Creation vs Evolution

Started by Da Pittman221 pages

Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
As my final word, do you believe that man would have ever entered space if they thought it was impossible?

Would entering space be discovering truth through faith?

The truth is that if you never test something because you believe it's impossible, science wouldn't be where it is today.
We would have never discovered the atom, because we'd just take life as we visibly see it, the "empirical evidence".
You'll never discover God, because you just take life by visible evidence.

They did believe that it was impossible and it took some to prove to the masses that it wasn’t and show them orbiting the planet. If they couldn’t show this then most wouldn’t have believed it but since they could show it then there was no doubt that it happened. I’m not real sure where you were going with that.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
They did believe that it was impossible and it took some to prove to the masses that it wasn’t and show them orbiting the planet. If they couldn’t show this then most wouldn’t have believed it but since they could show it then there was no doubt that it happened. I’m not real sure where you were going with that.

Why did you ask a question to someone who just said that this was their final word? You know what that means? A> Do not confuse me with facts. 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why did you ask a question to someone who just said that this was their final word? You know what that means? A> Do not confuse me with facts. 😆
I don't think I've ever seen the final word be the final word 😆

Fact: pitt_signspin

Confused now 😛

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I don't think I've ever seen the final word be the final word 😆

Fact: pitt_signspin

Confused now 😛

Not at all. I have talked to JIA.

actually i wish to say sumthing about the argument that "everything we expirience is created, hence this universe must have been CREATED and there must be a CREATER."

i do not agree with this point of view. we infact have NO precidence for ever witnessing anything being CREATED. we only see an avaliable pellet of existance, and constituents of matter and energy, TRANSITIONING, and changing FORM. it is perhaps our mistake that we give so much significance to the FORM and call it CREATIONG/existance. all we have seen is the universe transitioning from one FORM to another. destruction or creation of FORM is not the same as destruction or creation of its constituents. i say that we have no direct evidence for CREATION or DESTRUCTION, only for transition and assembly. and hence can not say that the universe hasnt always existed in one form or another. hence i suppose, it wud support evolution. assembly as opposed to manufacture.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

YouTube video

Is anyone going to see this movie?

Originally posted by ushomefree
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

YouTube video

Is anyone going to see this movie?


I am at about 7 tonight, going to be very, very interesting.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

YouTube video

Is anyone going to see this movie?

And your point is???

YouTube video

What exactly did you disagree with, regarding Ben Stein's statements?

Eh. All it does is try to set up the false dichotomy between ID and "blind chance" and/or "dumb luck" when natural selection is anything but. The brief video was just a recycling of Hoyle's tired 747 analogy. The fact that Stein says it gives it less credibility than if it were a legitimate scientist, and I notice that the video is funded by a Christian organization. Bias much?

So, you have seen the movie?

Originally posted by ushomefree
So, you have seen the movie?
What makes this one any different than the 50 others that have been posted?

I do not know; I have not seen it.

Originally posted by ushomefree
I do not know; I have not seen it.
Then I don't know what you were posting it for?

The movie seems interesting. That is all. Is there a need to engage in debate over that? Sheesh, man.

Originally posted by ushomefree
The movie seems interesting. That is all. Is there a need to engage in debate over that? Sheesh, man.
Lets see, big bold text, no explanation this sounded more like “why haven’t you seen this movie so I can prove my point” then a general enquiry about the movie. Just my 2 cents.

Amazing.

Originally posted by ushomefree
So, you have seen the movie?

I saw the clip you posted. Thing is, I've read pretty much all of the creationist arguments. Either the books that I've read (yes, I read material from the enemy), videos, or chats on the internet with people like yourself. But if they present anything new, let me know....ya know, like an actual theory of what's going on rather than just religious speculation...or something testable...or evidence that is something more than trying to poke holes in evolutionary theory.

You randomly brought up our talk a while back about the Dawkins article "The Information Challenge." Despite the fact that Dawkins answered the question, and despite the fact that the "rebuttal" was written by a lawyer on a Christian payroll, not an unbiased specialist in the field, and despite the fact that I answered even his objections (which you ignored)...you mentioned the other day that it was the type of question a "critical" person would ask. Quite true. Except that's as far as you go before perverting science. At that point you assume your correctness, and don't bother to offer an alternative...if A is false, B must be true? Really? What about C or D? Oh, but those answers aren't "God" so they must be false by default too. It's the same tactics as always. Also, let's say creationists proved evolution wrong on one or two points...huzzah! Yet it doesn't invalidate teh entire theory, which has mountains of empirical tests and evidence to its credit thus far. Science can change, dogmatic religion apparently can't, which is why it needs to obscure the facts and hide behind a smoke that is its lack of evidence.

As always, it comes down to evidence. You have none. All you have is an uncanny ability to question a fairly rock solid theory with such obscure (often misinterpreted or false) minutia that you can hide behind your religious veil without actually stepping into true scientific inquiry. Your critical questions aren't critical, they're vindictive, and they stifle true inquiry.

So please, tell me how the video proves God, or what it brings that's new to the table. Otherwise, it's the same cycle creationism has been through for a while.

Maybe ID is right. We just have no way of knowing from the world around us, and the evidence available to us, which all points to the contrary.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Amazing.
Yes I know I am 😄

Schmuck (ha ha ha)!