|
Post by shypsychologyguy on Dec 2, 2005 19:06:49 GMT -5
Logic?
If you walked into the woods and found a painting what would you think?
the painting did not just show up someone had to paint it and put it there.
The world is a like a painting so it is illogical to say that it was made without some outside influence.
|
|
|
Post by GreenFerret on Dec 2, 2005 19:27:19 GMT -5
Logic? If you walked into the woods and found a painting what would you think? the painting did not just show up someone had to paint it and put it there. The world is a like a painting so it is illogical to say that it was made without some outside influence. I've heard that analogy before, and it's total crap. Why is the world like a painting? It's not--it's very simply NOT. A painting is something created by humans. We see people doing it every day; many of us ourselves create paintings. How many worlds have you or, heck, ANY HUMAN you have ever known or heard of created? There is evidence that the painting was created by a human. You could probably analyze it and compare it with paintings that are known to exist and find out whether the artist was right or left handed--maybe hone in on a fingerprint left in a smudge of paint. He/she might even have signed the painting for ease of identification, and if you were so lucky you could whip out the phonebook and give them a call. You obviously are having a little trouble with this "logic" stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Bodhi on Dec 2, 2005 19:33:20 GMT -5
Logic? If you walked into the woods and found a painting what would you think? the painting did not just show up someone had to paint it and put it there. The world is a like a painting so it is illogical to say that it was made without some outside influence. Thats a bad analogy. A better one would be if you walked into the woods and found the woods. The universe is not like a painting, it does have rules though, which does lend credence to there was some force that designed the rules. But in my opinion that happened before the big bang, that some force created the rules and set things into motion. If you put certain rules into a computer program and tell it to draw things, you will sometimes get very complex pictures that may look like only an intelligent mind created them. Yet that doesn't mean the intelligence that created the rules is still there or cares at all about what happens. I think that if there is a God he has had no influence on the universe besides creating it. If he did why would he be so random about things? Since so many bad things happen to good people and so many good things happen to bad people. I know the counter-arguement is we can never know God's plan and maybe in the end everything that happens in the world will make sense. But I think that is unlikely and the more likely explantation is God isn't interfering.
|
|
|
Post by Scotty on Dec 2, 2005 19:35:03 GMT -5
Logic? If you walked into the woods and found a painting what would you think? the painting did not just show up someone had to paint it and put it there. The world is a like a painting so it is illogical to say that it was made without some outside influence. So by that logic, Alien beings could have put the Earth here, not necessarily an all knowing powerful being?
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Dec 2, 2005 21:05:40 GMT -5
What does that have to do with anything? Can god set everything up such that after a big bang all these things happen, such as stars forming and life evolving? How exactly did god created man? What was the process?
Evolution is a natural process that is always happening. Thats a proven fact. Evolution exists. It can be reproduced under laboratory conditions. Have you ever heard of drug resistant bacteria? Mutating viruses?
The scientific argument is about evolution / natural selection / random mutation being responsible for the origin of species. Not whether evolution is true.
No scientist refutes evolution. Its all done by people who have little affiliation with science. They are not challenging the established theories in a way that it is usually done - by providing evidence, but are fighting a political/pr battle.
How? What is the framework, the experiments? Has this been done at all? Anything? There is nothing stopping scientists from doing this, however until they have done it why should this 'theory' be taught in school? You can't just say I have this great idea, lets teach it in school. You have to do the work first. SPG, what do you know about theory of evolution? Intelligent design? What is your background on this issue?
Why? This has not been scientifically proven, why should it be taught in a science classroom? Why should something from the bible be taught in a science classroom? To make evangelical folks feel better?
|
|
|
Post by shypsychologyguy on Dec 2, 2005 22:55:52 GMT -5
I know a Phd in Biology who is a creationist. they are out there so do not say that all scientist believe evolution. My brother is a biology major and has had proffesours teach evolution and say they do not necessarily believe the theory. There are also phds that have left the belief in evolution for creationsm. This is rare but it happens.
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Dec 2, 2005 23:07:24 GMT -5
let me repeat this: evolution is just a process that happens. its true. the question debated in science is whether this process is responsible for origin of species - not whether evolution is true.
|
|
Yeti
Full Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by Yeti on Dec 5, 2005 14:23:12 GMT -5
Ask any scientist who changed belief from evolution to creationism what happened first, his change in belief of the orgins of life or his change in belief to christianity? Evolution does happen everyday its just there that are two types of evolution, micro and macro. Microevolution is not refuted by anyone, even creationist scientists, its how viruses and germs mutate and become resistant to drugs, its provable fact that no one with an ounce of intelligence can or does deny. Macroevolution is where the controversy is and yet, after one hundred fifty years of theory, still is the overwhelming choice of the vast majority of scientists, at least those who are not evangelical christians with a mind to push their religous text into factuality while reducing hard science to that of a simple analogy.
