Started By
Message
re: Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:22 pm to beejon
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:22 pm to beejon
quote:
quote:
Studies show that about 10% of American biologists are christians and about 90% of them accept evolution.
But not Darwinistic evolution.
Yes, fullblown we-came-from-a-single-common-ancestor "macroevolution (I loathe that term).
1
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:24 pm to Roger Klarvin
all this shite on a sports board...dadgum, bet all of intelligentsia is tuned in!
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:25 pm to Roger Klarvin
Thanks for the names, but just searching the first name, Francis Collins, brings up this concerning his theism...
"Almighty God, who is not limited in space or time, created a universe 13.7 billion years ago with its parameters precisely tuned to allow the development of complexity over long periods of time."
"God’s plan included the mechanism of evolution to create the marvelous diversity of living things on our planet. Most especially, that creative plan included human beings."
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't part of the typical Darwinist view taught in schools today.
"Almighty God, who is not limited in space or time, created a universe 13.7 billion years ago with its parameters precisely tuned to allow the development of complexity over long periods of time."
"God’s plan included the mechanism of evolution to create the marvelous diversity of living things on our planet. Most especially, that creative plan included human beings."
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't part of the typical Darwinist view taught in schools today.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 7:26 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:31 pm to beejon
Evolution is the mechanism, it makes no claim one way or the other about being a primary or secondary cause. Evolution isn't taught to students with the idea that it disproves God or anything of the sort. Schools teach the mechanisms of evolution.
If one wants to say God used the laws of nature and science to bring about all life through evolution I have no problem with that. The fact is that Collins and many others believe in the exact same mechanisms of evolution that I do along with believing in God.
If one wants to say God used the laws of nature and science to bring about all life through evolution I have no problem with that. The fact is that Collins and many others believe in the exact same mechanisms of evolution that I do along with believing in God.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 7:33 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:36 pm to beejon
Damn dude the theory of evolution is taught in schools cause it's science. Religion is not. It's your choice if you want to believe God created life through evolution. That's because that is a religion, which is not taught in schools. Scientist aren't just gonna throw God into a Scientfic theory.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 7:37 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:38 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
I doubt Pope Francis thinks life is meaningless, and yet he believes that you, me and everyone else came from one single cell billions of years ago.
Evolution isn't a religion, it isn't a philosophy, it's the science of our past. That's it. It's the mechanism by which life arose.
Yep, Pope Francis is according to Beejon an atheistic man. Good to hear.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:45 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Evolution is the mechanism, it makes no claim one way or the other about being a primary or secondary cause. Evolution isn't taught to students with the idea that it disproves God or anything of the sort. Schools teach the mechanisms of evolution.
If one wants to say God used the laws of nature and science to bring about all life through evolution I have no problem with that. The fact is that Collins and many others believe in the exact same mechanisms of evolution that I do along with believing in God.
The significant difference though is in the origin of the mechanisms. Atheistic Darwinism rejects any reference to any plan or purpose for creation and teaches instead that the mechanism of the complexity and variety of life we observe today were random, meaningless, accidental events with no purpose for the organisms other than survival of the fittest. The societal result of Darwinism is a people who view life as ultimately meaningless with no existence of God. It's the atheist message. No God, no ultimate purpose in life other than to survive. As I've pointed out before, in this form of Darwinism, when your child tells you he/she loves you, or you tell your child you love him/her, it's meaningless gibberish, chemical reactions in the brain which have evolved over time in order to promote the survival of the fittest. Atheistic Darwinism, which is currently taught in schools, absolutely promotes the message of no creator, no God, no real value of life other than to procreate.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:46 pm to NATidefan
quote:
Damn dude the theory of evolution is taught in schools cause it's science.
No, it's a series of atheistic guesses and suppositions.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:50 pm to beejon
Seriously don't know how ignorant arse people like you can manage to function in real life.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:51 pm to beejon
quote:
No, it's a series of atheistic guesses and suppositions.
I come back to the discussion after several pages and the first thing I see is "guesses and suppositions."
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:52 pm to Manzielathon
quote:
Seriously don't know how ignorant arse people like you can manage to function in real life.
I've done pretty well for myself.
(Atheist Darwinists always get so cussing mad.
)Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:53 pm to beejon
quote:
The significant difference though is in the origin of the mechanisms
Scientifically, it doesn't matter where the mechanisms came from. Science cannot speak to that which science cannot physically study.
quote:
Atheistic Darwinism rejects any reference to any plan or purpose for creation
No, atheists who accept evolution do this. Evolution itself does not because it cannot.
This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 7:55 pm
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:53 pm to Kentucker
quote:
I come back to the discussion after several pages and the first thing I see is "guesses and suppositions."
That's the basis for Darwinism. Guesses and suppositions, smoke and mirrors, flim-flam.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:54 pm to beejon
quote:
That's the basis for Darwinism. Guesses and suppositions, smoke and mirrors, flim-flam.
And what is the basis for your argument?
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:55 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Scientifically, it doesn't matter where the mechanisms came from.
Truth is, there's no scientific proof or evidence that the complex and varied creation we see today is the result of random accidents.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:56 pm to rootisback
quote:
all this shite on a sports board...dadgum, bet all of intelligentsia is tuned in!
Get in or get out. We're having fun here.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:56 pm to Kentucker
quote:
And what is the basis for your argument?
The basis is that the complexity and variety of life we see today is by the sole mechanism of random accidents.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:57 pm to beejon
Disgusting how people can live their entire fricking life so off base
You're literally living a lie and you're happy about it
You're literally living a lie and you're happy about it
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:57 pm to beejon
No it's not. You are making it a Godless theory, not Darwin or anybody else. You choose to believe God didn't do this. Lets go through the scientific method.
I come up with a theory or hypothesis based on something I believe to be fact based on some reason. Lets say its that i found acorns under a oak tree and i think if i plant it a oak tree will grow. Then I come up with a way to prove this. Experiment, research, etc. My method is to plant it and see if my theory was right. If a oak tree does grow, I repeat this experiment again, until the outcome can be accepted as fact.
Does the fact I didn't include God made this happen make it a Godless theory or untrue? The answer is no, the person readying my results decides that themselves.
You might as well not believe any scientific discovery, theory, or fact that doesnt have God made it this way written into it. which is pretty much all of them. Because they would all be godless theories by your definition.
I come up with a theory or hypothesis based on something I believe to be fact based on some reason. Lets say its that i found acorns under a oak tree and i think if i plant it a oak tree will grow. Then I come up with a way to prove this. Experiment, research, etc. My method is to plant it and see if my theory was right. If a oak tree does grow, I repeat this experiment again, until the outcome can be accepted as fact.
Does the fact I didn't include God made this happen make it a Godless theory or untrue? The answer is no, the person readying my results decides that themselves.
You might as well not believe any scientific discovery, theory, or fact that doesnt have God made it this way written into it. which is pretty much all of them. Because they would all be godless theories by your definition.
Posted on 4/13/14 at 7:58 pm to Manzielathon
quote:
Disgusting how people can live their entire fricking life so off base
You're literally living a lie and you're happy about it
I'm very happy. Yes I am.
Page 42 of 49
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News