08-25-2005, 04:26 AM | #761 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
EDIT DUPLICATE POST
|
08-25-2005, 04:26 AM | #762 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
EDIT DUPLICATE POST
|
08-25-2005, 04:44 AM | #763 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
I think this tactic of casting evolutionists as "religious" is quite clever. Because then you can say "well, it's just another belief system" so all sides of the story should be told.
Two things about this: 1) it's absolutely, completely NOT about belief systems in this way. 2) it's interesting that such a relativist argument should be used to support an absolutist world view Also, Rian, with the greatest respect, I don't think you've answered the question about "Why Evolution?" There are lots of areas where there's evidence that doesn't fit the theory. I mentioned my own experience of quantum chemistry as an example. In which other areas are you attempting to elevate the standards of science thusly? BTW, I liked your joke about being the only side of the argument who could ever know for sure that they are right. |
08-25-2005, 04:44 AM | #764 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
I think this tactic of casting evolutionists as "religious" is quite clever. Because then you can say "well, it's just another belief system" so all sides of the story should be told.
Two things about this: 1) it's absolutely, completely NOT about belief systems in this way. 2) it's interesting that such a relativist argument should be used to support an absolutist world view Also, Rian, with the greatest respect, I don't think you've answered the question about "Why Evolution?" There are lots of areas where there's evidence that doesn't fit the theory. I mentioned my own experience of quantum chemistry as an example. In which other areas are you attempting to elevate the standards of science thusly? BTW, I liked your joke about being the only side of the argument who could ever know for sure that they are right. |
08-25-2005, 04:58 AM | #765 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 3,514
|
Quote:
Well, there we go that's that settled then: the third way: a happy compromise: the martians did it! ... that'll be really popular in schools too! (... but how were the martians created? evolution or creationism ?... ) |
|
08-25-2005, 04:58 AM | #766 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 3,514
|
Quote:
Well, there we go that's that settled then: the third way: a happy compromise: the martians did it! ... that'll be really popular in schools too! (... but how were the martians created? evolution or creationism ?... ) |
|
08-25-2005, 07:09 AM | #767 |
Saviour of Entmoot Admiral
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: NC/NJ (no longer Same place as bmilder.)
Posts: 61,986
|
Uh, you are serious? Thats kind of insulting to those that don't believe in Creationism - not humorous.
And I've never said that it was ridiculous to believe in "Creationism" or "Intelligent Design" - certainly possible, but not scientifically backed up. It is called belief. Evolution is scientifically backed up. 1. Archeologicaly finds are scientifically backed up - what are you talking about? Why wouldn't "evolutionists" believe in human artifacts? That makes no sense. What are you getting at? *shrug* 2. Safe to say that a majority (if not all) of the people at NASA follow evolution (regardless of what religion they may be. People at NASA are very smart guys If they find evidence of life on Mars - how does that go against Evolution??!! It doesn't. Those lifeforms would have just evolved on Mars...... What is your point? 3. Scientists in SETI aren't creationists (maybe some, but certainly not all) - so what are you saying? The existence of alien life does not go against evolution.
__________________
President Emeritus (2000-2004) Private message (or email) me if you need any assistance. I am here to help! "I'm up to here with cool, ok? I'm so amazingly cool you could keep a side of meat in me for a month. I am so hip I have difficulty seeing over my pelvis" - Zaphod Beeblebrox Latest Blog Post: Just Quit Facebook? No One Cares! |
08-25-2005, 07:52 AM | #768 | ||
The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium)
Posts: 14,363
|
Quote:
Quote:
One can very likely determine the influence of either natural phenomena or human activity on objects. One can determine something is man-made when it does not occur in the natural world in that fashion. Sometimes it's hard to tell, if for example humans use natural processes to get something done. But at this point one simply CANNOT scientifically determine the influence of devine beings.
__________________
We are not things. |
||
08-25-2005, 08:26 AM | #769 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mirkwood, well actually I live in North-west Scania, Sweden
Posts: 9,481
|
Quote:
|
|
08-25-2005, 08:26 AM | #770 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mirkwood, well actually I live in North-west Scania, Sweden
Posts: 9,481
|
Quote:
|
|
08-25-2005, 09:11 AM | #771 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
...intriguing.....and there is a case for alien seeding of earth too but I'm not jumping into this now....conserving energy
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-25-2005, 09:11 AM | #772 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
...intriguing.....and there is a case for alien seeding of earth too but I'm not jumping into this now....conserving energy
__________________
Vizzini: "HE DIDN'T FALL?! INCONCEIVABLE!!" Inigo: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." |
08-25-2005, 09:11 AM | #773 | |||
Friendly Neigborhood Sith Lord
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,080
|
Quote:
therefore in the words of sherlock holmes when you eliminate the impossible whatever is left however improbable is the answer
__________________
I was Press Secretary for the Berlioz administration and also, but not limited to, owner and co operator of fully armed and operational battle station EDDIE Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
08-25-2005, 09:17 AM | #774 |
An enigma in a conundrum
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,476
|
Aliens?
