Zelaron Gaming Forum  
Stats Arcade Portal Forum FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Zelaron Gaming Forum > The Zelaron Nexus > General Discussion > Opinion and Debate

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-14, 11:33 PM in reply to Kaneda's post starting "Im not watching any of your propaganda...."
Kaneda said:
Im not watching any of your propaganda. I don't need any other information or people to tell me that life is this way or that way. I think on my own and come to my own conclusions.
Thats easy when THE CHOICES COME FROM ONE SIDE ONLY!

Frosted is right. Your "conclusion" is backwards.

Ask yourself a question, if you "think on your own" like frosted does, then why wont you open your mind to all the facts and information out there? I mean, do you realize how very fortunate you are to even be able to? TAKE ADVANTAGE BROTHER!!!!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-14, 11:52 PM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "Thats easy when THE CHOICES COME FROM..."
The Earth has been around for a very long time. 4.5-5 billion years. In that time, the very solar system itself has rotated around the galactic center many times. There are so many cosmic events that could have happened that may have caused the creation of Polonium. Maybe there was a MASSIVE solar flare in the early days of earth that caused all this, or maybe we were too close when a supernova went off and we got shot in the face with a galactic shotgun of high energy particles. Who knows?

Just because science has yet to or can't explain why those halo's are there, doesn't mean that God created everything in an instant. Humans still insisted that the Earth was FLAT until some schmuck had to take a boat and sail across the ocean to show us otherwise.

I don't think I have any right to claim to know how the universe was created, how life came around, or what happens when we die. I don't think anyone does. What we all have are our very own personal theories on everything that should be kept to ourselves until the human society as a whole has evolved enough to stop trying to shove THEIR opinions down others throats.

We're probably all wrong anyway.

Btw, moved to Opinion and Debate.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Sovereign enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHzSovereign enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHz
 
 
Sovereign
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:08 AM in reply to Sovereign's post starting "The Earth has been around for a very..."
Quote:
Just because science has yet to or can't explain why those halo's are there, doesn't mean that God created everything in an instant. Humans still insisted that the Earth was FLAT until some schmuck had to take a boat and sail across the ocean to show us otherwise.
God didn't do it in an instant, he took 6 days and did it.what is funny is that the BIBLE says the earth was round and it was written years before columbus ever whent.
Quote:
I don't think I have any right to claim to know how the universe was created, how life came around, or what happens when we die. I don't think anyone does. What we all have are our very own personal theories on everything that should be kept to ourselves until the human society as a whole has evolved enough to stop trying to shove THEIR opinions down others throats.
What we are trying to say is that Evolution should not be put into text books unless creation is.This way we all get a fair chance to have our beleifs noted.Sure, if they whant to have evolution in their text books,fine,but why not something that was proven even moreso then evolution.It isn't fair that we had to sit through school and listen to the teachers bash our beleifs, call us a supreme monkey, then tell us we came from a goop that was created by some weird rain that hit a certain rock(Evolution), ect. while we sit there and keep our cool.What even worse is that whenever we say something about it, we get brought to court and sued for some wacked out can't spread BIBLICAL truth law.I say if they can have a Non-Proven Theory in textbooks, then they can have a PROVEN source (Creation) in textbooks as well.And I state again, THE BIBLE HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN WRONG.It is 100% accurate in all scientific studies.
Angels encamp around them that fear the LORD!

Last edited by frosted_snow; 2006-06-15 at 12:21 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
frosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-betweenfrosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
frosted_snow
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:14 AM in reply to Sovereign's post starting "The Earth has been around for a very..."
Sovereign said:
Who knows?
god knows.

..and you can too..if you really want to!

read these pages...
http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...lSciences.html

Sovereign said:
Just because science has yet to or can't explain why those halo's are there, doesn't mean that God created everything in an instant. Humans still insisted that the Earth was FLAT until some schmuck had to take a boat and sail across the ocean to show us otherwise.
no actualy ,the bible says its round..you just have to know where to look!

