You know,,,i've always thought: what is the big deal about creationism and evolutionism. So, God make the world in 6 days and Genesis says there's only been another what 5,000 before Christ. Well, exactly how long is a God year to us. a million human years,,,a billion. Can't evolution happen in that time frame. What exactly have creationists and evolutionists argued ever since Darwin's days. It seems like only a debate about time. I'm with Jeff, let's argue some more about cow Farts and the effect rich food has on CEO Farts. isn't bathroom humor easy.
Traj, How do you differ between 'general' and 'specific' theories of evolution. Your previous post expressed concerns w/ being able to test evolution b/c the limited perspective of the human life. If we can observe successive populations of bacteria evolve in a lab, then I would think that the time scale issue is no longer pertinent, and that evolution is plausible. What does the following quote tell you? Reread my quote, I didn't just randomly give a shout out to mutations. I spoke of differential reproductive success. Where are you getting these quotes? If you have the book, you know what follows. I think that you should also reread my post. I differentiated between creationists and what I call the 'ideal scientist'. The perfect example of each are diametrically opposed, irregardless of what human examples are. I feel safe w/ science because even a flawed scientist is at least striving for objectivism. When they (the scientist) err, there is at least rational thought to rip apart their ideas. I'm a Geologist and my wife is a Biologist (she works in a Genetics lab, incidentally), I can honestly tell you that my professors (and bosses at the Copper Mine here) were bloodthirsty. Scientists are a very competitive group and would just as soon destroy the very arguments that they work with to get fame. As the people in my wife's lab point out, they don't get famous for reproving evolution over and over. I think that that system takes care of itself (I think I also gave some sort of advocation for the market economy ). Creationism, on the other hand, begs the question. The initial premise holds that a higher level being exists. All other premises are sought or interpreted to this end. The conclusion then, reiterates the initial premise, and thus, begs the question. The definition of faith is (a) 'firm belief in something for which there is no proof'. Therefore in your argument... I think that I responded to your claims as to scientific bias earlier in this thread (out of order, oops). p.s. I try to never take debates personally. I also have an undergrad in philosophy, so I have been taught that arguments are things made up premises and conclusions... emotions should be abandoned. If I find myself with something to gain in an argument, I admonish myself. p.s.s. Again, as a Geologist and a Philosophy major (and having graduated in 95), many of the things that I was taught were simplified or have recently been thrown away in molecular biology labs. I think that I have given a fair simplistic argument after hanging out w/ the lab geeks... but any errors are of course mine, not evolutionary theory's. ------------------ "At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived." --Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush. (Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00) Dubyah Speaks
H. E. B. I went to that site in your sig. Pretty funny stuff, but I still say nobody compares to Dan Quayle. That boy was a dim as a blown light bulb. Some of those quotes on that site are really stretching it to make Bush sound as ignorant as Quayle... nobody can do that. LOL! Anyway... back to your regularly-scheduled programming... ------------------ Just shut up and post
Evilution? Next thing you know they'll be allowing those unGodly Helliocentrists into public schools to fill our children's heads with all sorts of pagan concepts.
According to Genesis God made animals and man in the same 7 week that the earth was made. So did the dinosaurs all die out the day before he created man?
Finn, Then the sentence would read: "It seems to me that the Bible only has merit simply because there are millions who believe it and shot about it loudly enough. Would the same be true of any other belief?" Mango, where's my promotion? ------------------ "At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived." --Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush. (Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00) Dubyah Speaks
outlaw... Yes...the dinosaurs died out in one God day. Like exactly how can we measure a God day, does God revolve around the sun or something. If the creationist argument is only about fitting everything into time measurements in the Bible, this is a stupid argument. Creationism and evolutionism can both be right!!
heypartner, AMEN BROTHER MAN!!! How did Jesus present his message to the people? Through the use of parables. Is it so hard to believe that the 7 days is a parable? ------------------ Going for the Rolls Royce! visit www.swirve.com
So heb, you are saying "The Bible" is made up of Fables? Stories written by man that have no substance? Millions of people read these "Fables" and believe them enough to shout about them? None have been proven and yet people still believe them. ------------------ "The day after tomorrow is the third day of the rest of your life." ---George Carlin
So...was that an Amen about wanting to discuss cow farts...hehe And what is the day discrepancy. I say 6 and every else says 7 days. I thought God rested on the 7th day and watched football.
Finn, Mostly I was just trying to get props from Mango... but I am comfortable with this sentence. We've found ourselves on a tangent, ehhh?? ------------------ "At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived." --Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush. (Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00) Dubyah Speaks
Achebe, I really don't think you can prove the general theory of evolution by giving examples of the specific theory of evolution. Also, it is not a given among evolutionists that mutations are the cause of evolution: "A mutation doesn't produce major new raw material. You don't make a new species by mutating the species...That's a common idea people have; that evolution is due to random mutations. A mutation is NOT the cause of evolutionary change" (Gould). By the way, which quotes are dated and which are out of context? Could you point me to the discoveries that make the statements out of date? And could you tell me what the author meant to say in context? I really would like to know. It sould seem that you've come to the conclusion that I'm a creationist, Achebe. And that I'm a creationist like Henry Morris, who believes in a literal interpretation of Genesis. When did I ever say that? I would just like people to see that both creationists and evolutionists depend of faith. Faith is simply conviction about the verity of something unseen. I also believe that faith is based on evidence; if it's not, it's ludicrous. I also believe that evolutionists come to the table with preconceived ideas. How many people have made the decision to believe in evolution before really becoming conversant with the data which is supposed to prove it? Most of the men like Gould, Mayr, Patterson, etc. were evolutionists as undergrads. Do you really think undergrads are equipped to base their convictions (i.e., their faith) on the sum total of scientific evidence for and against evolution? Their faith is based in large part on the testimony of men they deem trustworthy. By the way, Achebe, I hope your not taking all of this personally. There's nothing wrong with a little discussion now and then. [This message has been edited by TraJ (edited August 05, 2000).]
