NewGuy's Disproving Evolution Thread

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Prove it noodle boy.

Nowhere in the thread is evolution disproven. That's MY proof, egg fu yung.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Nowhere in the thread is evolution disproven. That's MY proof, egg fu yung.

And "libs" are "libs" just because, right spock?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by NewGuy
And "libs" are "libs" just because, right spock?

Bend over, Uhura.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I suspect Libs are Libs because they were dropped on their head. Why? Are you a lib? do you prefer kerry over bush?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I suspect Libs are Libs because they were dropped on their head. Why? Are you a lib? do you prefer kerry over bush?

I was never dropped on my head :

dropped on my ASS a few times, but thats another story

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I was never dropped on my head :

dropped on my ASS a few times, but thats another story

But you're not really a lib, DK.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
No evidence?
" 1. The Earth is the center of God's attention in the universe. By implication, the Earth may also be located near the center - perhaps so man can see the glory of God's creation in every direction.
"
You have to mentally be at maximum density to think the Earth is NOT the center of attention in relation to all of creation according to Biblical view. Obviously you do not know what the Bible isabout. It doesn't spend 80% of its pages talking about other universes OR other planets, but the Earth and its inhabitants. If you DO read the Bible, you would find:

Ps 19:1 -1 [To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.] The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

1Cor15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

If the Earth is in position for Man to see the heavens in all of the glory they were created in, it could easilly be supposed that the Earth would be in the center. Nowhere in this entire discussion of EVOLUTION is this point submitted as FACT, but supposition. Having not READ the thread in its context, you wouldn't know that. In addition, you having this issue with the supposition really means nothing as you cannot prove otherwise anyway and the exact location of the Earth has no bearing on evolution anyway. This was illustrated to help bring about the understanding of what the Bible claims in its logic for clearer understanding.



You tell me:
1. This would point to knowing the stars' formational probability of directional movement
2. Is 40:22 "22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: "

Ummm...this was written in 700 BC. The correct original hebrew word more correctly means SPHERE.

3. Job 26:7 "7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. "

Listed is the fact Earth is suspended in space. This verse was written roughly 2000 BC.

No matter how hard you try, you cannot get away from the fact that MEN did not write these things. MEN whose hands were directed by GOD wrote these things.

If you have a problem with these clear facts, you have a problem with God, not the facts.

That the world was a sphere was well know to Greek and Roman mathematicians and philosophers...It requires no divine knowledge, just some mathematical acumen.

As for being "directed by the hand of God"...which God? All Christianity did was transform the pantheon of minor gods of other religions into angels and the head god into THE godhead. Nothing's really changed in the mythos but the names.

 

[KLSuddeth]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
I have...The metaphysics gets in the way of a reasonably sound moral philosophy.

I would like for you to further define this before I say anything else.

Please and Thank you.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by KLSuddeth
I would like for you to further define this before I say anything else.

Please and Thank you.

Most of the world's great religions be it Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism...pick most any "...ism", are rooted in a basically sound moral philosophy. It is when the metaphysics of supreme beings, rewards and punishments meted out in an after-life, etc. have grown up like rank weeds in a beautiful garden, all but obliterating what has come before that the problems start.

Chuck the metaphysics, and you find moral and ethical systems which take into account the consequences of those morals and ethics to this life, in this world..here and now. With human life, then, as the yardstick against which these consequences are measured, we have more human, and humane, moral and ethical systems.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Most of the world's great religions be it Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism...pick most any "...ism", are rooted in a basically sound moral philosophy. It is when the metaphysics of supreme beings, rewards and punishments meted out in an after-life, etc. have grown up like rank weeds in a beautiful garden, all but obliterating what has come before that the problems start.

Chuck the metaphysics, and you find moral and ethical systems which take into account the consequences of those morals and ethics to this life, in this world..here and now. With human life, then, as the yardstick against which these consequences are measured, we have more human, and humane, moral and ethical systems.

Like communism? try again.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Individual rights and free markets have raised the standard of living of the entire planet.

 

[KLSuddeth]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Most of the world's great religions be it Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism...pick most any "...ism", are rooted in a basically sound moral philosophy. It is when the metaphysics of supreme beings, rewards and punishments meted out in an after-life, etc. have grown up like rank weeds in a beautiful garden, all but obliterating what has come before that the problems start.

Chuck the metaphysics, and you find moral and ethical systems which take into account the consequences of those morals and ethics to this life, in this world..here and now. With human life, then, as the yardstick against which these consequences are measured, we have more human, and humane, moral and ethical systems.

Again, before I reply, would you kindly please share with me what you base this upon and from where you are getting that information. I dont mean 'site a source' - I could care less about that -lol. Im truly curious as to how you come to your conclusion.

Thank you.

 

[Isaac Brock]

Man, I wish I caught this thread at its beginnings! Very interesting. I've had this discussion numerous times with my Christian, Jewish and Muslim friend.

I think most of the friction that comes in the whole Evolution vs. Creationism debate is on how we are debating the issue.

Evolution is based upon science. It's a theory, it's not perfect by any means, but as a student of science it does make some very compelling arguments, scientifically speaking.

Creationism is based on faith. It assumes a knowledge beyond basic scientific principles, the Divine. It cannot be proven scientifically because it assumes a supernatural force not bound to the first physical principles.

The main conflict does not arise on the actual mechanics itself, but rather the knowledge systems that we use to base our theory on. The only truth we know is that both of them are theories and neither a reproducable. The major problem is placing a value judgment on the superiority or inferiority of one knowledge system over the other.

I don't see the harm in pursuing the truth of our origins through both knowledge systems! I mean, the roots of humanity is of great interest not just for revealing HOW we came as we are, but it also may tell us WHY we are. I believe pursuing the truth both scientifically and through faith is a noble pursuit. As corny as it sounds, I think the true value is in the path we take to explore, rather than our end results.

What I do know for sure, is that there certainly is not enough evidence to say anyone's wrong.

 

[proud_savagette]

This is not a very serious post, but it is a question that I've had for a long time--if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around? Wouldn't have they evolved as well? And why would humans evolve in the first place? Animals seem so much happier than humans anyhow, and we kill each other just because, hate each other just because, etc., while animals go off of instinct. I don't see how that is survival of the fittest....

 

[DKSuddeth]

evolution is a response to outside actions and stimulus in an attempt to adapt to change. Following the theory of evolution that one day we were 'monkeys' could be explained as 'our' species experienced some action or change in our environment that forced our species to either adapt to that environment or die out. That action could be as simple as a weather change or as complex as a happenstance motor skill discovery.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by proud_savagette
This is not a very serious post, but it is a question that I've had for a long time--if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around? Wouldn't have they evolved as well? And why would humans evolve in the first place? Animals seem so much happier than humans anyhow, and we kill each other just because, hate each other just because, etc., while animals go off of instinct. I don't see how that is survival of the fittest....

:

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by KLSuddeth
Again, before I reply, would you kindly please share with me what you base this upon and from where you are getting that information. I dont mean 'site a source' - I could care less about that -lol. Im truly curious as to how you come to your conclusion.

Thank you.

Observtion of the world around me and a survey of the worlds religions. Actually...It's nothing more than my opinion based upon those observations. I know that some here will find that offensive, but they also have their opinions.

 

[KLSuddeth]

bully - I can respect that answer. Thank you for being kind enough to indulge me with it

To everyone else:
Im still thinking about my reply that I promised 2 days ago - it'll come soon....and it WILL be long lol

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
evolution is a response to outside actions and stimulus in an attempt to adapt to change. Following the theory of evolution that one day we were 'monkeys' could be explained as 'our' species experienced some action or change in our environment that forced our species to either adapt to that environment or die out. That action could be as simple as a weather change or as complex as a happenstance motor skill discovery.

To say that we evolved from "monkeys" is inaccurate. A more accurate statement is that humans and current primates have a common homonid ancestor. Monkeys and humans are contemporaries on the evolutionary time scale.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Like communism? try again.

NO dipstick...NOT like communism. Although communism does substitute the state for the godhead...