Jedi Council Forums - Evolution or Creation

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Evolution or Creation
Saint_of_Killers Registered: Feb '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:24pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	"If you are serious about most scientists believing the theory that "God created the universe and let evolution do its thing" is true, I am not really offended, and actually pretty happy. As long as there is an acknowledgement of God watching over the whole process, it is not all that offensive to me. Well if scientists are beginning to put God back in the picure....soon the tables will turn again....bwa ha ha.....and more and more of the Creationism theory will be thought to be fact, not fiction." "God" doesn't necesarrily refer to the Christian God though, and creationism is exclusive to Christianity(at least the Genesis version of creation), so a belief in God doesn't necesarrily equal a beleif in creationism. I belive evolution to be the best theory on the subject, but I'm not an atheist. -----signature----- We enter into life naked and howling, covered with blood. The fun doesn't have to end there. Who to himself is law, no law does need, offends no law and is a king indeed Abraham failed the test. TAKE A BOW MISTER BUNNY!!!
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Fat_Fett Registered: Dec '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:29pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation - Date Edited: 4/9/02 10:31pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Fat_Fett
	Well put.... Perhaps if I said "a belief in a Creator." (?) The main thing is, the universe is far to complex and beautiful to have happened by chance. Albert Einstein said that there had to be a "Brain" (as he called it) behind the developments of the universe. Dang Saint, we both need to get to bed. We keep posting. Now I'm really goin to bed....stupid school. L8r -Fat_Fett -----signature----- "Your love of the halfling's leaf has clearly slowed your mind." AND HOW! Hey hey, if you wanna flame, take it to the Senate Floor already... You might also know me as A_Tossed_Dwarf at theonering.net
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth_SnowDog Registered: Sep '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:30pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation - Date Edited: 4/9/02 10:40pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Darth_SnowDog
	For your information, the Bible IS the religious book with the most fulfilled prophecies! And I take it you know this because you have read every other religious scripture on the planet and know just how many prophecies they made... which of course has nothing to do with evolution. If Hinduism has so many more completed prophecies than the Bible has (as you make it sound like it does), please tell me what they are, and how many more there are in the Hindu holy books than in the Bible! Thanks for proving my point... you were the one who brought up this asinine issue of prophecies, which, again, has nothing to do with proving or disproving evolution... or the fundamentals of creation (If creation already happened, then there's no empirical means by which you can prove to me that the prophecies were anything but statements written after the fact... if even that). I'm not taking your Evolution quotes and twisting them around and making a mockery of them! You're right, you're not. You're taking other references to evolutionary theory and... well, not understanding them at all. For some reason, you paraphrase and quote only parts of what we say in such a way that it makes you look better than you would if you actually used the genuine quote! And you're doing what? How exactly do your tangential rants about Jesus and how other religions, none of which you've actually studied or understood by your own admission of asking for scriptural references of which you yourself have no knowlege, prove Creationism? If you laugh at the Bible's prophecies, and want me to list the prophecies that came true.....I will list them. Actually, you're the one who started going on about religions. It might actually gain you more credibility to spend your time posting empirically testable evidence of Creationism. As to the question of why Moses allowed the slaughtering of women and children......If you are going to defend Hinduism, a religion which STILL encourages the killing of people of other religions....don't point your hypocritical finger at me. Excuse me? Did you ever read one page of Hindu scripture for yourself? Where precisely in the Hindu scriptures or in the Muslim scriptures does it say that either of them must kill each other? I would strongly advise you not to go in this direction. Like Double_Sting, my family is from India... I was born there. I am a Hindu and I know firsthand about the violence and I'd bet you $500,000 you don't have the slightest clue as to the origins of the violence between Hindus and Muslims... which has no basis in scripture or dogma (there is no Hindu dogma because there's no central "church" authority from which it is dictated). Hinduism, Islam, and scores of other religions still encourage the killings of other religious people (my dad should know, he has been a Pastor and a missionary for over 25 years!). Again, I'm a Hindu, not converted mind you. Hinduism has been my family's ethnic and religious heritage (and if you even begin to claim it's not an ethnicity and only a religion, that only furthers your ignorance of the subject... I don't come into your churches and tell you people what Christianity is and isn't.). I would wage my family's knowledge of Hinduism against your Christian father's... Many pastors have, in fact, asked my family to lecture on the subject of Hinduism, especially my own father... a scholar and a scientist who knows far more about Hinduism than any Pastor we've ever met. You care to tell these pastors they're idiots? Be my guest. Each Hindu holy book was not written over a span of over 1300 years! Well, since you don't know anything about Hindu scriptures and their vastness... you're guessing here... but, you're absolutely right. They weren't written over a span of 1300 years. They were written over a span of at least 4000 years. Furthermore, archaeologists will tell you that Indus Valley Civilizations populated prior to the Indo-Aryan migration Hindustan (India) consisted of complex irrigation and plumbing systems circa 5500 BCE... predating Biblical Creation by 1500 years. It was NOT on a Christian program that I overheard that the Bible is the book with the most fulfilled prophecies. It was on (can't remember the name) the show on PAX with the guy from Law and Order hosting it. And we all know you should believe everything you see on television without question... especially when it's hosted by an actor. Hey, they had this program on Fox about the moon landing being a hoax... and I think it was hosted by that guy from the X-files. It must be true! Now I know why you fundamentalists think that it's really music's fault that kids commit suicide. Well, there's a little bit of land called Kashmir that should be basic knowledge for anyone who has passed Freshmen level World History. Muslims and Hindus have killed over this land for 100's of years, and they obviously are not restrained by their religions. Ahem... my family is from Kashmir. My grandparents homes were destroyed by terrorists. I have been to Kashmir and I have been raised on this culture. It has nothing to do with religion... but if you want to make yourself look like a complete fool by commenting on a subject of which you have absolutely no firsthand knowledge... be my guest. Religion has very little, if anything, to do with that conflict... and as I said before, there's no scriptural basis for it... the religion doesn't endorse killing of anyone, especially humans... and Brahmins, like myself, are technically forbidden to kill animals (including humans), period. You don't seem to know a damn thing about the Hindu principle of ahimsa, nonviolence. But that's beside the point. Am I to believe that Christianity endorses pedophilia, murder of abortion doctors, the cannibalization of non-Christians (as in the Crusades) and the rape of young women (also during the Crusades) and the extermination of Jews and other non-Christians (the Inquisition)? Your father sounds like a racist the way you describe his attitude and lack of understanding towards other cultures, including mine, and your religion sounds more like Naziism if I attribute your religion as the sole cause of everything bad done by its constituents. Polytheism was started LONG before Hinduism. Hinduism is actually one of the world's oldest monotheistic religions... but then I digress again, assuming you'll actually pick up even one paragraph of Hindu scripture and find out its teachings are so strikingly similar to that of Christ, and yet predate him by at least 2000 years, according to secular historians and not just theologians. Hinduism is a henotheistic faith... it is monotheistic, it believes in one supreme creator, but does not proselytize against or denounce the practices of other religions, or the worship of other deities or demigods. If you actually studied anything about Hinduism, you'd know this. I don't come into your churches and tell you what Christianity is, and that Jesus was a fraud, and that Mary wasn't a virgin, and that the Bible is just a bunch of recycled folktales, that the story of Genesis is merely an allegory about the birth of agriculture, and that the entire conflict between Hebrews which gave rise to the Islamic, Jewish and Christian faiths was simply a power struggle over the fertile crescent because it happened to be the most fertile land known to the advanced, emerging agricultural civilizations of that time and the converging point of trade routes between the three most powerful civilizations on the planet (Greece, India and Egypt) 6000 years ago... Then again, what does any of your argument do for proving Creationism, or disproving Evolution? Get back to the debate... instead of trying the fool's way out... attempting to raise yourself up by cutting everyone else down. It doesn't work, and it only makes you look more the fool... especially when you don't have a clue about what it is you're attempting to cut down. Tis better to keep one's mouth shut and be considered a fool, then to open it and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain -----signature----- I am boycotting theforce.net because of their homophobic, bigoted policy concerning fanfic romance. Others who believe this is bigotry should boycott all TFN, Lucasfilm and IGN products.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
cydonia Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:35pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	I think it's foolish to assume either side knows 100% truth. Scientists want to be proven wrong when possible, at least that's the sense i get. It's logical, if you aren't willing to be wrong once and in a while how can you fix the erroneous thinking that made you wrong in the first place? How would science progress if it were so stubborn? I don't see people who follow the bible story of genesis as willing to be wrong. They are never wrong, because it's god's word. But it's not fair to debate it with science, because it's not a fair argument! One side says they're pretty sure it's this way, but accept that in priniciple could all change tomorrow and a new theory could come along. With Bible Creationists, there's no way that would ever happen. It's impossible for them to be wrong. I don't think i'm making my point very well. But sometimes it seems like the Twighlight Zone when i see Evolution and Biblical Creation try to duke it out on equal terms. Square pegs in round holes? Is this the analogy i'm looking for? (cydonia's brain hurt. Not understand. Want glass of water.) -----signature----- when you're born a lover, you're born to suffer- Like all soul sisters and soul brothers
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
cydonia Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:41pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	It was NOT on a Christian program that I overheard that the Bible is the book with the most fulfilled prophecies. It was on (can't remember the name) the show on PAX with the guy from Law and Order hosting it. And we all know you should believe everything you see on television without question... especially when it's hosted by an actor. Hey, they had this program on Fox about the moon landing being a hoax... and I think it was hosted by that guy from the X-files. It must be true! Now I know why you fundamentalists think that it's really music's fault that kids commit suicide. -----signature----- when you're born a lover, you're born to suffer- Like all soul sisters and soul brothers
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth_SnowDog Registered: Sep '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:43pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Darth_SnowDog use Hindu voodoo mumbo-jumbo to conjure glass of water for Cydonia's hurt brain... Voodoo drain energy, me tired... need nookie with wife. Go bed. Ug! -----signature----- I am boycotting theforce.net because of their homophobic, bigoted policy concerning fanfic romance. Others who believe this is bigotry should boycott all TFN, Lucasfilm and IGN products.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Fat_Fett Registered: Dec '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 10:58pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation - Date Edited: 4/9/02 11:13pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Fat_Fett
	Wow, Snowdog thanks for the counselling! You're right: I am a racist and so is my father and I confuse Indo-Aryan with Aryan and Jesus was a fraud and I kill abortionists, I am a Nazi, and I rape young women after I have eaten their non-Christian husbands, and you have died in a previous life. Please. Try to make a stronger argument by doing more than using these embarrasments that call themselves "Christians" to attempt making a bad stereotype of my beliefs. What are you gonna do, make me worship a cow and live in a country that is not blessed becuase they refuse to accept God's grace that is continually held out for them? Look what happened to Japan after WW II, after its people started accepting Christianity - God's grace extends to all, but not everyone reaches out for it. Did one of your dieties ever love its people SO much that it died for them, giving them eternal life? Tell me, where do I find that story in the four Vedas, or ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS TEXT? If you want to insult my religion, I am not afraid to speak my mind either. If you truly wanted me to get back on track of the discussion (which I had 2 hours ago), you shouldn't have paid attention to my "rants about Jesus." Obviously you think that I was just looking for attention. If you are thinking this way, why would you give me attention by responding to my claims? I want to know what you think about my post on Creationism and primordial soup. By showing that prophecies from the Bible come true, I am showing that it is a much more reliable source than any other religious book. I am still waiting for these Hindu prophecies that you told me about. -----signature----- "Your love of the halfling's leaf has clearly slowed your mind." AND HOW! Hey hey, if you wanna flame, take it to the Senate Floor already... You might also know me as A_Tossed_Dwarf at theonering.net
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
cydonia Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 4/9/02 11:02pm Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Did one of your dieties ever love its people SO much that it died for them, giving them eternal life? Tell me, where do I find that story in the four Vedas, or ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS TEXT? Are you familiar with mythology, or any of the ancient pagan myths that were told before Jesus' birth? If not, you should really look into it. It's a fascinating subject, and you just might find out some things you weren't expecting. -----signature----- when you're born a lover, you're born to suffer- Like all soul sisters and soul brothers
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Goldberry Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 4/10/02 12:04am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Fat Fett, I'm pretty sure you've just proven Snowdog's point - he wasn't saying that you were a cannabalistic rapist nazi like the people in the Crusades. You yourself claimed that the actions of a few terrorists show that his religion is evil. Snowdog's point is that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Of course there are good Christians, but there are also good Hindus, and good Muslims, and gasp/shock even good atheists! To defend a Christian monopoly on goodness by claiming that any Christians who have ever done anything bad weren't really Christians, and then attack all Hindus for the actions of a few, is just plain hypocritical. Don't take cheap shots at other people's religion if you don't want people to point out the uglier side of Christianity's history. This "my religion's better than yours" stuff is a sure recipe for riling people up, and it won't accomplish anything here except to convince everyone else that you're an arrogant, self-righteous young fool. You may not be, but you'll have to pull up your socks if you want to make a good impression. -----signature----- 'Mary 'ad a little lamb. I bit it in the head.' - Balrog of Moria http://www.yougotta.com/Goldberry
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Fat_Fett Registered: Dec '01	Date Posted: 4/10/02 12:29am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Fine. Just for the record I was not the one who mentioned all the downfalls of another religion....that was Snowdog attacking Christianity. I was not being the hypocrite. I did not say that people of other religions are evil. I did say that evolutionists are hypocrites becuase they say that the book of Genisis is a fairy tail becuase it has no scientific proof, and then they sometimes use primordial soup as a theory in their science, even though their is no evidence for it either. They say that faith in Creationism is not science. They say that faith in Evolution IS science. But didn't they say that faith was not science in the first place? To use the theory of primordial soup, or the big bang for that matter, they need to follow by blind faith, just like Creationists follow Creationism. But somehow when they place faith in an idea (not a hypothesis, which is an educated guess based on already existing facts), it is still science. Can someone please tell me how faith in primordial soup or the Big Bang theory IS science while faith in Creationism is not science (and you must hold up your argument that faith can not be science)? This is bias in a debate. The evolutionists have created their own stumbling block, but they choose to ignore it rather than address it as a problem, because one of their main arguments has been "faith is not science." THIS is hypocrisy. -----signature----- "Your love of the halfling's leaf has clearly slowed your mind." AND HOW! Hey hey, if you wanna flame, take it to the Senate Floor already... You might also know me as A_Tossed_Dwarf at theonering.net
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Goldberry Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 4/10/02 1:26am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	"Primordial soup" is a figure of speech, not a theory. If you want to talk about abiogenesis, fine. But learn something about it beyond a single phrase first. And as others have already said, abiogensis is not evolution. Darwin had no theory of abiogenesis - he was interested in the history of life, not its origin. You keep accusing people of just having faith in evolution, as you do in creation. But you seem completely ignorant of the content of these theories and the tests which they've been subjected to. It's understandable given that you're only 16, but you should still do some real research before you dismiss the work of thousands of serious biologists, biochemists, paleontologists and philosophers. There is plenty of serious work on abiogenesis, which is not to say that there's a final, settled view. But that's the nature of science-- we don't claim to know what hasn't been worked out and tested in detail, and we don't just "make it up" to fit the facts. What we have in abiogenesis studies is a detailed understanding of a wide range of chemical details, including simple chemical processes that give rise to a wide range of organic molecules, chemistry of and on various surfaces and membranes, self-catalysing and replicating RNA, and still more primitive self-replicating systems. To dismiss all this work with cracks about "primordial soup" shows exactly why you think evolution and creation are both just "faith": you don't know the first thing about how observations (in the lab and in the field) can confirm scientific theories-- not by "proving" everything they claim (physics can't do that anymore than biology can) but by finding a wide range of consequences that can be tested, and carrying out the tests. What predictions does creation make about how things are in the natural world, beyond things we already know? Darwin's theory predicts many, many things that weren't known when he first proposed it-- about the fossil record, about relations between the biochemistry of various organisms, about the dynamics of populations over time and how their characteristics tend to change, about the geographical distribution of related life forms and fossils... and the modern synthetic theory of evolution, combining genetics with selection, predicts still more striking observations whose truth was unknown when the theory was proposed. What novel and confirmed predictions about life does creationism make? None, to my knowledge-- and I've read the creationist literature pretty thoroughly, which is a lot more than I can say for your reading of evolutionary literature. Why don't you get a copy of the origin (or of Futuyma's text on evolution, or of his Science on Trial) and learn a thing or two? -----signature----- 'Mary 'ad a little lamb. I bit it in the head.' - Balrog of Moria http://www.yougotta.com/Goldberry
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Double_Sting Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 4/10/02 5:56am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation - Date Edited: 4/10/02 5:58am (1 edits total) Edited By: Double_Sting
	If I was a Christian soldier, I am not instructed by my religion to kill my enemy. I am instructed by my government to kill my enemy. cough And in the crusades the church just asked these people to go and play hackysack with the Muslims and refrain from killing them cough. Look, this is a discussion on EVOLUTION vs CREATION. I suggest that all of us immediatly move away from attacking other religions and get back to the issue on hand. Especially you Fat_Fett. The majority of your posts are about claiming that Christianity is superior to other religions and belittling other religions. The others here are just defending for the most part. -----signature----- no, i will not fix your computer
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Peez Registered: Mar '02	Date Posted: 4/10/02 7:48am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	R2D2-PENA: I have posted information but you evolutionists decided to debunk it by your bias, calling those scientists liars, or hoaxes, read my earlier posts, but since i noticed your attitude towards my posts, i decided not to post any more. Except this one, of course. Look, just claiming that you have posted evidence is easy to do. You clearly do not understand evolution, so I can understand that you do not know how to evaluate it. What I don't understand is your arrogant insistence that you have somehow shown it to be in error, and your refusal to even mention your supposed "evidence." And next time you decide to quote me, please be kind to include the whole quote, not just the part that you can use to your advantage, please. In what way did I choose something to use to my "advantage"? Are you claiming that the part that I quoted does not reflect your intended meaning? I do not think so, and it seemed pointless to clutter the post with your rant. Here it is: We can post as much scientific proof that supports creation and they will call the scientists liars, biased, ignorant, unqualified, etc. just because it does not support their side. We call creationism a science, since it IS, because it does comply with their 4 or 5 points that must be met to qualify, but that is just according to these evolutionists. This bickering is pointless, let them swim in ignorance, because i wont do it. Let them keep their faith on their scientific speculation, unproven "observation" (which i greatly doubt since the time frame needed to prove all that is way beyond observation), and just stick to your own beliefs. Exactly why did you think that it was important that I include all of that? I was specifically addressing your implication that you had posted "scientific proof" (whatever that is), so the remainder seems pointless. Also, "next time you decide to quote me, please be kind to include the whole quote, not just the part that you can use to your advantage, please." I'M OUT!! Bye. Peez
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Peez Registered: Mar '02	Date Posted: 4/10/02 8:54am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Fat_Fett: <rant on Christianity omitted> No matter how much all you Evolutionists try to sound like "scientists," with all of your INSTANTLY correct facts, you don't even follow the #1 rule of being a debating scientist... What is an "Evolutionist"? What is an "instantly correct fact"? What is a "debating scientist? Were you aware that oral debate is not how scientists work? Svientists carefully consider the evidence, generate hypotheses, test them, draw conclusions, and report everything (how the test was conducted, what were the results, how were they interpreted, how were the conclusions drawn) along with references. Debating is about convincing the audience that you are right regardless of whether you are or not. ....you are supposed to be objectionable, not biased! We are supposed to be objectionable? Perhaps you mean objective. Yes, scientists are supposed to be as objective as possible, unlike creationists. Why do you address only some of the subjects we bring up? Time. I do not have time to deal with the masses of writing that you creationists have been posting (especially since most of these "points" have been dealt with time and again elsewhere). I note that you creationists are certainly not addressing all of the subjects that we scientists are bringing up. You leave others totally ignored becuase [sic] you don't have an answer for them! s this a guess, or are you able to read my mind? Give me one example, and I will address it for you. If I do this, would you be willing to apologize for implying (incorrectly) that I am being dishonest here. And....this...somehow ISN'T biased? What, that I do not have time to post about every little thing that you say? Why do no famous Evolutionists come into a debate with any Creationists? They are afraid that their bias will be exposed, and with a bias they can not be legit scientists. LOL! You have no idea how science works, do you? Science is not served by "debating" with a person skilled in convincing people without evidence. Actually, most scientists are simply not interested because evolution is so well supported that such debate is pointless (especially with someone as ignorant of evolution as most creationists). If a creationist is not afraid of real debate, let him or her eneter into a written debate with a leading scientist in the field. By the way, do you have any actual evidence that any "Evolutionists" have refused to debate with creationists? Just wondering. One more BIG problem that none of you have addressed yet. No matter who's theory on evolution you are using (wow - there are different theories on evolution, just like there are different Christian denominations who can't agree on minor technicalities....somehow you only critique the denominations. Bias, no doubt), There is, indeed, disagreement on some details of evolutionary theory (that is what makes it an exciting field of research), but no evolutionary biologist doubts that species have evolved from common ancestors, and none doubt that evolution of adaptations has occurred by mutation and natural selection. On the other hand, there are Christian creationists and Muslim creationists and Cree creationists, and they have radically different ideas about how living things came to be the way that they are. Even among Christians, there are those who are creationists and those who accept evolution. It is pretty clear where your bias is. all Evolutionary theories (to my knowledge) refer to the Primordial Soup as the place from which the first living cells originated. Quite frankly, your knowledge is under-impressive. You obviously know little and understand less about evolution. How about giving us a reference to just one of those "evolutionary theories" that refer to a "Primordial Soup." However, there is not ONE fact to support this theory.. Make up your mind: is it many theories or one theory? Anyhow, one fact: whales have pelvic girdle bones, even though they no longer have pelvic limbs of any kind (inherited from ancestors that did have pelvic limbs). There are millions of such facts, it is hard to imagine how you could be missing them all (unless you are trying to do so). ..it is more or less a GUESS. How is it a hypothesis if there is no scientific knowledge to support it? A hypothesis is an EDUCATED guess....this is a shot in the dark. You cannot even make sense: first you say that it is a guess, and imply that it cannot be an hypothesis, and then you say that a guess is an hypothesis. Get it straight. To counter this argument, you would predictably and sadly complain about how the story of Creation is more or less a fairy tale, because according to your biased opinions, there is no evidence for it. No, I would simply point out that it does not make sense, and that it is not empirically testable. Some will say that Genisis is one man's simple, unscientific interpretation of how he thinks the universe came to be. If you are going to promote the account in Genesis, you might want to spell it correctly. How is primordial soup "science"- isn't it just based on faith like Creationism? I do not know anything about "Primordial Soup," I study evolution. It IS based on blind faith. You know it, I know it. You should restrict yourself to telling us what you "know," because you have no idea what I "know." If there is no science behind it, why is it not considered "blind faith" as you would call believing in Creationism? There is no science behind creationism, that's for sure, but evolutionary biology is science. You seem to be having trouble coming to grips with this. So, if there is no evidence (according to you) for Creation OR Primordial Soup...[/b] You are lying. I have never said that there is no evidence for "Primordial Soup." It is irrelevant, it is not the basis for evolution. ..um, exactly what makes primordial soup a legit base for the Evolutionary theory(ies)? It isn't. Perhaps you will understand if I put it this way: some people believe that a god created the universe, the earth, and life, and that that life then evolved. This does not contradict common descent or the theory of evolution.[/b][/blockquote]Both have no evidence according to what you have said or admitted, yet primordial soup is scientifically acceptable and Creation is still a fairy tale?[/b][/blockquote]Please point out where you came up with the idea that "Primordial Soup" is the basis for evolution. Now, I might be crazy, but isn't that (once again) a BIASED OPINION? For all the wealth of (false) knowledge you tote around, you still can't bring yourselves to be objectionable like a person of science is supposed to be. Your saying that it is so does not make it so. By the way, please look up "objectionable" and "objective" in the dictionary. This same question can be said for the Big Bang "Theory." It's not a hypothesis if there are no hard facts to back it up! You have all said that yourselves! You say this all the time when you talk about Creationism! It is blind faith.....the same blind faith that you consider so unscientific! I do not know much about the "Big Bang" theory, but if you think that physicists are not basing it on observations then you are very confused, but that is physics and not biology. Please clear this up......the massive, biased confusion that is Evolution continues to baffle me with its self-contradictions. Name one contradiction of evolution that you would like cleared up. Then again, I "don't even know the general facts about your so-called 'science'." That much is clear. Aristotle would be rolling in his grave if he heard how you have totally contradicted "science" itself. Why should we care about his opinion (not that I agree with your assertion)? If Christians are all "close-minded" and "holier than though", there are two words that sum up what an Evolutionist is. I have not made such a claim. Are you claiming that all Christians are creationists? A biased hypocrite. Roll out the ad hominems! Peez
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Goldberry Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 4/10/02 9:13am Subject: RE: Evolution or Creation
	Maybe he finds scientists objectionable, but still thinks they should be objective? -----signature----- 'Mary 'ad a little lamb. I bit it in the head.' - Balrog of Moria http://www.yougotta.com/Goldberry
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »