Creationism vs. Evolution

[News Bot]

Evolution... haha. Theory presented as fact.

How is that? Because there is circumstancial evidence for it? Sorry, fail comment is fail.

Who are you the Catholic Church? You believe in God and evolution. That's not how it works, that's just cop out to try and accommodate everybody. It makes no sense; the Bible and evolution just don't go. Sorry.

True. One is a fairy-tale. One is a theory backed up with evidence. You know. That we can see.

(Which is balls)

So is a man in the sky.

Then some of the other animals went "Shit, let’s go back in." (Oh snap) So they did.

Uhh, do you even have the slightest clue what you're trying to say? Evolution does not work like that.

I like this idea though. Maybe if I tell my children and there children an so on and so on to decide to get taller an stronger as they grow then eventually a few generations down there will be a troop of super Spence’s. EF YEAH!

Maybe if I tell my children that there is a man in the sky and they pass it down through the generations MAYBE HE'LL BE REAL YOU KNOW?

You're an idiot.

Speak for yourself.

If we did all come from a common ancestor then why have all the homo-whatever species between chimps and us die out whilst we and the wee monkeys remain?

Natural selection.

Let me sum it up for you. Evolution/Natural Selection = things we can see. Bible = book full of things we can't and will never see. Tell me, which one does rational logic point you to? And for your information, the Bible and evolution do go together. Genesis and evolution don't go together.

[Canas Renvall]

Who are you the Catholic Church? You believe in God and evolution. That's not how it works, that's just cop out to try and accommodate everybody. It makes no sense; the Bible and evolution just don't go. Sorry.

Oh, funny enough, I'm Catholic. I do believe in God and evolution. Like News Bot said, they go together just fine. Genesis and evolution, however, is where the problem lies. Sorry.

[Member_of_STARS]

This thread went from slightly irritating to bottomline retarded in the last 24 hours or so. Some of your arguments, guys, are just shocking.

"I believe in it, therefore its true!"

Is anyone actually even surprised that the IQ level of a religious person and an atheist is different? Even this thread shows that.

[REmaster]

Well I myself am agnostic, because even though an after life does sound nice and all, I can't possibly be sure what's after this world so I'm simply not going to believe in these things. Considering I was raised catholic, I've had to hear shit my entire life about how I need to believe in God. I'm not going to run my life a certain way because some dead people decided to write a book. Nor am I going to try and convince others of my beliefs, because the key word is "MY" beliefs. Even though I'm not a Catholic or Christian, I do live life by most of the same principals. You don't have to be religious to know the difference between good and bad. Stevie Wonder could see that this thread was going to turn into a huge argument sooner or later.

[Darkmoon]

My IQ is 139. If that helps.

You'll also notice I've never said that I'm deffintely right, just that I happen to believe something. Hell, there's a fairly solid chance we're all hideously wrong.

I also don't infer that people that don't share my opinion are idiots.

[REmaster]

Yea. Remember the end of Men In Black, when the camera zooms out of earth, and than out of the universe until it's just a marble, than an alien picks up the marble and tosses it into a whole sack of other marbles? Probably something along those lines.

[TheSelfishGene]

Interesting fact though. The Torah (and possibly the Bible, I'm not sure) never actually givers a number for the age of the world. The age of the world was calculated by scholars using the events in the Torah as a basis for there time table. A lot of religious people take it as a fact but it's not, it's one of man's opinions.

Bishop Ussher. From what I was taught he traced who begat whom in the bible, and got it back to about 6000 years ago. But from what I understand, there were some guesses on his part, but I'm not sure where.
I think the conflict comes into the belief that the bible is the inerrant word of God passed onto mortals. And if this is true, and Ussher's assumptions are reasonable (and afaik young earth creationists use his figures), then this can cause the conflict, as God wouldn't create an imperfect bible.

Interestingly there is a certain amount of evidence to back up at least some fof it. Evidence of a Great Flood in the Mediteranian after an ice age, evidence of Sodom, evidence of this and that. And then there's something about pigs. I forget exactly what but something about there feet being unique in mamals being mentioned, and so far being correct. It's certainly not hardcore evidence but it's actually not as far off from the Big Bang Theory (which has very little evidence backing it up as well) as you might think.

I don't doubt that some of the events of the bible didn't happen, it's just that I don't think the book written by God and bestowed to man. To find evidence of ancient cities and things mentioned in the bible doesn't suprise me all that much, as I think the bible was written by man, describing and attempting to resolve the world around him. The fact that the bible I'm most familiar with (in English) has been translated at least once, and canonized a number of times suggests to me that the book isn't perfect.

As for the Big Bang theory, it's actually very convincing. About 3 weeks ago I finished reading a 500 page book on the history of the theory. Starting with ancient creation myths, to ancient greek astronomers right through to the theory in it's current form (as of 2004). I can give you a reference if you like.
Interestingly, Pope Pius XII said of the big bang:

"In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to the august instant of the primordial Fiat Lux [Let there be Light], when along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, and the elements split and churned and formed into millions of galaxies..."

"Therefore, there is a Creator! Therefore, God exists!"

At least according to Pope Pius XII, the bible and cosmology are reconcilable.

[Mr. Spencer]

Natural selection.

Leaves survivors stronger and BETTER!

[WeskerSexyCheez]

I am all for anything that can produce real scientific evidence of its existence... So evolution it is. People can believe in Creationism if they like, but they better bloody well not try to teach my kids it when I send em' to school.

[kylehimself]

How is that? Because there is circumstancial evidence for it? Sorry, fail comment is fail.

Fail? Evolution is a theory. Ever time it is presented it's told as fact. What's fail about that? It's true, that's not an opinion that's just fact.

True. One is a fairy-tale. One is a theory backed up with evidence. You know. That we can see.

That's the problem... We can't. We are told that every species has x amount of versions that came before it. Yet none of these specimens are ever recovered. But what happens when we do find something? Like say an old fossilised monkey. All these scientist jump on it, claim it to be the missing link. Create a whole back-story based on what it did and how it would act based on no evidence what so ever. Present a fancy CG version on a TV show and present it as solid evidence.

Uhh, do you even have the slightest clue what you're trying to say? Evolution does not work like that.

Does it not? That's funny, my comment about the mammals making there way back into the sea and choosing blubber over fur was directly taken from your evolution lord god Richard Dawkins on a show on C4 just this week where they dissected a whale. I have it recorded on Sky+ if you'd like me to watch and transcribe it for you.

I'd like to think if anybody knows anything about evolution (which they don't) it would be Mr. Dawkins.

Maybe if I tell my children that there is a man in the sky and they pass it down through the generations MAYBE HE'LL BE REAL YOU KNOW?

You do that.

Speak for yourself.

I'm sorry, but the guy said he didn't believe in God but practiced Satanism. That doesn't make sense. If you believe in one then you have to believe in the other. Hence the idiot comment.

Natural selection.

Let me sum it up for you. Evolution/Natural Selection = things we can see. Bible = book full of things we can't and will never see. Tell me, which one does rational logic point you to? And for your information, the Bible and evolution do go together. Genesis and evolution don't go together.

Oh, funny enough, I'm Catholic. I do believe in God and evolution. Like News Bot said, they go together just fine. Genesis and evolution, however, is where the problem lies. Sorry.

Oh, so you believe in the Bible but just pick and choose the parts that suite? Genesis in this case doesn't, so you disregard it.Very good.

And really lets be honest, Catholic Church is laughable. A church that holds Mary on a pedestal and worships her like a God, an act which is 100% completely unscriptural. It's never mentioned anywhere yet you'll do that but not trust the words of Genesis. A text from the book that the entire religion is based on... Come on. Catholicism being the biggest sect of Christianity is irony at its best.

Like I said before, I'm not a Christian. But in my opinion it just makes sense. Especially when the other side of the coin is the likes of Dawkins whose answer to the Watchmaker analogy was,
"natural selection is sufficient to explain the apparent functionality and non-random complexity of the biological world, and can be said to play the role of watchmaker in nature, albeit as an automatic, nonintelligent, blind watchmaker"
Wow Mr. Dawkins how convincing. That's pretty terrible reasoning for such a scholer.

[News Bot]

Yet none of these specimens are ever recovered.

Someone hasn't been paying attention.

Does it not? That's funny, my comment about the mammals making there way back into the sea and choosing blubber over fur was directly taken from your evolution lord god Richard Dawkins on a show on C4 just this week where they dissected a whale. I have it recorded on Sky+ if you'd like me to watch and transcribe it for you.

I'd like to think if anybody knows anything about evolution (which they don't) it would be Mr. Dawkins.

Sorry your irritating sarcasm made me jump the gun.

And really lets be honest, Christianity is laughable

Fixed.

PS. The Catholic church was Christianity as a whole. Calling it laughable is pretty stupid considering your former comment about picking and choosing. Which is what each religious denomination is made up of. And considering the Bible is missing a couple dozen parts and has been canonized even more, your comment itself is laughable. The Bible itself is a result of "picking and choosing".

[Member_of_STARS]

My IQ is 139. If that helps.

You'll also notice I've never said that I'm deffintely right, just that I happen to believe something. Hell, there's a fairly solid chance we're all hideously wrong.

I also don't infer that people that don't share my opinion are idiots.

WARNING! Brownnosing ahead.

Youre a lot like some of my religious friends. They enter a discussion and are open minded and swing on both side of the fense and (this part may or may not be true) in the same time they like to keep their religion to themselves. In the sense that they are a little private on what they believe in.

Personally, Im too much of a competitive person so I tend to be a little agressive in matters that are not about opinions.

[kylehimself]

Someone hasn't been paying attention.

Please show me the defining proof that shows anything dug up proved anything? Like I said above. Things have been found and man made back stories created for them. I Watched the show where they dissected the elephant (same series as the whale) Dawkins explains all the elephant predecessors; they show pictures of them all and explain how the current day elephant came to be. My problem is that none of these earlier versions have been dug up. They have never been found. It's all just speculation. Because animal skeleton is found and has a slight difference doesn't make it a whole different type. It's just shit evidence.

PS. The Catholic church was Christianity as a whole. Calling it laughable is pretty stupid considering your former comment about picking and choosing. Which is what each religious denomination is made up of. And considering the Bible is missing a couple dozen parts and has been canonized even more, your comment itself is laughable. The Bible itself is a result of "picking and choosing".

It was, correct... Was. That's why Protestants broke away. Like I said, so many aspects in Catholicism aren't in the Bible. There was no picking and choosing as such involved. It was a movement of people who recognised that a lot of what the Catholic Church preached wasn't backed up by Bible i.e. Worshiping Mary or their hierarchy of priest’s, bishops, arch bishops and so on. After all, everybody is the same in Gods eyes.

[News Bot]

Because animal skeleton is found and has a slight difference doesn't make it a whole different type. It's just shit evidence.

Exactly what do you define as a "slight difference"?

You act as though the scientific community is full of morons (how playfully ironic). "Slight differences" are recorded as such. Any and all major derivations are recorded as such when the evidence at hand (its fucking remains) indicates that it was different enough to be considered a a new type.

"Man made back stories" is only slightly true. It's really a case of filling in the obvious blanks based on logical conjecture and reasoning. Believe it or not, actual research goes into this stuff.

And evolution is "presented as fact" (its not) because, while it is still a theory, it has enough evidence to at least make it partially true to an extent. And really, you have to be a fucking idiot to say it's 100% false. All you really need to do is observe. It's a slow process (which is one of the main reasons people automatically disbelieve it) but the results are there. Hell, take humans for example. We are some dynamic specimens. The webbing between our fingers and toes is a remnant from our sea-faring days, as is our hair. None of these are actually needed in our present state, and we are projected to lose them in a few hundred years. There are other differences too which have been observed over an even shorter period of time of simply a few decades.

Evolution too is largely caused by mutations through the course of time. That's the basic idea. Natural selection plays hand-in-hand with it in that we change according to our immediate environment in order to ensure our survival. Not only did Darwin observe this several times during the course of his research (finches on the same island with different beaks to allow them to get food in their environment). The general misconception which leads people to jump the gun on evolution is that they do not understand the very basics of the theory. Something will not suddenly become something else. Evolution is the direct result of natural selection. Changes (such as the aformentioned beaks) are minute and supposedly insignificant at first. They are also remote and isolated for the longest time. It is only through the course of time that major changes become apparent on a large scale. Your claim about "slight differences" is just another bullshit misconception caused by close-mindedness.

[adamthegrave]

if yal saying that we came from monkeys then where is my tail so i can go to super sayian? 2nd who cares about this crap evolution crap if u think ur came from a monkey then go eat your own crap lol . (USELESS Forum Discussion!)