10-22-2002, 09:24 PM | #41 |
Belladona Gamgee of the night sky
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: second star to the right and straight on till morning.
Posts: 1,783
|
Epp, I agree Katya! I new it would be a bad Idea.
__________________
Emperor Cusco: Lemme guess. We're about to go down a huge water-fall. Pacha:Yep. Cusco: Sharp rocks at the bottum? Pacha:Most likely. Cusco:Bring it on. ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~` Yes, I'm female. Fred Baggins is my NICKNAME! ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~` "The reason of the unreasonable treatment of my reason so enfeebles my reason, that with reason I complain of your beauty."~Don Quixote ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~` "Once upon a time there was a magical land where it never rained. The End."~from the movie 'Holes' ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~` ()_))_Crayola_))_> |
10-22-2002, 09:32 PM | #42 |
Self-Appointed Lord of the Free Peoples of the General Messages
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,214
|
As a christian I have to say, YES! Evolution is a good THEORY. I don't belive in it, but it's the best out there for non-Bible believing people. I wouldn't mind Creation being given as another theory, but I don't see it happening.
|
10-22-2002, 09:38 PM | #43 | |
Self-Appointed Lord of the Free Peoples of the General Messages
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,214
|
Quote:
I don't believe I need to say anymore. |
|
10-22-2002, 10:23 PM | #44 | |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: america junior
Posts: 320
|
I do not really think that creation should be taught in schools at all, if people want a religious education, they can do that on their own time, and there is obviously nothing wrong with that.
Quote:
__________________
peace never hurt anyone "Be not so bigoted to any custom as to worship it at the expense of Truth." Johann Georg von Zimmermann |
|
10-22-2002, 10:57 PM | #45 | ||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
and BTW, congrats on your new status, you beat me to it and katya - yes, I think Pres. Bush does look rather like a monkey, too (and i typically vote Republican ) And your "life cycle of moss" was hysterical - oh, the difficulties of staying awake in class sometimes! I had a Physics instructor in college who was Indian and spoke in that lovely, sing-song Indian voice. Unfortunately, I had the class right after lunch, and staying awake was sometimes difficult! However, I did manage to pick up a thing or two... IronParrot - Speaking of physics, wouldn't you say Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics, and *whoops, forgot the third, back in a flash with an edit* oh, ok - Einsteinian relativity would be considered fields of study, not theories? Now there are theories within these disciplines, but that is a different matter. And speaking further of physics, wouldn't you say that the second law of thermodynamics really rules out the types of things that the theory of evolution says happened? Quote:
In other words, things tend to disorder, not order and further refinement, unless there is an external source of energy, such as an intelligent designer/creator.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç å ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by Rían : 10-22-2002 at 11:26 PM. |
||
10-22-2002, 11:13 PM | #46 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
emplynx - a BANANA!?! Well, that explains why I peel when I get a sunburn!
and I like how you worded this : Quote:
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç å ™ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by Rían : 10-22-2002 at 11:21 PM. |
|
10-22-2002, 11:23 PM | #47 | |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wherever I may roam
Posts: 207
|
Quote:
So I guess my question is: Why can't we sort of believe both at the same time? Why can't God and evolution coexist? Being a Christian, I don't really have a problem with evolution. Who cares if the world was created in six days or billions of years? To me it doesn't matter, as long as you believe that ultimately God created it all. |
|
10-22-2002, 11:46 PM | #48 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Slow down and I sail on the river, slow down and I walk to the hill
Posts: 2,389
|
Quote:
Should it be taught in schools? Yes, of course, as well as intelligent design. It shouldnt' be taught in a way that it completely degrades those students who believe in God. And whoever said you can't believe in God and evolution? (Heck, I'm going to be a biology major.) Darwin's theories never attempt to disprove a divine creator. I myself believe in it, in a way. I believe that God created Adam and Eve, and yadda yadda, but I think if we saw them today, they would look very different than we, because we live in a very different enviroment. Also, there are other theories considering the origin of life, one of the most outlandish being that aliens planted it here. But where did that alien life come from? I discussed this with my AP Bio teacher who said that if you tried to follow that theory, it would inevitably lead to divine origin.
__________________
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” –Bertrand Russell Last edited by Starr Polish : 10-23-2002 at 12:00 AM. |
|
10-23-2002, 12:22 AM | #49 | |||
Fowl Administrator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Calgary or Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 53,420
|
Quote:
Well, actually, yes to quantum mechanics. Nope to the other two... they are only "studied" in the sense that people try to understand the damned thing. They are clearly posited theories that stand until proven otherwise. And actually, Newton's equations have indeed been proven otherwise, but the error is considered negligible at the macroscopic level. Rian, thank you for falling into the exact trap I'd laid out - a blatant misinterpretation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. That's okay, you're not the first one I've seen who's tried to use that argument, and I knew somebody was going to bring it up. Let's examine this, shall we... Quote:
Quote:
The Second Law does not disprove the notion of spontaneous order, as it deals with positive change in entropy, not absolute entropy itself. In other words, it is merely a description of the sum of a set of entropic changes, and does not imply that each of those individual changes in a single reaction or system must increase in disorder. What needs to be understood here are "entropic forces", also known as depletion/excluded-volume forces. Let's take a textbook example of a system consisting of small particles and large particles. If the Second Law was to be taken at face value, the expectation is that these particles would be randomly dispersed. However, what actually happens at a certain microscopic scale is that the large particles are clumped together to maximize room for the smaller particles to move freely, a process that a) orders the large particles, but b) maximizes the entropy of the system. In other words: as net entropy (in this case, that of the universe) increases, this merely means that the entropic advantage of one part of the system outweighs the ordering of another part. A system's increase in entropy does not imply that all constituents of the system also increase in entropy. Thus, the Second Law doesn't prove a bloody thing about intelligent design or creation.
__________________
All of IronParrot's posts are guaranteed to be 100% intelligent and/or sarcastic, comprising no genetically modified content and tested on no cute furry little animals unless the SPCA is looking elsewhere. If you observe a failure to uphold this warranty, please contact a forum administrator immediately to receive a full refund on your Entmoot registration. Blog: Nick's Café Canadien |
|||
10-23-2002, 12:23 AM | #50 | ||||
Fowl Administrator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Calgary or Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 53,420
|
Quote:
Mathematical proof does not determine what a scientific law is or is not. The Law of Ropes cannot be proven mathematically, but it is considered to be a scientific law. (It basically states that flexible cords cannot undergo compressive forces, i.e. you can't push on a string.) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, Darwin was a God-believing man whose remains lie in the crypt of Westminster Abbey... not too far away from Newton, in fact.
__________________
All of IronParrot's posts are guaranteed to be 100% intelligent and/or sarcastic, comprising no genetically modified content and tested on no cute furry little animals unless the SPCA is looking elsewhere. If you observe a failure to uphold this warranty, please contact a forum administrator immediately to receive a full refund on your Entmoot registration. Blog: Nick's Café Canadien |
||||
10-23-2002, 01:19 AM | #51 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I wonder though how you explain the human eye? If everything on the overall scale is gradually becoming more and more complex, and in short term tends to disorder, then how can you explain massive accumulations of order, such as the human eye? It seems rather incredible to me that such an unbelievably complex and detailed thing could be created out of overall, slow design.
But anyway, it's true that the Bible doesn't disprove evolution, even though I personally don't like to believe it. Evolution is outside of the interpretation that Christians have held for years, and that interpretation is what many are fighting to keep. I actually think it might be rather nice to be able to lay down the swords on that subject and simply say, "maybe that's true." |
10-23-2002, 04:01 AM | #52 |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
Yes it should be taught. I can't post as much as I but Iron Parrot, Cassiopeia, Bop etc are my cohorts
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
10-23-2002, 04:03 AM | #53 |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
PS the human eye is not perfectly designed. Squids have some really well designed eyes now.
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
10-23-2002, 07:15 AM | #54 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 694
|
What an interesting debate. It's not one I hear discussed too much here - it would have as much credibility as suggesting we teach that the Earth is flat and rides on the back of a giant turtle.
I put it down to most of our Puritans getting into boats and sailing away some time ago. Anyone know where they ended up?
__________________
I'm beset by self-doubt ....or am I? |
10-23-2002, 07:21 AM | #55 | |
Self-Appointed Lord of the Free Peoples of the General Messages
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,214
|
Quote:
|
|
10-23-2002, 08:10 AM | #56 | |
Domesticated Swing Babe
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Reality
Posts: 5,340
|
Quote:
__________________
Happy Atheist Go Democrats! |
|
10-23-2002, 11:45 AM | #57 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I didn't say that there was nothing better or more perfect than the human eye. All right, let's ignore the human eye and focus on the squid. It doesn't matter which. How did evolution create the squid's eye?
|
10-23-2002, 12:08 PM | #58 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 694
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm beset by self-doubt ....or am I? |
|
10-23-2002, 12:10 PM | #59 |
Custous Sanctus
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In your subconsicious....
Posts: 1,184
|
No Evolution should not be taught in schools. for those of us who are Catholics and go to public school don't want to study evolution and take tests on it. what about death?? if evolution is true(which it isn't in my opinon), where do we go after death?? do we just dissapear?? do we fall into nothingness?? I mean evolution says that we were there was one great big boom, and everything just happend to land like this. and then of course some molecules became slime, and then it became plants, and then worms, and then fish, and then the fish grew legs and became dogs, and then monkeys, and then apes, and then us. one science book I was looking over said something like "there is excess tissue in your forehead that was proboly a third eye". now where would we get a third eye?? I will write more later.
Ms. Undomial
__________________
I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. - Dune |
10-23-2002, 12:32 PM | #60 | |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wherever I may roam
Posts: 207
|
Quote:
Example: Assume there was a bunch of blind flatworm-type creatures swimming in a shallow pond. Their food is near the surface of this pond, but they have no way of knowing where the surface is. Assume there is a particular worm with a patch of skin that reacts to light. When it is turned toward the surface, it feels the light and can stay near where the food is. This creature would have an advantage over the others in that particular environment. It would therefore have a better chance at surviving and therefore passing on its genes to a new generation that would have the same patch of skin. Given enough time, a creature could appear that has an even better 'eye'. These gradual improvements are the basis of evolution. Given millions of years and gradual improvements you eventually arrive at the complex human eye. Does that answer your question? |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evidence for Evolution | jerseydevil | General Messages | 599 | 05-18-2008 02:43 PM |
Catholic Schools Ban Charity | Last Child of Ungoliant | General Messages | 29 | 03-15-2005 04:58 PM |
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution | Rían | General Messages | 1149 | 08-16-2004 06:07 PM |
A discussion about Evolution and other scientific theories | Elvellon | General Messages | 1 | 04-11-2002 01:23 PM |
Evolution | IronParrot | Entertainment Forum | 1 | 06-19-2001 03:22 AM |