|
08-25-2005, 09:44 AM | #775 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
embrace criticism, don't fear it here's an analogy explaining "the difference" between science and creationism... think of it like a murder investigation: scientist investigator: hears about a murder and goes to the scene of the crime looking for clues, interviewing people, checking on the victims history, friends and family... all in hopes of finding a motive as to why someone (and this could be anyone) would want to kill this person... he may come up with theories (or suspects) along the way... but these conclusions are open to change as further evidence presents itself creationist investigator: hears about a murder and is told by a highly-trusted friend that "joe smith" was the murderer... he proceeds to do the same thing as the scientist (looking for clues, interviewing people, checking on the victims history, friends and family), but all he is really looking for is evidence that proves his assumption true (that "joe smith" was the murderer), or disproves any theories the scientist investigator may come up with... the fact of the matter is, no matter how much contrary evidence is found, he will continue to believe that "joe smith" was the murderer because he trusts his friend who told him so that much both are methods of investigation... but one is open while the other is narrowed by assumptions... assumptions not based on fact either... that is the difference
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
08-25-2005, 09:51 AM | #776 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
go to a science class if you can this coming september... i'll bet you that in the first week they will discuss the scientific process and the difference between theory and fact
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
08-25-2005, 09:51 AM | #777 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
go to a science class if you can this coming september... i'll bet you that in the first week they will discuss the scientific process and the difference between theory and fact
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
08-25-2005, 11:00 AM | #778 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Ok, I'm back...wow there's been a lot going on here.
Ok, first I'd like to object to the terms scientists vs. creationist. May not seem like a big deal, but there are plenty of scientists who are creationists, and plenty of non-creationist scientists who don't buy into evolution. By the way, those who came up with evolutionary thinking had their own assumptions. Well before radiometric dating and well-organized paleontology, there were those scientists who denied the interference of God and started coming up with a way of explaining the universe without him. This is just as much an assumption. Everyone has their own worldview, their own set of assumptions about the universe. The evidence that they see is filtered through their worldview. We are even assuming that our senses are providing us with accurate information. Stating that evolutionary theory is based on an un-biased examination of the world just isn't realistic. And we're not just trying to find evidence to fit our worldview, we take the evidence that's already there and it fits. The fossil record is easily explained by a world-wide flood. Especially since many fossils seem to have suffered sudden, violent burial. An Icthyosaur was found in the middle of giving birth, animals have been found in the middle of eating other animals. Fossils normally happen when the body is buried quickly, otherwise they would rot and fall apart. Quoted from brownjenkins: though obviously you could just say "god made it that way 6,000 years ago" ... but if you take that route basically "anything goes" and any observation or deductions are essentially meaningless That is handy, isn't it? Assuming an all-powerful God makes it much easier to explain the universe. Not what suggesting here though since there's a bed of coal underneath the ice which would have been laid down during the flood. Incidentally, I haven't been able to find any info on your 400,000-year-old ice core, if you could point me to that I'd be able to get a better handle on it. The "oldest" ones I've heard of are claimed to be somewhere between 100K and 150K years old. |
08-25-2005, 11:04 AM | #779 | |
The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium)
Posts: 14,363
|
Quote:
But evolution-theory does not deal with how the universe came into being out of nothing, that's a different field of study: astronomy. However, where you have the building blocks of life (i.o.w. carbon, oxide, hydrogen, ect..), life is at once not so impossible anymore. Evolution may deal with how life may have come into being when those building blocks were present but mostly, and I think foremost, it deals with how life may have changed due to certain influences in the course of the Earth's existance to what life we know today. Evolution-theory has a far, far larger scope than the origin of life. Geological processes (not exactly or necesarily part of evolution-theories but since they are so often disputed by creationists, I thought I'd add them), genetic mechanisms, theories that try to give a reasonable explanation for the disappearance and the rise of new species are not necesarily worthless if life has NOT sprung from an uninviting primordeal sea. Whereas creationism depends UTTERLY on the existance and interference of a divine being. Take that out of the equasion and creationism and intelligent design lose their reason of existance.
__________________
We are not things. |
|
08-25-2005, 11:15 AM | #780 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
There has been a question posed, why evolution...Well, that's very simply answered. Other scientific theories have their basis in fact.
Macro-evolution sees natural selection, assumes that the world came about on its own, and hypothesizes genetic mutation as a method of changing one species to another. We don't have a problem with evolution being taught, we're just very leery about teaching it with the same level of certainty as genetics, wave-particle duality, or valence elections. That's all. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evidence for Evolution | jerseydevil | General Messages | 599 | 05-18-2008 02:43 PM |
How to teach evolution & Evidence for Creationism II | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 528 | 08-05-2006 03:50 AM |
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution | RĂan | General Messages | 1149 | 08-16-2004 06:07 PM |