I have read books on both sides and that which stands out in my mind is the fact that ID has very little scientific evidence supporting it. What it does have going for it is an obsession with trying to poke holes into evolution in an apparent attempt to mask the fact that it has far more holes in its own theory than evolution ever did and/or will. We will never be able to disprove or prove that there is in fact a higher being, therefore any theory with that at its core cannot be called science. The teaching of this so called theory belongs not in a science classroom but rather a theology or philosophy class. If anyone wants to choose ID over evolution as their personal belief system, I am not against it, but when one wants to attack the leading theory of the origin of life wth over one hundred fifty years of research behind it and demand equal time to teach our youth in science class of all places that there really must be a "God", that, I do have a problem with. Science and God do not mix, one is based on fact while the other, on that obsolete thing known as "faith".
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 5, 2005 14:47:51 GMT -5
Can we stop this please? This argument over ID and evolution is going nowhere, and all it's doing is getting my blood pressure up and a lot of other peoples' as well. Not just here, but all over the country. Anyway, let's talk about something else, okay? I don't know what; i'll think of something, a topic besides politics and religion. Just a topic less personal, shall we say?
|
|
|
Post by GreenFerret on Dec 5, 2005 21:52:40 GMT -5
Can we stop this please? This argument over ID and evolution is going nowhere, and all it's doing is getting my blood pressure up and a lot of other peoples' as well. Not just here, but all over the country. Anyway, let's talk about something else, okay? I don't know what; i'll think of something, a topic besides politics and religion. Just a topic less personal, shall we say? Sigh. Russ, if you don't want to be part of it, just don't read it. Most arguments of this nature will "go nowhere," but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed just because it's uncomfortable for some people.
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 6, 2005 0:16:35 GMT -5
Can we stop this please? This argument over ID and evolution is going nowhere, and all it's doing is getting my blood pressure up and a lot of other peoples' as well. Not just here, but all over the country. Anyway, let's talk about something else, okay? I don't know what; i'll think of something, a topic besides politics and religion. Just a topic less personal, shall we say? Sigh. Russ, if you don't want to be part of it, just don't read it. Most arguments of this nature will "go nowhere," but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed just because it's uncomfortable for some people. Okay, i won't read it anymore. I just know that debates like this can get ugly fast; i've seen it happen in real life.
|
|
|
Post by madiocre on Aug 5, 2008 9:40:22 GMT -5
evolution is a THEORY not a fact . often scientists involved in the research are as biased as priests are with their own believes. There has even been instance of forged evidence. Im not saying that it isn't true and that therfore god is .im saying it isn't proven, its just a possibility . ITs fine to believe it but don't turn around and say its a fact just like how ppl shouldnt turn around and say god is .At the end of the day there is no definite answer or knowledge . deal with it . It always seemed funny how in biology the first lesson dealt with the idea that yeah its just a theory but then evertything linked back to it as if it were proven .
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Aug 5, 2008 12:11:00 GMT -5
actually evolution and natural selection is just as much a fact as that the earth moves around the sun. living organisms evolve with each generation - any scientists, even religious ones will confirm this to you what is not yet proven beyond reasonable doubt is that it is responsible for the origin of species, and whether there are things we don't know of that guide, or have impact on the evolution itself lumping together proven scientific research with wishful thinking of priests is not an exercise in intelligent discussion here is a good article about the misuse of the word theory by anti-darwin crows www.evolutionnews.org/2008/07/is_evolution_a_theory_or_fact.html
|
|
|
Post by Naptaq on Dec 5, 2008 9:28:35 GMT -5
I might shock some people here but I found an explanation, which to me, makes a lot more sense than all of this creation vs evolution argument. Creation is evolution. Evolution is creation. Evolution is how creation unfolds itselfs, through time. They're both right. God created this material world and evolution exists, as proven by science. Here's a quote by someone who won the Nobel Prize in Physics and is one of the founders of quantum mechanics. Max Plank: "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Dec 5, 2008 12:23:15 GMT -5
that's great
fail
|
|