niviene Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 evidence for evolution wtf... I have to have been in this go-around literally hundreds of times so I really don't want to start again.. i originally thought there was no solid evidence for evolution when I was a devout Christian. I was wrong. So i took a step back, and actually researched it. I objectively found out that, still, there is no-where-near substantial amount of evidence to back up evolution..i dont believe Creation model by science, cuz it cant be proven either (though there is less contradicting evidence), but by logic..so many holes in evolution damn.. Anyway, if God existed, science would not be meaningless. Science is God's tool for governing the physical world He created. God would have to be purely physical for it to make science meaningless.. Please elaborate a little more on what exactly you mean by this statement.. I think I may see where you are coming from but not quite.. I don't think you "objectively" found anything out. You refer to yourself as a Christian in the past tense, and then go back to refering to God as a current worshipper. I deal with statement analysis all the time, and I think you'd be amazed at the things I can see about what you are saying. One of them is that if it had been objective, your first line wouldn't have included "wtf" in it. :) If God existed, he would BE science. He doesn't have to be purely physical, he doesn't have to be anything... he doesn't have to follow any laws or physics or whatever you are basing that statement on. He's supposed to be everything. There is plenty of real evidence that the world was around long before the bible says it was, not to mention that Buffy's post in another forum brings light to the fact that some of the bible's stories couldn't possibly have happened, according to science and history. This is enough to tell me that at least some things aren't true; enough to put real doubt into the cracks where the scent of doubt was lingering before. There are holes in Evolution - BIG ones. BUt there are also many, MANY holes in Creationism - much more contradicting evidence in this "theory" than in evolution. How can you say that by the science model there is less contradictory evidence of creationism, when that's purely religious? Science shows humans millions of years ago - that doesn't contradict Creationism? Seems to be a big one to me... You asked what people believe; not what you want them to believe. This is my elaboration. It's my belief, and you haven't shown me any evidence to contradict it. You say that you "researched it"... but what does that mean? You read the bible? What did you research? Have you written any papers on this amazing find, since you have discovered that science as we know it is wrong? I am open to the possibility that it's wrong, and I'm waiting to learn about it.... Quote
Biochemist Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 If God existed, he would BE science. I think this is a good insight. Biblical, as well.There is plenty of real evidence that the world was around long before the bible says it was, not to mention that Buffy's post in another forum brings light to the fact that some of the bible's stories couldn't possibly have happened, according to science and history. This is enough to tell me that at least some things aren't trueI feel obligated to reiterate that I don't think anything Buffy offered (or the evidence for a 4.5 billion year old earth) is at odds with normal, conservative Bblical interpretation. Biblical hermeneutics is probably a discussion for a different thread. I think Buffy's example is plausible and informs Biblical interpretation. It does not overturn it. Quote
Buffy Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 Ya got that right Bio! :) Curiouser and Curiouser,Buffy Quote
lindagarrette Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 Anyway, if God existed, science would not be meaningless. Science is God's tool for governing the physical world He created. God would have to be purely physical for it to make science meaningless.. Please elaborate a little more on what exactly you mean by this statement.. I think I may see where you are coming from but not quite..If there were a god who chose to use science as the tool for creation, then there would be no need for god to exist beyond that point of creation or to have existed prior to it. Science and religion are not comparable. They are based on two opposing concepts. Belief vs. knowledge. To determine if something is possible, we apply the scientific method. If the evidence is intersubjectively verifyable and the hypothesis can be tested for negative results, then we accept it and scientists everywhere have a chance to review and refute the theory. Faith based notiions are merely conjecture and superstition, and vary grossly from culture to culture and time to time. Sometimes reality is consequent to a religious story but not as the main point. Scientific theories invalidate the parts that are contrary to reality but people continue to believe anyway. Wierd. Quote
Smokinjoe9 Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 They are based on two opposing concepts. Belief vs. knowledge. To determine if something is possible, we apply the scientific method. This is sort of true, which means it is flawed and cannot be disputed. Science has not PROVEN Evolution, you cannot skip over gaps and be scientific. You can say you are being scientific but that does not make it true. If you believe there is a missing link or believe you have come to the right conclusion it is the same thing as religion. Everyone knows a fact is a fact, and a belief is just that. Religion does not show proof and we know why.... Quote
bumab Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 If God existed, he would BE science. He doesn't have to be purely physical, he doesn't have to be anything... he doesn't have to follow any laws or physics or whatever you are basing that statement on. He's supposed to be everything. Interesting point! There are holes in Evolution - BIG ones. BUt there are also many, MANY holes in Creationism - much more contradicting evidence in this "theory" than in evolution. How can you say that by the science model there is less contradictory evidence of creationism, when that's purely religious? Science shows humans millions of years ago - that doesn't contradict Creationism? Seems to be a big one to me... Good points. Let's not equate creationism with Christianity, however (i don't think you were :)) Thanks for your input to the site! Quote
Biochemist Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 If there were a god who chose to use science as the tool for creation, then there would be no need for god to exist beyond that point of creation or to have existed prior to it. This is a non-sequitur. Your postulate is that God, even if He existed, has no purpose for man. Therefore, and any discussion of God is a distraction from the intrinsic purposelessness of naturalism. Some folks appreciate that distraction, because they see value in that purpose. Antitheists are irritated by that distraction. You seem to fit that characterization. Science and religion are not comparable. They are based on two opposing concepts. Belief vs. knowledge. ..Unless you consider them a complementary set of facts. You, again, have ruled this possibility out via postulate. Quote
lindagarrette Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 This is a non-sequitur. Your postulate is that God, even if He existed, has no purpose for man. Therefore, and any discussion of God is a distraction from the intrinsic purposelessness of naturalism. Some folks appreciate that distraction, because they see value in that purpose. Antitheists are irritated by that distraction. You seem to fit that characterization.Unless you consider them a complementary set of facts. You, again, have ruled this possibility out via postulate. I can't figure out what you are trying to say.:) Quote
Biochemist Posted May 3, 2005 Report Posted May 3, 2005 I can't figure out what you are trying to say.:)Really? I can't tell if you are joking, but I will give it another shot. Many theists believe that God put us here for a purpose. That is, there is more to creation than the deterministic ticking of the particles of the universe. If we are here for a purpose, then there would be something else for God to do beyond setting the universe particles in motion. Your historical posts have suggested to me that you do not believe man has a purpose, ergo there would be nothing else for God to do after launching the universe. Did I misunderstand your previous posts? Quote
Aemeth Posted May 4, 2005 Author Report Posted May 4, 2005 Sup guys, just wanted to apologize for not being able to get involved in my own posts LoL..Life is crazy between school, biz (supremejays.com, bigpimpin.us), learning flash and dreamweaver, swim practice 5 hours every day cuz I AM gonna make nationals this year :-D.. But Ima be back in the summer, pz 'till then.. Quote
niviene Posted May 7, 2005 Report Posted May 7, 2005 Sup guys, just wanted to apologize for not being able to get involved in my own posts LoL..Life is crazy between school, biz (supremejays.com, bigpimpin.us), learning flash and dreamweaver, swim practice 5 hours every day cuz I AM gonna make nationals this year :-D.. But Ima be back in the summer, pz 'till then.. ........shamless plug, much? :( Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.