Evolution is a RELIGION and not Science

[sandwiches]

you seem to be under the impression that time and majority consensus implies credibility. you realize people have believed in things that have turned out to be wrong for much longer than 200 years.


there's a very good joke that has a lot of truth in it:

if a frog turns into a man its called a fairytale.
if a frog turns into a man over millions of years its called evolution.

if you tell someone they evolved from primordial soup 100 years ago they would laugh at you.
even if you said 1000 years ago they would still find it hard to believe you.
but if you tell them they evolved over millions of years they probably would believe that.

it seems time is evolutions ultimate hero

and no I don't think its a conspiracy. just a small group of people with an agenda and a very loud voice screaming over anyone who doesn't agree with them.

So, you don't think that the majority of scientists and biologists believe in evolution?

 

[cupid dave]

Indeed -- qv my four Biblical reasons against evolution please:


JESUS BELIEVED IN CREATION - NOT EVOLUTION

• Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Gen 5:2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name "Adam," (a species or type or kind) in the day when they were created.

 

[cupid dave]

Explain why God would create intermediate species that are now exxtinct?

Because...
Because God sees he made creatures with whom he can not co-exist, so he repents that he made them in the first place.


5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

 

[mathetes123]

Gen 5:2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name "Adam," (a species or type or kind) in the day when they were created.

The plural refers to Adam and Eve. In marriage, they were united as one.

 

[mathetes123]

So, you don't think that the majority of scientists and biologists believe in evolution?

Is truth determined by a majority vote. The majority has been wrong before, like when they believed in a flat earth.

 

[cupid dave]

The plural refers to Adam and Eve. In marriage, they were united as one.

Hahahaa = LOLL

Good try.

But the point is that this verse is scripture which supports the new Bible interpretation that shows science in support of the Bible.

Tjhat is so different from the present State-of-the Art in Theology, where everything the theologians say is in conflict with the Bible.

What this means to the Religious Institution, in general, is that with Science supporting the Bible, all other interpretations will disappear, give enough time for one paradigm to replace the old.

What this means for the Cultural Institution is that the atheists (like Bill Maher) can no longer mock the church and discredit and denigrate scripture.


What this means for the Educational Institution is that Genesis CAN be used in the a science curriculum.

 

[mathetes123]

Hahahaa = LOLL

Good try.

But the point is that this verse is scripture which supports the new Bible interpretation that shows science in support of the Bible.

Tjhat is so different from the present State-of-the Art in Theology, where everything the theologians say is in conflict with the Bible.

What this means to the Religious Institution, in general, is that with Science supporting the Bible, all other interpretations will disappear, give enough time for one paradigm to replace the old.

What this means for the Cultural Institution is that the atheists (like Bill Maher) can no longer mock the church and discredit and denigrate scripture.


What this means for the Educational Institution is that Genesis CAN be used in the a science curriculum.

How so?

 

[CabVet]

What this means for the Educational Institution is that Genesis CAN be used in the a science curriculum.

Yes, when all the other creation myths are added too.

 

[mathetes123]

*raises hand* they're about to tell you scientific dating is wrong too?

Has anyone ever gone back in time and calibrated dating methods to thousands, millions and billions of years ago? I don't think so. How then, do they know they are accurate? These dating methods make certain assumptions on conditions which existed millions of years ago that we cannot possibly know for sure.

 

[CabVet]

Has anyone ever gone back in time and calibrated dating methods to thousands, millions and billions of years ago? I don't think so. How then, do they know they are accurate? These dating methods make certain assumptions on conditions which existed millions of years ago that we cannot possibly know for sure.

So, let me ask you a question, if all that you describe (including time travel) was possible, and if dating was 100% accurate, would it change your mind about your religion?

 

[sandwiches]

Is truth determined by a majority vote. The majority has been wrong before, like when they believed in a flat earth.

I am not suggesting that truth is determined by majority. I am merely asking Mr Moe if he thinks that the majority of scientists do not believe in evolution. It's a relatively simple question that has nothing to do with truth.

 

[SonOfTheWest]

So, let me ask you a question, if all that you describe (including time travel) was possible, and if dating was 100% accurate, would it change your mind about your religion?

I don't suppose it would help explaining that many dating methods work because they work on a timescale of change so fast that you in fact DO know what conditions were a very long time ago.

It's part of why some dating methods are used for certain things and some for others. Because the different methods are ideal for dating stuff within certain spans of time.

 

[CabVet]

I don't suppose it would help explaining that many dating methods work because they work on a timescale of change so fast that you in fact DO know what conditions were a very long time ago.

It's part of why some dating methods are used for certain things and some for others. Because the different methods are ideal for dating stuff within certain spans of time.

My point is that his questioning of the dating methods is irrelevant. Even if there wasn't a shadow of a doubt about those dates he would still not believe them (I think), so why question the methods?

 

[SonOfTheWest]

My point is that his questioning of the dating methods is irrelevant. Even if there wasn't a shadow of a doubt about those dates he would still not believe them (I think), so why question the methods?

I want to blame at least in part educational standards. Not having the sort of basic knowledge of sciences seems to lead some people down the path of, 'They make all this stuff up."

 

[mathetes123]

So, let me ask you a question, if all that you describe (including time travel) was possible, and if dating was 100% accurate, would it change your mind about your religion?

If a man came back from the grave and confirmed that everything in the bible is true, would you believe? wait a minute, that already happened. Sorry.

 

[Davidjayjordan]

On a discussion board truth is determined by the majoriuty as board moderators want a majority for hits for increased ******

Here evolutionists are the majority therefore the board bans creation links.... and I am not allowed to use them.

 

[CabVet]

On a discussion board truth is determined by the majoriuty as board moderators want a majority for hits for increased ******

Here evolutionists are the majority therefore the board bans creation links.... and I am not allowed to use them.

How are you banned if you are posting this? Moderators don't ban creation links, there are hundreds posted here every day.

 

[sandwiches]

If a man came back from the grave and confirmed that everything in the bible is true, would you believe? wait a minute, that already happened. Sorry.

Sorry, I've never met this person. Where can I find him/her?

 

[CabVet]

If a man came back from the grave and confirmed that everything in the bible is true, would you believe? wait a minute, that already happened. Sorry.

That is my point. You don't need to try to prove evolution wrong. Just say you don't believe it, because even if you couldn't prove it wrong you would not believe it, so why bother?

 

[Davidjayjordan]

Sorry I am not allowed to give you that hyperlink as it is deemed advertisement...and can get me banned. Oh well

Here it tis

Jesus

Sorry for violating the rules Free in Christ, but the rule of Christ over-rides your board rules that I am not allowed to hyperlink to HIM.