Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Any Creationists here?

1468910

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Jakkass wrote:
    I don't dismiss all Science, just Evolution and the Big Bang theories. That is due to my faith and beliefs.

    Would you dismiss modern biology, that is almost entirely based on evolutionary models of life?

    You might have heard of the various super bugs that are effecting hospitals across the western world. These bacteria and viruses are a problem in hospitals because the anti-biotics and other anti-bacterial and anti-viral cleaners that are used in hospitals lead to the rapid evolution of resistant forms of the bugs. To tackle this problem medical scientists need to understand why it is happening, how mutation creates resistant versions and how this can be controlled.

    Accept of course you don't believe in evolution. So clearly this cannot be happening according to you. The bugs are not developing resitence to treatments based on mutation and natural selection because they are not evolving.

    So would you turn away a treatment for one of these super bugs if it has been developed based on this research into the evolution of the bug itself?
    Jakkass wrote:
    You said men and women mind, not scientists.

    I actually said

    "the greatest disservice to the proper men and women in the scientific community who toil and strive for the advancement of human understanding of the universe"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    wolfsbane wrote:
    There is no doubt that Evolution is the biggest lie of the past couple of centuries, designed to give a credible alternative to the ungodly, and to undermine the Christian's trust in the truth of Scripture.

    While at the same time creating modern medicine and helping to vastly improve the lives of billions of people across the world ... those bastards!

    :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭aurel


    Talliesin wrote:
    Similarly enough, I have no problem with people arguing against religions, but it amazes me that they can't come up with something better than this rubbish.
    Your next post in any of the religious forums will contain actual content, or it will be your last.

    Granted, I did phrase that rather flippantly but I think it is still a fair point. Maybe not entirely pertinent to the discussion at hand however so I'll withdraw.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 3,818 Mod ✭✭✭✭LFCFan


    Jakkass wrote:
    I won't force anyone to believe in anything either. I hope to just tell my children of it and allow them to make up their own minds.
    So you won't be getting your kids baptised?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Probably a bit later should they decide to do so.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,115 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Talliesin wrote:
    Signature
    Cuius rei demonstrationem mirabilem sane detexi. Hanc marginis exiguitas non caperet.


    :)


    Jakkass, please define what you think evolution is.
    You seem to use it in the past tense...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Cuius rei demonstrationem mirabilem sane detexi. Hanc marginis exiguitas non caperet.


    :)


    Jakkass, please define what you think evolution is.
    You seem to use it in the past tense...

    Evolution as in the evolution of lifeforms. e.g apes into humans and other progressions before that. It is a way of scientific thought that claims that we have all been formed from something more primitive. I believe we were all created, animals and humans no evolution involved. As for the past tense, it must be one of those annoying grammatical habits one can have.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭So Glad


    Jakkass wrote:
    Evolution as in the evolution of lifeforms. e.g apes into humans and other progressions before that. It is a way of scientific thought that claims that we have all been formed from something more primitive. I believe we were all created, animals and humans no evolution involved. As for the past tense, it must be one of those annoying grammatical habits one can have.

    Again, why is it that people find it offensive that we've come from a more primitive subspecies? Wasn't New York just a shanty town when it was first established? Now it's a sprawling metropolis. You need to build solid foundations if what is built on it is to last.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭So Glad


    Jakkass wrote:
    Evolution as in the evolution of lifeforms. e.g apes into humans and other progressions before that. It is a way of scientific thought that claims that we have all been formed from something more primitive. I believe we were all created, animals and humans no evolution involved. As for the past tense, it must be one of those annoying grammatical habits one can have.

    Also, I find it quite ironic that the same man who preaches God's peaceful words could be so involved in a computer game that revolves around killing, drug dealing and prostitution :o


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I didn't say I found it offensive. I just don't believe that's the way that happened.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,115 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    I mean, you don't seem to realise evolution is happening around us. Every generation, mutation. I'm not picking on your grammar. :)

    I don't see how you can dismiss evolution, when there is far more proof for it than for some of the physics you take for granted as being fact..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution


    Btw, you think the Earth is 6, 000 years old?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    Wicknight said:
    While at the same time creating modern medicine and helping to vastly improve the lives of billions of people across the world ... those bastards!
    Evolution created modern medicine and has vastly improved the lives of billions??? Exactly what organism was seen to develop into another organism? Maybe you meant observed mutation and natural selection led to techniques of coping with disease? The sleight of mind in skipping from evolution to mutation and natural selection won't fool any but the unwary.

    But if you know of any bugs or fruit flies that have evolved into bats or flamingos, I'll concede the argument. ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    Did anyone see the documentary on CH4 the other night?

    The Great Global Warming Swindle http://http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

    No, it's not Creationists vs Evolutionists, but it reveals how scientific 'consensus' can be no more than propaganda, leading to censorship and intimidation. A cautionary tale indeed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭So Glad


    wolfsbane wrote:
    Did anyone see the documentary on CH4 the other night?

    The Great Global Warming Swindle http://http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

    No, it's not Creationists vs Evolutionists, but it reveals how scientific 'consensus' can be no more than propaganda, leading to censorship and intimidation. A cautionary tale indeed.

    Hey, nice one! I've been looking for that ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    So Glad wrote:
    Also, I find it quite ironic that the same man who preaches God's peaceful words could be so involved in a computer game that revolves around killing, drug dealing and prostitution :o

    Theres a line between entertainment, and actually killing, dealing drugs and prostitution now isn't there?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭So Glad


    Jakkass wrote:
    Theres a line between entertainment, and actually killing, dealing drugs and prostitution now isn't there?

    Ah, so you're all for simulated killing etc. for fun?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    what does this have to do with Creationism?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,449 ✭✭✭Call Me Jimmy


    LFCFan wrote:
    I take it you were born into a Christian family? If so it's kind of convenient that this was the religion you 'found'.

    What about Protestantism? It is a subset of Catholicism because someone was pissed off with it and then England embraced it because it's King wanted to Re-Marry. How can this be the basis for an entire belief system? It just adds more weight to the arguement that Religion is flawed.

    QFT

    Simply, obvious stuff like this must make people wake up and smell the coffee when it comes to religion... people used to worship the sun as a god which most would agree is crazy but I find it less crazy than any modern religion. At least the sun actually grew yer dinner/provided light etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    wolfsbane wrote:
    Evolution created modern medicine and has vastly improved the lives of billions??? Exactly what organism was seen to develop into another organism?
    Bacterial. And viruses. Which is what 99% of modern medicine is concerned with.
    wolfsbane wrote:
    The sleight of mind in skipping from evolution to mutation and natural selection won't fool any but the unwary.
    Groan ... seriously you have been around for like 200 pages on the Creationism thread, how do you still not get this.

    Mutation combined with natural selection IS evolution.
    wolfsbane wrote:
    But if you know of any bugs or fruit flies that have evolved into bats or flamingos, I'll concede the argument. ;)

    Quite ... and maybe the next time you see God create something out of thing are take a before and after photograph ... :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    So Glad wrote:
    Also, I find it quite ironic that the same man who preaches God's peaceful words could be so involved in a computer game that revolves around killing, drug dealing and prostitution :o

    Even more ironic is that Grand Thief Auto uses primitive genetic algorithms to hand its population AI as far as I know :p


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    wolfsbane wrote:
    Did anyone see the documentary on CH4 the other night?

    The Great Global Warming Swindle http://http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

    I did, and I found it very interesting.

    Did you happen to catch "The Root of All Evil" on Channel 4 as well?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    wolfsbane wrote:
    Did anyone see the documentary on CH4 the other night?

    The Great Global Warming Swindle http://http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

    No, it's not Creationists vs Evolutionists, but it reveals how scientific 'consensus' can be no more than propaganda, leading to censorship and intimidation. A cautionary tale indeed.

    Indeed it is:

    Climate change: An inconvenient truth... for C4
    This expert in oceanography quoted in last week's debunking of the Gore green theory says he was 'seriously misrepresented'...

    I'll copy his letter if you like - he is seriously annoyed, and he was seriously misrepresented. I'm not sure it was the only example of it on the program, either...ironic, eh?

    Oh dear, and the director's response to the concerns expressed...."you're a big daft c*ck". Classy.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    if you read I claimed that the faith required for elements of Science are equal to that of Christianity.

    Is faith required to accept the Big Bang? Let's see.

    Is the Big Bang extensively modelled? Yes.
    Are those models mathematically and physically valid? Yes.
    Do those models make predictions? Yes.
    Do those predictions match the evidence of what we see in the Universe today? Yes.
    Did the predictions precede the discovery/measurement of the evidence? Yes.

    You see, there's an element to science that seems to completely baffle certain people. That aspect is testability, or falsifiability.

    A scientific hypothesis must make predictions that can be tested. If it cannot do so, it is non-scientific. If it passes all the tests, so all its predictions are true, it is accepted as being a reasonable hypothesis. If it does it year after year after year, then it gets to be called a theory. Eventually, it may even graduate to being a Theory with a capital T.

    You could consider this, if you like, to be exactly the same as prophecy - although please note that this is an analogy. Every day, science routinely predicts thousands of things that will happen far away, predicts what will happen in the future, determines the nature and location of things that are hidden, and determines what happened in the past. There is no other body of prophetic work that matches it in size, scope, or detail from any period in human history.

    Now some of these prophecies will be wrong, and science operates a 'one-strike' policy. If the hypothesis is wrong in a particular, it is wrong full stop.

    Imagine if we held religion to that standard? You would have to prophesy, from, say, the Bible, whether I have a raised risk of lung cancer as a smoker, whether my daughter is likely to have poor eyesite based on mine and my wife's, where we would most likely find oil in the Porcupine Basin, which drugs would best be taken by someone who has malaria in childhood, what the weather is likely to be tomorrow, and literally thousands or millions of other items.

    Now, the Big Bang, and evolution, fit into this framework. You don't think so? Why not? Oh, because they happened in the past, so they can't really be tested...

    So we turn to geology, which I will (rather tendentiously) call the queen of the forensic sciences. Geology's remit is the past, and it predicts what happened in the past. How can it do so? Well, by stating how the past it predicts will have affected the present - "if we think there was a sea there, then we should find this and that type of rock". And hoo boy geology is testable. Every day, everywhere, geology probably provides the most predictions to non-scientists of any forensic science, and has the most money riding on its predictions. Oil, gas, mineral finds - all predicted by geology.

    Would geology have to be rewritten, if Genesis were true. It certainly would. Modern geological hypotheses are made in a framework that requires an old earth, plate tectonics, radiometric dating, chronological sequences of fossils, and, to be blunt, no Genesis Flood. This is not your grandfather's geology!

    So, the framework that you reject in rejecting evolution is extremely well-supported. Decisions involving millions of dollars are made based on it every single day - and not one company bases its prospecting on what it says in Genesis.

    If Genesis were scientifically true, you could use it as a framework - and it would be better than the evolutionary framework now in use. Any company that used it would be at a huge commercial advantage as well as a spiritual one!
    Jakkass wrote:
    However I would consider the Bible evidence, but I know yet again that you will all find that rediculous so what's the point. I accept a lot of Science, infact all of it except Evolution and the Big Bang theory.

    Actually, you don't take the Bible as evidence - you take the Bible as the account itself. The Bible can be used as evidence to support something else, and external evidence can be used to support the Bible, but using it to support itself seems rather tautological.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    LFCFan wrote:
    I will NEVER force a child of mine to believe in anything (well apart from the fact that Liverpool are the greatest football team :) )

    I know you said it tongue in cheek, but wouldn't you want you child growing up to support Liverpool? You'd by them little Liverpool kits, watch the games with them etc which in it's own way is pretty similar to how parents bring up their children with their beliefs. And making a child support Liverpool is child abuse ;):D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Scofflaw wrote:
    So we turn to geology, which I will (rather tendentiously) call the queen of the forensic sciences. Geology's remit is the past, and it predicts what happened in the past. How can it do so? Well, by stating how the past it predicts will have affected the present - "if we think there was a sea there, then we should find this and that type of rock". And hoo boy geology is testable. Every day, everywhere, geology probably provides the most predictions to non-scientists of any forensic science, and has the most money riding on its predictions. Oil, gas, mineral finds - all predicted by geology.
    That reminds me, I believe that the continents that we have today were not formed in millions of years either as written in Wegners theory of plate tectonics. I'll learn it in Geography surely, but I won't accept it to be entirely true (It could have happened in a much faster timescale as a result of God)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Jakkass wrote:
    That reminds me, I believe that the continents that we have today were not formed in millions of years either as written in Wegners theory of plate tectonics. I'll learn it in Geography surely, but I won't accept it to be entirely true (It could have happened in a much faster timescale as a result of God)

    What do you accept as accurate with regard to scientific models and theories?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Wicknight wrote:
    What do you accept as accurate with regard to scientific models and theories?
    Anything that doesn't compromise the beliefs that are laid down in my religion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭Son Goku


    Jakkass wrote:
    Anything that doesn't compromise the beliefs that are laid down in my religion.
    And it doesn't really matter how much evidence they have? The main criteria is the one you've listed above.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Jakkass wrote:
    Anything that doesn't compromise the beliefs that are laid down in my religion.

    But pretty much everything is compromised in one way or the other based on a literal reading of the Bible.

    Do you accept that the modern theory of light is accurate? If you don't then how do you think your TV works? If you do then how do you reconcile that the Bible says the Universe is 10,000 years old when we are seeing light from stars that originated millions of years ago?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    wolfsbane wrote:
    Christians ought not get too upset about Evolutionist tales,
    ...
    There is no doubt that Evolution is the biggest lie of the past couple of centuries, designed to give a credible alternative to the ungodly, and to undermine the Christian's trust in the truth of Scripture.

    So much for not getting too upset.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement