|
Creationism vs. Evolution (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Renegade |
| quote: | | What the heck r u fools thinking. THere is a god and he is all knowing and all powerful. He was not created by human consciousness, he created us. See evolution, in my mind cannot prove so many things that it is not possible. See evolution's so called fossil gap, there is a gap in the fossil record, they still cannot prove why. Also the second law of thermodynamics (law that governs most things in the world) states that in a closed system, things run down rather than up. I mean evolution says that that the earth is going from chaos to order but this law contradicts it (look it up for yourself if you don't believe me), this law states that world is going from order to disorder which follows the creationist example. Yo, i could bitch and whine about all the unanswered questions i have about evolution and how many holes i think the theory has but i remind everyone that all beliefs are based on faith, believing in something, you cannot see and that is life. We all believe in things that we cannot see. So my question is, are you sure in what you believe in? |
Please refer back to the old "atheism" thread.
You posted the exact same sentiments there, and I - plus several others - told you exactly why those sentiments are misguided and can, and have, been broken down by simple empirical and logical evidence.
If you wish to post arguments in favour of creationism then I encourage you to do so, but hackeneyed comments like that - attempting to debunk evolution using misguided logic like that - just serve to undermine your position.
Besides the fact that you are wrong in what you say about the second law of thermodynamics and evolution, even if you were to somehow disprove the evolutionist standpoint - baring in mind that no human being has been able to do so in the past 150 years - it still wouldn't make creationism or god any more real. You are appealing to (and arguing from :rolleyes: ) ignorance - namely that if you can disprove evolution it must necessarily make creationism true. It's an artifical dichotemy, and you don't have to be a philosopher to understand the flaw in that logic.
Please think before you post - or at least read the responses from when you posted the exact same message a couple of months ago. That is if you're actually interested in learning anything?
Anyway, sorry if I seem a bit pissed off, but believe me when I say I don't mean any offence. Just understand, that as Green Velvet says in that track I helped you to ID, "I don't need this !". :D |
|
|
| randummboy |
b.s.e.
you've created a monster!!!
great thread, keep it up!
:D :D :D |
|
|
| RavingLunatic |
| quote: |
If everything, ultimately, comes from within, then why believe in a god at all? Why not just minimise pluralities (occam's razor) and believe in yourself?
|
i do :) i believe god is a concept, like love is a concept. love is a real thing, but it's nothing that someone could write a book on, then I could read it and know. I just have to experience it myself. |
|
|
| biznology |
| quote: | Originally posted by torontotrance
What the heck r u fools thinking. THere is a god and he is all knowing and all powerful. He was not created by human consciousness, he created us. See evolution, in my mind cannot prove so many things that it is not possible. See evolution's so called fossil gap, there is a gap in the fossil record, they still cannot prove why. Also the second law of thermodynamics (law that governs most things in the world) states that in a closed system, things run down rather than up. I mean evolution says that that the earth is going from chaos to order but this law contradicts it (look it up for yourself if you don't believe me), this law states that world is going from order to disorder which follows the creationist example. Yo, i could bitch and whine about all the unanswered questions i have about evolution and how many holes i think the theory has but i remind everyone that all beliefs are based on faith, believing in something, you cannot see and that is life. We all believe in things that we cannot see. So my question is, are you sure in what you believe in? |
yes, quite. whats your point exactly? i can believe that there is no God and that evolution was completely chance; or i can believe that evolution is Gods way of creation; or i can believe that there is no relation between animals and everything now is exactly the same as it was when the world was created, but it doesnt make me a fool!
personally i feel that there is unquestionable evidence that all species of animalia are related, and that just because WE as humans still struggle with science(inevitable) and the billions of years of earth history...this doesnt mean that im wrong, im right, or either as a matter of fact. frankly i also think that all my beliefs can do is push forward the current status quo, albeit very slightly. i really think that this is a matter of science and that modern religion is usually just popular fiction...late/ |
|
|
| {b.s.e.} |
Always sage words, Biz. I'm liking this debate. :D
Renegade, RavingLunatic, all you guys -minus one naysayer :D- keep it coming, ladies! |
|
|
| Tranzmit |
I'm a creationist.
I've always had a hardtime believing that as complex as we are we just came together by some big explosion...sorry! It's like the guy who built meat grinders said..."i make meat grinders, there's 14 parts in one of those things so they're pretty simple to build relatively. But i know this, i can stick all 14 parts of a meatgrinder in a washing machine for a million years but it'll never make a meat grinder"
Then there's the problem with Fossils, As Darwin himself said "if all creatures are in the process of evolving, We should be up to ears in fossils of missing links". We're not!!
In either case i believe it all boils down to Evolution being a faith or a belief just as Creationism is. |
|
|
| Renegade |
Ack. :)
| quote: | | I've always had a hardtime believing that as complex as we are we just came together by some big explosion...sorry! It's like the guy who built meat grinders said..."i make meat grinders, there's 14 parts in one of those things so they're pretty simple to build relatively. But i know this, i can stick all 14 parts of a meatgrinder in a washing machine for a million years but it'll never make a meat grinder" |
But it's not as though humanity just suddenly appeared (or life for that matter). There are major differences between the composition of a mechanical aperatus like a meat-grinder (or a watch in the popular analogy) and a biological entity.
Using conditions replicating those on planet Earth 3.5 billion years ago (i.e. a much higher preponderance of nitrogen and hydrogen, no oxygen) scientists have been able to "grow" amino acids, the building blocks of all life. I suggest you pick up a book on evolution and understand just what needs to happen for life to come into being, as I'm sure that someone else (i.e. an actual evolutionary scientist :rolleyes: ) can explain it much better than I - but I do know enough to tell you that the emergance of life on this planet 3.5 billion years ago was an almost inevitable "coincidence".
Sugar (which is what most life requires to live) was created by a simple enough chemical reaction in primordial clay, and from this, spurned on by the electricity in the air (lightning), Amino Acids, RNA, DNA and eventually (after hundereds of millions of years you understand) the first single celled organisms appeared. They didn't just spontaneously appear, the evolved from much more basic elements, and from here these single-celled organisms gradually evolved into multi-celled organsims (through self-replication - which was an evolutionary necessity - not governed by chance at all (read acid-fast's post in the "Atheism" thread) - that gave these organisms the best chance of survival).
From self-replicating multi-celled organisms came things like sponges and jelly-fish, then fish, then amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds, mammals, and finally, at 5pm on December 31st, came humanity.
A simple explanation I know, but there is nothing extraordinary or ungraspable about it. It's simple and almost inevitable - just get a book on evolution and at least understand the mechanisms behind it before you reserve judgement. :)
| quote: | | Then there's the problem with Fossils, As Darwin himself said "if all creatures are in the process of evolving, We should be up to ears in fossils of missing links". We're not!! |
I don't think you quite understand how fossilisation works.
It requires fairly rapid sedimentation otherwise the bones dissipate into the Earth quite quickly. And do you know what the odds of a land animal being buried by rapid sedimentation are? And then the odds that specimen surviving millions of years or erosion and sedimentary upheaval only to end up on the top of a mountain where it can be easily retreived? How many fossils that do exist are irretrievable due to being buried under tons of rock - or even worse, under tons of rock under hundered of meters of water? The fact that we do have such a complete evolutionary tree is quite a feat in itself.
Again, please refer to the earlier threads of the Atheism thread for more info.
| quote: | | In either case i believe it all boils down to Evolution being a faith or a belief just as Creationism is. |
There may be an element of "faith" in evolutionary science, but this only extends so far as our faith in the evidence we currently have. If all the evidence we have is correct (and we have little reason to believe that it isn't) then evolution is just as sound a theory as those of any other scientific doctrine. Of course, if you want to argue that the evidence we have supporting evolution (remembering that the theory of evolution only came into being as a result of this overwhelming evidence) is incorrect, then we are delving into an almost Cartesian absolute skepticism, by which means we can reject virtually all other scientific theories.
If you reject evolution because you believe that the evidence is unsatisfactory, then you reject vast amounts of the theories governing biology, geology and several other doctrines. Given all the evidence we have - and given that evolution is the best theory we have given this evidence - I find it hard to underdstand how it can be rejected.
Creationism, on the other had, is just pure faith: i.e. the literalistic interpretation of Genesis. If creationism truly described what we currently know about the universe better than all the other scientific tennets, then I can only question why it hasn't fared better in the scientific community. If someone could disprove evolution then they would be remembered forever in 4th grade science books world-wide, so it's not like there isn't enough incentive for the scientific community to persue all possible avenues. But, the fact is, creationism has no scientific value at all, and thus cannot be considered - by a long, long way - to be anything even close to a scientific doctrine.
It's religion at best, dogma at worst. It's no accident that, since Darwin, it has been shunned by all self-respecting scientists: it has no scientific value at all, it isn't a science, it is pure faith. To compare creationism to evolution is to demean the latter significantly in a scientific context.
Of course, in a religious context it's a different kettle of fish, but that's cause for a different discussion altogether. :) |
|
|
| biznology |
| quote: | Originally posted by Tranzmit
I'm a creationist.
I've always had a hardtime believing that as complex as we are we just came together by some big explosion...sorry! It's like the guy who built meat grinders said..."i make meat grinders, there's 14 parts in one of those things so they're pretty simple to build relatively. But i know this, i can stick all 14 parts of a meatgrinder in a washing machine for a million years but it'll never make a meat grinder"
|
au contraire! the meat grinder in the machine would eventually fall apart due to rust, neglect...the world could be eaten by the sun for all i care. the metal molecules would then float around until they combined with other molecules to begin the whole process over again (over many, many more billions of years). if life evolved similarly as to one earth, the highest beings could utilize metal just as early man did - eventually making an apparatus to cut or grind up the the flesh of other living things(assuming this was necessary, that they NEEDED flesh, etc). then you have a meat grinder again. both choices require a complete open mind, its just that ONE has more going for it than simple faith and wanting one reason for the world...late/ |
|
|
| ABTsportsline |
ooooooo.... i LOVE this subject. I can't believe i didnt see this thread until now.
My biggest problem is that i understand what all you guys are talking about, i just don't have the "eloquent" words to explain my views on such an esoteric level! :)
I don't know which category i fall under.... like b.s.e., i am torn between the two. I consider myself agnostic, and pretty much believe all the same stuff that RavingLunatic mentioned in his first post in this thread. I consider the religions of the world a buffet table, and i pick and choose!
as for evolutionism, i kinda believe it and kinda don't. for starters, to be general, the theory (in short) says we come from apes... but if thats the case, why do we still have apes? I do believe in it to an extent, however. You will notice how some animals develop limbs or functions that better serve their survival... like how a frog will dispose a poison mechanism to protect itself, or the eletric eel, etc.... but i don't see anything that would lead to evolving species.... this hasn't been proven, and like creationism, is really just faith in the rest of the theory. i know original man (see: Lucy austrolopithicus) was short and very rough-around-the-edges, but i dont see this as her evolving from apes.... i see as that is how man started out (maybe?) and we evolved in the sense of better survival (being larger and more "erect" & more intelligent)....
then again, i don't believe creationism at all..... i can't put pure "faith" into something that has no proof WHATsoever, something that even argues with itself!
i am sure all of you know that science is religion's greatest enemy. This goes back to the polytheist greeks and romans.... they had gods to explain the existence of things, and the reason why things happened.... (i.e. apollo pulled the sun across the sky, posiedon, when mad, caused turbulent seas)..... when since this has obviously been proven through scientific measures... rotation of earth around sun, weather patterns....... now that science has reasoned this, the use for the greek and roman system was no more. Of course this also stapled from (as someone mentioned earlier) the greeks and romans need to believe in something.... it is human's nature to NEED reasoning behind things. humans would be unsatisfied with just seeing something happen without there being a reason for it. Fortunately for the religious folk, religion was the easy answer. "Where did the planet earth come from?" -"God made it!"... see? easy. i am not content with all this. with all this debate, people never stopped to ask "WHY did god make this?" and "why did god make earth and people, as we appear today?" he could have made people look like the aliens you see in movies, etc... and you have seen how the human has evolved (since austrolopithacus).... is god constantly releasing newer versions of man? updates? MAN v.1.0.2?
heheh, but also, i kinda believe the big bang theory. and that the universe is constantly expanding, but one day will stop, and the gravity will start to contradict itself and "implode" if you will..... but this will all take billions of years. Why do i think this? because recently, its been proven. Did no one read the HUGE article about this in Time a couple of months ago? The entire magazine was dedicated to this fact that was recently proven with scientific laws and heavy studies of the solar system. But this really doesn't have to do with the debate in my eyes...... a creationist could just simply say "well god created the universe!!" I don't personally buy any of that, but anyway...
