|
 TeKHeAD009
Stranger
Registered: 04/04/02
Posts: 760
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
|
 Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS  [Re: ]
#749038 - 07/15/02 06:04 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Bah! Whadda you know.... Jackass.
I believe 100% that God created everything. I also know that their is such a thing as evolution - I just dont believe that everything started from a primordial ooze and eventuially evolved its way up to humans.
|
llib
journeyman
Registered: 07/04/02
Posts: 129
Loc: florida
Last seen: 21 years, 2 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: ]
#749139 - 07/15/02 06:31 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
these forums are for discussion, dont say childish comments before you have researche dteh possibility that what someone says , albeit not anything you hav eevery heard may be true. I am here only to present som evarious thought, not even my discussionsa, premises and conclusions do I necessarily fully believe, at times.
before you reply,why dont you do some research into what groups supported him and whom is 'his asociations were with
the Royal society was established, soem believe , to control the vision, breadth and spiritual understaning of scientific development. The lunar society merged with the royal society. Another member of this society was benjamin franklin, ahigh level freeemason, rosicrusian. Other memebers included erasmus darwin, grandfather of charles darwin, it was he who actually wrote abook called the "zoomania in 1974 that explained the theory of evolution and teh survival of the fittest. rom this premise arose thoughts from people like Malthus, Hitler an dKissinger who used some of the darwinistic theories of survival of the fittest as premises, bases and justification for their "genocide" of the lessers. malthus once quoted " We are boun din justice and honour fromally to disclaim the right of th epoor to support. To this end, I should propose a regulation to be made declaring that no child born...should eb entitled to parish assistance...The )illegitimate" infant is, comparatively speaking, of little value to society, a sothers will immediaetly supply it splace...All children beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this "desired" level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by deaths of grown persons. Charles Darwin didnt even believe in his own theory an dthsi is teh company he kept.
How is that for ebonics?
about 20 years ago i explored darwin in college
|
llib
journeyman
Registered: 07/04/02
Posts: 129
Loc: florida
Last seen: 21 years, 2 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: llib]
#749150 - 07/15/02 06:34 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
correct year to 1794
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#749581 - 07/15/02 10:47 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The evolution theory is just the best way to explain what happens around us. It's not possible to prove it but it will remain valid until we find an example where it fails. The theory that God created life has much bigger problems. It doesn't give answers to many questions: Who created God? What is God? Is there anything that suggests that God exists? etc.
One problem of evolution theory is how did the first life form begin.
I had an oportunity to talk with Jehovas witnesses about it. This was their argument: "If you put wood and nails in a washing machine and start it, is it possible that a chair will come out?".
It is possible. The probabilty is very low but it is not 0! You just have to repeat the experiment for many many times.
Evolution can be simulated with computers (Genetic algorithms and Artifical life: http://www.alife.org/). I saw an experiment where simple life forms emerged from chaos and they evoluted in two different life forms: herbivors and carnivores who feeded on herbivors. With stronger computers it might be possible to drive evolution up to a point where an intelligent life form will emerge.
|
 RebelSteve33
Amateur Mycologist
Registered: 05/28/02
Posts: 3,774
Loc: Arizona
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#749614 - 07/15/02 11:09 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Enter-
Way back on Page 1 of this thread, I posted a lot of information about Darwin's theories and findings, as he is the one who is usually credited with the theory of evolution. I thought you might be interested in some pre-Darwinian evolutionary ideas that I have notes on and just came across:
Before the eighteenth century, speculation on the origin of species rested on myth and superstition, not on anything resembling a testable scientific theory. Creation myths viewed the world as a constant entity that did not change after its creation. Nevertheless, some thinkers approached the idea that nature has a long history of perpetual and irreversible change.
Early Greek philosophers, namely Xenophanes, Empedocles, and Aristotle, developed a primitive idea of evolutionary change. They recognized fossils as evidence for a former life that they believed had been destroyed by natural catastrophe. Despite their spirit of intellectual inquiry, the Greeks failed to establish an evolutionary concept, and the issue declined well before the rise of Christianity.
The opportunity for evolutionary thinking became even more restricted as the biblical account of the earth's creation became accepted as a tenet of faith. The year 4004 B.C. was fixed by Archbishop James Ussher as the time of life's creation. Evolutionary views were considered rebellious and heretical. Still, some speculation continued. In the mid 1700's, a French naturalist named Georges Louis Buffon stressed the influence of environment on modifications of animal type. He also extended the age of the earth to 70,000 years.
The first complete explanation of evolution was authored by the French biologist Jean Baptiste de Lamarck in 1809 (the year that Darwin was born). Lamarck made the first convincing case for the idea that fossils were the remains of extinct animals. The mechanism for Lamarck's evolutionary theory, known as inheritance of acquired characteristics, was fairly simple:
It stated that organisms, by striving to meet the demands of their environments, acquire adaptations and pass them by heredity to their offspring. According to Lamarck, the giraffe evolved its long neck because its ancestors lenghtened their necks by stretching to obtain food and then passsed the lengthened neck to their offspring. Over many generations, these changes accumulated to produce the long neck of the modern giraffe.
This concept of evolution is known as transformational because it claims that individual organisms transform their appearance to produce evolution. We now reject transformational theories because genetic studies show that traits acquired by an organism during its lifetime, such as strenghtened muscles, are not inherited by its offspring. This theory would also mean that if a man lost one of his limbs during his lifetime, that trait would be passed on to his offspring. We now know that children concieved by parents who are missing a limb are born with all limbs intact. Thus, this theory is obviously false, but it was important as it led to future speculation on more correct evolutionary theories.
The next important step towards our present day theory of evolution came from the geologist Charles Lyell. He established the principle of uniformitarianism, which encompasses two important principles that guide the scientific study of the history of nature. These principles are:
1. The laws of physics and chemistry remain the same throughout the history of the earth, and
2. Past geological events occurred by natural processes similar to those that we observe in action today.
Lyell showed that natural forces, acting over long periods of time, could explain the formation of fossil-bearing rocks. Lyell's geological studies led him to conclude that the earth's age must be reckoned in millions of years. These principles were imporant for discrediting miraculous and supernatural explanations of the history of nature and replacing them with scientific explanations.
It was these theories that Darwin used to come up with his own theory of evolution, which he devloped after his infamous voyage to the Galapagos Islands on the H.M.S. Beagle, and which is now generally accepted as fact. I apologize for another lengthy post, but I merely wanted to shed some light on where this "bullshit" theory of evolution came from and hopefully open your eyes a little bit more to its validity.
I admire the way you have dealt with people who responded to your post with nothing but childish and ignorant flames. I also admire your strong beliefs, and your search for knowledge. The only thing I have to suggest to you is to not let your mind become set in thinking that "THIS is the truth and I will never believe in THAT." Keep searching, and keep an open mind! Peace,
RebelSteve
--------------------
Namaste.
|
World Spirit
PNW
Registered: 07/27/01
Posts: 9,817
|
 Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: zeronio]
#749623 - 07/15/02 11:20 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Deleted by admin
|
Nomad
Mad Robot
Registered: 04/30/02
Posts: 422
Last seen: 15 years, 11 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: ]
#749728 - 07/16/02 01:16 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
This of course begs the question of how this hypothetical alien life arose.
It could have been evolved by a process not involving irreducibly complex systems. In fact, it could be so radically different from us that we wouldn't even recognize it as life. It could be so alien that there would be no way to communicate with it or understand its motivation. I think it was Terence McKenna who pointed out that searching the universe for radio waves as a hint to intelligent life is as culture-bounded as searching the galaxy for a good italian restaurant.
So while aliens may not be a good theory to explain the origin of life, it is a valid scientific theory, as long as it does not contradict any evidence we see. Darwinian evolution, on the other hand, seems to flatly contradict the biochemical complexity of early life. I didn't even mention the cillium, which is a different way for single cells to achieve motility, not based on the flagellum. It works on a different mechanism and is built out of completely different proteins, meaning that it didn't evolve from the flagellum, nor did the flagellum evolve from the cillium. Yet the cillium, too, is irreducibly complex. Enter a theory of intelligent design.
however I do not consider this to be an argument for any particular opinion on the matter (which is the opposite approach of most, if not all religions).
I didn't state any opinion. I don't have any preference in the matter - evolution or not, it bears no implication on myself whatsoever. I don't even consider it a specific religious issue.
It is best to admit our ignorance and not allow it to be used as an excuse to blindly believe the mythologies and follow the dogma of a stone age society
I agree, but what I consider dangerous is the kind of scientific hooray-patriotism (well, kind of) related to the theory of evolution. For many people, there couldn't be ANY evidence whatsoever to disprove evolution. It just isn't treated as a theory anymore. It is a fact. If you don't recognize it, you are a religious fanatic. Yet science is all about theories and not about facts at all. When we treat theories as facts, we have lost ourself in ignorance.
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#749751 - 07/16/02 01:33 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
There are many scientists that belive in God and there is nothing wrong with that. It's just that you won't get any useful or universal conclusions if you mix science and religion. Science is one of the rare issues that many people from all around the world agree about, because it doesn''t talk about feelings, religion and spirituality. Science won't give you salvation or something to believe in. It's just a bunch of basic facts and rules.
For example if someone comes up with a proof that theory about evolution is wrong then you won't be able to find a group of scientists that will continue to belive in it despite the facts. I think that future will prove that our current understanding of nature is oversimplified. It's like in physics where the theory of relativity has proven that the old Newton's laws are wrong (they were just a good aproximation). And these laws were basis of science for more than 300 years.
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: Nomad]
#749905 - 07/16/02 03:55 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Actually, if any alien life exists, it would probably be similar to life on earth. The carbon atom has unique abilities to form multiple bonds and that is one of the reasons that it is the basis for life. Any other life would most likely be made from ammino acids and protiens just like us. There is much evidence that the generation of life is not a rare event but a natural chemical process. Every ammino acid known has been synthesized using early earth conditions, they have also been found on meteorites.
The first "cells" that existed are thought to be aggragates of these organic molecules just like oil drops in water. The better fit "oil drops" survived and split forming two drops of equal chemical concentration. Eventually a metabolic chemical system evolved due to the advantage of reproduction and replication. Think about it for a while and it will make perfect sense.
Darwinian evolution, on the other hand, seems to flatly contradict the biochemical complexity of early life. I didn't even mention the cillium, which is a different way for single cells to achieve motility, not based on the flagellum.
That is called convergent evolution and it strongly supports evolutionary theory. It occurs when unrelated organisms evolve analogous structures due to the advantage that they get in a particular environment.
So while aliens may not be a good theory to explain the origin of life, it is a valid scientific theory, as long as it does not contradict any evidence we see.
A scientific theory is based on a testable hypothesis. This is NOT a testable hypothesis because it assumes that the existance of aliens is a fact which it is not.
"Theories are our attempts to explain facts and integrate them with over arching concepts...natural selection is the mechanism Darwin proposed to explain the historical facts of evolution." -Biology 5th ed.
--------------------
Edited by Catalysis (07/16/02 04:14 AM)
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: RebelSteve33]
#749907 - 07/16/02 03:56 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
That was extremely well written and thought out. I admire your clarity of thought and the way it flows. You have quite a bit of knowledge of the history of the theory of evolution and it shows that you take the subject seriously.
I disagree with your conclusions however. But I find arguing or even discussing the subject a waste of our time.
As you said to enter, it is best to keep an open mind. I hope you do as well.
Former Evolutionist,
|
gnrm23
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/29/99
Posts: 6,488
Loc: n. e. OH, USSA
Last seen: 2 months, 3 days
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#750403 - 07/16/02 08:01 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
more books & authors:
microcosmos (lynn margulis and dorian sagan) (mostly about the evolution of prokaryotes + bacteria)
lifetide (lyall watson) (clay as the template for organics to line up on...)
'most anything by stephen jay gould  (see:punctuated equilibrium)
dear departed dr. carl sagan's books (esp. cosmos, and maybe ummm the dragons of eden, but all of his books are wonderful...)
& i dunno there's plenty more but mine mind is otherwise occupied, hehheh....
--------------------
old enough to know better
not old enough to care
|
World Spirit
PNW
Registered: 07/27/01
Posts: 9,817
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: gnrm23]
#750675 - 07/16/02 09:44 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Deleted by admin
|
ArisEve
My Chronic
Registered: 07/09/02
Posts: 373
Loc: Use a GPS if ya wanna kno...
Last seen: 20 years, 15 days
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: Catalysis]
#750728 - 07/16/02 10:03 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Very true. With the right conditions life can be created quite rapidly and the rate at which they can evolve and become more complex organisms is impressive.
--------------------
Simple pleasures in life are only to momentarily distract you from the obviousness of lifes reality...
-ArisEve
|
francisco
Richman Sporeman
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 133
Loc: USA
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#751088 - 07/16/02 01:21 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
1.Some monkeys were stupid and could not learn;therefore,they are still a monkey.
2.Have you not been to D.C.?
3.We havn't,the dinosaurs are dead.
Yes it is contrived,it has been setup.Who knows the mind of God,but God .
--------------------
Well...Maybe just a little.
|
Bullfrog1
Discovery BeyondImagination
Registered: 07/03/02
Posts: 272
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#751237 - 07/16/02 02:44 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Enter,
No one doubts your faith. I think that you do since you want us to argue a point that you seem unsure of. Evolution does not need your approval. Those here like myself know that it is the living word of science which HAS been proven, unlike your living word of exclusivity which deems the rest of humanity unworthy of the creator. I am no greater for my "non-belief", than you are for having yours. YOU, and other christians feel that you have this "backstage pass" with the creator, or whatever you may call him. I do not believe in "Jesus", nor do I believe in the old testament "Elohim", a crazy old sadist who doesn't have his act together.
10 commandments which preach "Thou shalt not kill", yet slaughter roughly 35,000 native people of the region, as is done throughout the beginning of your bible. It negates itself.
Bullfrog1
--------------------
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder
Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: Bullfrog1]
#751422 - 07/16/02 04:01 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Both you and enter interpret the Bible in the exact same way - literally. The only real difference is that he chooses to believe in the writings as historically accurate, and you do not. However, enter takes a whole raft of shit, with an abundance coming from me (in PM's), and he doesn't become angry. You, however, have some anger, and could chill some. BTW, the translation of the Hebrew OT into the Greek Septuigint and into English has mistranslated the word "kill." The commandment is "Thou shalt not murder." All of us may be called upon to kill, just to protect an innocent or helpless person. Whether you believe or not is your choice, but you should really Know what it is you're rejecting before you do so.
--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
|
Markos-
As long as you're bringing up the Septuagint...
Do you still believe In the Virgin Mary, even though the Septuagint scholars also mistranslated "Young Mother" into "Virgin"?
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Anno
Experimenter
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 days, 9 hours
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: World Spirit]
#752140 - 07/16/02 08:44 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
|
World Spirit
PNW
Registered: 07/27/01
Posts: 9,817
|
 Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: Anno]
#752208 - 07/16/02 09:29 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Deleted by admin
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder
Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: The Idea of Evolution is BS [Re: Sclorch]
#752620 - 07/17/02 05:39 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
As John Shelby Spong has pointed out:
"The word 'virgin' did not enter the Book of Isaiah until it was translated into Greek some 500 years after Isaiah had written these words, and some 200 years before the birth of Jesus. The translators chose the Greek word parthenos to translate the Hebrew word almah. Almah means a young woman in Hebrew. It never means virgin; the Hebrew word betulah was used for that. However, in the Greek word parthenos the concepts of young woman and virgin were merged. So it was only in the word parthenos that the connotation of virgin entered the reading of Isaiah. That, however, did not deter Matthew, who built his whole narrative around this mistranslation. He probably never checked the original Hebrew." -'Liberating the Gospels' pp. 188-189
So, no, I do not believe in the Virgin Birth, or the Immaculate Conception of Mary herself. However, I do understand as a student of religions that many historical persons are written about in like ways. Astronomical anomalies, parthenogenic births, lotus blossoms springing up from the first baby steps of an avatar, nimbuses and halos depicting divinity, etc. This is the language of myth that I often post. The fantastic depictions in the Bible are 'midrash' - an ancient story-telling technique intended to convey spiritual truths. Such writing was not intended to be taken as a modern journalistic reporter or a scientistic observation. There was no reporter at a mythic manger in Bethlehem [or Nazareth, depending on the account], taking notes. Neither was Mary [Miriam] interviewed years later about the details of her labor. Neither is there a specific reference to 3 magi, or their names or that they rode camels; yet who hasn't seen these artistic depictions at Christmas, and 'assumed' that this was history. I need to separate 'the wheat from the chaff,' and that means demythologizing the history.
--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Droz
Dankman
sir tripsalot
SkorpivoMusterion
Anonymous
