Evoloution is Just Bad Science

[Asimov]

Not everyone will die. Some people will be transformed without ever having to taste death. Only sinners die.

What does that mean, John?

 

[Nathan Poe]

What does that mean, John?

It means he doesn't believe in physical death.

 

[Asimov]

It means he doesn't believe in physical death.

....interesting....

 

[Risen from the Dust]

Every liberal Christian I know would agree that abortion is an action a woman should never have to contemplate. The fact that millions of women do have to consider it is de facto evidence of the existence of sin and of the consequences of sin.

But let's not go off on a tangent here. I believe there is another forum more appropriate to this discussion.

My apologies gluadys. I did not mean to bring up a hot topic to cause strife -- it was the first example that came to my mind.

The point, however, is this: there are some groups that take a less serious outlook on the nature of sin. In redefining it, they basically reduce it to the status of an accident, or a mistake, or...well...basically anything but an actual sin as defined in the Scriptures.

In doing this, in the most extreme examples, they tend to reduce the danger of sin insofar as to say that no one actually goes to a place eternally separated from God. If this is going on within their theology, while I respect it as being what they believe, I cannot personally accept it in my own thoughts regarding the nature of sin as recorded in the Scriptures.

In mediating on this, I also can't help but wonder if this way of thinking has manifested in similar ways within the church so as to diffuse key theological areas where sin's effects might be downplayed -- such as in the Garden of Eden where some seem to debate over whether the sin commited was "actual" or "potential".

Again, I meant no offence. I'm merely stating it to the best of my own perception.

 

[gluadys]

My apologies gluadys. I did not mean to bring up a hot topic to cause strife -- it was the first example that came to my mind.

ok

In doing this, in the most extreme examples, they tend to reduce the danger of sin insofar as to say that no one actually goes to a place eternally separated from God.

I don't think there is any question that liberal Christians take a more optimistic view of how many will be saved. But universalism is by no means a defining characteristic of liberalism. And as for no hell (assuming that is the place you are referring to) that idea is not even unique to liberalism. Jehovah's Witnesses deny it as well.

In mediating on this, I also can't help but wonder if this way of thinking has manifested in similar ways within the church so as to diffuse key theological areas where sin's effects might be downplayed -- such as in the Garden of Eden where some seem to debate over whether the sin commited was "actual" or "potential".

I think it is not so much a downplaying of sin, but of identifying what sort of sins are most heinous. Conservatives tend to identify personal (often sexual) behaviour as deeply sinful: thus the emphasis on teenage pregnancies, abortion, homosexuality as the major moral problems. Liberals tend to identify systemic sin as more heinous: thus an emphasis on war and violence, racism and discrimination, callous use of natural resources and disregard of human rights by oppressive governments draws their attention more.

Obviously there is truth in both perspectives.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Evoloution is Just Bad Science



I am new to this forum, but from what I have seen, all of the arguments regarding evoloution are old and tired and frankly, Not even good science.

The latest scientific information regarding DNA, verses Evoloutionary theory, is that under the constraints of Evoloution, DNA, being Digital Code, invalidates all Evoloutionary theory. Since DNA is Coded information about how matter is to be constructed, it is impossible that DNA could occur naturally. All Good Scientists know that Digital Code comes from an intelligent source, not by random selection. Anyway, I have taught this subjest for 20 + years and have over 1,000 hours of lectures on the subject. I look forward to any intelligent interaction with well informed challengers, if you dare!

damn theres a lot of posts here... like im gonna readem all...

you say that DNA codes its own creation, so it cant be made without external aid. science has long shown that chemicals found in Primordial Earth form amino acids when electricity (eg lightning) strikes them. Thus, spontaneous creation. id prefer to debate this via PM, cuz this thread is mental

 

[Cirbryn]

For example, most creationists (of almost all sorts) would contend that sin entered the garden when our first two parents transgressed the Lord's will. They would also argue that the wages of this sin was the suseptability to physical death. Some would not argue that all people were born spiritually damned from this inherited sin. Others, however, would.

How would the Tree of Life fit into this? In Gen 3:22 God seems to kick Adam and Eve out of Eden lest they "take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever." Doesn't that imply that they hadn't eaten it before and that they would have needed to do so in order to live forever?

On the other hand, most theistic evolutionists would contend that sin entered humanity's earliest ancestors (sometimes even implying literal personages). They would also argue that the wages of this sin was the suseptability to spiritual death.

And wouldn't "spiritual death" imply ceasing to exist. If that's what happens, who would go to Hell?

 

[Jet Black]

For how many years did evolutionists try to find a way around the 2d law of thermodynamics? How many theories were ‘proven’ to parallel the 2d law, then tossed when found to be junk science? Now you cling to some obscure theory that tries to show life being a different system than the rest of the universe. It’s pitiful….

none. the second law of thermodynamics presents no problems for evolution.

 

[Arikay]

Ah yes, the evil 2d law, as opposed to the 3d law.

I know Darwin strugled for years with the 2d law of thermodynamics, you can read all about it in Origins. See right there, on page gerfumbleby. What, didn't hear me? I said page, gerbadle.

It's amazing the giant conspiracy that evolutionists have going, so many smart scientists trying to hide the fact that the 2d law of thermodynamics proves evolution wrong. It's why they teach it in school.

 

[raphael_aa]

Yea...So? Where's the spontaneous life? If science has us pointed in the right direction regarding life on earth how come they haven’t created it (and I don’t mean Amino acids) Out of all this scientific garbage no one has proven that life was created out of some goo; speculation is all it’s been and faith is the basis for evolution.

You are a transitional….what a bunch of hogwash! I can just see the sneer on that posters face and distain for creationists when they typed that…..thinking to themselves that bible-thumpers are a bunch of ill-informed wackos that know nothing of ‘real science’ and should leave the questions of life to the real ‘intellectuals’ and those who have doctorates.

For how many years did evolutionists try to find a way around the 2d law of thermodynamics? How many theories were ‘proven’ to parallel the 2d law, then tossed when found to be junk science? Now you cling to some obscure theory that tries to show life being a different system than the rest of the universe. It’s pitiful….

You have a basic belief system and try to conform your scientific observation and theory around that foundational belief.

I feel sorry for you evolutionists…I really do. You live in a dream world and don’t even know it: thinking you are finding answers when all you’re doing is digging yourselves deeper into the pit of foolishness.

But don’t despair…we Christians are praying for you…

There ya go .... this, this is why people are repelled by christianity. This is why certain YEC's actually do damage to the very cause they claim to believe in. You've got the basic lack of science understanding (in this case physics) married to self righteousness, superiority and patronizing arrogance.

... and all of it posted by someone who thinks they are a 'humble servant' of God

 

[Oliver]

You are a transitional….what a bunch of hogwash! I can just see the sneer on that posters face and distain for creationists when they typed that…..thinking to themselves that bible-thumpers are a bunch of ill-informed wackos that know nothing of ‘real science’ and should leave the questions of life to the real ‘intellectuals’ and those who have doctorates.

So you can read minds? Or are you just putting words in someoneelse's mouth?

Be careful not to judge someone based on what you think they think.

You have a basic belief system and try to conform your scientific observation and theory around that foundational belief.

I feel sorry for you evolutionists…I really do. You live in a dream world and don’t even know it: thinking you are finding answers when all you’re doing is digging yourselves deeper into the pit of foolishness.

But don’t despair…we Christians are praying for you…

I don't despair. I know that a lot of christian evolutionists on these boards are praying for you to see the light.

Not all Christians are creationists, you know.

 

[Sanguine]

For how many years did evolutionists try to find a way around the 2d law of thermodynamics? How many theories were ‘proven’ to parallel the 2d law, then tossed when found to be junk science? Now you cling to some obscure theory that tries to show life being a different system than the rest of the universe. It’s pitiful

2nd Law: It is impossible to obtain a process that, operating in cycle, produces no other effect than the subtraction of a positive amount of heat from a reservoir and the production of an equal amount of work.

There is nothing to "find a way around", the Earth is an open system with energy put into it by the sun. This is a local decrease in entropy, the entropy of the Universe still increases regardless small local decreases here on earth. What is so hard to understand about this? Futhermore if such a process did violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics then life (see Cell metabolism) could not exist regardless of whether or not there is a creator.

 

[notto]

…..thinking to themselves that bible-thumpers are a bunch of ill-informed wackos that know nothing of ‘real science’ and should leave the questions of life to the real ‘intellectuals’ and those who have doctorates.

For how many years did evolutionists try to find a way around the 2d law of thermodynamics?

 

[Remnant]

again I say....speculation....if it takes thousands of years how would you know?

Assumption and faith based is all it is with no practical proof of spontaneous life and all your 'scientific' proof is nothing but guesswork and observance of just a small portion of the universe.

And you call Christians faith-based....

And yes there is malice as those (look to see for yourselves) in this particular thread has done the same with Creationists. What makes the 'scientists' correct ? Because the observations and experimentation that is done proves them right? How do you know the data is correct? (Because it's proven over and over again?) How do you know that our mere observance of the data does not influence the outcome? So it's OK for them to have malice, but have a Creationist say something that may step on toes, then it's not OK.

Well excussssse me.

 

[Arikay]

I would agree with Remnant, his version of evolution (the one some creationist groups teach) is most definitely pure speculation and junk science.

Of course, the real theory of evolution is much different.
When people are taught a junk version of evolution, no wonder they think it's junk science.

 

[Remnant]

I would agree with Remnant, his version of evolution (the one some creationist groups teach) is most definitely pure speculation and junk science.

Of course, the real theory of evolution is much different.
When people are taught a junk version of evolution, no wonder they think it's junk science.

Well now see....you are making an assumption based on very little information.

You assume that my version of evolution is something that creationists teach.

My version is what my Professors taught us, long before I even thought about other possible scenarios of life. I keep up on all the latest developments in science not because my scientific foundation is based on spontaneous life, but because I like science and finding out how things operate and the sheer joy of learning new things. In fact that is how I came to believe in a Creator; because science had shown me the obvious. I never had a religious family and never was introduced to Christianity by a pastor: Science taught me to look at all the available evidence and make unbiased decisions.

But when folks have a foundation of bias by telling those who keep open minds to other possible explanations that they are ignorant of the ‘facts’, then malice is returned for malice and if you don't like it, thats too bad.

 

[Arikay]

Whatever professor taught you that evolutionists have fought the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or evolution caused spontaneous life, should be fired.

Again, it appears you have been taught a junk version of evolution, so it makes sense it seems like junk science. I would recommend doing research into the real theory of evolution, if you want to be taken seriously here.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

You are a transitional….what a bunch of hogwash! I can just see the sneer on that posters face and distain for creationists when they typed that…..thinking to themselves that bible-thumpers are a bunch of ill-informed wackos that know nothing of ‘real science’ and should leave the questions of life to the real ‘intellectuals’ and those who have doctorates.

Not at all, as a Christian and a scientist I have been shown a great deal of respect here by posters. Can I ask if you have done a great deal of research about the ToE? I ask because you don’t seem to realise that if the ToE is true then all life, you, me, everyone and everything, is transitional. The poster was not mocking you or Christians but trying to explain the ToE to you.

For how many years did evolutionists try to find a way around the 2d law of thermodynamics?

Not a single year. For that matter not a month, not a week not a day not an hour not a second. That is becasue the ToE doesn’t violate the 2nd (or any other) law of Thermodynamics at all. here is the 2nd law for you so you can check;-

“There is no process for which the unique effect is the removal of positive heat from a reservoir and the production of positive work”

There are at least two posters on CF who have the laws of thermodynamics in their sig. lines, I am amazed how many creationists don’t seem tp know what 2lot states but still try to use it to rebut ToE (which they also don’t seem to know).

I feel sorry for you evolutionists…I really do. You live in a dream world and don’t even know it: thinking you are finding answers when all you’re doing is digging yourselves deeper into the pit of foolishness.

But don’t despair…we Christians are praying for you…

Please do not claim to be speaking for all Christians, the majority of us are Theistic evolutionists.

Ghost

 

[Wiccan_Child]

creationism is a cop out really, because it just lumps everything as 'God did it'. how do you know this? evolution has evidence, theories, it accounts for everything creationism does and provides back-up for its theories.

and, as DJ_ghost said, anti-evolutionists often have a false or distorted view of the ToE, and thus disaprove. if we heard both sides of the argument clearly and farily then we may actually get somewhere... personally, i cant think of any evidence to support creationism. anyone help me out?

 

[ForsakeAll2FollowJesus]

(George Caylor, interview with a molecular biologist -- identified as "J" -- "The Biologist," Febr. 17, 2000, in The [Lynchburg, VA] Ledger ).

J says-. . . To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold onto two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don't believe evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures -- everything would stop. I'd be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn't earn a decent living.

Caylor says-I hate to say it, but that sounds intellectually dishonest.

J says-The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind's worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the elephant in the living room.