching for webistes that pull quotes out of context to support their views. You silly, silly man...

In the end, I'm all for science progressing and uncovering everything. As long as it is the pursuit of truth, I don't know why the religious or athiest can complain.

Is someone arguing the bible as literal?

PT: Yup, there are multiple "Christ-like" stories throughout the world. From the ancient Egyptions to Myans and the far East. To me, this isn't proof that Christians are wrong in their belief, but more proof that they are right. If you had an all powerful diety and no telephone, how would you spread your story to all around the world and to have them accept your tenents or not other than repeating the same story. Depends on your translation of the Holy Trinity and Jesus's soul/divinity. Could it be that God's only son was given up several times in several parts of the world to spread the word?

jdhdiggs

unc2701 wrote:

That wasn't with respect to christianity- Nearly all christian religions ascribe to the idea that god cares what we believe. Which is odd since the new testament is a bit lacking in guidance there as evidenced by, well, everything from the death of christ through the year 325.

This is confusing, could you clarify? Give some examples?

PolkThug

cmy330go wrote:

Genesis talks about land, flying, and sea creatures all coming from their "kind". Besides that where has their ever been even a shred of proof of birds evolving from lizards? I've never heard of a bird half covered in scales with 4 legs, or a lizard growing feathers. I've also never heard of any fossils, or other evidence, of the like being found.

And, of the millions and millions of fossils uncovered they have yet to come up with anything that even remotely closes the gaps.

They've found it several times, its called archeoptryx.

...also, take a good look at the chicken, it has lizard feet and can barely fly.

Airplay355

Geeze, no1 even reads my posts anymore haahaa

audiobliss

Did someone say something?

Airplay355

lol bastage

PolkThug

Airplay355 wrote:

Geeze, no1 even reads my posts anymore haahaa

shhh. Dinosaurs were planted in the rocks by Satan to confuse us.

cmy330go

I think people are forgetting a major aspect of creation. The creative days spoken of in the Bible are not 24 hour days. They could have easily been millions of our years. As I stated before, all living creatures were created during the 5th and 6th periods. That could have been nearly an eternity from our point of view.

In regards to the reptile like bird fossils found. Where are the fossils linking them to either modern day birds or reptiles?

There have never been a series of fossils found that conclusively linked two species together. It only stands to reason that if there were any we would have found them by now.

jdhdiggs

To follow CMY: How would you explain evolution and billions of years to someone that is walking around barefooted and hasn't figured out the most basic farming techniques.

audiobliss

cmy330go wrote:

I think people are forgetting a major aspect of creation. The creative days spoken of in the Bible are not 24 hour days. They could have easily been millions of our years. As I stated before, all living creatures were created during the 5th and 6th periods. That could have been nearly an eternity from our point of view.

THAT is hogwash. It's a perfect example of what the church has been doing for many, many years: giving ground and compromising the Bible. There is absolutely no reason given from reading the Bible that would lead one to suspect the 6 days of creating weren't 24 hour days. The only reason this theory has become so popular is Christians getting all nervous, afraid the world is going to turn their back on the Bible in light of all this scientific 'evidence' of 'evolution' and millions of billions of years. So, the religious world has tried to adapt the Bible to fit this new theory saying, "Well, each day could have been thousands upon thousands of years." Guess what? You've now compromised the Bible and the world has turned its back on the Bible.

Ken Ham gave an awesome lecture on the book of Genesis in which he presented a bullet-proof argument for 24-hour days for creation.

venomclan

The way I see it. I believe in god. Always did. Always will. I beleive in science too with a more limited view. At the end of the day, WE DON'T KNOW ****.

Evolution, there are over a billion planets, in a billion galaxies, trillions of years old. We Think. We are the equivalent of almost nothing. Less than dust. What we do not know is endless. We know more about space than our own oceans. Our brains are barely used. And we focus on our "little Brains" way too much.

Life, enjoy. When we are dead, maybe we will have an answer, maybe we will be dust. Who gives a crap.

"It still doesent change the fact that I don't own a car" Ferris Bueller

cmy330go

audiobliss wrote:

THAT is hogwash. It's a perfect example of what the church has been doing for many, many years: giving ground and compromising the Bible. There is absolutely no reason given from reading the Bible that would lead one to suspect the 6 days of creating weren't 24 hour days. The only reason this theory has become so popular is Christians getting all nervous, afraid the world is going to turn their back on the Bible in light of all this scientific 'evidence' of 'evolution' and millions of billions of years. So, the religious world has tried to adapt the Bible to fit this new theory saying, "Well, each day could have been thousands upon thousands of years." Guess what? You've now compromised the Bible and the world has turned its back on the Bible.

Ken Ham gave an awesome lecture on the book of Genesis in which he presented a bullet-proof argument for 24-hour days for creation.

The Bible itself states that a thousand years seems as but a day to God. It's all in the use of the word "day", and you point of view. We ourselves may say, "back in my grandfather's day".... Does that mean we are speaking literally; that he only lived one day?

audiobliss

mrbigbluelight wrote:

Something to consider is how limited our brain capacity is.

What?! How limited our brain capacity is? Our mind is an extraordinary thing! It's incomprehensible, to me, how powerful it really is!

I found this real quick on google, which quotes some studies that concluded the human brain has a storage capacity of anywhere from 1 to 1,000 terabytes, but most likely from 500 to 1,000 terabytes. That's a lot of storage capacity! And notice the article also says that the brain's algorithms for compressing certain types of data are more efficient than those used in computers.

Hi Twistedpixel,

Current estimates of brain capacity range from 1 to 1000 terabytes!

"Robert Birge (Syracuse University) who studies the storage of data in
proteins, estimated in 1996 that the memory capacity of the brain was
between one and ten terabytes, with a most likely value of 3
terabytes. Such estimates are generally based on counting neurons and
assuming each neuron holds 1 bit. Bear in mind that the brain has
better algorithms for compressing certain types of information than
computers do."
http://www.sizes.com/people/brain.htm


I like this explanation:

"The human brain contains about 50 billion to 200 billion neurons
(nobody knows how many for sure), each of which interfaces with 1,000
to 100,000 other neurons through 100 trillion (10 14) to 10
quadrillion (10 16) synaptic junctions. Each synapse possesses a
variable firing threshold which is reduced as the neuron is repeatedly
activated. If we assume that the firing threshold at each synapse can
assume 256 distinguishable levels, and if we suppose that there are
20,000 shared synapses per neuron (10,000 per neuron), then the total
information storage capacity of the synapses in the cortex would be of
the order of 500 to 1,000 terabytes. (Of course, if the brain's
storage of information takes place at a molecular level, then I would
be afraid to hazard a guess regarding how many bytes can be stored in
the brain. One estimate has placed it at about 3.6 X 10 19 bytes.)"
http://www.geocities.com/rnseitz/The_Great_Gray_Ravelled_Knot.htm

Google Article

jdhdiggs

Limited as in can be damaged, how small of a % of it we use, compared to how complex the universe is, etc... It is limited...

audiobliss

cmy330go wrote:

The Bible itself states that a thousand years seems as but a day to God. It's all in the use of the word "day", and you point of view. We ourselves may say, "back in my grandfather's day".... Does that mean we are speaking literally; that he only lived one day?

Yes, the Bible does say that a thousand years is like the blink of an eye to God.

Here's an article I found off Ken Ham's website (www.answersingenesis.org). It's not nearly as compelling as the lecture I heard him give (and have a tape of), but it's still pretty good.

Answers in Genesis Article wrote:

Dear Editor,

I was disappointed to see that a series of articles are to be printed supporting young-earth creationism. Young-earthism is not the literal interpretation of Genesis, nor is it biblical or scientific. It is based on a number of false assumptions and contradictory claims. It is one of the prime examples that skeptics hold up to show, “The Bible is fiction.”

