Originally posted by Matthew
I have to agree. I would also add that people seem willing to agree with whatever they hear from authority figures. Their opinion really isn't based on hard work.
Originally posted by JohnR7
Just what is the practical application of the theory of evolution. How is it that we use it in our daily life?
Originally posted by MSBS
(this has led to a better understanding of disease and the development of better treatment stratagies).
Originally posted by MSBS
Based on the arguments online I think many of you have a skewed view of scientists-- most invest no energy at all into this debate, looking at YEC ideas as nothing more than being the product of crackpots and not being worthy of even being addressed.
Originally posted by JohnR7
Better treatment stratagies in who's opinion? Are we talking "miracle" cures that are 85% effective. Or are we talking something that is slightly better than a sugar pill? Are we talking long term drug addiction, or short term cure?
Originally posted by MSBS
Besides that, what is wrong with something only slightly better than a sugar pill? Do you suggest that that isn't better than doing nothing?
Originally posted by MSBS
The human genome project has raised the possiblity of treatments tailored to individuals based upon their genetic heritage, but it's going to be a long time and a lot of work before anything comes from it. Should we not continue research along those lines? Literally, it will cost billions of dollars and take millions of man hours of research and may only result in improved treatment or partial cures. It'll still be worth it.
Originally posted by kern
What are you talking about? It's not like you have to choose between God and effective medical treatment. We're not Christian Scientists here, are we? -Chris
Originally posted by JohnR7
This is more about the difference between good medicine and bad drugs. Good doctors and quacks. Good nurses and bad nurses, and so forth. Before you submit to a treatment program, you should be sure to pray about it, to make sure that is what God is leading you to do. The "cure" may kill you.
I guess actually being a biologist and working with "evolutionists" I can't get past how ludicrous the "hijack" argument is. No one I know ever uses evolution against Christians-- the only place I ever get exposed to that kind of stuff is on the Internet. Scientists go to work and do research and for most of them religion is a personal thing just like at any other work place.
For this "hijack" to be true, it requires such a vast and all consuming conspiracy among such a diverse group of people the logistics of it become impossible. I really can't give it any more credit than the UFO, hoaxed moon landings, flat earthers, or any other of the many rediculous conspiracy theories out there.
I give someone that subscribes to YEC a little more credit for intelligence than someone that is a big UFO believer, just based on the religious aspects of the situation-- but I still think the belief itself is somewhat irrational. It's not that I'm against Christians, I just can't deal with the illogic and denial that goes with it, and YECs are far more emotional about this than people on the other side of the argument.
Based on the arguments online I think many of you have a skewed view of scientists-- most invest no energy at all into this debate, looking at YEC ideas as nothing more than being the product of crackpots and not being worthy of even being addressed.
They don't come to work and think "today I'll prove evolution so I can attack Christians" or anything else of the sort. Evolution is accepted because the data supports it. Some of the details have been debated, sometimes heatedly, in scientific circles, but the foundations of the theory (common descent, descent with modification, etc.) are well supported and a variety of mechanisms at the cellular and molecular levels have been elucidated since Darwin that match what was predicted by theory. It isn't a theory in crisis and very few people equipped with the education and theoretical underpinnings to understand it, disagree with it. There aren't a bunch of druids worshiping trees out there making up a bunch of stuff in order to attack Christianity.
Ultimately, I still haven't seen any unambiguous support for YEC coming from the bible. Every passage seems to have a thousand interpretations-- every Christian seems to see things slightly different than every other Christian. I'm far from being anti-christain, and my appoligies to anyone offended by my assesment of YEC.
Do you have a source for that? Because I've worked for a major pharmaceutical company and I've seen the budget for my research department and I don't believe they could spend more on advertising.The drug companies put more money into advertising than they do into research. Always have, always will. They do not spend as much on research and development as they try to lead people to believe.
Hate to break it to you, Matthew. Religion does not equal Science. Just because you believe your religious views are correct does not make it so. It's still a personal matter. I believe my political party is the right one so should everyone be a communist?While some do think that scientists attack Christianity, I will grant that many do not (intentionally). However, you have so far managed to say that "religion is personal", which does attack Christianity. After all, what would you think if I said "science is a personal matter"?
Hate to break it to you, Matthew. Religion does not equal Science.
Just because you believe your religious views are correct does not make it so. It's still a personal matter. I believe my political party is the right one so should everyone be a communist?
Originally posted by MSBS
In other words, you have no answer and prefer to throw up a smoke screen. I'm beginning to despair of ever actually getting more then empty rhetoric out of YECs.
Originally posted by kern
Basically. If you are not conservative you have no reason to think Evolution is false because you likely do not believe in an inerrant Bible (among other things).
But I agree with the OP entirely, and it's one reason why I've basically stopped arguing this evolution vs. creation thing. In time, perhaps 200 years, perhaps only 50, Evolution and the old earth will be accepted by everyone, including conservative Christians. People will laugh at the interpretations Christians of this day made of Genesis, the same way Christians now (including in this thread!) scoff at the geocentric interpretations of the Middle Ages.
I saw an interesting article on religioustolerance.org that described a 7-step cycle that every controversial scientific theory goes through. I don't have time to look it up now, but it's interesting to look at.
-Chris
Originally posted by Matthew
Christians do not believe that "religion is a personal matter". First, Christianity (as classically understood), is the foundation of one's life. The Bible is God's word, and religion has to do with the real world. When God says, "Jesus rose from the dead", or "Jesus will come and judge the world", these beliefs are true and about the world we live in.
Creationists do not believe in a conspiracy of evolutionists.
I have seen equal amounts of emotion and illogic coming from both sides on these forums.
While I can't say a lot about other's beliefs, what do you think that scientists in Ptolemy's time thought about opposing theories?
While some do think that scientists attack Christianity, I will grant that many do not (intentionally). However, you have so far managed to say that "religion is personal", which does attack Christianity. After all, what would you think if I said "science is a personal matter"?
The viewpoint of Christians says nothing about the actual matter of interpretation. There is a real and objective interpretation: Christian thought does not allow for subjective interpretations of the Bible. And virtually all major Hebrew scholars believe that Genesis states that:
1) The world was created in 6 24-hour days.
2) There was a world-wide flood.
3) The genealogies of Genesis 5&11 can be added up to give the age of the earth at the time of Abraham.
You won't get anything more than empty rhetoric out of YEC's because as soon as they stop using empty rhetoric they quickly stop being YEC's.
You can found your life on what ever belief system you want to, but preaching at co-workers, be you Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, etc. is bad manners, as is being anti-Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Hindu in the work place.
Some do, and I've seen it being posted about.
But my point was that to say biology has been hijacked by evolutionists, you have to have a conspiracy to prevent any dissenting views.
YECs are all vociferously anti-science.
There were no scientists in Ptolemy's time. Science did not exist as a intellectual tool until the renaissance. There were natural philosophers and many addressed topics that scientists now address, and I'm sure many held opposing views and were quite emotional about it, but so what?
I wouldn't care in the slightest. Scientific experiments, in order to have any validity, have to be presented to the public and scrutinized by the peers of the people presenting the data, but the practice of science can be very personal. Its a powerful intellectual tool and nothing more.
Some Christians believe otherwise, but I suppose you'll say they aren't true Christians.
The viewpoint of Christians says nothing about the actual matter of interpretation.
No matter, as I have said before, the YEC view is not supported by the data, and that data is not going to go away, no matter how much rhetoric is thrown at it.
What it comes down to, and where I think this debate becomes so heated, is that some people look at science as being anti-Christian.
It's not. Many scientists are Christians and many Christians believe what science has elucidated about life and the universe, it's not an either/or proposition.
I know what your feelings are on this, but I look at your beliefs in this matter is just being the dogma of your particular sect, and I'm not impressed with them. No insult intended.
You won't get anything more than empty rhetoric out of YEC's because as soon as they stop using empty rhetoric they quickly stop being YEC's.
Your sentence is a perfect example of empty rhetoric.