evolution

Omega: Nah. That was just my humble contribution to help dialogue here.

St. Anselmus defended the capacity of the reason human being to investigate the mysteries of God. He used a ontological method to prove that God exists. In a very simple way somelhing like: "if we have the idea of a perfect being, the absolute perfection exists, soon the perfect being exists"

Dont be nasty with him he was a genius as all the ancient philosohers. Descartes and Hegel followed him not so many centuries ago.
🙂

Here's a debate. Let's say there is a God. Why couldn't evolution be part of his master plan? Going with the above statement, the universe could have been created by God using the Big Bang and he just sat back and let everything happen. I don't understand why so many... uh, "religious groups"... for lack of a better term, insist that he snapped his fingers and everything just appeared. I actually consulted a minister, who told me that Genesis should be taken quite literally and that God, being infinitely powerful could easily blink things into existence. Someone please explain why this limited thnking is still so prevalent in the 21st century.

I actually consulted a minister, who told me that Genesis should be taken quite literally and that God, being infinitely powerful could easily blink things into existenceSomeone please explain why this limited thnking is still so prevalent in the 21st century

because when science kicks in some have problem arguing their faith, so in order to prevent loosing their religion. They cling to this dark ages way of thinking just to avoid all the facts laid out before them that really contradicts and challange the basic platform their faith is based uppon.

Yerssot> Anselmus, hm? Sounds like he’s talking nonsense. I don’t really take people serious who speaks on behalf of others. “Even those who don’t”…? Yeah, right?

T1P2> Well, I don’t see any evidence of any God anywhere. It’s not very Ockham’ish to add the extra assumption that everything was created by some divine being, who then just sat back and stopped caring. Things work just fine WITHOUT this extra assumption.
And why do religious groups insist that everything is 6000 years old? I guess it’s because if you they don’t, then the Bible should NOT be taken literally (You get the weirdest contradictions if you insist on doing that anyways, but that’s another story). And if it shouldn’t be taken literally then EVERYTHING in it is up for interpretation – ultimately it should perhaps not even be taken seriously.

Hmm. Seems the Force disappears every time I counter his statements. He insisted there were no contradictions in the Bible, I showed him there are… And now he’s silent again. What utter lack of respect!

well, I should get the quote next week when I'm back at my place
just remind me again than

Whether you believe in Creation or not, i encourage you to take a look at http://www.creationevidence.org/ It is the website of a Creation Evidence Museum in Texas, and it has, whether you want to call it proof or evidence of, Creation. Again, i encourage you to take a look. I have not read the past 18 pages of this site, however, i am a firm believer in Creation, and i think that, if one is to make a valid argument, one must look at both sides of the argument.

*Sigh*... Well, I can hardly blame you for not wanting to read so many pages, and long ones at that. But I have said time and time again that I have done a good bit of research looking for evidence of Creation. I wrote via email to a Creation website, answersingenesis.org (.com?). I asked for evidence of Creation, which they claimed, on almost every page of the site, to have but never actually gave. Their reply was a long statement about how "the evidence is all the same, the difference is the way we interpret it", and how Aristotle didn't pioneer the scientific method. (which I mentioned VERY briefly in my letter) I wrote back pointing out that they never answered my question. That was several months ago. I have yet to recieve a reply and at this point am certain that I will not.

Anyways, I will look at the link you provided, but I wanted to let you know that I have looked at both sides of the issue.

Don't get me wrong...i will read it, but i wanted to provide that link first. And i'm not saying that no one tries to find the truth, but many i have met do not. I am always interested in finding out more about this debate, and am glad it has been brought up. Thank you for being civilized and being a seeker of the truth.

Whether you believe in Creation or not, i encourage you to take a look at http://www.creationevidence.org/ It is the website of a Creation Evidence Museum in Texas, and it has, whether you want to call it proof or evidence of, Creation. Again, i encourage you to take a look. I have not read the past 18 pages of this site, however, i am a firm believer in Creation, and i think that, if one is to make a valid argument, one must look at both sides of the argument.

I read through most of it and it is pretty vague, it just list a lot of books to read to argue their point. Its not like they proove a thing just a bunch of innuendos. And they refere a lot to the biblical flood to support their stand.

The biblical flood??? 😂 😂 😆

Thank you for being civilized and being a seeker of the truth.

and how Aristotle didn't pioneer the scientific method. (which I mentioned VERY briefly in my letter) I wrote back pointing out that they never answered my question. That was several months ago. I have yet to recieve a reply and at this point am certain that I will not.

Thats because whenever challange they actually have problems defending their views.
Their main problem is that logic reasoning aint their strong side, they are so afraid of being wrong, so afraid that their believes might not be right afterall. So whenever confronted by logic their foundation of faith is challange and their biggest fair is that their faith might not be as strong as they want to display it is.

I wish they banned it here. That would cut off a hell of a lot of learning. I already know about it, so really, it would be just doing me a favor.

already know about it, so really, it would be just doing me a favor.

gatheringIs this Thread about the Movie Evolution?????

would have found it in the movie section then

Originally posted by finti
The biblical flood??? 😂 😂 😆

Noahs ark is the laugh, and hey there are floods all the time

i didn't read all the past posts but when i saw Noah's ARk i knew you guyz are talkin about the Bible.

i read somewhere that the Noah story was actually from The Epic of Gilgamesh in Mesopotamia.

It seems everyone here have a wrong perception of faith, church, God, creation or evolution. I dont know any religious man who believes in a 6000 years old world, I am lucky to know religious people that have the sense to not mix faith with science. To believe in evolution but to keep is faith on methaphisical knowledge. Dont you know that only a fundamentalist religion believes a world with 6000 y old. It seems people are arguing about angels sex? You talk against a small minory of ortodox believers not to the modern believers, who have the same positions about evolution as you Omega. Faith does not means ignorance. Fundamentalim yes.
Actually there are no doubts about evolution, perhaps doubts about the creation, but an eclectic theory is acceptable. No mather a lot of stupidities that scientists found on Darwin's work about evolution. In the same way there are a lot of stupidities and contradictions on religions, and in the same way we are talking today will be silly things to someone who read this trhead on the year 3000, no mather how sure we are about it. To believe in evolution is to assume our ignorance and so, to be more more tolerant to the others, bcs we have a lot to learn. And the first thing to learn is that we must pick our knowledge everywhere without stupid constaints.
The first step should be to respect St Anselmus, bcs he gave a enormous contribution to what you think today. Even he dont know that. But I believe he would have more sense if he was born today. Maybe if we were on middle-age Omega could be a catholic inquisiteur, and by other side St Anselmus a anarchist and revolucionary today. 😛

JediHDM> How about you post the evidence this museum claims to possess here… for all to see and discuss?
“Meso American Pottery demonstrates eye witness encounters with dinosaurs in recent centuries.”
I’m sorry but that is UTTER nonsense. Do these people claim
Humans existed in the Mesozoic era???
That dinosaurs have existed within the recent centuries???

Pottery is full of mythical figures. Do you believe hippogrifs really lived n Ancient Greece? I don’t find any people on this site with actual anthropological or palaeontological education. And paper that sites the BIBLE as scientific references is going into circular arguments.
"Coal: Evidence for a Young Earth" tries to use the decay rate of Uranium to pove coal can form quickly. Two things: One, when did the decay rate of Uranium suddenly change, and secondly: Why then, are we running out of coal if it forms so quickly?

”2. Decay of Earth's Magnetic Field... Dr. Thomas Barnes, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Texas at El Paso, has published the definitive work in this field.4 Scientific observations since 1829 have shown that the earth's magnetic field has been measurably decaying at an exponential rate, demonstrating its half-life to be approximately 1,400 years. In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star. Under those conditions many of the atoms necessary for life processes could not form. These data demonstrate that earth's entire history is young, within a few thousand of years.”

There is no evidence of mass extinction 20.000 years ago. And it’s utter nonsense to claim that “In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star”. WHAT, pray tell, is a magnetic star? What stars are NOT magnetic?? No scientific observations since 1829 have shown the Earth’s magnetic field flips once every 20.000 years. EXCUSE me, this is crap!

More to follow.

JediHDM> You know I respect you, and we can agree on a lot of things – just not religion. If you have time perhaps read through this thread, paying attention to The Forces postings, and see if you can answer the things he’s refused to this far.
Then – post it – here – the evidence for Creationism. You’re of course aware that you don’t prove Creationism by trying to disprove Evolution.

3. The Global Flood... The Biblical record clearly describes a global Flood during Noah's day. Additionally, there are hundreds of Flood traditions handed down through cultures all over the world. 5 M.E. Clark and Henry Voss have demonstrated the scientific validity of such a Flood providing the sedimentary layering we see on every continent. 6 Secular scholars report very rapid sedimentation and periods of great carbonate deposition in earth's sedimentary layers..7 It is now possible to prove the historical reality of the Biblical Flood.8
”

It’s quite possible the Earth experience global climatic changes at the end of the last ice-age, leading to floods – which again lead to stories, handed down through generation, of cataclysmic events. There is, however, NO evidence to support the Biblical version, where the entire PLANET was covered by water. If this was the case, how come people from cultures that didn’t know about God and Noah how flood-stories, but no ark and no Noah?

” 4. Population Statistics...World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah's day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on an evolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one "couple" just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 1089. 9 The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies.”

In recent times. The way we lived after settling into urbanisation changed the birth- and deathrate of homo sapiens. There is no evidence of a global flood 4500 years ago. At that time Egypt was blooming for example. Zosers step-pyramid is 5100 years old. The reference used here is ”Morris, Henry, Scientific Creationism”. Are these two people antropologists or sociologists?

Consider the case of the alleged Paluxy River "manprints." These have played an important role in creationist apologetics since Whitcomb and Morris published photographs of "manprint" carvings owned by Clifford Burdick in the Genesis Flood in 1961. The film "Footprints in Stone" features several trackways presented as human footprints in Cretaceous limestone. ICR has long featured them in its museum, and John D. Morris, son of ICR founder Henry Morris, wrote a popular book about them. But creationism's Paluxy River apologetics are rapidly collapsing.

”10. Design in the Human Brain...The human brain is the most complicated structure in the known universe.”
The reference is ”Restak, Richard, The Brain: The Last Frontier.”
How does this man know what the most complicated structure in the Universe is? The inside of a black hole is pretty complicated, too. The brain of a dolphin is pretty darn complicated, too.

”5. Radio Halos...Physicist Robert Gentry has reported isolated radio halos of polonuim-214 in crystalline granite.”
If I do a google search on Robert Gentry and polonium-214 all I get are five Creatinist sites.
Robert Gentry is not a doctor or professor in physics. He does have a masters degree and he’s a Creationist. Have a look here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/lorence_collins/polonium.html

” 6. Human Artifacts throughout the Geologic Column...Man-made artifacts - such as the hammer in Cretaceous rock”.
Ahem. The hammer is encrusted with calcium carbonate, which can happen quickly. The fossils are in nearby rocks, not part of the material encrusting the hammer. There is no evidence the hammer is more than a few decades old.

”7. Helium Content in Earth's Atmosphere... Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.12”

Helium is a very light atom, and some of the helium in the upper atmosphere can reach escape velocity simply via its temperature. Thermal escape of helium alone is not enough to account for its scarcity in the atmosphere, but helium in the atmosphere also gets ionized and follows earth's magnetic field lines. When ion outflow is considered, the escape of helium from the atmosphere balances its production from radioactive elements. [Liesvendsen and Rees 1996]

” 8. Expansion of Space Fabric...Astronomical estimates of the distance to various galaxies gives conflicting data.13 The Biblical Record refers to the expansion of space by the Creator14. Astrophysicist Russell Humphries demonstrates that such space expansion would dilate time in distant space.15 This could explain a recent creation with great distances to the stars.”

Space expansion can NOT cause time dilation! Goodness. Humphreys tries to use clocks in the earth's frame of reference. But the cosmos is much older than the earth. Judging from the heavy elements in the Sun and rest of the solar system, our sun is a second generation star at least. Billions of years must have passed for the first stars to have formed, shone, and novaed, for the gasses from those novas to have gathered into new star systems, and for the earth to form and cool in one such system. The billions of years before the earth are not accounted for in Humphreys' model.
The Earth is 4,5 billion years old: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH210.html

” 9. Design in Living Systems...A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations.”

This is a common mistake to make. Just because something is complex it doesn’t mean it’s been created by anyone. Complexity does not prove a God.