Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

[amariselle]

This post strikes me as incredibly arrogant. It seems you are arguing laity, such as yourself, know far more about it than all these highly educated research scientists. So, good luck on trying to be a guest lecturer. Hope you don't mind some constructive criticism from your audience.
Also, evolution is actually not taught that thoroughly in public schools. That is part of teh problem. Students are maybe given a smattering of evolution, as is true of other scientific fields, but that really isn't very much.
That the real truth is being destroyed by intellectuals is the hue can cry of just about every fascist, oppressive government, from Nazi Germany to Red China. Let's keep all those pointy headed intellectuals, all those effete intellectual snobs (as old Spiral T. said) under lock and key; they simply ask too many disturbing questions.

Actually evolution is taught everywhere. I can't even watch a nature program without hearing about how our ancestors climbed out of the "primordial sludge" 2 billion years ago. (Or some such claim) And this is also true of nature museums and zoos.

 

[HitchSlap]

Actually evolution is taught everywhere. I can't even watch a nature program without hearing about how our ancestors climbed out of the "primordial sludge" 2 billion years ago. (Or some such claim) And this is also true of nature museums and zoos.

Of course. Evolution is a fact.

 

[Cearbhall]

Evolution itself has evolved because it can't prove its premis. It used to say we came from apes that apes were our ancestor. But it has evolved in its presentation and took away that part. Now it's a common ancestor even though they can't say or show what that common ancestor was. If you follow their logic far enough every living thing including plants and animals, cells viruses esentially everything came from a common ancestor. That takes as much faith to believe as it does to believe that God just created it.

Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that those who agree with it have the same lack of understanding and are relying on faith.

 

[amariselle]

Of course. Evolution is a fact.

That kind of evolution is not, there are many holes in it and theories proposed about it. It is not irrefutable fact.

Do you believe we descended from single celled organisms?

 

[HitchSlap]

Absolutely, I have often thought the same. Atheists often do not realize the faith they put in their own beliefs, because science has in no way proved beyond a doubt that Darwinian evolution is true.

Of course evolution is true. It's why the highest classification of theory is conferred on it.

 

[Cearbhall]

Do you believe we descended from single celled organisms?

Yes, of course. Do you have a more likely theory? Do you think multicellular organisms came about without single-celled organisms existing first?

 

[HitchSlap]

That kind of evolution is not, there are many holes in it and theories proposed about it. It is not irrefutable fact.

Do you believe we descended from single celled organisms?

You would be wrong. ToE is as robust a theory as they come. Your assertions regarding ToE betrays your ignorance of the theory.

And yes, the evidence overwhelmingly suggest life evolved from simple to complex.

 

[amariselle]

Yes, of course. Do you have a more likely theory? Do you think multicellular organisms came about without single-celled organisms existing first?

I believe God created us in His image.

 

[amariselle]

You would be wrong. ToE is as robust a theory as they come. Your assertions regarding ToE betrays your ignorance of the theory.

And yes, the evidence overwhelmingly suggest life evolved from simple to complex.

Interesting, because I just saw others criticizing the validity of ToE on this forum the other day. (And they weren't all Christians)

 

[Cearbhall]

I believe God created us in His image.

Ok, and why couldn't that have been through a logical scientific process? Do you see him poofing things into existence today? Or going against any scientific laws or theories at all?

 

[amariselle]

Ok, and why couldn't that have been through a logical scientific process?

Sure, God is an intelligent Designer. But He didn't create us as single-celled organisms first. The complexity and beauty of this creation points me even more clearly to the Creator.

 

[HitchSlap]

Interesting, because I just saw others criticizing the validity of ToE on this forum the other day. (And they weren't all Christians)

Sorry if I don't accept your statement at face value, but no one familiar with ToE doubts the "validity" of the theory itself. Certainly as new information is found, there may be some discussion as to some of the specifics of ToE, but no one questions the theory itself.

 

[Cearbhall]

Sure, God is an intelligent Designer. But He didn't create us as single-celled organisms first. The complexity and beauty of this creation points me even more clearly to the Creator.

Could you explain further? I'm not seeing how that logically follows. It seems to me that you think you're supposed to believe in Creationism. When I was Christian, I just understood that ancient authors wouldn't have been able to comprehend evolution. Anachronistic knowledge didn't seem to be part of the divinely-inspired deal. The vocabulary for it didn't even exist in their languages.

 

[HitchSlap]

Sure, God is an intelligent Designer. But He didn't create us as single-celled organisms first. The complexity and beauty of this creation points me even more clearly to the Creator.

Then how do you explain the fossil record?

(And please don't say a global food six thousand y.o., because that never happened)

 

[TLK Valentine]

It has been said to me many times. The argument I have encountered (and I am not referring to this forum in particular) is that since science has discovered what we've descended from, this disproves a Creator.

I'm relieved that you didn't hear it on this forum -- I'd like to think we attract a smarter level of heathen.

 

[Cearbhall]

But He didn't create us as single-celled organisms first. The complexity and beauty of this creation points me even more clearly to the Creator.

When do you believe single-celled organisms were created, and why?

It has been said to me many times. The argument I have encountered (and I am not referring to this forum in particular) is that since science has discovered what we've descended from, this disproves a Creator.

Well, that could mean a couple different things...do you mean that they said it disproves God entirely? Or did they just mean that it disproves the idea that there was a Creator with a capital C, aka Creationism?

 

[amariselle]

When do you believe single-celled organisms were created, and why?

When God created the world and everything in it. And His creation brings Him glory.

 

[amariselle]

Then how do you explain the fossil record?

(And please don't say a global food six thousand y.o., because that never happened)

How do you know it never happened?

 

[Cearbhall]

When God created the world and everything in it.

Do you believe that's the same time that humans were created?

How do you know it never happened?

Because we generally operate from the standpoint of "There was not a global natural disaster that created a population bottleneck of less than 20 humans" until we actually have a reason to think it happened...

 

[Hoghead1]

That kind of evolution is not, there are many holes in it and theories proposed about it. It is not irrefutable fact.

Do you believe we descended from single celled organisms?

You said earlier that you did hold with evolution, however.