Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hellbender

A challenge for creationists.

Recommended Posts

Religion can be flexible...I'm not so sure about Scientists :) ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have to say I certainly don't want to cloud this thread in the sense of what is theary and what is fact. Generally it's accepted that a theory predicts and a fact qualifies, but we don't need to bother ourselves with that to understand my point. Firstly, creationisms does not imply a biblical connection for much the same as evolutionists beleif's differ within the theory of evolution and so to does creationists.

 

The simple fact of the matter is. How did life start on this planet! One could simply read a bible and find out, or reject that notion and go for evolutionism. But how do evolutionists account for life developing on the planet?

 

Since some say it was chemical related with amino acids and I presume (though I don't know) close to the beginning of the DNA trail, or life came to the planet on the back of a meteorite or comet and has it's DNA origins in an infinate past. And Evolution as you seem to suggest is wrong, though evolvement was inevitable and did occur but in a creationist way. I hate evolutionists that pass off the theory of evolution as a fact, and try to ram down our throats without keeping an open mind to a created past but not at all God as the bible suggest's.

 

It's a very plausable theory, not fact.

 

 

Root

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How did life start on this planet! One could simply read a bible and find out, or reject that notion and go for evolutionism. But how do evolutionists account for life developing on the planet?

 

evolution says NOTHING about the beginning of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a very plausable theory' date=' not fact.

 

 

Root[/quote']

 

It's the theorys of evolution, as in plural. Some are proven, and some debunked. It seems you have confused those theorys that have become fact with those that have not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darwin's doesn't... but there is a theory that does give a chemical explaination, though it'ss not necesarly under the title "Evolutionary Theory"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darwin's doesn't... but there is a theory that does give a chemical explaination, though it'ss not necesarly under the title "Evolutionary Theory"

 

Darwin wrote 'The Origin of Species', which is one of the texts taken to be in contradiction with the Bibles account. It doesn't deal with the origin of life, but then few people actually read it.

 

I'm including me on the 'haven't read it' list btw. Even though I have the book on my shelf (stolen from sayo, heh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And, by the way, Creationism and Evolution are two seperate things...they don't have anything to do with each other. They are 2 different and completely[/i'] valid theories.

 

 

No, really, they aren't. Creationism is in no way a valid theory. It can't be a theory because it's not science - it's religion masquerading as science. But a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

evolution, on the other hand, HAS been proven. AVIDA proves that evolution isn't even restricted to biological life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Guys' date='

 

Wehey my first post. I think it's lame to ask a creationist to prove themselves right! Afterall their proof is that they are here. On the same tune I think it is lame to suggest one can prove "The theory of evolution". It is to this day just a theory, a theory has yet to establish itself as fact. Not only are evolutionists really struggling with the theory, your failing yourself for what you accuse others as being "Uneducated".

 

Thoughts?

[/quote']

 

Theories can never be proven in the mathematical sense. They can only be disproven.

 

Evolution is both a fact and theory. That it has been shown to happen is the fact, and the explanation for how it happens is the theory. Anyone who argues that evolution is "just" a theory is just demonstrating their ignorance of the scientific process. And if you don't understand the scientific process, how can you validly criticize it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to dispute what you say, but I seem to recall someone on this forum postulating a theory about little green magicians (or was it little green elephants?) creating the world. What type of evidence would you consider possible to disprove such a theory? Until such "proof" is presented to you, would you consider it a valid theory that should be accepted on equal terms with evolution?

 

There were the invisible pink fairies...

 

"I can explain just about everything with invisible pink fairies, and you can't disprove their existence. But it's useless as a theory, as there is no predictive power, and nothing that is explained that isn't already.

 

(feel free to substitute the deity of your choice into that)" (me)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Religion can be flexible...I'm not so sure about Scientists :) ...

 

Science or scientists?

 

That religion can be flexible is why it isn't scientific. It can explain anything, even two mutually exclusive points. There is no way to disprove it, in principle, so it is unscientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(feel free to substitute the deity of your choice into that)"[/i'] (me)

It's settled then. I'll go with little green elephants. The only point still open to debate is just how little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Guys' date='

 

Wehey my first post. I think it's lame to ask a creationist to prove themselves right! Afterall their proof is that they are here. On the same tune I think it is lame to suggest one can prove "The theory of evolution". It is to this day just a theory, a theory has yet to establish itself as fact. Not only are evolutionists really struggling with the theory, your failing yourself for what you accuse others as being "Uneducated".

 

Thoughts?

 

Root[/quote']

 

yeah here's my thoughts. The word "theory" means something different when speaking about a 'scientific" theory. This is a typical tactic used by creationists. A scientific theory is well proven and well tested. Gravitational theory and atomic theory are theories as well. That means they, as well as evolution are estabilished as fact. Try reading a real scientific source on this instead of parroting the propaganda that creation "scientists" write.

 

Evolutionists struggling? *sigh*. It is good for scientists to "struggle" or to use a less melodramatic term, to continually test out and find out new things about something. But are we just struggling to find any sense in this theory? No. If you can provide a source of this, I would be grateful.

 

If you use that fact that "we are here" as proof of something unprovable like creation, can't that fact also be used as proof of evolution? Its not lame to ask a creationist to prove their facts. This is a science forum. Thats what we do. You make a claim, you better be prepared to back it up. And pointing to the bible and saying "it says so here" is a source, but not an acceptable one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, really, they aren't. Creationism is in no way a valid theory. It can't be a theory because it's not science - it's religion masquerading as science. But a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf.

 

I agree with swansont here. I love how some people think of creation as a "alternative explanation" When something is fact and explains occurances naturally, there is no alternative to it. But still some creationist claim their religious texts are seperate answers to evolution. There is no multiple choice here. What you see is what you see. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with swansont here. I love how some people think of creation as a "alternative explanation" When something is fact and explains occurances naturally, there is no alternative to it. But still some creationist claim their religious texts are seperate answers to evolution. There is no multiple choice here. What you see is what you see. Sorry.

 

You say creationism is not a valid explaination, yet, desite all your bashings nobody has come up with sufficent evidence to disprove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with swansont here. I love how some people think of creation as a "alternative explanation" When something is fact and explains occurances naturally, there is no alternative to it. But still some creationist claim their religious texts are seperate answers to evolution. There is no multiple choice here. What you see is what you see. Sorry.

 

Note that I said that Creationism isn't a theory, not that it wasn't an explanation. "God did it " and "rubbing my lucky rabbit's foot caused it" are both explanations - explanations need not be scientific. (they probably aren't correct, but that's another issue)

 

A religious text can be a separate answer. An answer without proof, to be sure. Wrong answers are still answers, after all.

 

My issue isn't whether some people want to believe something (even though in my opinion they are deluding themselves). It's when they want their beliefs to be accepted as facts by all, and as science by all, that I have a problem. It's when they lie about the issues, and denounce with nary a whiff of understanding, that I have a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many languages does it speak? :eek:

 

And didn't God say it would loose it's legs after the apple thingy.. :confused:

 

My point is that lines in the bible can be related to science. Snakes wiht legs is not far-fetched at all. Vestigial appendiges is quite common, in the theory of evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You say creationism is not a valid explaination, yet, desite all your bashings nobody has come up with sufficent evidence to disprove it.

 

I can observe and prove evolution at work, naturally. I don't see any god doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You say creationism is not a valid explaination, yet, desite all your bashings nobody has come up with sufficent evidence to disprove it.

 

"God did it" can't be disproven. It's not science. I know you were replying to Hellbender here, but I never said it wasn't a valid explanation - I said it wasn't a valid theory. Big difference. Calling it one is to try and attach an internet-diploma-mill-like legitimacy to it; it sounds nice but has no actual value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Note that I said that Creationism isn't a theory' date=' not that it wasn't an explanation. "God did it " and "rubbing my lucky rabbit's foot caused it" are both explanations - explanations need not be scientific. (they probably aren't correct, but that's another issue)

 

A religious text [i']can[/i] be a separate answer. An answer without proof, to be sure. Wrong answers are still answers, after all.

 

My issue isn't whether some people want to believe something (even though in my opinion they are deluding themselves). It's when they want their beliefs to be accepted as facts by all, and as science by all, that I have a problem. It's when they lie about the issues, and denounce with nary a whiff of understanding, that I have a problem.

Good post.

 

I also have nothing at all against people who want to believe in the bible. I do not appreciate people who expect creationsim to be taken seriously as an alternative to evolution in a scientific forum, given that the creationists that I have read seem to feel no need to provide scientific support for their idea. The notion that "evolution has problems, and dumping it leaves us with creationism" does not qualify as scientific support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Note that I said that Creationism isn't a theory' date=' not that it wasn't an explanation. "God did it " and "rubbing my lucky rabbit's foot caused it" are both explanations - explanations need not be scientific.

 

My issue isn't whether some people want to believe something (even though in my opinion they are deluding themselves). It's when they want their beliefs to be accepted as facts by all, and as science by all, that I have a problem. It's when they lie about the issues, and denounce with nary a whiff of understanding, that I have a problem.[/quote']

 

Sorry, I left topic there. Its an explanation, but not a valid, proven one. Not a scientific one.

 

I agree with you here, as well. Its fine to believe something, but when you want it accepted by all, taught in southern schools, for example, I have a problem with that, especially when no evidence is presented. I too have a problem when facts and quotes are subtly and cleverly bent to enforce religious doctrine. Most creationists simply deny evolution because it disagrees with what the bible says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok... so it's not a theory, in the scientific method form of the word, but it still a valid explaination (I know you agree, swansont, but others wouldn't)

 

Of course you don't physically see God, hellbender, but that's the entire nature of God. We see only the result of his work, not the creator himself. Sorry, you'll have to do better then that to convince me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
feel no need to provide scientific support for their idea. The notion that "evolution has problems, and dumping it leaves us with creationism" does not qualify as scientific support.

 

like root's post earlier. Its all about character attacks, false notions and propaganda. ecoli is the exception. I can tell he is simply not going to creationist sites and copy/pasting the crap that they write there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.