Creation And Science

[An Historian]

Dude, youre asking to us to condense at least a semester's worth of material into a forum post. That is grossly unfair and displays a lack of interest bordering on contempt. You found your way to a site on which your opinions could be expressed; surely you can find your way to a site on which you can discover more than a century of research to the contrary, if only to judge it illegitimate. Come back when you have a specific question instead of denouncing a gigantic field of scientific study.

 

Interesting.  If I had came here asking about the hypostatic union, would you tell me to go off and read the Summa?  You are assuming of me that I am ignorant of the science of evolution because I disagree with it and find that there is insufficient evidence for it.  I ask you, what point in even having this thread, or having a discussion forum in the first place, if it's simply going to be a referral to other sites and textbooks?  To be quite honest, I can only assess your post and those of CrossCut as cowardly, as you have both demonstrated an unwillingness to engage the discussion.  Perhaps you simply don't understand the topic at hand?

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evolution+

 

LT research. If you rely on everyone else to spoon feed you basic stuff, then youre going to have a hard life.

One of my favorite scientific search engines is PubMed. But basic Google tactics will work as well. Drink up the power of knowledge! 

 

 

St Paul. " beware of those whom preach knowledge can save."

 

Faith, hope and love comes from above and beyond this is our true song.

 

All glory to God ( including evolution of man if it happened. And i agree there is no solid evidence, most well respected scientist will tell you there's to many missing links to actually prove it and is still theoretical no matter how solid that theory may or may not seem.)

Edited April 25, 2014 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Ice_nine]

Interesting.  If I had came here asking about the hypostatic union, would you tell me to go off and read the Summa?  You are assuming of me that I am ignorant of the science of evolution because I disagree with it and find that there is insufficient evidence for it.  I ask you, what point in even having this thread, or having a discussion forum in the first place, if it's simply going to be a referral to other sites and textbooks?  To be quite honest, I can only assess your post and those of CrossCut as cowardly, as you have both demonstrated an unwillingness to engage the discussion.  Perhaps you simply don't understand the topic at hand?

 

If you came in here and said, "so what about the hypostatic union? It defies logic and doesn't make theological sense." without being more specific, you'd get precisely the same response you're getting now.

 

And calling people (or their posts) cowardly? Come on brotha man. Get off your high horse.

[PhuturePriest]

If you came in here and said, "so what about the hypostatic union? It defies logic and doesn't make theological sense." without being more specific, you'd get precisely the same response you're getting now.

 

And calling people (or their posts) cowardly? Come on brotha man. Get off your high horse.

 

I liked the "brotha man" part. I don't think I've ever seen a girl say that before, so it amused me. :P

 

You may all continue with your science debate.

[Fidei Defensor]

Dude, youre asking to us to condense at least a semester's worth of material into a forum post. That is grossly unfair and displays a lack of interest bordering on contempt. You found your way to a site on which your opinions could be expressed; surely you can find your way to a site on which you can discover more than a century of research to the contrary, if only to judge it illegitimate. Come back when you have a specific question instead of denouncing a gigantic field of scientific study.

This. It took me 4 years of college study to get a degree in biology—I certainly can't justify the entirety of a scientific theory (in actuality, it is really a law. All of modern biology rests on the understanding of evolution) in the course of a thread on a forum on the internet.  There's just no way.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

If you came in here and said, "so what about the hypostatic union? It defies logic and doesn't make theological sense." without being more specific, you'd get precisely the same response you're getting now.

 

And calling people (or their posts) cowardly? Come on brotha man. Get off your high horse.

 

 

I agree with what An historian said but i don't agree with the cowardly comment/ judgement, nore do i agree with yours assuming that he is on some kind of discrimination binge where the saying get off your high horse comes from, st paul riding into damascus to persecute the christians, a christian calling another christian a coward is not persecution, just a mis use of words and perhaps a bit judgemental.

 

All glory to GOD.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

This. It took me 4 years of college study to get a degree in biology—I certainly can't justify the entirety of a scientific theory (in actuality, it is really a law. All of modern biology rests on the understanding of evolution) in the course of a thread on a forum on the internet.  There's just no way.

 

 

The natural changing of cells in a life time isn't evolution in the form that man came from monkeys, surely? Try us on the whole we won't understand your 4 years of study, truly this thread could go on for 4 years if you like, if phatmass lasts that long. :) And how is theory ever fact, no matter how good and probable a theory is?

Edited April 25, 2014 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Fidei Defensor]

 ( including evolution of man if it happened. And i agree there is no solid evidence, most well respected scientist will tell you there's to many missing links to actually prove it and is still theoretical no matter how solid that theory may or may not seem.)

