Was Darwin Wrong?

[capsfan78]

So, you and Beta are both open to the possibility that ID is correct.

Maybe you didn't realize you were, and believe something else is MORE likely, but you've now both admitted that you believe that ID is a viable option to consider.

Thank you.

Of course, anything is possible. But, by not believe 100% in one thing, I have options. Unlike those who believe, have no options it is black and white. I just don't work that way.

 

[lewis7lewis]

Gee your so Smart????????????????????????????

Nor do you have the Holy Spirit enlightening you...

Funny guy...
People make bad choices or haven't done the necessary research on the Bible. You like books? Read "The case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. He was an avowed atheist trying to disprove Christ and he ended up becoming a Christian because he couldn't. He details his research in it.

He made a very true statement. The Bible doesn't tell us everything about God or life but it does tell us most of what we need to know.

WOW! And I thought it was my cooking that caused those stomach pains...

Soitainly not! That would be like going back to 8 track tapes...

So What dose that prove your no Theologian I'm sure and just
because,,, You believe in something dosn't make it So ,,,and just because
you Don't,,,dosn't mean it's not True. That goes for Reglion,UFOs,Bigfoot
and so on and so on!Look genius the Bible was written by authors
unknown,,,Fact....Storys left out of the Bible,,,,,,,,,Fact....It was written
centurys later,,,,Fact. The problem is that anytime that anything gets
written down people figure it must be true or why else would somebody
have written it.

PS,,,You know what they say about God don't you,,,He's an invisible
friend for grown up's!

 

[capsfan78]

obviously evolution didn't happen. Those walking monkeys that we've found artifacts of are just extinct now. they didn't evolve into humans. humans were always here.

although that would probably just give darwin an argument with natural selection, even if it disproved his evolution stuff. geez this guy was good

How can you say evolution didn't/doesn't happen. We deal with evolution every day.

All life forms on this planet are basically made up of the same things. If you look at things on a people/animal scale, you don't see evolution happen for 100s of years. But look at it on a much small scale. We will use viruses. Viruses are constantly evolving to adapt to the medicines we create to fight them. They also have the abilities to change in the manner of how it is contracted (ingestion, injection, inhalation) these are evolutionary changes in the virus itself.

Or does God(or who ever) keep sending down new versions of illnesses?

 

[Beta84]

So, you and Beta are both open to the possibility that ID is correct.

Maybe you didn't realize you were, and believe something else is MORE likely, but you've now both admitted that you believe that ID is a viable option to consider.

Thank you.

I've never said it's not a possible option, just like you're apparently saying evolution is a possible option. I've just said ID is ridiculous and wrong.

 

[Beta84]

How can you say evolution didn't/doesn't happen. We deal with evolution every day.

All life forms on this planet are basically made up of the same things. If you look at things on a people/animal scale, you don't see evolution happen for 100s of years. But look at it on a much small scale. We will use viruses. Viruses are constantly evolving to adapt to the medicines we create to fight them. They also have the abilities to change in the manner of how it is contracted (ingestion, injection, inhalation) these are evolutionary changes in the virus itself.

Or does God(or who ever) keep sending down new versions of illnesses?

I WAS BEING SARCASTIC. geez people

 

[foodcritic]

I was only trying to make a point -- I wasn't saying the Bible is definitely false. I'm saying that it's very difficult to determine what's true, what's not, and basically everything else in between. Can we say, for certain, that certain events took place? Even if every little piece of history was accurate within the bible, does that mean the actual supernatural events took place? No. Same with any other book written for the purposes of religion. I am not saying any book is wrong, I'm just saying there's no way to prove definitively that any of them are right.

Speaking of the earth being round, didn't the Vatican strongly disagree that the earth was round for centuries? Didn't they disagree that the earth rotated around the sun for centuries? It's archaic. They tell you what they want to believe based on the Bible. They ignore science. Religion is good for some stuff, but to listen to religion when there is science saying otherwise is just silly.


It has. Heck, Christianity believes in that book too...it's called the Old Testament. It's just that the New Testament changed a ton because they didn't really like the first cut



You've already proved that you're pretty effing stupid, but to quote ME of all people when I was being completely sarcastic and mocking some people with that statement is just retarded. Go away and let the big boys discuss.

I think your missing a little of what I meant. The round earth thing was just an analogy. Is it difficult to determine what is true? I think you can look at evidence to make a determination that one is more true than the others. While that evidence may not prove 100%, it will provide REASONABLE answers to the question.

 

[This_person]

I've never said it's not a possible option, just like you're apparently saying evolution is a possible option. I've just said ID is ridiculous and wrong.

I've actually said it's pretty obvious that evolution on a micro scale exists.

Believing ID is wrong, but possible, is much different than simply dismissing it as an impossibility.

Your data for it being "ridiculous"?

 

[lewis7lewis]

Okay then Explain This!

Yes. The oldest was Methuslah at 969. The best answer(s) to this are
1) God simply allowed for this for the purposes of re-population.
2) The human body was less corrupt from the results of Adam's sin and we are naturally regressing from perfection. With out medical advancment how old would we live to be....I suspect
In Gen 6 set's man's age at 120yrs and in Psalms

In Psalm 90 we read
10 The length of our days is seventy years—
or eighty, if we have the strength;
yet their span [a] is but trouble and sorrow,
for they quickly pass, and we fly away.


I find this passage amazing. It was written at least 1500 years ago by King David. How much incite did it take for him to see that man kind's life span would be between 70-80 yrs????. Exactly what it is today.





This is a fair question. Without looking at any creation talking points I would speculate that it would be hard to determine the landscape of the earth pre-flood. The flood forever changed the landscape of earth. No one doubts a world wide flood BTW.



Usually the bible is very clear. There are some areas of disagreement. However Christians should not divide on issues that are not essential. I personally think that creation is an essential point that is reiterated through out the OT and NT.

So let me get this straight Adam&Eve had some kids Cain and Abel and
2or3 others then how do you explain such a wide range of Skin Colors
and Ethic backgrounds?And it has not been proven that there was
global flooding,,,,Fact and the Bible contradicts itself,,,,Fact! You guys
always say that we can't find the missing link yet when Moses took
the Israelites into the dessert for Forty Years we can't even find
a campfire pit or bones,dishes and so on and so on.Yet we have found
that we are getting closer to that missing Link from Hundreds of Thousands
of years ago. But God explains everything that's always the Excuse.
Here we go again,,,Plants have evolved Fact,,,,,Animals have evolved
Fact,,,,The Planet has evolved Fact,,,Humans have evolved.

PS,,,Try this with 25 to 35 people you line everybody up or put them in
or a circle then whisper just 3or4 lines about anything that makes
sense then the first person will whisper it to the next one and the
next will do the same till you get to the End,,,,by the time the last
person repeats what the First one said it will be so Twisted that
it won't make sence! My point is that the bible your bible was
written so long after it had all happened that the storys it tells
can not be all true.And as far that goes all great stories need
a great ending enter the Book of Revaluations if I spelled it right?
But I guess your gonna say I'm out of my F###### Head right?

 

[OoberBoober]

I've actually said it's pretty obvious that evolution on a micro scale exists.

Believing ID is wrong, but possible, is much different than simply dismissing it as an impossibility.

Your data for it being "ridiculous"?

If you see an animal with 4 hooves, it gallops around, has a tail, neighs, and eats grass do you call it a unicorn that's missing a horn? Or do you do what most sane people do and call it a horse?

 

[This_person]

If you see an animal with 4 hooves, it gallops around, has a tail, neighs, and eats grass do you call it a unicorn that's missing a horn? Or do you do what most sane people do and call it a horse?

If it's a horse, I call it a horse.

If you see that animal, and see one standing next to it with an incredibly long neck, do you assume they both had similar ancestors and one mutated out with a group of others that had virtually the exact same genetic mutation, and thus thrived in one area while the other moved on and thrived in another - or do you just see two similar looking animals with one big difference?

 

[OoberBoober]

If it's a horse, I call it a horse.

But how can you prove it is not a unicorn? It is, after all, just a horse that has a magic explanation.

 

[This_person]

But how can you prove it is not a unicorn? It is, after all, just a horse that has a magic explanation.