The Hebrew in Genesis one does not say “24 hour days” in any manner. The Hebrew can be interpreted at least three ways, literally. One must look to context, which young-earthism does not. To believe young-earthism, you must except (sic) the Sun existed before life and that Adam and Eve and all the events in Genesis 2 happened in one day. In old-earth creationism there are no such contradictions.

I hope you will at least consider allowing an old-earth creationist detail their side. Old-earth creationism, contrary to some of the more extreme young-earth supporters, doesn’t compromise with evolution and, in fact, is integral to intelligent design theory.

Sincerely,

–D.D., Pennsylvania

Dear D____,

Thank you for taking the time to write to us. We are glad you are reading this paper and we hope that you find articles that uplift you and strengthen your faith. Obviously, a complete response to your letter would take more time than we have in this column, but we encourage you to visit answersingenesis.org for a more in-depth study. In the meantime, we ask that you please read the upcoming series of articles on young-earth creation with an open mind, putting aside the fallible opinions of men, which are constantly changing.

In response to your letter:

The Hebrew word for “day” in Genesis 1 is “yom.” It is true that the word “yom” can have a range of meanings, such as: a period of time, a specific point in time, a year, the time of day when it is light out and it can also refer to 24 hour period of time.

However, in Genesis 1, the writer (the Holy Spirit, writing through Moses) didn’t allow for any other interpretation than 24-hour days because He used a number, and the phrase “evening and morning” for each of the six days of creation (“and there was evening and morning the first day,” etc.). All throughout the Bible, when “yom” is used with a number or the words “evening” or “morning,” it is referring to a 24-hour day.

I assume that when you refer to the “contradiction” that the “Sun existed before life,” you mean that plant life, according to Genesis 1 was created before the Sun. This would be a problem if the “days” were millions of years, I grant you, but it’s not a problem if the “days” were 24-hour periods of time because they only had to survive for 1 day. The Sun certainly existed before animal and human life, which were created on days 5 and 6.

All of the events of Genesis 2 could have easily happened in one day since Adam was only asked to name all of the livestock, beasts of the fields and birds. If we let scripture interpret scripture, these were the “kinds” referred to in Genesis 1:20-25. This would not need to have been all of the species that have emerged [not evolved—just like breeds of dog emerge from the same dog-kind gene pool today—AiG Ed.] since that time.

We are not concerned with compromising evolution. Our concern is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We do not accept the opinion that the “days” of Genesis 1 are millions of years because that requires a belief that there was death [of “nephesh” life—and cancer and other evidence of suffering as evident in the fossil record—AiG Ed.] before sin. Since Jesus came to pay the penalty of sin, which is death, the Gospel is attacked at its very foundation by evolution and Old-earth creationism.

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12).

“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all should be made alive” (I Cor. 15:22)

–Editor

The Article

EDIT - Also notice that the article points out the damage done to the foundation of the Christian faith if one accepts an 'old earth creationism' standpoint.

audiobliss

jdhdiggs wrote:

Limited as in can be damaged, how small of a % of it we use, compared to how complex the universe is, etc... It is limited...

Yes, indeed, we use a very small percentage of our brain's functional capacity. However, that doesn't mean it's not there, nor does that mean we can't tap into it.

unc2701

jdhdiggs wrote:

This is confusing, could you clarify? Give some examples?

Following the death of christ, the early christians had a whole bunch of conflicting ideas about what it meant to be a christian- there were dozens of different sects, most of which would be totally unrecognizable as christian now... Gnostics, aryians, etc. [BTW the gnostics believed in a spiritual world and a material world- the material world was under the influence of an stupendous dumbass known as the Demiurge who created it as part of a cosmic ****-up. The demiurge thought he was a badass, but really just created all suffering- celestial beings trapped in this material world. I'm guessing CP's own Demiurge probably isn't familiar with that particular meaning to the name. The more common is just plain old Satan.]

If that little sidebar doesn't sound a damn thing like christianity, you're right...
and that's how things were until the Nicaean council in 325; our current ideas of one god in heaven, as the creator and the holy trinity were just one of many sects.

One of the first conflicts the early christians faced was the question of whether or not they should be Jewish. Christ was a jew, should they follow his lead? One little catch- for a grown man to convert to Judeaism, he'd have to get circumsized. It's his pact with god. Now, the church will tell you that divine guidance lead man to the conclusion that you did not have to be a Jew like Christ... the other possibilty was that the guys saying that you didn't have to put your dick on the line won the popularity contest. St paul BTW, was in the non-circumcision party.

Now the reason why all this conflict existed was that christ failed to give clear instruction on the creation of a church/ religion, or clarify many of the different ideas of god or creation. So in 325, a bunch of men got together and voted on it. A few years later they voted on which religious texts should go into the bible.

Demiurge

Evolution is a faith every bit as much as any other religion is a faith. Evolution is a faith in nothing -- that we're merely pointless organisms in the universe, and everything is fair game. Religion is a faith in the divine. The metaphysical as it pertains to a deity, or deities may not exist, and neither can be factually proven by any extent of the imagination. That's why it's called faith.

If you believe in evolution, why do you care what the Christian, Muslim, Shintoist, etc. believes in? It's just a faith, and shouldn't be threatening to you unless it's infringing on you.

The reason it's become a bigger deal lately is because the idea of Intelligent Design is being banned from public schools, but evolution is being taught as truth, and as a science -- when in the end it's anything but. Either have both or teach neither to the degree that either are an absolute truth. It's really not the responsibility of public schools to teach religion, and I do think that evolutionary theory is a religion.

Demiurge

unc2701 wrote:

I'm guessing CP's own Demiurge probably isn't familiar with that particular meaning to the name. The more common is just plain old Satan.]

Actually, the meaning is meant to be:

- A powerful creative force or personality.

...but I suppose if you want to take the archaic definition of the word, fine. After all, I must have just made the word up without knowing what it meant. :rolleyes:

Did I ever say I was Christian? You atheists tend to bring every religions discussion to Christianity and Catholicism, which pretty much shows you have a lot against not just religion, but those in particular. After all, you loved to defend Islam in the WWIII thread.

I really don't know who you're trying to convince here. The faithful that they're wrong, or reflecting on your own insecurities in knowing you are. Once again, you're the one who has everything to worry about. At least I'm operating with a percentage that's above 0%.

audiobliss

Demiurge wrote:

After all, you loved to defend Islam in the WWIII thread.

Whao, defend Islam? Wow.

jdhdiggs

unc2701 wrote:

Following the death of christ, the early christians had a whole bunch of conflicting ideas about what it meant to be a christian- there were dozens of different sects, most of which would be totally unrecognizable as christian now... Gnostics, aryians, etc. [BTW the gnostics believed in a spiritual world and a material world- the material world was under the influence of an stupendous dumbass known as the Demiurge who created it as part of a cosmic ****-up. The demiurge thought he was a badass, but really just created all suffering- celestial beings trapped in this material world. I'm guessing CP's own Demiurge probably isn't familiar with that particular meaning to the name. The more common is just plain old Satan.]

If that little sidebar doesn't sound a damn thing like christianity, you're right...
and that's how things were until the Nicaean council in 325; our current ideas of one god in heaven, as the creator and the holy trinity were just one of many sects.

One of the first conflicts the early christians faced was the question of whether or not they should be Jewish. Christ was a jew, should they follow his lead? One little catch- for a grown man to convert to Judeaism, he'd have to get circumsized. It's his pact with god. Now, the church will tell you that divine guidance lead man to the conclusion that you did not have to be a Jew like Christ... the other possibilty was that the guys saying that you didn't have to put your dick on the line won the popularity contest. St paul BTW, was in the non-circumcision party.

Now the reason why all this conflict existed was that christ failed to give clear instruction on the creation of a church/ religion, or clarify many of the different ideas of god or creation. So in 325, a bunch of men got together and voted on it. A few years later they voted on which religious texts should go into the bible.

Just seeing how much or little you know on the subject. Not too many errors which is good, lot of peices left out but brevity does have its place. Carry on...