Page 5 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 675
  1. #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    Christians also realize that they are not perfect and in fact never will be
    Ahh...but they sure like to judge those that aren't. Well at least those that don't subscribe to their belief system.

    I know....I'm Catholic.
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    Evolution alleviates pain, hunger, suffering, and even death?


    Do tell....
    Sorry, sxtg, I think my last post was too brief and you were probably expecting an example, so I'll give you one.

    Consider the field of infectious disease. We used to live in an age where millions of people died from bacterial infections. Then we discovered antibiotics. Then we discovered that bacteria evolved to become resistant to the antibiotics, through random mutations and adaptive survival based on those random mutations. So since that time, for the last thirty or forty years, we have been in a race with evolving bacteria to develop new drugs which can kill them before they kill us. If we did not understand or denied that they were evolving, we could not understand how to develop newer drugs to circumvent their mutations.
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    Christians call faith- faith. Evolutionists argue the "facts" to be indisputable, and question the intelligence of those who dissagree. I was simply pointing out that even the provider of the Whale facts was including some pretty broad CYA disclaimers.
    I don't question anyone's intelligence. As I said before, I just want to make sure that if people refute an idea, they accurately know what the idea is stating! I don't think it is wise to be opposed to a theory without knowing what the theory really means, and how it works (rather than listen to repeated dogma that may or may not be correct).

    As for the "facts" being indisputable - if it is a fact, it is indisputable. If it is an interpretation of a fact, it can be disputed. If it is an interpretation of a group of facts that has time and time again proven to be accurate, my personal belief is that interpretation is probably correct.

    Do we know everything about evolution? No way. Do we know how all organisms evolved, or how they are related to each other? Not at all. It is a learning process, and that is why it is an ongoing process (and why, to relate it back to a previous post, scientific ideas can change and adapt as new knowledge and information is found).

    Chris
  4. #84  
    Wow, intersting "discussion". First the necessary disclaimers: I am an atheist and all my comments will be colored by this believe system.

    Unfortunately, theism and atheism are both powerfully emotional believe systems based on the idea that what ever you hold as true is an absolute. Evolution v Creationism is just a surrogate battlefield between this two believe systems, the underpinning argument here is the acceptance or rejection of a suppreme being.

    First, we need to accept and respect that everyone has the right and freedom to accept or deny the concept of a god without being insulted or ridiculed. Second, no amount of "evidence" will be enough to convice either camp to change their believes...believes are rooted in emotion not reason.

    After twelve years of theology in a Catholic school, I have come to believe there is no such thing as a god. I have read the Bible twice (first as a believer then with a more critical mindset), also dabbled on other religious believe systems such as Islam. Being a scientist, I trust empiric evidence, things I can measure, weight and catalog. I operate within the constrains of the known laws of physics, that leaves little room for supernatural feats.

    Regarding the Theory of Evolution, is just that, a theory. So far offers a good (ablit scientific) explanation of the origin of the species, but is not perfect. Creationism (also Intelligent Design) provides a different explanation (theological) of how life originated. I have come to reject the latter as it requires the need for magical thinking and faith, none of these are compatible with my current mindset. I have come to embrace the Theory of Evolution because seems more plausible. The main "draw" of this scientific theory (for me), it can be tested and ammended to reflect new evidence obtained through empiric observations. Creationism on the other hand, being a religious believe, offers more constrains when confronted with new discoveries - it has to be accepted as true by faith with little room for question.

    Having expressed my opinion and believes, I recognize religion as an important believe system that serves to provide direction and purpose in the lives of many...who is right or wrong is not relevant, is what makes sense to you that is.

    As said above, we need to be more tolerant of opposing points of view. In the end, the common ground that unite us should trump our petty differences; after all, we are all together in this journey.
    Last edited by TreoNewt; 04/25/2007 at 12:00 AM.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    According to our history book, the Bible (the first five books are also called the Torah in Israel), we can extrapolate the age of the earth by looking at the geneology written down in Genesis chapter 5. It gives us the geneology and ages of 11 generations from Adam to Noah. Those 11 generations comprise about 1,556 years. Many scientists claim that a major world catastrophe occured around 4,000 - 5,000 years ago. They do not call it the Biblical flood, they say that an asteroid hit, or some other event happened to begin an Ice Age. They will tell you that somehow the ocean currents got disrupted, eliminating the heat transmital in the ocean, causing an ice age. The Biblical flood would be an excellent cause for the ocean currents to stop moving. Thus 4k-5k + 1,556 = around 6.5k years.
    "Many scientists claim that a major world catastrophe occured around 4,000 - 5,000 years ago"? "Many" in this case means 1 fringe scientist who cannot even publish in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in 10 million other scientists who can show tons of peer-reviewed evidence for earth being billions of years old. There is no scientific evidence for a worldwide catastrophe such as a worldwide flood a few thousand years back at all. So your belief that earth is 6,000-10,000 years old is based on inexistent credible evidence for a worldwide flood 4,000-5,000 years ago?

    I estimate that not more than 0.5 of Christians on earth believe earth to be only a few thousand years old (this belief seems to be restricted to a small group of US Christians. It is totally unheard of e.g. in Europe). What makes you think you are right and all the others wrong? Are you more intelligent or better trained in geology, archeology, cosmology, paleontology, or whatever?
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    Wow, intersting "discussion". First the necessary disclaimers: I am an atheist and all my comments will be colored by this believe system.

    Unfortunately, theism and atheism are both powerfully emotional believe systems based on the idea that what ever you hold as true is an absolute. Evolution v Creationism is just a surrogate battlefield between this two believe systems, the underpinning argument here is the acceptance or rejection of a suppreme being.

    First, we need to accept and respect that everyone has the right and freedom to accept or deny the concept of a god without being insulted or ridiculed. Second, no amount of "evidence" will be enough to convice either camp to change their believes...believes are rooted in emotion not reason.
    This is not true. If God appeared regularly and did supernatural things I would believe. Athiesm is not a belief system, its the rejection of a belief system.

    You dont wake up one day and convert to atheism, you just realize one day all these theistic explanations are crap, and that there are better, more plausible explanations that dont require, as you say, magical thinking. Its the same way we as children wake up from believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus.

    Atheism should be the default base state, not some alternate belief system. If it was not for organized religion indoctrinating our children every generation it would be too.

    Surur
  7.    #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    This is not true. If God appeared regularly and did supernatural things I would believe. Athiesm is not a belief system, its the rejection of a belief system.

    You dont wake up one day and convert to atheism, you just realize one day all these theistic explanations are crap, and that there are better, more plausible explanations that dont require, as you say, magical thinking. Its the same way we as children wake up from believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus.

    Atheism should be the default base state, not some alternate belief system. If it was not for organized religion indoctrinating our children every generation it would be too.

    Surur
    I agree that this is the crux of the issue. Do you believe in God or not? You are asking for proof of a miracle, and there is some.

    I work with a man who is a medical doctor. He is also a Christian. He was leading a team that held medical clinics in the interior of Mexico. He and his wife were driving back to the US when they were hit head-on by a truck. His wife was injured badly. He did not know how badly, but from a cursory exam after the accident he knew it was serious. When the police and ambulance came, the police arrested him and the driver of the other vehicle. (If you've never been to Mexico, the police's policy is arrest everyone and ask questions after they've been in jail a little bit.) While my friend was in jail he prayed for God to spare his wife, to save her life. He prayed through the night. In the morning when they let him out, he went to the hospital to check on his wife. She was doing very well. When he asked the doctors about what had happened to her, they showed him the X-rays of when they brought her in. She had multiple fractures in her skull. Then they showed him X-rays from just a few hours after arriving at the hospital. There were no signs of any fractures found on her skull.

    My friend believes God healed his wife. What explanation could you possibly give to what happened? Yes this is a true story that this individual shared with me quite recently (within the past two months). He is a licensed doctor, and would know a fracture in an X-ray when he saw one.
  8. #88  
    Medical mistake? These are fairly common. One does not see doctors claiming God's intervention when they accidentally chop of the wrong limb, remove the wrong kidney or operate on the wrong patient when similar errors occur.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 04/25/2007 at 03:43 AM.
  9. #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    When he asked the doctors about what had happened to her, they showed him the X-rays of when they brought her in. She had multiple fractures in her skull. Then they showed him X-rays from just a few hours after arriving at the hospital. There were no signs of any fractures found on her skull.
    The first x-rays with the fractions in the skull were from another patient. Accidental or deliberate mix-up of images. Happens not only in Mexico.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  10. #90  
    Chris I would like you to share one example that one species changed to another. That there DNA changed. please
  11. #91  
    For the one that said christians judge other people, well they are not christians. I am a christian and amproud to be a christian and I never judge people at all. Christians believe that only one person has the right to judge.
    I respect all of you and this discussion as long as you don't attack other people. Good example is Surur who is just having a discussion.
    I love my GOD and I think if more people did this world would be a lot nicer place.
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    Chris I would like you to share one example that one species changed to another. That there DNA changed. please
    How about the evolution of the horse. This is one lineage which is pretty well researched, with a large number of intermediate stages, and with many existing easily recognizable modern branches, like donkeys and Zebras, which are not reproductively compatible at a DNA level (Donkeys have 62 chromosomes, horses 64, Zebras 44-62)

    Surur
  13. #93  
    But ther DNA is different and are they not different species?
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    Regarding the Theory of Evolution, is just that, a theory. So far offers a good (ablit scientific) explanation of the origin of the species, but is not perfect.
    Gravity is just a "theory". The idea of atoms is just a "theory". The concepts of biological cells is just a "theory". According to people who question evolution because it is just a "theory"- they should be questining these theories (and others) as well. Yet people very rarely say those are "just" a theory, or question their truth.

    Why?

    When it evolution, people love to use the common definition of the word "theory" instead of how it is used scientifically. The term "theory" in a scientific context is defined differently, and it is important to make that distinction when discussing the "theory of evolution".

    More later...gotta get my daughter a waffle.

    Chris
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    But ther DNA is different and are they not different species?
    Thats the point. Its evidence for speciation, ie. the change of one specie into many.



    The common ancestor is long gone, but its quite clear they did have one in the past.

    Surur
  16. #96  
    I see what your saying let's use another example: Let's take a Tiger and a house cat, they are in the same family but clearly the DNA is different. different species.
    Same with a donkey and a horse. I think, and I am no scientist, but a tiger and an elephant cannot mate and make a new species you cannot mate outside ypur species.
  17. #97  
    By the way love the pictures.
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    I see what your saying let's use another example: Let's take a Tiger and a house cat, they are in the same family but clearly the DNA is different. different species.
    Same with a donkey and a horse. I think, and I am no scientist, but a tiger and an elephant cannot mate and make a new species you cannot mate outside ypur species.
    The definition of specie has always been in flux, but the generally accepted one is where animals can cross breed true. Therefore, all dogs are the same specie, despite the large variety of appearances, while donkeys and horses are not, because their offspring are not fertile.

    I think you are saying the tiger and domestic cat are not really separate species, but of course they are much more closely related than a tiger and elephant. Donkeys and Zebras and Horses are certainly different, but related species.

    The main point however, which I would like to hear your opinion of, is that we can see animals change over time into very different, but related animals in the fossil record. Do you accept this, or can you refute this in some way.

    Surur
  19. #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    But ther DNA is different and are they not different species?
    Different species means that two species cannot interbreed (have fertile offspring).

    DNA is the information storage which determines how our cells are built up and work. Two different individuals are never identical on the DNA level. That is why we have "DNA fingerprints" which allow to link a trace of e.g. blood and a person. From one human to another, the differences on DNA level are very small though.

    The DNA of humans and chimpanzees is about 98% identical. Conclusive evidence from the fossil record and from genetic data shows that the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees lived about six million years ago. Then two lineages started to separate, leading to two different species.

    The last common ancestor of humans and rhesus monkeys lived about 25 million years ago. Rhesus monkeys and humans have about 93% of the DNA in common.

    http://www.livescience.com/humanbiol...s_monkeys.html
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    I see what your saying let's use another example: Let's take a Tiger and a house cat, they are in the same family but clearly the DNA is different. different species.
    Same with a donkey and a horse. I think, and I am no scientist, but a tiger and an elephant cannot mate and make a new species you cannot mate outside ypur species.
    Two different species mating to make a new species is not how evolution works!!!

    Evolution works within a species, within a population, by altering the gene freqency in populations that are reproductively isolated from each other.

    Chris
Page 5 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions