Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution

[Insidious Rex]

Do please enlighten us if creationism isnt about creating things from nothing.

[Grey_Wolf]

If people began understand that Creationalism and Evolution worked together then there wouldn't be any conflict.

It says in the bible: "A thousand years is like a day to the lord".

Well, that was as long they could think in those times.

What if one of the lord's days actually was One Hundred Thousand Years or A Million Years. Then C and E could have happened at the same time. I E, no conflict.

[Insidious Rex]

But creationists do not allow for evolutionary mechanics to work at all. If they work at all then they can directly oppose creationist thinking so it is considered a threat and must be approached as one. I agree with you that theres no reason to exlude evolution in a god centered universe. Evolution could be a tool of the christian god. why not? Ive never really understood why some are so resistant to this kind of thinking. I can only assume it threatens the fundamentals of their beliefs too much to be allowed because it states that god created man in his image. Not by natural means.

[Grey_Wolf]

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
But creationists do not allow for evolutionary mechanics to work at all. If they work at all then they can directly oppose creationist thinking so it is considered a threat and must be approached as one. I agree with you that theres no reason to exlude evolution in a god centered universe. Evolution could be a tool of the christian god. why not? Ive never really understood why some are so resistant to this kind of thinking. I can only assume it threatens the fundamentals of their beliefs too much to be allowed because it states that god created man in his image. Not by natural means.

Yes. But the substance must have come from Nature if he used "earth" to create man, but we're not arguing, so I'm just making a point.

[Nariel]

As much as I am enjoying this debate, I'm afraid that between school and three jobs to pay for it, I can't handle this... It's far too time-consuming.

So with great dismay, I fear I must withdraw from the debate.

If, however, you would like to continue this on a one-on-one level, I would very much enjoy that. You can e-mail me: high_iq_grrl@yahoo.com

So, good luck guys.... I do love a good debate.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by Grey_Wolf
If people began understand that Creationalism and Evolution worked together then there wouldn't be any conflict.

That's where my theory about Creator-Guided Evolutionism came in. In the pure forms of the theory, I don't think they would work together. The point of Creationism is that all beings on the earth were created pretty much as we see them today. Evolutionism says life that exists now finds its origins in one-celled animals millions of years ago.

Sorry to see you go Nariel, but if you're too busy I understand. Er... not that you'll see this message now.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Lizra
Rian, you really aren't debating fairly ....

Whoa!

I just dropped by to say a temporary goodbye (I'll be out for a bit because of having to have some surgery) and I just saw this - how in the WORLD am I not debating fairly?!?! Please be specific if you're going to make such a terrible claim, because I intend to fight it - if there's one thing that I despise, it's being unfair and deceitful, and I've NEVER intentionally done this here!!!


And Nurvi - I'm NOT looking at this issue from "inside a Christian perspective"!! I'm looking at it impartially, on the evidence! If I thought the evidence supported evolutionism more than creationism, then I would believe that evolution happened!! But I don't think the evidence sides with evolutionism.


I HATE false accusations and I'm tired of trying to fight false claims like IRex's "But creationists do not allow for evolutionary mechanics to work at all. If they work at all then they can directly oppose creationist thinking so it is considered a threat and must be approached as one. " That's silly and untrue, at least in my case. I am interested in TRUTH. I say over and over that I look at the evidence, at what actually is observed, and I STILL get statements like this thrown at me. I think that evolutionists are MUCH more biased, and have MUCH stronger preconceived notions than creationists. ANY theory has to have some basic ideas behind it, then one makes predictions based on the ideas, and you see how OBSERVABLE evidence fits in. And to me, on the evidence that I see, evolutionists are the ones that hang onto the unproven parts of their theory with MUCH more "faith" than creationists!


I have to go get ready for surgery tomorrow - all I would ask you guys to do is to look at the EVIDENCE, and discern between what is OBSERVED and what is only a GUESS.

[Insidious Rex]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
If I thought the evidence supported evolutionism more than creationism, then I would believe that evolution happened!! But I don't think the evidence sides with evolutionism.

what people are saying is you wont even consider it as PART of gods plan. Not even a little bit. Which makes it seem quite clear that you are biased against it because of religion. If you were to say well I think that evolution doesn’t necessarily explain X or Y or Z BUT I can acknowledge that the concept of it could be within the scope of gods power to bring about well then that would be much more reasonable because that’s clearly true. But you discount it out of hand. Sure you go on about analyzing and thinking it over but it seems disingenuous that everything you “analyze� always seems to come back to the literal word of the bible conveniently. That makes it seem like you are approaching topics like these from the point of view of “how do I get to the answer I want to give from here� and not in a truly unbiased scientific approach of the data as much as you say you do. And knowing full well how INTELLIGENT you are this is something you are good at doing. Someone with lesser skills in this arena wouldnt be able to keep that up at all. So thats a compliment to you. But what Im curious to know is has there ever been anything stated in the bible (or inferred by Christianity) about nature (or about anything really) that you disagree with because the evidence just doesn’t add up? Or can you categorically state that EVERYTHING in the bible and EVERYTHING Christianity holds as truth is in fact 100% accurate on a scientific level.