See? i am really, HONESTLY on the fence on this one. I don't want to say "there is no god", but there is no proof that there isn't a god.... really there isn't. we don't know that maybe GOD is evolutionizing man and animals.... maybe god does have something to do with whats happening to earth. But i can't say that i believe he created man on one day, light on another, etc.... i dont' believe that.
and i don't believe the bible either. the bible is a book, mind you. not fact, no proof. Can you imagine what the world would be like if one of Tom Clancy's thrillers was understood (2000 years from now) to be "THE authority"???? how hilariously ridiculous would THAT be? the Bible is just an old-time thriller story that a couple of guys got together and wrote. it could be a big hoax! it could be what these guys REALLY believed.... but i don't.
Also think about this..... if the really devout catholics believe that if you don't believe in christ and follow the bible you go to hell, does that mean the BILLIONS of muslims, jews, and shinto, buddists, etc... are all in hell?????? no. how can you go someplace if it doesn't exist? hell is a fictious place, just as heaven is. I don't believe in heaven and hell, but i believe they were constructed by man to give mankind something to believe in. It gives humans something to look forward to in the afterlife. it makes a friend's death appear not to be so bad. "don't worry jim, he's going to a better place"....... humans would not be content with knowing that when you die, thats it. nothing. you won't know there is nothing because you are not thinking (you're dead), and you are not in existence to see this. its like going to sleep but not having a dream. This is what i believe.
mankind's goodness shines through, and wants to do well (in general), and i think that is another reason for religion - if you notice it only practices and preaches (for the most part) of doing good to others, being nice, etc....... i like that. if someone is going to be anything, i'd rather them be religious than a gang-banger. Just because it results in them wanting and trying to be a good person. Some of us do not need religion to be good... and that is cool too.
sorry for the long rant, but i love these types of discussions, as they *never* seem to get resolved, just go on and on :)
Good thread, guys!
-ABT- |
|
|
| trancaholic |
I've posted my views on this subject in the excellent Are We Real-thread, some months ago (in brief I'm a weak agnostic in my mind, but believe with my heart), but I just wanted to point out a few things from the above posts:
| quote: | Originally posted by randummboy
well, since time is infinate, it was bound to happen some time or another and that some time was 15 billion years ago..
|
...that is, if you consider the probability of it happening to be above 0, otherwise it would never happen.
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
If everything, ultimately, comes from within, then why believe in a god at all? Why not just minimise pluralities (occam's razor) and believe in yourself?
|
If you line up all possible explanations for a given phenomena from the simplest to the most complex, disregarding any other evidence than the order of the explanations, chosing the simplest one is just
as probable to be correct as choosing any of the others. It is heavily debated whether Occam's razor is valid, and experimental evidence for *and* against has been produced. I won't rant on as I regard you as far too intelligent and informed in these matters.
Generally, the arguments in this thread are influenced by individual definitions and interpretations of terms such as time, space and life, but every post I read is through and out well written and you al have clearly given the matter much thought. Thank you. |
|
|
| astroboy |
the Darwinism v. creationism debate is one mainly concerend with biology. Creationists say that all animals/plants were created within seven days. Some modern creationists even say God put dinosaur fossils in the ground to fool us. I think if there is a god 'he' does not work according to such obviously human principles.
There is too much evidence of evolution for any intelligent individual to dissmiss it entirely. Viruses are evolving under microscope lenses before our very eyes. In Russian experiments on foxes, where only foxes displaying friendly charecteristics were allowed to survive, the new breed of foxes developed, had blue eyes, wagged their tails and generally behaved like dogs. It is common sense that if a similar process occured over thousands of years, it would lead to the formation of a new species.
What I can't understand is why people still insist on a literal interpretation of the bible. Evolutionism/Darwinism, does not preclude the existance of a god. If god is the supreme being, can't he set a trillion atoms in motion so that they eventually form life and evolve into humans. To god, the ETERNAL present arent 15 million years like 7 days? and aren't there parts of the bible that all Christians have decided no to take literally (eg. stoning prostitutes to death, killing homosexuals etc.), so why not this? |
|
|
| astroboy |
In case anyone is interested her is a brief summary of my views on religion:
GOD:
I believe in god but not in the conventional sense. I don't believe in some anthropomorphic god - some old man that looks a bit like Santa Claus sitting up in the clouds. I don't belive in a god that has a human-consciousness, or one whose mind functions anything like ours - therefore my "god" is unlikely to interfere actively with the direction of history.
I see god as some form of intelligent creative force. Bear with me for a moment and try to grasps the complexity of a simple life form such as an ant (which biologists still don't know everyithing about) and then consider the myriad of life forms that have evolved exist on earth and exist in an almost impossibly complex interactive eco-system. Now imagine space, with some rocks floating around in it cold and lifeless.
It is difficult for me to imagine that the former formed out of the latter by accident - sure all the chemicals were there but how did they form life?
Imagine a tornado sweeping through a junkyard full of mechanical parts and accidentally assembling a fully working 747 jet - even this analogy is an inadequate in describing the infinitesimal probability of life being formed "by accident". Indeed if one considers how and why the universe itself was formed the probability of life existing becomes even smaller.
For me this makes the existance of some itelligent force behind the creation of life, more probable than some univeral accident
I also do not believe that god dictates a moral code for us to follow. I believe the rules and codes of conduct in modern religions were created by people to allow society to function productively, without descending into anarchy. and to give people an escape from taking responsibility for their actions. In this sense I am a bit of an existentialist. Do what you want to do, but remember you ALWAYS have a choice and the responsibility for taking that choice is entirely yours. There is no mythical father figure to tell you its ok to do something in certain circumstances, and not ok to do it in others. There is no divine legislation, you have to face the difficult choices in life yourself, with no other-worldly rules to guide you.
AFTERLIFE:
Secondly I believe in an afterlife because I am certain that I (my mind) is more than a cluster of neurons functioning according to the laws of physics. If we assume that our identities and thoughts are contained entirely in the brain then we consign ourselves and our thoughts to predictability and mechanism. According to science the electrical activity in our brains (thoughts) are either completely random, or describable by some formula and therefore completely predictable - this, to me does not explain conscioussness, identity and the human thought process. This topic demonstrates the very thought processes that define us as humans and contradict the suggestions that our thoughts are completely random, or the output of some predictable but highly complex clockwork mechanism (pursuing this line of thinking would suggest that murder is no worse than destroying a computer or an expensive, and highly complex machine).
This leads me to believe that I have a soul, something that contains my thoughts and identity and functions outside the confines of space and time, and hence outside the laws of this universe. And since their is no reason to believe that this soul dies with the body, it must continue to exist.
As for what happens to your soul after you die, I tend to favour the Buddhist theory. Perhaps the soul becomes reincarrnated into different bodies, gaining more and more experiences with each life, after it is sufficiently developed it goes to Nirvana - this is not heaven!, (the concept of nirvana is most easily described this way: imagine the soul as a drop of milk being dropped into the ocean, and losing its individuality and sense of self, but joining something greater).
TRIPPY SPECULATION:
These are just some trippy theories that I've come up with, but don't necessarily believe:
Perhaps this "ocean" or collective of fully developed souls IS "god" - after all smaller parts usually make up greater, more complex things (eg. cells make up an organism; resistors, transistors capacitors etc make up computers; sound waves make up a trance tune ). So effectively god consists of us - maybe god is what will happen when enough people are connected to the internet. Maybe the universe, and life was created by this intelligent force in order to develop itself, by dividing itself into individual souls and requiring each soul to undergo a certain amount of development through experiencing several lives?
hmmm... this freaks you out if you think about it too much, I think I'll go have a cup of tea.
Hey bse - how bout we start a philosophy thread here: you seem to know a bit about Kant and Existentialism... just a sugestion - I can't think of what to start it off with. :) |
|
|
|
|