No offense meant, but most well respected scientists will laugh in your face if you say this to them.  All of modern biology as we know it rests on the theories behind evolution. The incredible complexity of the body is the work of millions of years of happenstance and survival of the fittest.  I honestly don't think people can grasp just how long millions of years is. We're not talking about 2 months and a week, we're talking about millions of years. Remember, all of human history has happened in about 15,000 years—and look at the progress that's occurred. Evolution took millions, if not billions, of years.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

15,000 years huh? There is evidence of 40,000 years in australia actual tools and bone fragments, and no monkeys. :P

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

That the whole worlds land mass was once one big land mass is even theory, they say probable but we can't actually know 100%, at present. I think science should be told to produce probability tables before something is even half accepted, what is it guys, 50% sure, 30% sure, 80% sure 99% sure?

Edited April 25, 2014 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Fidei Defensor]

The natural changing of cells in a life time isn't evolution in the form that man came from monkeys, surely? Try us on the whole we won't understand your 4 years of study, truly this thread could go on for 4 years if you like, if phatmass lasts that long. :) And how is theory ever fact, no matter how good and probable a theory is?

Organisms and cells don't evolve, populations do.  

 

Here is an example. Let's say there are originally 2 colors of a species of beetle—red and yellow. Now both beetles are preyed upon by a bird. Now lets say that by a mutation, a green beetle is found among the others. The red and yellow beetles are generally eaten much more often than the green beetle because it blends in with their surroundings.  Over time, red + yellow beetles are eaten, often before they reproduce. The green beetle, however, lived long enough to pass on its genes to new generations of green beetles. After a long enough time, green beetles will become more and more common because they are better equipped to hide from predators, and the red and yellow beetles eventually disappear from being eaten to extinction.

 

This is evolution. The beetle didn't consciously choose to become green, it just so happened that instead of red or yellow, a mutation caused a beetle to be green instead.  It is by happenstance that evolution occurs through gene mutations and natural selection

[Fidei Defensor]

Now, you may ask — how does that kind of thing turn monkeys into humans? It doesn't. It is how "lower" life forms became higher ones — mutations (among other things) changed populations and eventually enough changes accumulated that a whole new species was born. Given millions of year and tiny changes and slow shift, you can get something as radically different as a human. It is like filling a bucket with a single drop of water at a time—wait long enough and you could have an ocean. It just take a looooooong time.

[Guest]

I don't say this to objectify women but look at the really beautiful ones (females can say the same about men) Some are so beautiful you are left in awe.......To say God didn't have something to do with that is obserd........Focusing to much on the beauty aspect is vain but it's still something to be thought about.........I love science and evolution and the big bang.......It shows evidence of God's work at hand.....If you think Kate Upton evolved from a ape to what she is now just by random luck then I have no words to describe the depth of your stupidity...

[CrossCuT]

Interesting.  If I had came here asking about the hypostatic union, would you tell me to go off and read the Summa?  You are assuming of me that I am ignorant of the science of evolution because I disagree with it and find that there is insufficient evidence for it.  I ask you, what point in even having this thread, or having a discussion forum in the first place, if it's simply going to be a referral to other sites and textbooks?  To be quite honest, I can only assess your post and those of CrossCut as cowardly, as you have both demonstrated an unwillingness to engage the discussion.  Perhaps you simply don't understand the topic at hand?

 

Hey now, I invited you to a PM conversation if youre serious. It IS a large topic but it isnt unattainable from someone with a non science background. GM was very correct when he said that these things are typically taught over a semester in school. There is a lot of information and things that build up a foundation for it. 

I think a lot of the time even if you explain evolution in the best way, if someone doesnt have an appropriate background they will not fully grasp it.

 

I think evolution is beautiful and I am very willing to engage in a discussion about it. Its just hard to start from square one. Usually people have a specific problem...not a problem with the WHOLE thing. Usually if they disagree with the entire concept, there are some serious flaws in their understanding that need to be corrected. You just let me know where youd like to start and Id be up for it.

[PhuturePriest]

I don't say this to objectify women but look at the really beautiful ones (females can say the same about men) Some are so beautiful you are left in awe.......To say God didn't have something to do with that is obserd........Focusing to much on the beauty aspect is vain but it's still something to be thought about.........I love science and evolution and the big bang.......It shows evidence of God's work at hand.....If you think Kate Upton evolved from a ape to what she is now just by random luck then I have no words to describe the depth of your stupidity...

 

*Headdesk*

 

I will explain this only one more time, and I will try to do it as simply as humanly possible.

 

We do not believe Kate Upton is pretty by chance. Evolution happened by God's Hand, not by accident. I honestly don't see why that's so hard for you to understand.