Now, DON’T you answer this till you have yourself all taken care of HEALTH wise thank you. THEN we can fuss some more.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
oh my goodness another fantastic analogy wasted on you Rian.

Insidious: Allow me to give you an example of what I mean. Of course you aren’t supposed to take this LITERALLY but its meant to describe what Im saying in a language that is easier to picture.

Rian: well since your example isn’t me therefore its not true. *smiie * *smilie * And all that counts is that god says that god is god and therefore god made us to look just like him! *smilie * *smilie *

This is exactly why I was saying we cant really discuss this issue because you default to the “that’s outside Christian thinking therefore is wrong� mentality which is impenetrable closed circuit thinking.

I'm sorry you misunderstood me, IRex.
Analogies like yours (and I use them a lot, too) are useful for EXPLAINING an idea, but not PROVING one. Your analogy would have been useful to me if I had said "IRex, I don't understand how you think that our relative size has anything to do with not understanding things." Then you would have said your analogy, and that would have helped me to understand your point. Then, understanding it, I could decide if I thought it was true.

However, I already understand your point, but disagree with you that it is true. To me, it makes much more sense that a God that could create a universe would have enough smarts and enough power to create people with a capacity to understand Him in some meaningful way.

Do you see what I mean about your analogy? Analogies, IMO, explain, but after you understand something, then you need to analyze it and decide if you think it's true.

(and you didn't have to be so snarky about it )

And I DON"T default to "“that’s outside Christian thinking therefore is wrong� mentality" - I think about things, and as I pointed out, I assumed your POV was right when I was analyzing it. You NEVER assumed that my POV was right in order to analyze it, as far as I could tell.

is it that we don’t understand what an analogy is or dare I say is the slight of hand beginning here?

Are you going to accuse me of being deceptive, too? It's a false accusation, if you choose to make it. And I told you what I think analogies are for in the section above. Do you agree, or do we have different opinions?

Actually that’s a characteristic of our brain. It says nothing about god. You are saying God must fit in this box right here! At this angle! Like this! If not hes NOT god! And im saying god doesn’t need a box. And its impossible to contain him IN one. God created the infrustructure how could he fit within the confines of a box he himself created. (Note I use the human pronoun language you like to make this more meaningful for you). My opinion is that the christian god is a human interface if you will to this creator force. It’s the best we can do (well Christians) to comprehend the incomprehensable.

I don't put God in a box. I DO believe that things have characteristics, however, or else they aren't ... anything.

Do you claim that a creator force is ENTIRELY beyond ANY meaningful comprehension for people? (I just want to get this straight, and not put words into your mouth).

And I conclude that it is actually science not religion. But at the same time I don’t bar the idea of a creative force like you bar the idea of ANY other concept beyond the extremely specific one laid out in the bible. And to be blunt I see that as biased at best and self delusional at worst.

Again, every THING has characteristics. Now we may not KNOW the characteristics, but I don't see how something could not HAVE characteristics, do you?

you see these are the kind of comments that just make me shrug and say well theres no point arguing with that. You are coming from this from the point of view you want to reach and there is no other alternatives in your universe. How can you argue with that? How can you argue with someone who believes they would be violating the rules of their religion by thinking beyond what their religion says?

Again, this is a false claim. I tell you over and OVER that what I believe is based on what I see around me, and in me. I grant you the courtesy of believing you when YOU say that your beliefs are based on your thoughts, but you refuse to grant me the courtesy of believing me when I say that. I'm tired of that false accusation, and I wish you would believe me when I say it's false. I could just as easily say that since YOU always have the same conclusion, that YOU are mindlessly believing it. Is this true for you?

which I immediately responded to with a third much more plausible and more obvious deduction. Which is basically what we are talking about here. Which you replied to with nope! Not an option! Sorry! *fingers in ears *

IRex, you entirely missed my point. I ASSUMED your view was TRUE - then I thought "if this is true, then what logical inferences could I make?" Do you see? Let me say it again - I ASSUMED your view was TRUE, then thought about it.

Your "third much more plausible and more obvious deduction" was NEVER based on assuming that my POV was true and then thinking about it - it was only a REPEAT of YOUR beliefs.

. Your “analyses� are only to lead to one conclusion. Always. This is something I have clearly noticed in interacting with you and observing your arguments over the past year or so.

and yours DON'T always lead to one conclusion? Be fair, please.

And again, I'll grant YOU the courtesy of saying that I think you think about things impartially and carefully when you reach conclusions. I TELL you that I think about things impartially and carefully when I reach conclusions. Will you believe me, or will you think that anyone that doesn't agree with you is a person that refuses to think? I'm not that unfair, are you? We both have stuck with our conclusions, because we both think they make sense.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
what people are saying is you wont even consider it as PART of gods plan. Not even a little bit. Which makes it seem quite clear that you are biased against it because of religion.

I think of this apart from religion - it's things like macro evolution that I have problems with, and this is independant of religion. Yes, God could have used evolutionary processes to make things how we see them today - but to me, the evolutionary processes that have been theorized are not well supported, and THAT'S why I don't think it happened. It has nothing to do with religious beliefs.

If you were to say well I think that evolution doesn’t necessarily explain X or Y or Z BUT I can acknowledge that the concept of it could be within the scope of gods power to bring about well then that would be much more reasonable because that’s clearly true.

I can certainly acknowledge this, and have considered it, but as I said above, I don't think the evidence supports it. Note - "think" and "evidence". That's all - I don't think it happened because of the evidence. It has nothing to do with whether or not I think God exists.

That makes it seem like you are approaching topics like these from the point of view of “how do I get to the answer I want to give from here� and not in a truly unbiased scientific approach of the data as much as you say you do.

All I can say is that is so false, it's sad.

And knowing full well how INTELLIGENT you are this is something you are good at doing. Someone with lesser skills in this arena wouldnt be able to keep that up at all. So thats a compliment to you.

Oh IRex, do you realize what you just said? I'd rather you hit me in the face then "compliment" me like that You're saying I'm deceitful. and intelligent enough to keep it up. I'd far prefer that you thought me stupid but honest. This hurts. I don't think you meant it to hurt, by any means, because you are a kind person, but please realize that you just called me deceitful.

But what Im curious to know is has there ever been anything stated in the bible (or inferred by Christianity) about nature (or about anything really) that you disagree with because the evidence just doesn’t add up? Or can you categorically state that EVERYTHING in the bible and EVERYTHING Christianity holds as truth is in fact 100% accurate on a scientific level.

Now, DON’T you answer this till you have yourself all taken care of HEALTH wise thank you. THEN we can fuss some more.

Would you please move this over to the Offshoot thread (or some other thread, but tell me where) so we could discuss it? I've already been on longer than I wanted and need to get off. Thank you for your concern - you are very kind, and I like you.

[Insidious Rex]

I think what we need to do is take this from a different approach. I guess what i dont understand is why you seem to think creationism is much more plausable then a scientific theory like evolution based on all your "careful thinking". so maybe if you wouldnt mind what you could do to make that point would be to list out reasons WHY creationism is the correct theory. And say NOTHING about evolution. Because its standard practice for creationists to attempt to prove creationism by attacking evolution thereby concluding with a sort of "well since evolution doesnt make sense then creationism MUST be how it all works." Which of course is a disingenious and falty way of coming to a proof. So maybe what I need is reasons WHY creationism works. And lets just forget about evolution for a while.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
And Nurvi - I'm NOT looking at this issue from "inside a Christian perspective"!! I'm looking at it impartially, on the evidence! If I thought the evidence supported evolutionism more than creationism, then I would believe that evolution happened!! But I don't think the evidence sides with evolutionism.

Sorry RÃ*an, I didn't mean to accuse you or anything. I just got that impression. (If you actually had been thinking like that, it wouldn't have necessarily been wrong.) My mistake.

Good luck on your surgery, and I hope you have a speedy recovery! (And not just so I can keep discussion Creationism either. )

Hey guys, let RÃ*an go have surgery already. You know she will respond if you post on her comments.

[Rían]

*sits on her fingers*

*gives up*

IRex, that one will have to wait until post-op

But I still hope you don't think I'm deceitful

Thanks Nurvi and everyone else for the good wishes!!

[Falagar]

Good luck, RÃ*an!

[Lizra]

Take a break Rian! I sent you a PM explaining myself. Get well soon.

[Rían]

OK

[cassiopeia]

It's good to see this thread going again. Though I don't see the debate being settled anytime soon.

I don't have much to contribute, but I still believe the evidence points to evolution over creation, from an impartial perspective.

Good luck, RÃ*an!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by cassiopeia
It's good to see this thread going again. Though I don't see the debate being settled anytime soon.

I don't have much to contribute, but I still believe the evidence points to evolution over creation, from an impartial perspective.

Good luck, RÃ*an!

If the debate was ever resolved, I think the Universe would implode on itself or something equally drastic.

Edit: Forgot the toothy-grin smilie.

[Mercutio]

Creationism: My views/ reviews of articles from Honors Biology (last year). I don't quite remember everything I wrote! If you ask me a question, I will try to answer it/defend myself, etc.

Go to
:http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=theMercutio

The file was too big for an extension.


Mercutio

[Nurvingiel]

Thanks Mercutio.

What do Creationist theories say about hybrids?

God did not create mules (not directly anyway), humans did by crossing donkeys and horses. However, they cannot reproduce, and this applies to all animal hybrids as far as we know.

In the plant world, there are many fertile hybrids. This occurs when the cell wall does not form during meiosis, creating cells with four sets of chromasones. They then have the chance to align properly, and can reproduce.

A chemical can be applied to a hybrid to ensure the cell was doesn't form. It's used a lot in horticulture and agriculture.

Hybrids lead to evolution in plants, and we've actually seen the progress. (It's more concrete than the dinosaur theory.)