Sovereign said:
I don't think I have any right to claim to know how the universe was created, how life came around, or what happens when we die. I don't think anyone does.
sure you do, you are special man. feerfully and wonderfully made! thats why you were made, and have the ability to choose. ...and to observe and ponder and give praise to the creator!!! nothing else can, the world and stars and heavens were created just for you!!!!
God gave you the answers man cannot explain! What a gift!

Sovereign said:
What we all have are our very own personal theories on everything that should be kept to ourselves until the human society as a whole has evolved enough to stop trying to shove THEIR opinions down others throats.
Its easier for some more than others. Facts are facts and opinions and lies are another...

the truth IS obviously out there...and it will make you free! imagine...

Last edited by ~JESUS~; 2006-06-15 at 12:24 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:16 AM in reply to frosted_snow's post starting "God didn't do it in an instant, he took..."
~Jesus~ said:
The Earth, granite and Polonium were created by God together in an instant.
Frosted_Snow said:
God didn't do it in an instant, he took 6 days and did it.
Make up your mind.

Frosted_snow said:
what is funny is that the BIBLE says the earth was round and it was written years before columbus ever whent.
And I have a high school textbook that states the universe is shaped like a sphere that is expanding at a idenical speed in all directions. If future science prooves that true will my text book be the spawn of a new religion? Not really trying to poke fun but that's the only comparison I could think of at this hour. It's interesting that it was stated, yes, but I think it was by mere luck more then anything.

EDIT: And I'm off to bed. Happy debating!

Last edited by Sovereign; 2006-06-15 at 12:22 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Sovereign enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHzSovereign enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHz
 
 
Sovereign
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:23 AM in reply to frosted_snow's post starting "God didn't do it in an instant, he took..."
frosted_snow said:
God didn't do it in an instant, he took 6 days and did it.what is funny is that the BIBLE says the earth was round and it was written years before columbus ever went.
Thats right! amongst other things..check out JOB!

frosted_snow said:
What we are trying to say is that Evolution should not be put into text books unless creation is.This way we all get a fair chance to have our beleifs noted.
Exactly!

If you are gonna teach biology, teach biology, you can without going into orgins. if you are gonna teach theories of orgins, call them what they are, not factual science..it confuses people for the worse! give them the truth!!!..let them take it from there as God intended.

when a group controls all the information sources and further, LIEs about that information, well that means that there is a motive. ...and believe me, your BEST interest is not it!

Recent studies show that over have of the people today still beklieve and support creation by God!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:26 AM in reply to Sovereign's post starting "Make up your mind. And I have a..."
Quote:
~Jesus~ said:
The Earth, granite and Polonium were created by God together in an instant.



Frosted_Snow said:
God didn't do it in an instant, he took 6 days and did it.


Make up your mind.
However, if granite and Polonium are part of the earth, it is very possible He
(God)Made the outer layer(crust,rock,gasses)at the same time,I dunno,what I do know is that it took HIM 6 days to make it ALL(Earth water rock animals mammals humans ect.)WOW I am really tired, i can tell in my typing.My mind isn't strait right now so I will check this post later and see if I am accurate.
Angels encamp around them that fear the LORD!

Last edited by frosted_snow; 2006-06-15 at 12:42 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
frosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-betweenfrosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
frosted_snow
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:29 AM in reply to Sovereign's post starting "Make up your mind. And I have a..."
Sovereign said:
Make up your mind.
In the beginning he made the heavens and the earth. The days were not yet, time was not yet...then he made the first day by making the sun and moon for that very purpose, amongst other things..)

Sovereign said:
It's interesting that it was stated, yes, but I think it was by mere luck more then anything.
I dont believe in luck or coincidence or chance.

Sovereign said:
EDIT: And I'm off to bed. Happy debating!
good night!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:32 AM in reply to frosted_snow's post starting "However, if granite and Polonium are..."
the earth, granite and polonium are all one. Granite is the earths crust.

The rest of creation (the contents there of) took 6 days total.

Read the bible and you will see.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:34 AM in reply to frosted_snow's post starting "However, if granite and Polonium are..."
frosted_snow said:
However, if granite and Polonium are part of the earth, it is very possible He
(God)Made the outer layer(crust,rock,gasses)at the same time,I dunno,
nope..you know!

yes thats what the bible says...and science..

frosted_snow said:
but what I do know is that it took HIM 6 days to make it ALL(Earth water rock animals mammals humans ect.)
Are you sure its 2 different people? amazing, must be luck!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 12:44 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "nope..you know! yes thats what the..."
Quote:
Are you sure its 2 different people? amazing, must be luck!
LOL, funny ~Jesus~.
Angels encamp around them that fear the LORD!

Last edited by frosted_snow; 2006-06-15 at 12:52 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
frosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-betweenfrosted_snow is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
frosted_snow
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 07:40 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "nope..you know! yes thats what the..."
You still haven't answered my question.

So instead, 2 more questions. Answer them and you will find out why they are relevant.

1. How old do YOU think the Earth and the Universe are. No posting from Websites for this, it's PERSONAL opinion. Use your Bible if you really must.

My answer is 13.5 billion years for the universer, 4.5 billion years for Earth.

2. Do you believe in the Pentecost (apostles started speaking in tongues, flames above their heads)? If so, is that a good indication of their holiness?

If you really want me answer, then I'd say it was another metaphorical story to prove 'Gods Power' to believers.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Lenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basics
 
 
Lenny
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 08:07 AM in reply to frosted_snow's post starting "LOL, funny ~Jesus~."
In the end what it comes down to for myself an many others is seeing proof. "Seeing is believing", eh? I have yet to see any solid proof. All of your C&P nonsense? Just not proof enough, imho. For me...though I do believe in a higher being, and I'm open to all religions, I find it impossible to put all of my faith into a book that was written by man, and not God himself. Men err, and it's my belief is that the Bible has contradictions.

Erring comes naturally to humans. We learn from mistakes, and forever seek the truth to everything around us. Some people find their truth sooner than others, and some never find it at all.

And for those who do find their truth? They're usually pigheaded, close-minded and refuse to believe anything other than what they believe in. It's pointless to argue really, no one ever shifts from what they believe, and that's usually the reason I never debate about religion to begin with.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Jessifer read his obituary with confusionJessifer read his obituary with confusionJessifer read his obituary with confusionJessifer read his obituary with confusion
 
 
Jessifer
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 08:17 AM in reply to Jessifer's post starting "In the end what it comes down to for..."
Quote:
And for those who do find their truth? They're usually pigheaded, close-minded and refuse to believe anything other than what they believe in. It's pointless to argue really, no one ever shifts from what they believe, and that's usually the reason I never debate about religion to begin with.
That's a very good point. I'll be the first to admit that I rarely take onboard other views, and this thread and other's give evidence that other people don't either.

But it's what make arguments and deabtes and whatnot, fun! Don't you agree? It's better than arguing against a "Yes-Man", for a start.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Lenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basicsLenny simplifies with no grasp of the basics
 
 
Lenny
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 08:18 AM in reply to Lenny's post starting "You still haven't answered my question...."
Lenny said:
You still haven't answered my question.

So instead, 2 more questions. Answer them and you will find out why they are relevant.

1. How old do YOU think the Earth and the Universe are.
I believe based on the word of god and science, that the earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old.

Lenny said:
2. Do you believe in the Pentecost (apostles started speaking in tongues, flames above their heads)? If so, is that a good indication of their holiness?
Acts 2:1~4 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Penticost was a feast where jews from every nation heard the gospel of Jesus and the holy spirit filled them all, and they understood each other and what Peter preached by the power of the Holy spirit filling them all, even though Peter spoke in one language. As a result 3,000 jews were converted and believed on the name of Jesus.

"Tongues" are languages... anything else is lack of understanding the bible.

"Speaking in tongues" in the bible means languages. NOT the language of angels or god! Just different languages. Angels through the bible spoke the same language man does. Anybody who claimes they can "speak in tounges" doesnt understand the bible and further, have a bit of dillusion going on.

On the day of pentecost God provided two symbols of the spirits presence: thw WIND, which was assosiated to the Jews as spirit, and the FIERY TONGUES: which contrary to what some ignorant uninformed present day churches think, is actually understanding through the spirit coming upon them.

Communication can be amazing with the true power of the spirit! Communication and understanding on deeper levels by the power of there belief and conversion. Spiritual levels.

I have seen people who cant speak english yet hear a preacher preach the gospel in english and understand on a different level..a spiriual level that has no boundries. That is the lake of fire that comes upon the very soul from the holy spirit!

Simple if you understand the bible and really want to know the truth!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 08:39 AM in reply to Lenny's post starting "That's a very good point. I'll be the..."
further on Pentecost in general.

This day was very important, Pentecost was the third great Israelite feast mentioned in Lev 23. It was a harvest fest 50 days after the passover week. This actual pentecost , was greater then all others. The Old testament pentecost occured 50 days after Israel left egypt and the passover lamb was slain. New Testament Pentecost occured 50 days after the Lamb of God Jesus was slain. Old testament pentecost celebrated the birth of the nation Israel. New Testament pentecost celebrated the birth of the church of Christ. Old testament pentecost wittnessed the slaying of some 3,000 souls. New testament Pentecost wittnessed the SAVING of some 3,000 souls. The former pointed to the later which is the case of the bible.

The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed!
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between~JESUS~ is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
 
~JESUS~
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 09:08 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "further on Pentecost in general. ..."
Couple of points...

1. ~JESUS~ if you don't stop simply copying and pasting or linking rebuttals, no matter how applicable, people are going to stop reading them and thus stop caring. Whether or not your sources are right, we're not having a research-off. We're having a debate. State your understanding and interpretation of an idea and then give your references if you want.

2. As I've read, society, as a whole, did not think the earth was round before Columbus sailed. The general consensus was inaccurate, in that they underestimated the size of the planet, but they did not believe that a person would simply fall off at the edge as dramatized in cartoons.

3. Stop responding to your own posts or to previous posts multiple times. If you can't find the edit button, then I can't imagine how you're putting forth complex and seemingly intelligent responses in a debate about the beginning of existence.

Additionally, ~JESUS~, people want to know how old you are because it is appliable to the points you are making. The life experiences you've had and the time you've been here supposedly indicate levels of intelligence. I don't believe the two are necessarily linked, thus, if I would reccomend that, if you don't want to be ridiculed for whatever age you are, you keep it secret.
D3V said:
This message is hidden because D3V is on your ignore list.
What is it they say about silence being golden?

Last edited by Medieval Bob; 2006-06-15 at 09:12 AM.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Medieval Bob enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHzMedieval Bob enjoys the static noises of ten television sets simultaneously tuned to 412.84 MHz
 
 
Medieval Bob
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 09:10 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "..and its not even the right Mary. ..."
~JESUS~ said:
I only wish others would not be afraid of the truth. But thats what shaping of the mind does. Everyone can sit comfortably and make jokes and play video games and live for land that doesnt belong to them all they want, its comfortable I know, but meanwhile things are gonna get worse. If anyone really cares about the future of mankind, unity and true peace, (at least of the mind) then they will wake up and listen, then try to help there fellow man. Its actually our duty!
Whats this have to do with ones belief in a religion. Religion is a main instigator of war.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Kaneda is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
Kaneda
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 09:49 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post "Evolution shouldn't be taught in..."
I know. Let's take this to bits, paragraph by paragraph.

~JESUS~ said:
Evolution shouldn't be taught in schools if creationism isn't allowed

Ken Schalfley, Midland Daily News
06/04/2006

There have been several recent letters to the editor concerning the teaching of evolution and creationism in the public school curriculum. Proponents of evolution say it is based upon scientific evidence and creationism is not, therefore, creationism should not be taught. I would ask those who favor only evolution to consider the following questions derived from the Discovery Institute in Seattle concerning recognized icons of evolution.

Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment shows how life's building blocks may have formed on Earth, when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a mystery?
The experiment showed that it is not impossible that "life's building blocks" appeared purely by chance. There would be many permutations of the conditions in the experiment which could lead to different proteins being formed, and no-one can say what the initial conditions were like. This was just a proof of concept, not a proof of what precisely happened.

Quote:
Why don't textbooks discuss the Cambrian explosion, in which all major animal groups appear together in the fossil record fully formed instead of branching from a common ancestor, thus contradicting the evolutionary tree of life?
Are you looking in the right textbooks? When the Cambrian explosion was first discovered, the technology to look at the fossils properly, to find the precursors of the species which emerged in this eight milion year window. The boundaries of microscopy are being pushed back, and it is expected that more detail will be found regarding these organisms yet; no reasonable person in the scientific community assumes they have found everything.

Quote:
Why do textbooks use drawings of similarities in vertebrate embryos as evidence for common ancestry, even though biologists have known for over a century that vertebrate embryos are not most similar in their early stages, and that the drawings are faked?
This paragraph requires a great deal of detail which it is missing to be of any use to anyone. The accusations appear to be unfounded, a slew in general on textbooks which remain nameless, and there would have been an outcry by biologists (I feel it can be reasonably assumed that not all young biologists taking their first degrees of study, looking at textbooks and comparing with reality, are dishonest, many in fact profess to be Christian).

Quote:
Why do textbooks portray the archaeopteryx as the missing link between dinosaurs and modern birds even though modern birds are probably not descended from it, and its supposed ancestors do not appear until millions of years after it?
The archaeopteryx is not generally believed to be a missing link. It is believed to be a relative to the direct ancestors of modern birds, and is still not fully understood. However, its bone and wing structure is particularly interesting to scientists, and has been observed fossilised in very fine grain limestone, meaning it can be studied perhaps more thoroughly than most fossils, hence its heavy use in textbooks and the like.

Quote:
Why do textbooks use pictures of peppered moths camouflaged on tree trunks as evidence for natural selection, when biologists have known since the 1980s that the moths don't normally rest on tree trunks, and that all the pictures have been staged?
The peppered moth is a useful demonstration of the theory, showing how it could be employed. There is argument on both sides of the debate, not just one, and it is not the only demonstration of the principle (polar bears vs brown bears is a more wide ranging example across different species, but illustrates the point).

Quote:
Why do the textbooks claim that beak changes in Galapagos finches during a severe drought can explain the origin of species by natural selection, even though the changes were reversed after the drought ended and no net evolution occurred?
Darwin, the first major literary proponent of evolution in his book "The Origin of Species..." used Galapagos finches as his own example. It is a very easy to understand presentation of the idea, and shows the differences across the different islands clearly, something a textbook is meant to do. It tries not to demonstrate evolution (a long term process), but natural selection by means of survival of the fittest (a more short term process, where genetic mutation is not paramount to its success, merely an already present difference). Also, the meaning of this paragraph is somewhat vague, and could do with some clarification of what it's getting at precisely, for instance when you use the term "net evolution".

Quote:
Why do textbooks use fruit flies with an extra pair of wings as evidence the DNA mutations can supply raw materials for evolution even though the extra wings have no muscles and these disabled mutants cannot survive outside the laboratory?
It is particularly difficult to engineer extra wings on an animal, or even just extra cartlidge, or an extra head. Give the scientists a break, they demonstrated that if you modify DNA, you can end up with a very different animal. Scientists have demonstrated their concept much more successfully where GM crops are concerned, with many GM crops now in large scale production. The changes to DNA with physical consequences show that changing DNA could lead to improvements in an organism.

Quote:
Why are artists' drawings of apelike humans used to justify claims that we are just animals --when fossil experts cannot even agree on who our supposed ancestors were or what they looked like?
Artists drawings are useful in showing to the general public what has been found. They are usually representations of evidenced creatures, found by their fossil, or even bone records, and make science more accessilble. They would not be used as evidence (hence justifictation) in serious research.

Quote:
Perhaps the most important question to be asked is why are students told that Darwin's theory of evolution is a scientific fact, even though many of its claims are based upon misrepresentations of the facts?
Scientific fact is unlikely ever to be proven, and is used as a substitute phrase for "proven beyond reasonable doubt". It is not believed by the scientific community, which oversees what is protrayed as "scientific fact" that the current theory of evolution (not exactly the same as Darwin's original) that the theory is based on misrepresentation of "the facts". Any fact in science is up for disproof; that's what the scientific method is about, I'm afraid.

Quote:
I have always been under the impression that Darwin's theory of evolution is just that -- a theory. Darwin himself, in his work, Origin of Species, said, "For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in the volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I arrived."
"The Origin of Species" is no longer the be all and end all of evolutionary theory, it has been expanded upon, as Darwin would have wished, its claims tested, sometimes disproved, but very often supported. Just because Darwin said something in his book does not make it true, so his admission that his theory may not be up to scratch was in fact very correct of him. The people who were to read his book would possibly have been rather shocked by his work, and he did not want to appear too prescriptive, and he therefore allowed people to make up their own minds, based on the evidence he produced.

Quote:
Reflecting on his work near the end of his life, Darwin stated, "I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them." I find it interesting that Darwin compares his work as a religion to those who reveled his work. Based upon what he said, if other concepts such as creationism should not be allowed in the public schools, neither should the theory of evolution.
THis argument does not follow. Darwin's followers did take to his ideas and believe fervently in them, but this is because they stood up to scientific scrutiny, and not because of a blind faith which would lead a religion into turmoil and uselessness. Creationism is not regarded as scientific fact, it is a religious concept. Evolution now is regarded as a scientific fact, not as a religious concept, however "religious" its beginnings. By saying "other concepts such as creationism", you also imply that creationism is one of many different things which "should be banned", when in fact, this debate appears to be purely about creationism and evolution; nothing else had so far been mentioned. Overgeneralisation spring to mind?

Quote:
Is Darwin's theory of evolution worthy of discussion and investigation? Of course. Should it be given scientific law status? More conclusive evidence needs to come forth before that can ever happen, which appears unlikely, since some of the critical "evidence" for evolution has had to be altered. For more indepth information, get a copy of "Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?," authored by Jonathan Wells.
Evolution has not become a scientific law in the same way that the effect of gravity on a macroscopic scale is regarded as a law. People are looking for the evidence, and it appears that "Icons of Evolution:..." would be a rather biased source; Jonathan Wells has not been without criticism. Namedropping a book such as this in an argument is a rather unsteady way to support your claims. There has been much less "evidence" (I use ""s ironically here, I'm getting bored of this argument)

Quote:
Since education is to be a quest for learning, it is proper to investigate any queries to creation. Our Forefathers would approve, why can't we?
We are doing. It's called the study of evolutionary theory, and I couldn't agree with you more. However, by using this conclusion with such unsteady evidence as above, you discredit yourself as a serious debator. Think it through yourself next time, okay?

Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Bat-Melon is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-betweenBat-Melon is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
Bat-Melon
 



 
Reply
Posted 2006-06-15, 09:53 AM in reply to ~JESUS~'s post starting "I believe based on the word of god and..."
When looking into tongues, do you entirely discount the experience of those who are from a background of worship in the power of ths holy spirit, and who can speak in their own, individual "prayer language", which is very clearly (when it is heard) not any earthly language? It does happen, really.
Old
Profile PM WWW Search
Bat-Melon is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-betweenBat-Melon is neither ape nor machine; has so far settled for the in-between
 
Bat-Melon
 
 

Bookmarks

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules [Forum Rules]
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:47 PM.
'Synthesis 2' vBulletin 3.x styles and 'x79' derivative
by WetWired the Unbound and Chruser
Copyright ©2002-2008 zelaron.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is best seen with your eyes open.