Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Evolution Or Creation?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1 Mitch

Mitch
  • 1237 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:36 PM

Let me see your views on this... I know there is a topic on thise SOMEWHERE but can't find it and don't want to grave dig...

And basicaly what I have to say is that man was defintly not created by evolution by those flecking monkeys.

I believe that god made man etc so on so on so on (read first book in bible if your confused)
So that they have found skulls etc from the past showing resemblance to monkeys gorrilas etc.

Well this is my view, That man was made and it was just like being born into a new world YOU have to explore and everything is new. So theirfore they where just dumb and opened minded and they where the first part of a human. They adapt to the envirement and develope even more and this keeps going on. Now we have up to us. see how that goes? This REALLY pissed me off about this topic as it was in my science book and we had a discussion on this and it says we fricken evolved from flecking monkeys.

#2 Tetiel

Tetiel
  • 11533 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:46 PM

Both! God created evolution ^_^

#3 RandomNameIgnoreIt

RandomNameIgnoreIt
  • 1828 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:50 PM

All I know is that someone pulled the book of Genesis straight out of their ass.

#4 Ives

Ives
  • 4320 posts


Users Awards

Posted 09 February 2006 - 08:02 PM

Who really knows? I believe evolution makes perfect sense. We evolve as we grow older, so its inevitable people can be different and evolve from climate changes and the like. Monkeys are only a closely related cousin of human, hence why they didnt evolve. Intelligent design is a little harder to believe for me, but I can understand that is only reasonable 4.5 billion or so people believe it.

About schools. Really, why are you trying to teach people anything before college? lol they shouldnt be able to learn shit like that in school, especially when quite some people take religion personally rather then wanting to take a midterm on what god created on day 3. It's like teaching a disproven theory like "pigs can fly". lol

#5 Mitch

Mitch
  • 1237 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 09:06 PM

ONLY thing I DO NOT get about the bible is the first book on how adam and eve could talk to each other......wtf?

But anyways they could have had a form ov communication rom something I don't know.

Plus all those theorys on how the world became as it is... Their bullshit. If there is nothing then no fricken way a explosion will happen to create an INFINATE universe.... Also since there was nothing there was NO TIME so how could some of the others happen with NO TIME? excactly they can't only one way is by a god which I believe in christianty....

#6 Funnlecake

Funnlecake
  • 2076 posts

Posted 11 February 2006 - 09:27 AM

I belive in evolution. Its more beliveable then ID to me. I just dont like religion.

#7 Ives

Ives
  • 4320 posts


Users Awards

Posted 11 February 2006 - 10:58 AM

ONLY thing I DO NOT get about the bible is the first book on how adam and eve could talk to each other......wtf?

But anyways they could have had a form ov communication rom something I don't know.

Plus all those theorys on how the world became as it is... Their bullshit. If there is nothing then no fricken way a explosion will happen to create an INFINATE universe.... Also since there was nothing there was NO TIME so how could some of the others happen with NO TIME? excactly they can't only one way is by a god which I believe in christianty....


It's not neccesarily bullshit. I can understand why you're pro-ID though, it doesnt make much sense that we all just happened? I can't find any logic in how God just is though. But I stick with atheism because I just dont understand agnosticism.

And the universe is finite. Nothing is infinite. In fact, thats what most atheists believe. O_o.

#8 volycz

volycz
  • 107 posts

Posted 11 February 2006 - 06:29 PM

some problems with evolution:

1) Most species exhibit no evolutionary change during their time on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty much the same as when they disappear; morphological (anatomical or structural) change is usually limited and directionless.

2) In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformations of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed.'

3) Natural selection only deals with the number of species and not the change of the species. Natural selection preserves DNA, it does not create genetic material that would allow an animal to sprout a new organ or limb. I.e. selection has not created anything new but only more of certain kinds of individuals.

4) Partial transitional structures are no aid to a creature's survival and may even be a hindrance which means the creature would die out according to natural selection. What good is half a wing or an eye without a retina?
Many cellular systems are irreducibly complex (needs serveral components before it can work properly). A cell missing a tenth of its parts doesn't function at all so how can u say a cell evolved over time?

5) While fungi provide vital protection and moisture to algae, the algae nourish the fungi with photosynthetic nutrients that keep them alive. Neither could exist without the other. How could two completely different species evolve separately from distinct ancestors, yet depend on each other to live? This is one example but there are other relationships like this in nature.

6) Evolution involves random mutations and probability. Astrophysicists Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe calculated the odds that the enzymes needed to produce the simplest living creature came together by chance to be 1 in (10^40,000). A probability of less than 1 in (10^50) is considered to be a complete impossibility by mathematicians.

#9 Freddy

Freddy
  • 5500 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 01:24 PM

I believe in creationism seeing as ive gone to church my whole life and the oldest book that isnt only the oldest but also the best selling book ever (The Bible) if you didnt know there is hardly any proof of evolutionism and if there is who cares the main point is that we are here now

on the made earth in 7 days issue it states in the bible that a life time is like a blink of the eye for god so going by his time frame it is totally possible to have made the entire earth and everything in millions/billions of years in our timeframe

#10 Ives

Ives
  • 4320 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 01:34 PM

some problems with evolution:

1) Most species exhibit no evolutionary change during their time on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty much the same as when they disappear; morphological (anatomical or structural) change is usually limited and directionless.

2) In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformations of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed.'

3) Natural selection only deals with the number of species and not the change of the species. Natural selection preserves DNA, it does not create genetic material that would allow an animal to sprout a new organ or limb. I.e. selection has not created anything new but only more of certain kinds of individuals.

4) Partial transitional structures are no aid to a creature's survival and may even be a hindrance which means the creature would die out according to natural selection. What good is half a wing or an eye without a retina?
Many cellular systems are irreducibly complex (needs serveral components before it can work properly). A cell missing a tenth of its parts doesn't function at all so how can u say a cell evolved over time?

5) While fungi provide vital protection and moisture to algae, the algae nourish the fungi with photosynthetic nutrients that keep them alive. Neither could exist without the other. How could two completely different species evolve separately from distinct ancestors, yet depend on each other to live? This is one example but there are other relationships like this in nature.

6) Evolution involves random mutations and probability. Astrophysicists Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe calculated the odds that the enzymes needed to produce the simplest living creature came together by chance to be 1 in (10^40,000). A probability of less than 1 in (10^50) is considered to be a complete impossibility by mathematicians.


That's for what we know anyways. I just don't understand whatsoever the logic in a God / Deity at all. We are in a gigantic world of logic, don't quite get how something can be "Above" logic. Thats robbing the game against evolution. Just my belief though like you are a christian (or so you have told me to say the least.)

One thing I do not take into a good atheistic argument is the argument from evil. It is not "god" who is the creator of evil. "God" just created humanity, which without ignorance is potential evil.

Again, just my look at things. I find it silly we can try to identify anything as proven yet, though I believe in having somewhat of a faith.

I believe in creationism seeing as ive gone to church my whole life and the oldest book that isnt only the oldest but also the best selling book ever (The Bible) if you didnt know there is hardly any proof of evolutionism and if there is who cares the main point is that we are here now

on the made earth in 7 days issue it states in the bible that a life time is like a blink of the eye for god so going by his time frame it is totally possible to have made the entire earth and everything in millions/billions of years in our timeframe


Not gonna bother too much with you here, but the bible cant prove the existence of a god.

#11 Kimoflea

Kimoflea
  • 5359 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 01:57 PM

Creationists make me so angry. Evolution is real, it happened. We have fossil evidence, and we can see it happen (in bacteria) and exploit it for our own benefit (aritificial selection in plants).

It is hard to believe that we are a cosmic accident, but we are. There are billions upon bilions of planets in the current universe, and if you believe in an oscillating universe (big bang>big crunch>big bang etc) theres an infinite chance that just one of those planets can produce life. There are things we haven't answered yet, but that doesn't mean you should deny what we know so far, what we have EVIDENCE for, in favour of something based entirely on one book.

#12 Freddy

Freddy
  • 5500 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 02:06 PM

Creationists make me so angry. Evolution is real, it happened. We have fossil evidence, and we can see it happen (in bacteria) and exploit it for our own benefit (aritificial selection in plants).

It is hard to believe that we are a cosmic accident, but we are. There are billions upon bilions of planets in the current universe, and if you believe in an oscillating universe (big bang>big crunch>big bang etc) theres an infinite chance that just one of those planets can produce life. There are things we haven't answered yet, but that doesn't mean you should deny what we know so far, what we have EVIDENCE for, in favour of something based entirely on one book.


that goes back to the seven days part it may have took billions of years to form us from bacteria or whatever but that happened in one day for god

#13 Sakura

Sakura
  • 2180 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 02:20 PM

Creationists make me so angry. Evolution is real, it happened. We have fossil evidence, and we can see it happen (in bacteria) and exploit it for our own benefit (aritificial selection in plants).

It is hard to believe that we are a cosmic accident, but we are. There are billions upon bilions of planets in the current universe, and if you believe in an oscillating universe (big bang>big crunch>big bang etc) theres an infinite chance that just one of those planets can produce life. There are things we haven't answered yet, but that doesn't mean you should deny what we know so far, what we have EVIDENCE for, in favour of something based entirely on one book.


Only problem with the "proof" is that a lot of it has been proven false. Such as where they try to show the evolutions of horses, pretty recently we found ALL of those fossils next to each other, in the same era. They didn't evolve, they were entirely different species, there were a few more examples, but its hard to remember all the way back to high school. I'll look it up in a bit.
And I agree, though I am a Christian, a religious text cannot be used to prove the existence of a deity/s. We have no way to prove it, and evolutions proof is slowly falling apart.
This is yet another of those arguments that one side will never agree with the other.

I personally believe that God created the world. But who is to say that 7 days to him isn't 700 billions years to us. Then the few factual peices of evidence that comes up, is actually us seeing his creation over time.

ONLY thing I DO NOT get about the bible is the first book on how adam and eve could talk to each other......wtf?

I..don't get what you're asking? Its unbelievable that two people from the same place at the same time worked together to make a language?

#14 Mr. Hobo

Mr. Hobo
  • 8152 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 03:00 PM

God created the universe (the big bang theory is stupid in my opinion, I'd go into details but I don't want to type up 50 lines) and evolution (which is a natural process) made us what we are presently. /My 2 cents

Edited by Toxic Hobo, 17 February 2006 - 03:01 PM.


#15 Bora

Bora
  • 955 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 05:09 PM

Neither evolution nor creation can be measured.

So, we originated from a planet of cheese :blink:

#16 Bora

Bora
  • 955 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 05:29 PM

Heh, sorry.

Well if evolution is true, and we did come from monkeys or gorillas or apes or whatever, then why are there still monkeys, gorillas and apes?

Also, I don't think there is any uninterrupted fossil layer on earth that has been truly reported.

Edited by Nythius, 17 February 2006 - 05:30 PM.


#17 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1230 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 05:39 PM

It is impossible to quote the probability factor.
Probability is meaningless without an intelligent observer.
Therefore, in the countless aeons before life finally evolved, there may have been thousands, millions, trillions of "attempts" by chance to form life, but they failed. Though, until life succeeded in taking hold, there was noone to realise the failures that went before.
Thus, to these newly formed observers, they are a first, and immediate success, though unbeknownst to them, they were not.

This logic can be applied to evolution. The big bang. The universe. And if you're a really radical free thinker, The Multiverse.
:)

#18 Ives

Ives
  • 4320 posts


Users Awards

Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:16 PM

And then your also accepting that the gabajillions (alot) of things that could have possibly went wrong and never supported life on the earth in the first place were not controlled by any outside force? It's your own game of logic against you. Take a bunch of 20 sided dice and roll them and try to get 13, not real good odds. Looking at the odds for the creation of the earth through the big bang theory, very pathetic attempt if you ask me.
There are things we havn't answered yet that are thousands of years old. I lost faith in them along time ago, it's not because we havn't found them, it's because we're not going too.


It just is. You cannot comprehend as much as to practical existence as you cannot understand god. So yes, I am technically confirmed to a faith. However, I like the idea we use logic in our own reasoning as to expansion through the big bang.

Not going to get much into it but my key beliefs are : The logical explanation is what I prefer. Because we are living, we describe the creator as a living spirit (or pretty damn close), which I do not see reasoning into. There isn't sin. the 10 commandments aren't what makes murderers and rapists bad, its the fact murderers and rapists are assholes.

But believe what is believed. Generally, with a faith, we dont open our eyes in the way a child does when they may pick up a book on arguments for the faith they are looking at. I'm sure when you went to church for your first (or near first time), you probably felt a wave of great brightness and enlightenment.

Oh yes, just curious on this question.

A member of the church of Satan : If they go to hell would it technically be heaven? Or will they, as weak humans, are blind of the fact a void without gods love is the highest emptieness level imaginable? I'm just curious.

#19 Funnlecake

Funnlecake
  • 2076 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:14 PM

how do you explain moral law? As in, when you do something bad, why do you get the feeling that it's bad. In my religion, it's the Holy Spirit, how do you explain that though?


I belive the feeling bad is the knolage that youve hurt another human or something else your compastionate too. Theres people out there that dont care and thats why they dont feel that bad fealling.

#20 Sakura

Sakura
  • 2180 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 08:52 AM

Na, everyone get's the feeling. They may not express it, because that shows their weakness. There has always been a sense of moral law, they didn't just magically get created on day. That's how the laws were founded basically.


Well, all normal people anyways. Sociopaths don't get that feeling, that's why they're so dangerous. No conscience to ever hold them back.

#21 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 18 February 2006 - 08:59 AM

Well, all normal people anyways. Sociopaths don't get that feeling, that's why they're so dangerous. No conscience to ever hold them back.


Is there something wrong with that?

#22 pyke

pyke
  • 13686 posts


Users Awards

Posted 18 February 2006 - 09:16 AM

Is there something wrong with that?

They are capable of murdering innocent people without any regret? Seems like a bad thing to me xD

#23 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 18 February 2006 - 09:18 AM

They are capable of murdering innocent people without any regret? Seems like a bad thing to me xD


Well you're wrong. I know it's an opinion, but you're still wrong.



So nur. :shifty:

#24 pyke

pyke
  • 13686 posts


Users Awards

Posted 18 February 2006 - 09:20 AM

Well you're wrong. I know it's an opinion, but you're still wrong.



So nur. :shifty:

And this is why I am glad I live far away from you :lol:

#25 Sakura

Sakura
  • 2180 posts

Posted 18 February 2006 - 11:38 AM

Well, that's what alot of people say but I personally don't think so. First off, there's no way to prove it. Second off, Moral laws exist all the time in every person, there are no "exceptions".


You're one funny boy Alias. Very very funny.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users