...Do you even believe in Evolution in the first palce?

[TheBear]

BlueLioness,

I found the same on this Christian forum, elite evolutionist that dominate threads with Naturalism. Rather than being open minded they have sharpened their debate and bullying skills.

But the forum allows Christians and non-Christians on this specific forum. And God is ever so near.

Oh, good grief! Another persecution complex? Really?


You're the one with the elite attitude around here. It seems like you came here to preach and teach the rest of us lowly heathens, instead of discussing and maybe learning something too. It doesn't even dawn on you that your beliefs may be bogus. No. They are final and unchangeable in your mind. If that's not being an elitist, nothing is.

 

[Heissonear]

I was raised a Naturalist. I was schooled in evolution and the natural sciences. You may not find any positive reason for me to now be different. In short, there is a Creator after all.

Why have you not found Him?

 

[CabVet]

We one is raised and schooled in evolution and natural sciences they eventually learn the strengths and weaknesses of Naturalism. No?

No, you haven't show any knowledge of evolution yet. Being "raised and schooled" is very different than understanding something.

 

[KWCrazy]

I do not believe in molecules-to- man.
I do not believe in the spontaneous creation of everything from nothing.
I do not believe in the spontaneous origination of life from non living material.
I do not believe that rare duplication errors can create new information to advance a species.
I don't believe that single celled creatures can give birth to multicelled creatures.
I don't believe that a dinosaur with feathers is any more than a dinosaur with feathers.
I do not believe that the Bible, which had 40 human authors over 1500 years, is a book of mythology.
I do not believe that the Son of God would verify that the Bible is the inspired word of God if it was completely wrong about how the world was created.
I don't believe Jesus would have spoken of the first man and woman if they were not real.
I don't believe Jesus would have mentioned Noah if he was a myth.
I do not believe that the fossil record shows anything evolving into anything else.
I do believe that Jesus would have mentioned if the Fourth Comandment, which was carved into a stone tablet by God, contained and untrue statement.
I do believe that God is the creator of the universe; and of all things seen and unseen.
I do believe that God created the world in six days; that on the sixth day He created man; and that on the seventh day He rested.
I do believe that evolution is completely false and based on bad science; that it only enjoys the support of the scientific community simply by nature of the fact that there is no alternative.

I no longer believe that it is productive to argue with evolution proponents. In the immortal words of Tom Petty, "It don't make no difference to me, 'cause you believe what you want to believe..."

 

[AV1611VET]

I do not believe in molecules-to- man.
I do not believe in the spontaneous creation of everything from nothing.
I do not believe in the spontaneous origination of life from non living material.
I do not believe that rare duplication errors can create new information to advance a species.
I don't believe that single celled creatures can give birth to multicelled creatures.
I don't believe that a dinosaur with feathers is any more than a dinosaur with feathers.
I do not believe that the Bible, which had 40 human authors over 1500 years, is a book of mythology.
I do not believe that the Son of God would verify that the Bible is the inspired word of God if it was completely wrong about how the world was created.
I don't believe Jesus would have spoken of the first man and woman if they were not real.
I don't believe Jesus would have mentioned Noah if he was a myth.
I do not believe that the fossil record shows anything evolving into anything else.
I do believe that Jesus would have mentioned if the Fourth Comandment, which was carved into a stone tablet by God, contained and untrue statement.
I do believe that God is the creator of the universe; and of all things seen and unseen.
I do believe that God created the world in six days; that on the sixth day He created man; and that on the seventh day He rested.
I do believe that evolution is completely false and based on bad science; that it only enjoys the support of the scientific community simply by nature of the fact that there is no alternative.

... Preach it, brother!

 

[CabVet]

... Preach it, brother!

Good for you both. It would be even better if you didn't try distort science to justify and fit your beliefs...

 

[TheBear]

... Preach it, brother!

Get a room already.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I do not believe in molecules-to- man.

Really? I'd argue that you do - the Genesis creation story is exactly that.

I do not believe in the spontaneous creation of everything from nothing.

Can you define nothing? I suspect nobody here (except AV?) believes in creation (spontaneous or otherwise) from nothing.

I do not believe in the spontaneous origination of life from non living material.

Perhaps you misunderstand the word "spontaneous"?

I do not believe that rare duplication errors can create new information to advance a species.

What would an advance be? Bacteria gaining the ability to digest nylon is not an advance?

I don't believe that single celled creatures can give birth to multicelled creatures.

I don't think anyone will argue with you there.

I don't believe that a dinosaur with feathers is any more than a dinosaur with feathers.

Again, we are in agreement.

I do not believe that the Bible, which had 40 human authors over 1500 years, is a book of mythology.
I do not believe that the Son of God would verify that the Bible is the inspired word of God if it was completely wrong about how the world was created.
I don't believe Jesus would have spoken of the first man and woman if they were not real.
I don't believe Jesus would have mentioned Noah if he was a myth.

Good for you, and nobody is asking you to believe otherwise. But this is all irrelevant to the belief claims you made above about evolution and origins.

I do not believe that the fossil record shows anything evolving into anything else.

What would such a fossil look like? I suspect you are choosing to ignore the evidence rather than refuting it.

I do believe that Jesus would have mentioned if the Fourth Comandment, which was carved into a stone tablet by God, contained and untrue statement.

What has the sabbath day got to do with anything in this thread? Or are you just getting this off your chest?

I do believe that God is the creator of the universe; and of all things seen and unseen.
I do believe that God created the world in six days; that on the sixth day He created man; and that on the seventh day He rested.

Again, good for you. And again that's irrelevant to the belief claims you made above about evolution and origins.

I do believe that evolution is completely false and based on bad science; that it only enjoys the support of the scientific community simply by nature of the fact that there is no alternative.

But I'm guessing you cannot demonstrate this "bad science"?

I no longer believe that it is productive to argue with evolution proponents.

Simply repeating "la la la I'm not listening and everything you say is false" does not constitute arguing. Addressing the evidence presented by evolution proponents would be considered arguing.

 

[KWCrazy]

Really? I'd argue that you do - the Genesis creation story is exactly that.

No, in Genesis God created man from the dust of the earth and did so withing the time span of one day. Man did not evolve from molecules.

Can you define nothing? I suspect nobody here (except AV?) believes in creation (spontaneous or otherwise) from nothing.

Actually, the creation of the universe can be described as a conversion of God's energy into matter. Natrualists do not believe in God, therefore for them the universe has no possible oprigination.

Perhaps you misunderstand the word "spontaneous"?

"Coming or resulting from a natural impulse or tendency; without effort or premeditation; natural and unconstrained; unplanned: a spontaneous burst of applause. "

What would an advance be? Bacteria gaining the ability to digest nylon is not an advance?

How about fish gaining legs? A change of diet isn't exactly a world changing reformation.

What would such a fossil look like? I suspect you are choosing to ignore the evidence rather than refuting it.

The fact is that every fossil we find is a distinct animal that lived and died. None of them show any transition to anything else. The oldest fossil ever found had complex DNA, which indicates design.

What has the sabbath day got to do with anything in this thread? Or are you just getting this off your chest?

Exodus 10:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

From the hand of God, the universe was created in six days. Nothing evolved. Moses did not write the 10 commandments. God inscribed them into stone tablets.

But I'm guessing you cannot demonstrate this "bad science"?

I have many times. Someone else can do it now; not that anyone will pay attention or open their minds to the truth and the limitations of science. There is no proven identifiable mechanism for evolution. Coppy errors do not re-write information any more than my printer can mess up a report and print an original novel.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

I have many times.

I dare you to cite single primary scientific source in support of any objection you've made toward evolutionary biology. As it stands, you have yet to say anything that can't be refuted with about forty-five seconds worth of research.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

No, in Genesis God created man from the dust of the earth and did so withing the time span of one day. Man did not evolve from molecules.

Trying to move the goalposts - what a surprise. But ignoring the element of time, where did the dust come from? You'll find that dust is made from molecules which (you believe) were then made into man. Ergo you believe in molecules-to-man.

Actually, the creation of the universe can be described as a conversion of God's energy into matter. Natrualists do not believe in God, therefore for them the universe has no possible oprigination.

Uh-huh. So that's your definition of nothing, is it?

How about fish gaining legs? A change of diet isn't exactly a world changing reformation.

Again, moving the goalposts. You haven't shown how it is not an advance, you've redefined your belief.

The fact is that every fossil we find is a distinct animal that lived and died. None of them show any transition to anything else. The oldest fossil ever found had complex DNA, which indicates design.

You avoid the question again and throw in a couple of new, bold and unsupported assertions.

Coppy errors do not re-write information any more than my printer can mess up a report and print an original novel.

Great illustration of your complete lack of understanding of ToE. For your analogy to be correct man (for example) would have "evolved" directly from bacteria in one generation. Is that your demonstration of bad science?

FYI a more accurate analogy would be that your printer could mess up and print "a" instead of "e" - but only for the 77th occurrence of "e" in the entire, 5000 page report i.e. a minor change to a single character in the whole report. Or perhaps random insertion of a single "," in sentence 53 on page 914. Would it make a difference to the report? Potentially it could, but most likely it would have no effect.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yup.

Just ignore all the missing links in between, add time as necessary, and you can have any habitable planet biodistributed & biodiverse in no tim... er ... in time.

It's easy to believe in evolution:

1. Start with a habitable planet -- nevermind how it got here.
2. Start with life already in progress -- nevermind how it started.
3. Skip all missing links between nodes -- assume they were there at one time.
4. Add time as necessary -- never assume there wasn't enough.
5. Assume the environment was conducive to growth.

And voila! evolution on paper!

It's easy to believe in Creationism... everything happens by magic, you don't need to explain a thing.

Science, however, must endure the burden of actually attempting to explain things. The explanation is never perfect, but even the slightest imperfection seems to be enough for a Creationist to rubbish the entire theory and declare that his vastly more imperfect theory is triumphant. If the rest of science functioned in this way we'd still be fumbling around aimlessly in an intellectual dark age.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I do not believe in the spontaneous creation of everything from nothing.

This is contradicted by that:

I do believe that God is the creator of the universe; and of all things seen and unseen.

Creation ex nihilo.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's easy to believe in Creationism... everything happens by magic,

If the universe was created by magic, then it already existed, since with magic, it already exists, but is hidden from view with smoke and mirrors.

you don't need to explain a thing.

... Now they tell me!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If the universe was created by magic, then it already existed, since with magic, it already exists, but is hidden from view with smoke and mirrors.

... Now they tell me!

Smoke and mirrors... yeah, that's Creationism in a nut shell.

 

[AV1611VET]

Smoke and mirrors... yeah, that's Creationism in a nut shell.

Only because you think it's magic, instead of miracles.

You may not see a difference between the two, but it's enough to keep you from appreciating Creationism.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Only because you think it's magic, instead of miracles.

You may not see a difference between the two, but it's enough to keep you from appreciating Creationism.

What is the practical difference between the two?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Only because you think it's magic, instead of miracles.

You may not see a difference between the two,

The 'difference', such as is, is utterly superficial -

When a nerd follow sports, they're called a jock.

When a famous person gets murdered, it's called an assassination.

When a god performs magic, it's called a miracle.

but it's enough to keep you from appreciating Creationism.

Actually, the complete lack of evidence or coherency is enough the keep me from appreciating Creationism. The fact that its proponents are willfully, abysmally ignorant doesn't help either.

 

[mandelduke]

I mean, all over this forum there is the recurrent theme of evolution, and I know a couple of people who don't believe in evolution to begin with.

So I'm feeling at odds.

I mean, are there any non-evolutionists on this forum or are you all like-minded in the evolutionist thing?

If I say there is someone who is Creationist, does that belong over in another board or something?

No; not at all.

 

[KWCrazy]

Again, moving the goalposts. You haven't shown how it is not an advance, you've redefined your belief.

If a change of diet is the only proof you have of evolution, then you should just admit there is no proof.

Great illustration of your complete lack of understanding of ToE. For your analogy to be correct man (for example) would have "evolved" directly from bacteria in one generation.

For evolution to be correct, bacteria would have to containe the genetic information to become man. You'd also have to overcome that nasty sterility that happens whenever there is excessive change in a species.

The OP was not an invitation to debate evolution with its proponents. If so, I wouldn't have posted here. I've found that evolution believers cannot be educated and attempts to do so are a waste of time. The question was whether people believed in evolution. I do not. Adaptation moves in the opposite direction of evolution. I believe de-evolution is possible, but not evolution. Information can be lost, but not magically added.