I answered yours, you answer mine:

If you see that animal, and see one standing next to it with an incredibly long neck, do you assume they both had similar ancestors and one mutated out with a group of others that had virtually the exact same genetic mutation, and thus thrived in one area while the other moved on and thrived in another - or do you just see two similar looking animals with one big difference?

 

[OoberBoober]

If you see that animal, and see one standing next to it with an incredibly long neck, do you assume they both had similar ancestors and one mutated out with a group of others that had virtually the exact same genetic mutation, and thus thrived in one area while the other moved on and thrived in another - or do you just see two similar looking animals with one big difference?

Both. Humans and chimps share 98-99% of our genetic code, yet we are drastically different creatures. If such a small mutation can create that big of a difference, a longer neck should be simple.

 

[Beta84]

I think your missing a little of what I meant. The round earth thing was just an analogy. Is it difficult to determine what is true? I think you can look at evidence to make a determination that one is more true than the others. While that evidence may not prove 100%, it will provide REASONABLE answers to the question.

Evidence. Exactly. My point was that evidence is often ignored in religion in favor of some old books and people who are unwilling to accept new findings. If the Vatican refutes that the earth is round for hundreds of years after it's commonly accepted elsewhere, then you don't see some sort of problem or disconnect? I just take the Vatican as an example since it's basically the most known religious leaders.

If you see an animal with 4 hooves, it gallops around, has a tail, neighs, and eats grass do you call it a unicorn that's missing a horn? Or do you do what most sane people do and call it a horse?

thank you for making my life easier on this one

 

[This_person]

Both. Humans and chimps share 98-99% of our genetic code, yet we are drastically different creatures. If such a small mutation can create that big of a difference, a longer neck should be simple.

Should be, but they aren't considered to have evolved from the same line.

Cows and whales, yes. Horses and giraffes, no.

Unless you want to take it back far enough. Then, you, me and the ficus in my office all evolved from the same ancestor.

 

[This_person]

But how can you prove it is not a unicorn? It is, after all, just a horse that has a magic explanation.

I'm not sure what you're driving at. Why would I try and prove something that's not there in evidence, without actively trying to research it?

 

[This_person]

Evidence. Exactly. My point was that evidence is often ignored in religion in favor of some old books and people who are unwilling to accept new findings. If the Vatican refutes that the earth is round for hundreds of years after it's commonly accepted elsewhere, then you don't see some sort of problem or disconnect? I just take the Vatican as an example since it's basically the most known religious leaders.

Yet, take Nuck earlier in this thread - the Big Bang theory is conceived due to scientific investigation by a science professor (who happens to also be Catholic), peer reviewed by scientists and eventually given a thumbs up by even one of the most skeptic scientists (Einstein). It's the basic scientific belief, even held in higher esteem as the likely right answer than macro evolution among scientists.

But, the Vatican bought into it almost immediately, and the scientist who discovered and documented it originally was a Catholic priest, and therefore Nuck assumes it to be wrong (among others).

This lack of ability to be open minded goes both ways......

 

[Beta84]

I'm not sure what you're driving at. Why would I try and prove something that's not there in evidence, without actively trying to research it?

Just giving an example...there's evidence that Jesus walked on water? And i'm not talking about books or the stories of a few people. I'm talking about hard evidence that can be researched and proven.

 

[This_person]

Just giving an example...there's evidence that Jesus walked on water? And i'm not talking about books or the stories of a few people. I'm talking about hard evidence that can be researched and proven.

I'm missing the relevance to a faith based story about an individual, and the concept of Darwin vs. a potential intelligent designer of the universe.

You know that ID doesn't require the designer to be the Christian God, nor Genesis to be correct, right?

 

[OoberBoober]

I'm not sure what you're driving at. Why would I try and prove something that's not there in evidence, without actively trying to research it?

Because that is the argument you have used this entire thread. You can clearly observe evolution is taking place, or has taken place (See: fossils) aka horse. But you are making a wild conjecture that something magic has a hand in all this, aka unicorn. All in all this is an argument for Occam's razor with relation to Evolution vs ID. However the same argument can be applied to god, and almost everything religious.