Do non-experts really appreciate the work and knowledge of experts?

[OdwinOddball]

I'm not going to reply to the majority of your post for a couple of reasons. First of all I apologize for even going as far as it did with this discussion. My original intent was solely to make a point, but as these things usually go, it always goes back to the science. I have little to no background in science and am not qualified to argue the finer points thereof. Secondly and most importantly I have little to no faith in what much of evolutionary science produces because I believe it all to be a lie. Since I see it as a lie, I'm not about to spend a lot of time studying it or arguing its finer points.
I always find points like this to be rather humorous. My personal interpretation of the Bible, if I said that about science and it's findings you'd all jump on me and state otherwise. Well I see the Bible the same way, it doesn't contradict itself unless you allow it to. There is a proper method to study it and mine the truths within it, the problem is the vast majority of Christians hardly open it and yet will pontificate upon what it says. Kind of like YECs and evolution you might say.
No I don't read science journals and to tell you the truth I'm not much interested in them. I do know this that the number of Christian biologists is less than the number who aren't. I base that upon Gallup polls that have been conducted which show that only 45% of scientists believe in God. From that, as a Christian using the Bible, one can see that of those 45% only half at best are true to their faith. So this then tells me at best 20% of scientists are Christian. Then of those a highly significant percentage are evolutionists. That doesn't leave a lot left for those that believe the Bible as it is written.

So what are they all seeking? IMO, for many it is fame and $$$.

So to summarize, you don't understand alot of what is presented to you on this forum. And instead of taking the time to learn the foundational material so you could understand, you'd rather remain ignorant with your pre-conceived ideas, never challenging your mind to find the truth.

THanks for confirming everything I suspected about Creationists. You fear evolution because you don't want to lose your unique status as God's special children. You can't be bothered to actually get an education, instead choosing to remain ignorant.

You're right, you really should have posted your one point and left, you have no reason being in ther Cr/Evo forum.

 

[Aron-Ra]

Have we observed where mutation creates new and increased complexity of form? They've done thousands of experiments with the fruit fly and in the end all they ever had was a fruit fly, mutated, transformed, even unrecognizable as a fly, but nonetheless a fly. So the assumption of new species development is just that, it has never been observed.
Whether it is reasonable or not I'm not talking about, it is an assumption nonetheless.

There is another thread you should really see. The OP is One Thing Never Evolves into Something Else.

On another thread, a die-hard young-Earth creationist just told me:

I do not deny Speciation. I doubt if any real YEC would either. In fact, YEC depend on speciation much more than e’ist! Remember, we believe that ALL animals (and let’s talk about animals only here for the sake of brevity. Plants, sea creatures, insects, etc. can also be discussed but for our purposes they just kind of clog up the space) developed from those “kinds” (The definition of “kind” is up for discussion – but it would denote an animal group with enough DNA/Genetic diversity to allow for all current species to “evolve” – ha ha) that survived on Noah’s Ark. Hence, YEC have only a few thousand years for speciation to result in the massive diversity we see today, while the e’ist has BILLIONS. So, who is really a more ardent defender of speciation?

I can't wait to show Mr. Calvert that he was wrong again, and that there really are some creationists who still deny speciation.

 

[vossler]

So to summarize, you don't understand alot of what is presented to you on this forum. And instead of taking the time to learn the foundational material so you could understand, you'd rather remain ignorant with your pre-conceived ideas, never challenging your mind to find the truth.

Thanks for confirming everything I suspected about Creationists. You fear evolution because you don't want to lose your unique status as God's special children. You can't be bothered to actually get an education, instead choosing to remain ignorant.

You're right, you really should have posted your one point and left, you have no reason being in ther Cr/Evo forum.

I guess according to you this has now become an evolutionist only playground and other views need to find another sandbox to play in.

Well since you've obviously got me and all other creationists all figured out I suppose there's no need for any of us to ever come back. I wasn't aware that you were only looking for people to post like minded information. Then again, I suppose that isn't much of a surprise.

What was a surprise is how long it took for you to come and tell me this.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm not going to reply to the majority of your post for a couple of reasons. First of all I apologize for even going as far as it did with this discussion. My original intent was solely to make a point, but as these things usually go, it always goes back to the science. I have little to no background in science and am not qualified to argue the finer points thereof. Secondly and most importantly I have little to no faith in what much of evolutionary science produces because I believe it all to be a lie. Since I see it as a lie, I'm not about to spend a lot of time studying it or arguing its finer points.

How do you know that evolution is a lie if you know very little about science? This relates right back to the OP. Calling a scientist a liar is a very lofty accusation. A scientist's carreer is built upon their reputation. For instance, the Korean cloning scientist that you mentioned before. He will never work in science again because he falsified his data. He lied. If you are accusing scientists of lying you need to back it up with a ton of evidence, or immediately retract your statements.

I always find points like this to be rather humorous. My personal interpretation of the Bible, if I said that about science and it's findings you'd all jump on me and state otherwise.

There are no personal interpretations in science. All interpretations are open to falsification by new evidence. Whether or not an interpretation is falsified is not judged by the person interpreting but by the whole of science.

Well I see the Bible the same way, it doesn't contradict itself unless you allow it to.

And by requiring the Genesis story to be literal you have mad God's Word contradict His Creation.

No I don't read science journals and to tell you the truth I'm not much interested in them.

That is where the evidence for evolution is.

I do know this that the number of Christian biologists is less than the number who aren't. I base that upon Gallup polls that have been conducted which show that only 45% of scientists believe in God. From that, as a Christian using the Bible, one can see that of those 45% only half at best are true to their faith. So this then tells me at best 20% of scientists are Christian. Then of those a highly significant percentage are evolutionists. That doesn't leave a lot left for those that believe the Bible as it is written.

They believe the Bible as written, but they do not interpret it like you do. It would seem to me that you do not believe the Creation itself, which you claim was directly written by God instead of inspired like the Word.

 

[vossler]

How do you know that evolution is a lie if you know very little about science? This relates right back to the OP. Calling a scientist a liar is a very lofty accusation. A scientist's carreer is built upon their reputation. For instance, the Korean cloning scientist that you mentioned before. He will never work in science again because he falsified his data. He lied. If you are accusing scientists of lying you need to back it up with a ton of evidence, or immediately retract your statements.

First of all I didn't call any scientist a liar. I said evolution was a lie, many, many people have been deceived by it. Does that make them liars? No! Now the Korean scientist, yeah he's a liar.

 

[Loudmouth]

First of all I didn't call any scientist a liar. I said evolution was a lie, many, many people have been deceived by it.

The theory of evolution is a theory put forth by scientists. If evolution is a lie then those who put forth the theory are also liars. Either supply evidence that they are lying or retract the statement.

Now the Korean scientist, yeah he's a liar.

I agree, and he will be given the worst punishment any scientist can recieve. His work will become irrelevant as well his future work. In the US, he would probably never be funded again by any university or granting institute. I don't know what his fate will be in Korea, but abroad his work will be largely ignored from this point on.

It is for this reason that no scientist takes the "liar" moniker lightly. Either show where the lie is, with evidence, or retract.

 

[vossler]

The theory of evolution is a theory put forth by scientists. If evolution is a lie then those who put forth the theory are also liars. Either supply evidence that they are lying or retract the statement.

So are you telling me someone can't tell a lie without knowing they are lying?

 

[Edx]

There is another thread you should really see. The OP is One Thing Never Evolves into Something Else.

On another thread, a die-hard young-Earth creationist just told me:
I can't wait to show Mr. Calvert that he was wrong again, and that there really are some creationists who still deny speciation.

Insidently, I wonder if he will reply again. Its been a while!

 

[Caphi]

So are you telling me someone can't tell a lie without knowing they are lying?

The only way that could happen is if the liar himself is deceived. Deception can be applied either by another person or by personal misinterpretation. Unfortunately, the interpretation made by the scientists in question is a bit too obvious to be a result of some confusion or bias. This means that a person is behind the deception. Either evolution is a massive hoax being perpetrated by a small group of people for the purpose of deceiving scientists and students; OR it is a deception from a deity; OR there is no deception involved. Which of the three is it, vossler?

 

[Loudmouth]

So are you telling me someone can't tell a lie without knowing they are lying?

It wouldn't be a lie if it wasn't intentional. By calling evolution a lie you are insinuating that the scientists who constructed the theory are decieving intentionally.

Again, please present the evidence that evolution is a lie or retract the statement. Your tip-toe dance around the semantics of "lie" tell me that you have no such evidence. Reminds me of President Clinton dancing around the word "is".

 

[caravelair]

I'm always willing to read another article or listen to another argument. Both of which I've been doing in this thread.

and yet a couple posts up you said this:

Since I see it as a lie, I'm not about to spend a lot of time studying it or arguing its finer points.

 

[vossler]

It wouldn't be a lie if it wasn't intentional. By calling evolution a lie you are insinuating that the scientists who constructed the theory are decieving intentionally.

No that's just it, I said people were deceived by it, including scientists. I don't believe the vast majority of people are intentionally deceiving others with the lie of evolution. Satan, who is the father of lies perpetrated this one upon humanity and unfortunately we bought it hook, line, and sinker. So someone who repeats a lie that he himself believes to be true, isn't a liar. I haven't called anyone or insinuated that anyone, other than the Korean scientist, was a liar.

Again, please present the evidence that evolution is a lie or retract the statement. Your tip-toe dance around the semantics of "lie" tell me that you have no such evidence. Reminds me of President Clinton dancing around the word "is".

As for your evidence that evolution is a lie, all the evidence I need is contained within Scripture, something you don't hold as truth and therefore would dismiss. So that avenue of discussion would be obviously be fruitless.

 

[vossler]

and yet a couple posts up you said this:

This is still true, I am willing to read and listen to other arguments, that doesn't mean I have to spend a lot of time doing it.

 

[vossler]

The only way that could happen is if the liar himself is deceived. Deception can be applied either by another person or by personal misinterpretation. Unfortunately, the interpretation made by the scientists in question is a bit too obvious to be a result of some confusion or bias. This means that a person is behind the deception. Either evolution is a massive hoax being perpetrated by a small group of people for the purpose of deceiving scientists and students; OR it is a deception from a deity; OR there is no deception involved. Which of the three is it, vossler?

As I stated to Loudmouth, it is a deception from Satan.

 

[Caphi]

As I stated to Loudmouth, it is a deception from Satan.

Which, in turn, is just your way of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "LA LA LA" whenever anything is brought up which threatens your faith. Now suppose, just quietly suppose, that all those fossils and things really are genuine organism material. What would you do?

 

[Loudmouth]

No that's just it, I said people were deceived by it, including scientists. I don't believe the vast majority of people are intentionally deceiving others with the lie of evolution. Satan, who is the father of lies perpetrated this one upon humanity and unfortunately we bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Is heliocetrism also a deception created by Satan?

As for your evidence that evolution is a lie, all the evidence I need is contained within Scripture, something you don't hold as truth and therefore would dismiss. So that avenue of discussion would be obviously be fruitless.

What is keeping me from claiming that the Bible is a deception written by Satan? Nothing. So there you go.

 

[dad]

...
What is keeping me from claiming that the Bible is a deception written by Satan? Nothing. So there you go.

Actually, I think there may be. Do you actually really believe in eithher God or the devil? If not, how could you claim either wrote it?

 

[Aron-Ra]

As I stated to Loudmouth, it is a deception from Satan.

Here are the options;

(1) A giant invisible (possibly imaginary) being cast an incantation spell which poofed everything out of nothing. And the only indication of this is an old storybook written by men pretending to speak for that possibly imaginary being. So it is no different than many other supposedly holy books written in homage to other imaginary beings with magic powers. Without any reason to believe it all, it can only be considered on faith alone.

(2) The combined genius of all the world's expert specialists, and all thier independant research in every related field consistently demand another explanation, one which they all agree on unanemously and exclusively, and which is based on an overwhelming preponderance of demonstrable evidence and repeatable facts such that we can measurably confirm its accuracy on many levels.

Without doing any research of your own, you believe the first option as a preconceived notion you're unable to question objectively. And dismiss the latter option as a massive and pointless deception by yet another imaginary being, one with no logical backing or possible motive. You will accept any explanation no matter how silly it is -as long as you never have to face the possibility that you may be the one who is deceived, and not everyone in the world who knows tons more about everything than you do.

 

[vossler]

What is keeping me from claiming that the Bible is a deception written by Satan? Nothing. So there you go.

That's right, you're free to believe it if you wish.

 

[vossler]

Here are the options;

(1) A giant invisible (possibly imaginary) being cast an incantation spell which poofed everything out of nothing. And the only indication of this is an old storybook written by men pretending to speak for that possibly imaginary being. So it is no different than many other supposedly holy books written in homage to other imaginary beings with magic powers. Without any reason to believe it all, it can only be considered on faith alone.

(2) The combined genius of all the world's expert specialists, and all thier independant research in every related field consistently demand another explanation, one which they all agree on unanemously and exclusively, and which is based on an overwhelming preponderance of demonstrable evidence and repeatable facts such that we can measurably confirm its accuracy on many levels.

Without doing any research of your own, you believe the first option as a preconceived notion you're unable to question objectively. And dismiss the latter option as a massive and pointless deception by yet another imaginary being, one with no logical backing or possible motive. You will accept any explanation no matter how silly it is -as long as you never have to face the possibility that you may be the one who is deceived, and not everyone in the world who knows tons more about everything than you do.

Those may be your only options because you don't believe in a higher being. You are prone to accept theories and explanations that are worldly, that's to be expected, no surprise there.

If I am being deceived what are the consequences? None that I know of, my life doesn't change whether I believe in evolution or not.

Now for you the stakes are much higher.