Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 112
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    I am well aware gaps are not flaws, but it could mean that two items that are being considered as relevent to each other really are not related at all. To compare a birds bill growing longer to get deeper into a seed pod and man evolving into a completely new creature is a stretch. Yes, we know an animal adapts (evolves) to allow it to survive and prosper, there may still be gaps in the data but not leaps between steps. The current theory of evolution of man has large gaps that allow for constant disagreement even among evolutionry scientist.
    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolib...e/0_0_0/evo_40
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    I find Origin of the Species, Special Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics all intuitively uncomfortable. I can rarely get my head around them for more than 15 minutes at a time. Their value is in the fact that they can be demonstrated, one can make verifiable predictions with them. Like Genesis, Intelligent Design is intuitively comfortable but can neither be demonstrated nor disproved. One can not make verifiable predictions with it.
    While I don't completely agree, this was well put.

    A lot of this discussion can be put into two columns that are eternally linked: "What can you prove?" and "What makes you sleep well at night?".

    I've found LOTS of evidence to back up the findings in C. Darwin's teachings. Doesn't make me happy or sad. I'm pretty neutral with it.

    I've found LOTS of evidence to back up findings in my Bible. MOST other evidence CAN'T be proven in a natural environment. However, I take great comfort in my Bible.

    Why put much weight (faith) in something that really doesn't matter to you to begin with?
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Well, since you bring up the possibility of an open mind, here is some information for you to consider. It will require you to accept the possibility you may have been misinformed by faulty science. I am not asking you to reject what you beleive, but to seriously consider the scientific evidence.

    http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/08dna02.htm

    If you disagree that is fine, but try to refrain from validating your views in your mind with derogatory statements toward me or our nation as a whole. It makes you look kinda pathetic.
    My favorite quote from the cited website:

    "The truth is that something totally impossible can never happen. If I throw a book into the air, it will never change into a live pigeon, never."

    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Do you disagree with the data concerning DNA, RNA, cells etc that is presented or just the fact that it points the gaps in todays evolutionary theory? Or is it that the presenter just does not share your view?

    I did not state this to show scientific evidence of how we were created, just that it questions todays evolutionary theroy. There are questions that I have not seen answered, and yes I have looked. I do not accept the answer of random chance or random mutations. There are just too many holes, and too many scientist who simply try to make the result fit into the evolutionary frame and if it does not work, or worse yet disagrees with evolution, they use the similarities argument or such.
    I agree with clulup regarding your citation- there is no data presented. There are some definitions and some statements of the obvious.....but the "meat and potatoes" of the site are simply statements of disbelief at a well-studied, and in my humble opinion, proven theory.

    Simply saying you are not comfortable with others' data is not a relevant arguement. Evolutionary and Molecular Biologists have made their case...what's yours?

    I also would like to add that the Bible does not have to be taken so literally. Genesis is relayed to us in a form of poetic parralelism. Perhaps evolution is the means by which God, or the supreme being of your choice, decided to manufacture the world? Would this be inconsistent with your ideas?
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  5. #45  
    "The truth is that something totally impossible can never happen. If I throw a book into the air, it will never change into a live pigeon, never."
    Actually, in our quantum universe this is definitely possible - just very improbable.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Actually, in our quantum universe this is definitely possible - just very improbable.
    Amen!!
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    While I don't completely agree, this was well put.

    A lot of this discussion can be put into two columns that are eternally linked: "What can you prove?" and "What makes you sleep well at night?".

    I've found LOTS of evidence to back up the findings in C. Darwin's teachings. Doesn't make me happy or sad. I'm pretty neutral with it.

    I've found LOTS of evidence to back up findings in my Bible. MOST other evidence CAN'T be proven in a natural environment. However, I take great comfort in my Bible.

    Why put much weight (faith) in something that really doesn't matter to you to begin with?
    Good for you that you get comfort from the bible, however blindly following something is risky..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    I've found LOTS of evidence to back up findings in my Bible. MOST other evidence CAN'T be proven in a natural environment. However, I take great comfort in my Bible.
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Good for you that you get comfort from the bible, however blindly following something is risky..
    How patronizing. Why is it that so many skeptics assume that Christians are mindless followers who have never questioned their faith? AlaskanDad clearly stated that he has investigated the claims of the Bible and has found sufficient evidence to convince him of its truth.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Good for you that you get comfort from the bible, however blindly following something is risky..
    ... and driving over a well-posted cliff with your eyes wide open while following someone you trust is pretty risky too!

    We ALL put our faith in something or someone (when you sleep, do you keep one foot on the floor just in case it won't hold you up this time?). It's all a matter of proving it to your own satisfaction and expectation of where it will all lead you.

    I sleep well at night with plenty of well-proven faith in MANY things.
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
  10. #50  
    "Christianity is not a religion; it is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ"

    Read that somewhere. Guess hundreds of millions of peeps are confused and taking a big risk.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  11. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetoad
    I agree with clulup regarding your citation- there is no data presented. There are some definitions and some statements of the obvious.....but the "meat and potatoes" of the site are simply statements of disbelief at a well-studied, and in my humble opinion, proven theory.

    Simply saying you are not comfortable with others' data is not a relevant arguement. Evolutionary and Molecular Biologists have made their case...what's yours?

    I also would like to add that the Bible does not have to be taken so literally. Genesis is relayed to us in a form of poetic parralelism. Perhaps evolution is the means by which God, or the supreme being of your choice, decided to manufacture the world? Would this be inconsistent with your ideas?
    I am questioning the lack of information that the evolutionay and molecular biologist have. There are even arguments amongst themselves as to how evolution occurred. Did we all evolve from the same point in Africa, or did we geographically evolve and if so at the same time or individually. Then bring in the paleoentolgist (sp) and the fossil records and even more questions arise. One of Darwin's concerns was if there was not a record of transitionalfossils his theory would be in great jeopardy, he expected to find transitional fossil records at every level of sediment. Now 150 years later, with a greatly expanded fossil record, the transitional fossils are not there to support. Yes, there is an occasional find that will be put into one of the gaps (correctly or not?) but not to the point of providing the defining support of transitional records. Just for one example look at the Java Man, 3 partial bones (femur, small portion of skull and I forget the third) found within 50 feet of each other. It was decided (without DNA evidence) that they were from one creature (named Java Man) from these 3 bones, pictures were drawn of a transitional man covered with hair and a large brain. Later, the same scientist decided it was actually from an early Gibbon instead of man so it would fit into the gap better. However, it appears this was done without any further evidence or study.

    So, yes, I question evolution as it stands today. If you accept it as is, good for you. If you accept biblical creation, good. If you think it is a combination, good. If you accept everything you are told and will not look at other possibilities or other points of view you become dependant on others to think for you.
    Last edited by cardio; 10/03/2005 at 03:01 PM.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Funny, do you have any evidence a supreme being was the creator?

    A case of the pot calling the kettle black IMHO
    I am not sure what you mean by "supreme being," but I have a large body of evidence for creation, most of it from and consistent with science. There is little resemblance between that creation and Genesis.

    For me that implies a creator. Little resemblance between the creator of the universe and the puny myth I was taught as a child.

    For me there is nothing so unlikely as that I should be here at all and nothing so awesome and miraculous as that I am. I appreciate that miracle and I am grateful for it. Do I think the creator cares whether or not I do and am? Not likely.

    Do I prefer the story in Genesis to the story of science? I do not. Science has given me a better appreciation of creation and the creator than has special revelation. Do I believe that the creator expects me, under pain of eternal damnation, to accept testimony about things revealed to the ancients, and not revealed to me, ahead of all the awesome evidence available to me through direct observation and science? I do not. Do I think that the creator prefers true believers in special revelation to those who collect and weigh evidence themselves? I do not. Do I believe that the creator prefers Moses to Copernicus and Galileo or Thomas Aquinas to Isaac Newton? I do not.

    That leaves the question of whether that creator involves herself in the affairs of men and nations. While certainly any being capable of setting all this in motion could if she wanted to, it is hubris to believe that she does. I believe like, if not with, John F. Kennedy that God's work on earth is done by men.
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    How patronizing. Why is it that so many skeptics assume that Christians are mindless followers who have never questioned their faith? AlaskanDad clearly stated that he has investigated the claims of the Bible and has found sufficient evidence to convince him of its truth.
    I agree. I also believe in the Bible......I do not take a literal approach to it, but all of us are entitled to our beliefs. I agree with AlskanDad, we all follow some moral ethic and apply it to our daily lives. Whether this be some religious tenet or an aversion to all things religious, it still comprises our own personal ethos.
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    If you accept it as is, good for you. If you accept biblical creation, good. If you think it is a combination, good. If you accept everything you are told and will not look at other possibilities or other points of view you become dependant on others to think for you.
    That's a bit harsh......I do not let others formulate opinions for me. I had thought we were having a discussion on the origins of life, a discussion that is rife with strong opinions much like in discussions regarding abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, etc. I have no problem with your view, I simply do not share it.

    I must say that through all of these posts you have only pointed to evidence lacking in the theory of evolution as a victory for your particular theory. It seems to me that you should be presenting data that positively endorses Intelligent Design instead of negatively endorsing evolution. While evolution may be disproved by this route it will do no justice to your cause.

    Of course there are differing opinions on evolution among the scientific community. In my humble opinion it is the basic theory of evolution that has been agreed upon and embraced by the majority of biological scientists. The finer points are being discussed. Be it Stanley Miller's "primordial soup" experiment, adaptive radiation, or the disproved Lamarckian belief, evolution has data.

    Intelligent Design cannot be proven. As Augustine pointed out to us, "if you understand it, it is not God."
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  15. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetoad
    That's a bit harsh......I do not let others formulate opinions for me. I had thought we were having a discussion on the origins of life, a discussion that is rife with strong opinions much like in discussions regarding abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, etc. I have no problem with your view, I simply do not share it.

    I must say that through all of these posts you have only pointed to evidence lacking in the theory of evolution as a victory for your particular theory. It seems to me that you should be presenting data that positively endorses Intelligent Design instead of negatively endorsing evolution. While evolution may be disproved by this route it will do no justice to your cause.

    Of course there are differing opinions on evolution among the scientific community. In my humble opinion it is the basic theory of evolution that has been agreed upon and embraced by the majority of biological scientists. The finer points are being discussed. Be it Stanley Miller's "primordial soup" experiment, adaptive radiation, or the disproved Lamarckian belief, evolution has data.

    Intelligent Design cannot be proven. As Augustine pointed out to us, "if you understand it, it is not God."
    My apologiees, I did not intend that to sound harsh, nor was the last statement directed at any individual, but to any individual who refuses to consider other viewpoints whatever they may be. The discussion was actually on the progression of life, evolution in its truest form does not attempt to identify the origins of life.

    As far as my theory of how we have arrived at our point today, don't think any of them are completely accurate, but a mix. Yes, I believe in a creator, but I also know that species have evolved in their own lines to survive (microevolution). I have not advocated one theory, but I have tried to shed light on some of the unanswered questions and unverified statements in evolution of species (marcoevolution).

    Again, I apologize for I did not intend to sound harsh. Everyone is free to beleive as they see fit.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    The discussion was actually on the progression of life, evolution in its truest form does not attempt to identify the origins of life.
    My error.

    I misunderstood, no offense taken.....I love debating these issues.
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetoad
    My error.

    I misunderstood, no offense taken.....I love debating these issues.
    Me too, I normally wait to see what side Clulup takes and then I take the other side. Easy win that way jk
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetoad
    I agree. I also believe in the Bible......I do not take a literal approach to it, but all of us are entitled to our beliefs........
    I cannot parse that sentence. It seems to me that either one takes the Bible literally, or one reserves the right to one's own interpretation. If one reserves the right to interpret on one's own authority a collection of books edited and translated across multiple generations and centuries, then what does it mean to say that one "believes?"
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    I cannot parse that sentence. It seems to me that either one takes the Bible literally, or one reserves the right to one's own interpretation. If one reserves the right to interpret on one's own authority a collection of books edited and translated across multiple generations and centuries, then what does it mean to say that one "believes?"
    I do believe the Bible is open to interpretation. There are many who take the Bible at its purest literal form........I personally believe this makes the Christian faith lose credibility. Obviously the world is older than roughly 450,000 years, the sun did not stop in the sky, and the world was not created in a literal six days........

    However, just because I don't believe the literal interpretation of every word in the Bible doesn't mean I'm not a believer in the overall message of the book.

    I have always been a believer that religion is a personal journey. If we want to dig further, I probably believe that the only reason there is religion at all is to establish a moral code and to alleviate some of the fear of death. I also believe that there are many paths to the top of the mountain......but I feel this thread has taken a turn into the religious belief realm rather than a discourse on Evolution vs. Intelligent Design.

    My post was simply meant to say that you believe something, I believe something, we are all entitled to believe whatever we want, and "this" is what I believe.
    I've heard that polar bear steaks are tough, but maybe if you marinated them in beer they'd turn out all right.
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    I cannot parse that sentence. It seems to me that either one takes the Bible literally, or one reserves the right to one's own interpretation. If one reserves the right to interpret on one's own authority a collection of books edited and translated across multiple generations and centuries, then what does it mean to say that one "believes?"
    I know that some of you would label me a one-tooth, drooling dullard for "blindly" accepting the Bible as literal truth. I do not reserve the right to personal, private interpretation. That is reserved for the Holy Spirit.

    2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

    Try opening your mind to accept that it MAY be possible for an educated, discerning man to believe in something that he cannot see with eyes.

    whmurray, this is not directed at you but to those who have difficulty accepting those who believe in the literal truth of the Bible. I'm not asking anyone to believe like I do but to understand that you don't have to be married to your sister to think like this. Respectful disagreement is SO much more enjoyable in civil discussions.
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions