re: Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution

quote:

---

The scientific method is wonderful when trying to understand how the natural world works, but as I said previously, it is limited to the natural world.

---

But the theory of evolution is what results when you apply the scientific method to observations in the natural world. Is it only wonderful sometimes when its convenient for you?

quote:

---

But the theory of evolution is what results when you apply the scientific method to observations in the natural world. Is it only wonderful sometimes when its convenient for you?

---

Not necessarily. We see changes in species but we can't observe the changes on a larger scale that take place over (supposedly) millions of years to change one type of organism into another type (not just a subtle change from one species to another). It's simply assumed that the small changes lead to the bigger changes because it isn't observable or really testable. It's taken on faith. The fossil record is plugged into the equation (based on that assumption) to justify the theory.

It all rests on uniformitarianism, and when that assumption is challenged, the canned response is "why should we believe something different based on our observations?" It assumes naturalism because there is no scientifically-testable evidence for supernaturalism, so it throws that idea entirely and limits the scope of "truth" based on its own limitations. I choose to believe that there is more to this world than what we can observe with our senses.

quote:

---

My statements were not generalizations. In fact, they're quite succinct.

---

Actually, your comment was a generalization.

You said "I adhere to the scientific method. You rely on beliefs." I don't discount the scientific method at all. I believe it is quite useful for understanding the natural world that we can observe and test. So you're wrong to say or imply that I don't adhere to the scientific method at all. Your implication that I rely on beliefs while you don't is also a generalization. I rely on my beliefs in many aspects of my life where they are applicable, but I rely on a lot of things, including the scientific method, where applicable. So yeah, I think your generalized.

quote:

---

I don't have any beliefs. Beliefs are acceptance of ideas without any scientific evidence.

---

Everyone has beliefs, including you. Everyone has certain presuppositions (look! I used the word!) and assumptions/beliefs about the world that they base everything upon. You believe that the physical world is all that there is. I say "believe" because you can't possibly know for sure, but you believe it to be so because you haven't seen any evidence to the contrary. As I said previously, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, yet you believe that is the case.

You also believe that the way the world works today is how it has always worked, though you can't test it or observe it. It's simply accepted on faith. Again, it's because you don't have evidence to the contrary, but that gets back to my point about absence and such. You take it on faith. You may have a good reason to, but you believe it all the same.

quote:

---

There is only the natural world. There is no evidence that any other kind of world exists.

---

I'm glad you've confirmed that you hold beliefs.

Have you been everywhere? Have you seen everything? Do you have all knowledge? Are you omniscient and omnipresent? If the answer to any of those questions is "no", you have to admit that you believe that the natural world is all there is. It may be or it may not be. If there is something more than the natural world, the scientific method should be useless to detect or to test it, assuming the supernatural is different from the natural world.

You base your understanding on the evidence. I would say that it is very short-sighted since you are adamant that you know the truth based on the evidence, yet the evidence continues to change as time goes on. At best, you can say that we don't know anything for certain, since our understanding of everything could potentially change over time.

quote:

---

Beliefs don't have, and can't have, any scientific validity. So there isn't any point to studying them

---

Beliefs are a large part of the conversation around "truth". Truth is something that extends beyond the scientific method. Perhaps you don't think there is any point in studying it, but I would say that is an ignorant position to take. You may beg to differ, but that would be another difference in beliefs.

This thread got me wanting to look into evolution more, cause I accepted it quite awhile ago and stopped paying as much attention to if it was real or not... I'm watching becoming human on youtube.... It's really good so far. LINK

Beware if you watch it, it starts out talking about how man came from an ape or ape-like species.... Although this is true, it's not saying we came from monkeys, or chimps, or any specific ape species... It saying that human, monkeys, chimps, along with tons and tons of other now extinct species all originated from a common ape-like species...

I think the most interesting part about it so far is the search for transitional fossils... As one poster said earlier, he is waiting on those (as I believe many doubters are) and that Darwin said we would be tripping over them...

