Rape is a human word for a human concept. If you think no other species has sex with their offspring I can safely assume you've never had hamsters.
Evolution Debate ...
- Thread starter Planet_EN
- Start date
Incestuous hamsters aside, our species is the one that's destroying the planet. We've done it in isolated systems before, but this time it's for the whole ball of wax.
Just like most beauty implies danger, I wonder if intelligence implies danger also.
If we were to look at all of this as a process, we may assume a need to come towards the brink of disaster, blink, and then back off and re-assess.
I believe the idea of evolution, of nature, and all process of anything, implies a swing of the pendulum, where we must confront the brink of an abysss, or we must understand that for every power that arises there will arise an opposite and equal power.
We see it in our hemoglobin. We see it when the body fights off any foreign substance in our bodies.
If we were to look at all of this as a process, we may assume a need to come towards the brink of disaster, blink, and then back off and re-assess.
I believe the idea of evolution, of nature, and all process of anything, implies a swing of the pendulum, where we must confront the brink of an abysss, or we must understand that for every power that arises there will arise an opposite and equal power.
We see it in our hemoglobin. We see it when the body fights off any foreign substance in our bodies.
My, you’ve all been busy during my absence. I don’t have time to get into it the way I would like, but I’ll answer what I can.
Pea Pod
Sounds like a double standard, Pea.
The ID proponents do show all their work. The criteria, the method, the studies, the research papers, the labs are the same as all scientists use. It’s all in the data that’s produced by mainstream science.
Pea Pod
Sounds like a double standard, Pea.
The ID proponents do show all their work. The criteria, the method, the studies, the research papers, the labs are the same as all scientists use. It’s all in the data that’s produced by mainstream science.
Frappuccino Dibs
This is a very revealing point:
“These type of evolutionary processes have occured due to 'survival of the fittest'. I Hummingbird with a bill that could not reach the pollen may die out. “
This is obviously an adaptation that strengthened the species, preventing, as you pointed out, extinction. Just like Darwins Finches, it did not change to a new species.
This is a very revealing point:
“These type of evolutionary processes have occured due to 'survival of the fittest'. I Hummingbird with a bill that could not reach the pollen may die out. “
This is obviously an adaptation that strengthened the species, preventing, as you pointed out, extinction. Just like Darwins Finches, it did not change to a new species.
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...
”One obvious [myth] is that before Columbus, Europeans believed nearly unanimously in a flat earth-a belief allegedly drawn from certain biblical statements and enforced by the medieval church. This myth seems to have had an eighteenth century origin, elaborated and popularized by Washington Irving, who flagrantly fabricated evidence for it in his four-volume history of Columbus…The truth is that it’s almost impossible to find an educated person after Aristotle who doubts that the Earth is a sphere. In the Middle Ages you couldn’t emerge from any kind of education, cathedral school or university, without being perfectly clear about the earth’s spericity and even its approximate circumference.”
David Lindberg, former professor of the history of science and currently Director of the Institute for Research in the Humanities at the University of Wisconsin,.
DasFX said:
”One obvious [myth] is that before Columbus, Europeans believed nearly unanimously in a flat earth-a belief allegedly drawn from certain biblical statements and enforced by the medieval church. This myth seems to have had an eighteenth century origin, elaborated and popularized by Washington Irving, who flagrantly fabricated evidence for it in his four-volume history of Columbus…The truth is that it’s almost impossible to find an educated person after Aristotle who doubts that the Earth is a sphere. In the Middle Ages you couldn’t emerge from any kind of education, cathedral school or university, without being perfectly clear about the earth’s spericity and even its approximate circumference.”
David Lindberg, former professor of the history of science and currently Director of the Institute for Research in the Humanities at the University of Wisconsin,.
Pea Pod
There are still textbooks using material that is blatant fraud. Some of them contain material that was exposed as fraud more than 100 years ago. I could look up the names of them for you. Stephen J. Gould, when confronted with it, said that he had known about it for 20 years, but thought it was OK because it gave beginning students an idea how evolution worked. Evolutionists aren't quite as objective as you think.
There are still textbooks using material that is blatant fraud. Some of them contain material that was exposed as fraud more than 100 years ago. I could look up the names of them for you. Stephen J. Gould, when confronted with it, said that he had known about it for 20 years, but thought it was OK because it gave beginning students an idea how evolution worked. Evolutionists aren't quite as objective as you think.
Machjo
“Science and religion……are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge. Some people may find this surprising, for there’s a feeling throughout our society that religious belief is outmoded, or downright impossible, in a scientific age. I don’t agree. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that if people in this so called “scientific age” knew a bit more about science than many of them actually do, they’d find it easier to share my view.”
Physicist and theologian John Polkinghorne, Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1994),xii
Of course, the atheists would never agree. They lump all believers in together.
“Science and religion……are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge. Some people may find this surprising, for there’s a feeling throughout our society that religious belief is outmoded, or downright impossible, in a scientific age. I don’t agree. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that if people in this so called “scientific age” knew a bit more about science than many of them actually do, they’d find it easier to share my view.”
Physicist and theologian John Polkinghorne, Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1994),xii
Of course, the atheists would never agree. They lump all believers in together.
No 1 important
More likely errors in your understanding.
The Bible doesn't say that.
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”
This refers to the big bang, the creation of all matter, energy, time and light, including the sun and earth. Our point of observation is from without the creation, in other words, from “heaven” with the creator.
“The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
Important change here. Our point of observation is now on the surface of the new earth. The atmosphere is opaque, and no light reaches the surface.
“And God said,”Let there be light”; and there was light.”
The verb used in the original Hebrew would be better translated as, “Let the light appear”. Unlike the verb used for the creation of the universe which refered to making something out of nothing, it refers to something which already exists. The atmosphere is cleared enough to allow light to reach the surface.
No, you’re reading it incorrectly. For example, the stars, the sun, etc. were created in verse 1. They appear, become visible on the surface of the earth in later verses.
Right you are. But there is another meaning to the word rest, which means to stop. Currently we are still within that 7th “day”, and there is no more creation going on.
Yes it is. Moose are not native to Newfoundland. There were 4 pairs introduced about 100 years back. They currently number over a million.
I could post a lot more on this subject but it's off topic.
More likely errors in your understanding.
The Bible doesn't say that.
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”
This refers to the big bang, the creation of all matter, energy, time and light, including the sun and earth. Our point of observation is from without the creation, in other words, from “heaven” with the creator.
“The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
Important change here. Our point of observation is now on the surface of the new earth. The atmosphere is opaque, and no light reaches the surface.
“And God said,”Let there be light”; and there was light.”
The verb used in the original Hebrew would be better translated as, “Let the light appear”. Unlike the verb used for the creation of the universe which refered to making something out of nothing, it refers to something which already exists. The atmosphere is cleared enough to allow light to reach the surface.
No, you’re reading it incorrectly. For example, the stars, the sun, etc. were created in verse 1. They appear, become visible on the surface of the earth in later verses.
Right you are. But there is another meaning to the word rest, which means to stop. Currently we are still within that 7th “day”, and there is no more creation going on.
Yes it is. Moose are not native to Newfoundland. There were 4 pairs introduced about 100 years back. They currently number over a million.
I could post a lot more on this subject but it's off topic.
Pea Pod,
Darwins Finches is not an example of evolution. Their original report suggested something like if there were a drought every 10 years then it would take only about 200 such cycles to produce a new species. Only when critics pointed out that the end of the drought resulted in the return of the original beak sizes was that bit about evolution turning around added. What that example actually shows is stasis.
Darwins Finches is not an example of evolution. Their original report suggested something like if there were a drought every 10 years then it would take only about 200 such cycles to produce a new species. Only when critics pointed out that the end of the drought resulted in the return of the original beak sizes was that bit about evolution turning around added. What that example actually shows is stasis.
Dex
I’ll try and explain a bit better. The evidence is that the theories fail, and not only that, in many instances, that it would be impossible naturally. It’s not just not knowing, it’s that we also know from evidence that it can’t happen. Therefore, there must be an external cause. Since many of the things we see are only known to us to be products of intelligence, then it is reasonable to assume there should be an intelligent outside cause.
Just about every person whom I’ve heard say that it’s not falsifiable have then proceeded to falsify it. And no theory of the cause of the universe is testable.
I think I’ve just explained that it isn’t an argument from ignorance.
I’ll try and explain a bit better. The evidence is that the theories fail, and not only that, in many instances, that it would be impossible naturally. It’s not just not knowing, it’s that we also know from evidence that it can’t happen. Therefore, there must be an external cause. Since many of the things we see are only known to us to be products of intelligence, then it is reasonable to assume there should be an intelligent outside cause.
Just about every person whom I’ve heard say that it’s not falsifiable have then proceeded to falsify it. And no theory of the cause of the universe is testable.
I think I’ve just explained that it isn’t an argument from ignorance.
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...
You're right - I'd never have something that had to be caged.
Alter the natural habitat and you change the behavior.
Much like we're doing to the planet and all inhabitants, including ourselves.
Meanwhile - we're still the only species which, as adults, has sex with infants. How ever it's said - it's still repugnant.
LadyC said:
You're right - I'd never have something that had to be caged.
Alter the natural habitat and you change the behavior.
Much like we're doing to the planet and all inhabitants, including ourselves.
Meanwhile - we're still the only species which, as adults, has sex with infants. How ever it's said - it's still repugnant.
I beg to differ extrafire, I find Jerry Fawell a mad rabid dog, a snake oil salesmen, a hate and fear monger. Bottom line extrafire, you cannot prove what you say with data and observation, its not science, its religion.
Insane?? you be the judge.
I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!
I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!
-- Rev. Jerry Falwell, America Can Be Saved, pp. 52-53, from Albert J. Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom.
