Darwins evolution

[Bushido216]

So your saying to me that it matters little what the man says but more about what he believe's. That's very interesting, thanks, but you still haven't explained to me what this has to do with what we were talking about. I'm not a young earth creationist and I believe that FaithintheFlesh could've learned something from the quote, it does speak truth no matter who spoke it.

I must have misunderstood the purpose of your signature. I thought that you were using it to try and tell evolutionists to accept creationism. Apparently it was all-purpose.

I said what I did because creationists mis-quote evolutionists all the time.

 

[wblastyn]

Ok Look, check THIS out
It was a thread on a message board it was not the beginning of a world war. If I made a mistake then it has been made but yes I WOULD appriciate it if next time my faults could be presented a little more pleasantly because although I MAY have been wrong this time, you have been wrong too, and everyone has..as you said JEsus is perfect WE are not...so in no way did I deserve to be called ignorant, or a waste of time.
I am a 16 year old student. Students LEARN they do not get told they are ignorant for not KNOWINg, and if you say I am ignorant your intentions arent to teach they are to criticize.
I understand if you get the same arguments over and over but that is LIFe...that is people...I have not been at the board long enough to SEE these other discussions Im sorry if I didnt think to read every other post before saying mine, but at the same time, you did not have to respond.
And I am sorry if you think standing up for my own beliefs and lifestyle in school are wrong, because noone in the classroom did..well..one person..who just wanted an argument.
I posted for input not insults. Sorry to cause such a problem

I whole-heartedly apologize for being nasty, it just gets frustrating when you hear the same old arguments over and over, but that doesn't jutify my behaviour.

A theory in science is different from the common usage of the word you hear the general public using. A Scientific Theory has ALOT of supporting evidence and has undergone ALOT of peer-review testing (where your scientific peers - ie. your competition - try to attack the theory and falsify it). It's not just an idea someone comes up with one day and decides "this must be true!". Darwin didn't wake up one day and say "men share a common ancestor with apes!"

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

I re-iterate my earlier offer. Ask a question.

Ok..to leave it open...
WITHOUT the insults...explain to me where My take on creation is wrong.

 

[Bushido216]

For LOTS of reasons, heh.

First off, the universe cannot be young because we see the light from supernovae millions of light-years away.

The earth cannot be young because we see very little nuclides with half-lives over a million years.

There is a clear fossil record showing evolution.

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

I whole-heartedly apologize for being nasty, it just gets frustrating when you hear the same old arguments over and over, but that doesn't jutify my behaviour.

A theory in science is different from the common usage of the word you hear the general public using. A Scientific Theory has ALOT of supporting evidence and has undergone ALOT of peer-review testing (where your scientific peers - ie. your competition - try to attack the theory and falsify it). It's not just an idea someone comes up with one day and decides "this must be true!". Darwin didn't wake up one day and say "men share a common ancestor with apes!"

Thank you I appriciate it.

No, true, he did not. Well aware. Though (seems arrogant but o well) where does the creation theory in the bible stand then?

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

Evolution is HUMAns though? Ok, because if it says God created fish maybe they invloved to w/e else..(example)but isnt it right (ok if im wrong??) that it does state God CREATED man not Man evolved..
I apologze because that DOES seem like a stereotyped question but I have never gotten a clear answer

 

[Bushido216]

I'm not sure what you're saying. I think you are asking if humans, too, evolved.

They did.

When you take Genesis literally, you are interpreting Genesis. What many Christians forget to do is use God's creation to interpret God's word. No Christian evolutionist says that God didn't create, we merely argue the methods. I use the evidence God left behind in his creation to help me interprete Genesis.

You'd be surprised the theological truths you can extract from the text when you stop looking at it line by line and read the whole spiritual meaning.

 

[Larry]

Nevermind.

 

[Curt]

When you keep posting falsehoods about evolution proof, and old earth you are the ones who are decieved. When God for instance said he would bring frogs all over egypt it didn't take but a second for that to happen, and we all know that frogs couldn't multiply that fast. Like it says God said let there be light and there is the sun moon and all the stars, just like that. Even your hero Darwin admitted that it was only a theory. And that's all it will ever be. Get your heads in The Bible, and you won't be deceived cause God loves you too much to deceive you.

 

[Bushido216]

You didn't just use the "it's just a theory" arguement, did you? You realize that a theory in science is different than a theory in the vernacular, right?

A theory, in science, is an explaination put forth to explain observed facts. That arguement is useless. It's like saying the theory of gravity is "just a theory".

 

[wblastyn]

When you keep posting falsehoods about evolution proof, and old earth you are the ones who are decieved. When God for instance said he would bring frogs all over egypt it didn't take but a second for that to happen, and we all know that frogs couldn't multiply that fast. Like it says God said let there be light and there is the sun moon and all the stars, just like that. Even your hero Darwin admitted that it was only a theory. And that's all it will ever be. Get your heads in The Bible, and you won't be deceived cause God loves you too much to deceive you.

Did you even read my post?

 

[nephilimiyr]

I must have misunderstood the purpose of your signature. I thought that you were using it to try and tell evolutionists to accept creationism. Apparently it was all-purpose.

God's honest truth Bushido, I never knew who T.H. Huxley was until you said something here about him. I was looking through a book of quotes when I saw his and I really liked it, I think one can use that quote and apply it to just about anything.

I said what I did because creationists mis-quote evolutionists all the time.

And I realize that and that's why I say that sometimes you just have to take a break from it every so often when it get's too frustrateing. Again I'll let you guys go at it and just take my usual place on the sidelines where it's much easier to keep ones sanity.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

When you keep posting falsehoods about evolution proof, and old earth you are the ones who are decieved. When God for instance said he would bring frogs all over egypt it didn't take but a second for that to happen, and we all know that frogs couldn't multiply that fast. Like it says God said let there be light and there is the sun moon and all the stars, just like that. Even your hero Darwin admitted that it was only a theory. And that's all it will ever be. Get your heads in The Bible, and you won't be deceived cause God loves you too much to deceive you.

Serious accusation, Curt.

I challenge you to find one post where an evolutionist has posted something that is demonstrably false - i.e. not just something you think is false.

Because I can find plenty of examples of creationists on this board doing just that, which is what totally p***es me and other TEs off.

It's not as simple as you make out, Curt. If God, 6000 years ago, had said "Let there be light" and created stars, we would still not be able to see most of them. And yet we can. Your YEC hypothesis cannot account for that, without bringing in unverified and groundless ad-hoc concepts such as C-decay and Humphrey's flawed white hole business. Alternatively, you claim God created the light in transit, meaning that the events we see in distant galaxies never happened, and God is a deceiver.

 

[Bushido216]

Infact, we wouldn't be able to see any of them. And we definitely shouldn't see any supernovae at all unless God created new stars that were very poorly designed.

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

I'm not sure what you're saying. I think you are asking if humans, too, evolved.

They did.

When you take Genesis literally, you are interpreting Genesis. What many Christians forget to do is use God's creation to interpret God's word. No Christian evolutionist says that God didn't create, we merely argue the methods. I use the evidence God left behind in his creation to help me interprete Genesis.

You'd be surprised the theological truths you can extract from the text when you stop looking at it line by line and read the whole spiritual meaning.

Ok, Yes I was asking that I suppose.
Then, from how you have stated it, why is there so many discrepancies between creation in the bible and evolution?

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

When you keep posting falsehoods about evolution proof, and old earth you are the ones who are decieved. When God for instance said he would bring frogs all over egypt it didn't take but a second for that to happen, and we all know that frogs couldn't multiply that fast. Like it says God said let there be light and there is the sun moon and all the stars, just like that. Even your hero Darwin admitted that it was only a theory. And that's all it will ever be. Get your heads in The Bible, and you won't be deceived cause God loves you too much to deceive you.

That is how I was thinking before....but now...am I wrong to think so?
That is what I meant...God didnt say 'let there be fish to evolve into men'..no offense at all, because I am trying to learn from all viewpoints...

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

You didn't just use the "it's just a theory" arguement, did you? You realize that a theory in science is different than a theory in the vernacular, right?

A theory, in science, is an explaination put forth to explain observed facts. That arguement is useless. It's like saying the theory of gravity is "just a theory".

Everything is a theory, so using the term doesnt nes. Matter...even the Bible for instance...There are plenty of fingers pointing to its reliability, but no proof..as is many things in life..Maybe I started this thread of wrong but ok, right now, I am trying to see everyone else's viewpoint, (wishing people would stop posting so forcefully because NOONE KNOWS that they are right) because you never know when you are wrong.
This thread is complete theory, belief, opinion, faith, all of that...I am just trying to learn because I will be ready to say ok maybe I was wrong...
Those of you that are posting reasoning with your posts thank you, those of you that continue just to point the finger and flame one another's beliefs...it is unnes. please back yourself up with things other than 'Ive heard it before', or sarcastic remarks...

 

[FaithInTheFlesh]

Infact, we wouldn't be able to see any of them. And we definitely shouldn't see any supernovae at all unless God created new stars that were very poorly designed.

I dont understand this can you explain?

 

[lucaspa]

the discussion was based on creation in the bible vs men evolving from other things. and the prurpose was to say her theorys arent proven so to teach them to people as the truth is wrong. Then again, that is only my opinion

And your opinion is wrong. When theories are supported with a lot of evidence, they are accepted as (provisionally) true and we accept them as such unless and until new evidence shows them to be wrong.

Gravity, heliocentrism, atomic theory, earth is round theory, germ theory, etc. are all theories. They have all been "proven" true and are taught as such. Evolution is in the same group. There is so much evidence in favor of it and all alternative theories -- such as creationism -- have been falsified.

You have gotten some really bad information from creationists. And yes, you wasted class time.

 

[lucaspa]

Everything is a theory, so using the term doesnt nes. Matter...even the Bible for instance...There are plenty of fingers pointing to its reliability, but no proof..as is many things in life..Maybe I started this thread of wrong but ok, right now, I am trying to see everyone else's viewpoint, (wishing people would stop posting so forcefully because NOONE KNOWS that they are right) because you never know when you are wrong.

There are some things that we know are wrong. This comes from the fact that true statements can't have false consequences. That's deductive logic, in case you haven't run into it under that name before.

For instance, the earth is not flat. We know that for certain. And we knew it before we got pictures from satellites in orbit.

Similarly, the earth is not the center of the solar system. We found that out because if that were true, planets would not appear in the positions from earth that they do.

Now, the scientific theory that says earth is young, was created in 144 hours, and that each species was individually formed in its present form is wrong. It's not true. There are observations we have, such as pseudogenes and transitional fossils, that simply can't be there if the theory were true.

This thread is complete theory, belief, opinion, faith, all of that.

Not all of it. It is belief, opinion, faith that God created. But it is not faith how God created. God did not create by a literal reading of Genesis 1 or Genesis 2-3. Instead, God created by the processes that you lump together as evolution. That's not opinion or belief or faith. It is deductions and conclusions arrived at from the evidence that God left us in His Creation.

Have you read Origin of the Species? If not, then you don't even have a starting basis to say evolution is wrong, do you? In order to say something is wrong, you at least have to know what it is. Now, I suggest you listen carefully in class and let the teacher tell you what evolution is and some (she has only a little time to present just a few bits) of the evidence that supports it. In the meantime, I suggest you go here and read Origin online:
http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin/