Adam and eve or evolution

Started by Acrosurge5 pages

Originally posted by inimalist
as a further note:

in the same book, Sagan describes an alien species who [b]use vehicular interstellar transport as not being able to determine if it is the cars on earth that are alive or if they are vehicles.

so, ya, Sagan was the man, but again, nothing in science is absolute and people can disagree on many things.

For instance, I believe science should be open to anything supernatural provided it can be empirically tested. Give me an experiment that will provide conclusive evidence for the existance of God and my thoughts are that it should be run. Scientists have their own personal philosophies which will absolutly effect the way they perform science, but the scientific method does not require any philosophical commitment, simply empirical evidence upon which predictions can be made and tested. [/B]

Again, I agree absolutely. And it should be noted that Richard Dawkins's credibility has not been injured by his suggestion that aliens created life on Earth.

The term "supernatural" is a strange one. How should one define it?

Originally posted by inimalist
i must have misinterpreted, appologies
No apologies necessary. From the beginning, my point has only been that one must make assumptions when it comes to the origin (or alternatively, the eternal nature) of the universe.

well if you wanted a biblical reason for diffrent language,color of skin,traditions etc. you could read in the old testement where it talks about how the people were all the same in those aspects, physical aspects that is. and then they decided they were going to try and build a tower to heaven. when they did this god didnt like it so he spread them through around the world, confusing their tongues and them being put in places like asia, North America, and russia made them have to adapt. this is the incident of the tower of babel.

Originally posted by BetrayedUnicorn
well if you wanted a biblical reason for diffrent language,color of skin,traditions etc. you could read in the old testement where it talks about how the people were all the same in those aspects, physical aspects that is. and then they decided they were going to try and build a tower to heaven. when they did this god didnt like it so he spread them through around the world, confusing their tongues and them being put in places like asia, North America, and russia made them have to adapt. this is the incident of the tower of babel.

And before this happened, what color was the people?

I dont know. I will assume that since this is a middle eastern/jerusalem setting they would have the distinct look of the area.

Originally posted by BetrayedUnicorn
well if you wanted a biblical reason for diffrent language,color of skin,traditions etc. you could read in the old testement where it talks about how the people were all the same in those aspects, physical aspects that is. and then they decided they were going to try and build a tower to heaven. when they did this god didnt like it so he spread them through around the world, confusing their tongues and them being put in places like asia, North America, and russia made them have to adapt. this is the incident of the tower of babel.
I don't think this would have much to do with skin color, but it might be applied to the radical differences in linguistic construction between more exotic languages.

Im saying skin color variations because of things like the south americans are closer to the equator...wait;never mind that part really does make no sense to me either haha but I still stand on the other things.starwars

Originally posted by BetrayedUnicorn
Im saying skin color variations because of things like the south americans are closer to the equator...wait;never mind that part really does make no sense to me either haha but I still stand on the other things.starwars

lol

ya, god did it is a pretty complete and nice package to wrap all those difficult questions up in

Originally posted by BetrayedUnicorn
Im saying skin color variations because of things like the south americans are closer to the equator...wait;never mind that part really does make no sense to me either haha but I still stand on the other things.starwars

So, languages did not evolve, but came into existence at one place and time?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, languages did not evolve, but came into existence at one place and time?

god took painstaking care to make them look as if they did when he created them all at once.

Originally posted by inimalist
god took painstaking care to make them look as if they did when he created them all at once.

Which leads to the question of why? But you already knew that.

BTW I know the answer...

yeah....good times good times.

Originally posted by BetrayedUnicorn
yeah....good times good times.

What?

Originally posted by inimalist
god took painstaking care to make them look as if they did when he created them all at once.
Languages do evolve. Germanic languages are a perfect example. On the other hand, there are languages that have little linguistic or syntax denominators. Several African languages require additional study, as they should be quite similar to surrounding natives (having descended from common ancestors in the recent past with common communication), but they are not. Several South American native languages are also disimilar from their North American neighbors (also sharing common descent).

Originally posted by Acrosurge
Languages do evolve. Germanic languages are a perfect example. On the other hand, there are languages that have little linguistic or syntax denominators. Several African languages require additional study, as they should be quite similar to surrounding natives (having descended from common ancestors in the recent past with common communication), but they are not. Several South American native languages are also disimilar from their North American neighbors (also sharing common descent).

Anomalies only mean we don't understand the complexity of the evolution... but I digress.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Anomalies only mean we don't understand the complexity of the evolution... but I digress.
Of course. In this thread, I believe we have already established the incompleteness of scientific knowledge. Therefore, more examination is necessary, possibly to account for factors and data previously unknown or unobserved.

Side note: It is fascinating to me that there is so much discussion of science going on in what is essentially a philosophy thread. I suppose none of us have yet realized that in such an arena, philosophy will trump science every time. 🙂

adam and eve, obviously.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What?

I do not know...

Originally posted by Acrosurge
Of course. In this thread, I believe we have already established the incompleteness of scientific knowledge. Therefore, more examination is necessary, possibly to account for factors and data previously unknown or unobserved.

Side note: It is fascinating to me that there is so much discussion of science going on in what is essentially a philosophy thread. I suppose none of us have yet realized that in such an arena, philosophy will trump science every time. 🙂

Are we considering etymology and linguistics sciences? I have no problem seeing them as sciences, but I think you mistook shakya's use of evolution in his comment.

Both.
Apes were first, Adam and Eve were the first humans to have walked the earth after evolving from apes. 😛

So, what about Adam and Eveolution?

Hahahaha, oh yeah, I went there, high five, **** yeah. STEVE HOLT!