This is tame to some of the things this sick bastard spews!!!!!! Here is one of my favorites:
AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
Talk about being offended!!! Amazing how fundies cry foul and intolerance, and yet this kind of crap is okay.
Most of all tho, what I find sickening is the methods fundies employ to undermine science. Not only,do they think they are not required to present scienctific methods, in the field of science, but its okay to lie, mis-represent facts, mis quote and munipulate and take out of context legitimate scientists.
Its insulting and wrong that fundies use these methods. Jerry fawell is a major contributor the the creationist movement, others are just as scary. They are liars, and have no ethics and have no scienctific method to prove their claims in the realm of science.
I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!
I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!
-- Rev. Jerry Falwell, America Can Be Saved, pp. 52-53, from Albert J. Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom.
This is tame to some of the things this sick bastard spews!!!!!! Here is one of my favorites:
AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
Talk about being offended!!! Amazing how fundies cry foul and intolerance, and yet this kind of crap is okay.
Most of all tho, what I find sickening is the methods fundies employ to undermine science. Not only,do they think they are not required to present scienctific methods, in the field of science, but its okay to lie, mis-represent facts, mis quote and munipulate and take out of context legitimate scientists.
Its insulting and wrong that fundies use these methods. Jerry fawell is a major contributor the the creationist movement, others are just as scary. They are liars, and have no ethics and have no scienctific method to prove their claims in the realm of science.
Extrafire quoted:
”One obvious [myth] is that before Columbus, Europeans believed nearly unanimously in a flat earth-a belief allegedly drawn from certain biblical statements and enforced by the medieval church. This myth seems to have had an eighteenth century origin, elaborated and popularized by Washington Irving, who flagrantly fabricated evidence for it in his four-volume history of Columbus…The truth is that it’s almost impossible to find an educated person after Aristotle who doubts that the Earth is a sphere. In the Middle Ages you couldn’t emerge from any kind of education, cathedral school or university, without being perfectly clear about the earth’s spericity and even its approximate circumference.”
David Lindberg, former professor of the history of science and currently Director of the Institute for Research in the Humanities at the University of Wisconsin,.
Do you do that on purpose extrafire? If you do, than Shame on you!
"The hullabaloo about intelligent design, says evolutionary biologist David R. Lindberg, director of the Museum of Paleontology at the University of California, Berkeley, "is all really a smokescreen to get back to basic 'creation science'."
"Lindberg at the Museum of Paleontology, who last July received a grant from HHMI to develop an interactive Web site on evolution (see sidebar), is promoting evolution with no apologies. "K-12 science classes should reflect what scientists call science"
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
”One obvious [myth] is that before Columbus, Europeans believed nearly unanimously in a flat earth-a belief allegedly drawn from certain biblical statements and enforced by the medieval church. This myth seems to have had an eighteenth century origin, elaborated and popularized by Washington Irving, who flagrantly fabricated evidence for it in his four-volume history of Columbus…The truth is that it’s almost impossible to find an educated person after Aristotle who doubts that the Earth is a sphere. In the Middle Ages you couldn’t emerge from any kind of education, cathedral school or university, without being perfectly clear about the earth’s spericity and even its approximate circumference.”
David Lindberg, former professor of the history of science and currently Director of the Institute for Research in the Humanities at the University of Wisconsin,.
Do you do that on purpose extrafire? If you do, than Shame on you!
"The hullabaloo about intelligent design, says evolutionary biologist David R. Lindberg, director of the Museum of Paleontology at the University of California, Berkeley, "is all really a smokescreen to get back to basic 'creation science'."
"Lindberg at the Museum of Paleontology, who last July received a grant from HHMI to develop an interactive Web site on evolution (see sidebar), is promoting evolution with no apologies. "K-12 science classes should reflect what scientists call science"
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
I don't understand the arguments of religious zealots. They reject evolution stating it is just a theory with no evidence, but instead stand by a story that was written thousands of years ago by other humans.
Where is the proof for creationism? The story written in Genesis is only one version of creationism. I mean every culture has their own story, which is right?
I don't understand how the zealots can pick and choose which parts of science they will believe and embrace. They'll embrace the science that allows them to recover from cancer or a heart attack, because it is beneficial to them or they agree with it, but if it goes against their closed minds, then it must be wrong.
Just like those against stem cell research, sure it is bad and ungodly, but the second the scientists discover a cure or treatment for what's killing them; they all say Hallelujah, praise Science!
Religion has been and continues to be humanity's greatest divisive force.
Where is the proof for creationism? The story written in Genesis is only one version of creationism. I mean every culture has their own story, which is right?
I don't understand how the zealots can pick and choose which parts of science they will believe and embrace. They'll embrace the science that allows them to recover from cancer or a heart attack, because it is beneficial to them or they agree with it, but if it goes against their closed minds, then it must be wrong.
Just like those against stem cell research, sure it is bad and ungodly, but the second the scientists discover a cure or treatment for what's killing them; they all say Hallelujah, praise Science!
Religion has been and continues to be humanity's greatest divisive force.