Well we are tripping over them... every species is constantly evolving, every fossil is one of some form of transition... but to see any major links... especially when all you have to go off is fossils without corpses is very difficult when you consider the time it took any major changes to occur.

The separation between human ancestors and today's primate ancestors occurred what is now believed to be around 7 billion years ago (film explains why). 7 BILLION YEARS AGO!!! Can you even fathom how long ago that was?

So we are trying to find links between now and what occurred 7 billion years ago... although many links have been found...an astonishing amount really considering the conditions needed for a fossil to form and still exist for even 1/4 of that long along ago with the only places these fossils can be found.... Africa.

I never really though about it, but you can't go looking for human links to apes just anywhere... you have to go to Africa. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the links found dated more than 1.2 billion years ago was found in Africa... most of the ones found dated later than 1.2 million where slowly spread out from Africa... LINK

I mean I knew we originated from Africa and spread out.. I just had never thought about the time span it took to go from Ape-like to anywhere near human like (about 6 million years) and then start spreading out of Africa across the world... (a point that is greatly proven in "The Human Family Tree" where they swab DNA and trace everyone back to africa) LINK

quote:

---

Right there is the difference between religion and science that I wish all theists could accept. Science holds to only that which is observable and/or testable.

---

You are 100% correct, and it's why I think science, while very beneficial, is not the answer to all knowledge and truth; it is limited to only what we can presently observe. Perhaps that is all you want or need, but I prefer something more.

quote:

---

Religion is entirely philosophical in nature and cannot compete or be compared to science. Science uses philosophy to establish theories but readily abandons any hypothesis that cannot be supported by the scientific method

---

I would say that religion is primarily philosophical in nature, but just like science, it is interested in truth. Science is just a tool that humans use to gain information about the natural world. I view the Bible as a tool that we can use to gain information about the supernatural world and how the supernatural interacted with the natural in the past. That extends beyond the limits of scientific discovery by its very nature.

Humans (not science) may use philosophy to establish theory and abandon any hypothesis that cannot be supported by the scientific method, but that does not mean that we have found the truth. We have only found an explanation based on a certain set of parameters.

quote:

---

You can be as rude as you want but it does not affect me. Feel free to define yourself and your circumstances as you wish with beliefs. It will never affect me and how I observe myself and nature

---

I apologize if I'm coming across as rude. I honestly am not trying to be. I'm simply trying to defend my position as best as I can and point out the inconsistencies of your position. That's typically how a debate or discussion about a particular topic goes, but I admit that I don't have all the answers and don't have all information that exists in the universe. I'm just trying to do the best I can.

I didn't join this discussion with the assumption that I would change your or anyone else's beliefs or opinions on the topic. I just wanted to give my $0.02. Take it or leave it.

quote:

---

The best "fossils" for evolution are genes. By studying genes in human mitochondria, we have established that every living human descended from a genetic "Eve" some 200,000 years ago in Africa. Other genetic studies have determined that an African "Adam" from 300,000+ years ago is the progenitor of all living humans.

It's great to find fossils that show the transitions of species but the study of evolution has progressed far beyond "transitional fossils."

---

Well yeah.. but that's only going back 200,000-300,000 years... Which the documentary "The human family tree" explains..

This one I'm watching now is about the 6.5 million years or so leading up to that moment, but still after the split from our common ancestor with today's primates.

If you haven't seen Becoming Human, then you really should watch it... I'm only 1/3 and have already learned a bunch of stuff I didn't know.. one of the best human origin films I've seen outside of the human family tree.

quote:

---

If you haven't seen Becoming Human, then you really should watch it... I'm only 1/3 and have already learned a bunch of stuff I didn't know.. one of the best human origin films I've seen outside of the human family tree.

---

I've watched the series, more than once. I have a good background in biology, including evolution. One of my degrees is in biology. I can't get enough of it.

quote:

---

I've watched the series, more than once.

---

cool, just thought if you hadn't you might want to.