Science vs. Evolution

[Cabal]

They think that you can't be a true Christian unless you live in a cave or something

No, it's more to do with the inconsistency of reaping the benefits of science in one area while rejecting another even though they were obtained by exactly the same means.

Actually, that's not even quite the case, there's also much benefit derived from flu vaccines (because the viruses are evolving), as well as anything created via a genetic algorithm, so some are quite happy to live off the benefits of a theory they constantly decry for no other reason than it goes against their personal interpretations of the Bible.

Anyway, cry me a river, you want to talk about constantly being under accusation of not being a true Christian - try being a TE for a day.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That's the thing -- they didn't need to have knowledge of microbes to live [what is probably] healthier lives than we do today.

Healthier lives with lower life expectancies?

 

[Cabal]

That's the thing -- they didn't need to have knowledge of microbes to live [what is probably] healthier lives than we do today.

When does your stand-up career start?

 

[AV1611VET]

I could take it guess... it might have something to do with 'Science can take a hike' line. I've never been ridiculed for believing in evolution, except by Creationists on these forums.

I have a feeling you don't even know what I mean by that tag line, but that certainly doesn't stop others from using it as justification for ridicule, does it?

In any event, I think you were wrong about mockery coming as a result of those of us who want creationism taught in science class.

I must be some kind of an exception then.

 

[tanzanos]

Paul warned that believing in nature over the written Word would lead to atheism for some -- and that's exactly what happens.

Hey don't look at me! I'm not the one who disregards the OT such as killing disobedient children. I am bound by our secular laws and thus exempt. Now why have you forsaken such a law?

 

[interested in life]

I could take it guess... it might have something to do with 'Science can take a hike' line. I've never been ridiculed for believing in evolution, except by Creationists on these forums.

I think you have the wrong idea regarding our differences.I believe evolutionists are largely correct,there is strong evidence regarding common descent,however for people like me thats because about 4500 years ago a man took a whole bunch of animals on a vessel(for conservation purposes)and all life came from these selected animals.
Now you believe that common descent extends much further than that.I disagree with this assertion and believe biology actually supports the 1st scenario more than the 2nd.
Theres no malice intended,but i believe you guys are misled.

 

[tanzanos]

I think you have the wrong idea regarding our differences.I believe evolutionists are largely correct,there is strong evidence regarding common descent,however for people like me thats because about 4500 years ago a man took a whole bunch of animals on a vessel(for conservation purposes)and all life came from these selected animals.
Now you believe that common descent extends much further than that.I disagree with this assertion and believe biology actually supports the 1st scenario more than the 2nd.
Theres no malice intended,but i believe you guys are misled.

Misled? Perhaps your theories may hold water in cartoon physics but in the real world? Well...... Beep Beep.... Ziiinnngggg!!!

 

[AV1611VET]

Healthier lives with lower life expectancies?

You mean 70 or 80 as the Psalms say?

 

[interested in life]

No, it's more to do with the inconsistency of reaping the benefits of science in one area while rejecting another even though they were obtained by exactly the same means.

Actually, that's not even quite the case, there's also much benefit derived from flu vaccines (because the viruses are evolving), as well as anything created via a genetic algorithm, so some are quite happy to live off the benefits of a theory they constantly decry for no other reason than it goes against their personal interpretations of the Bible.

Anyway, cry me a river, you want to talk about constantly being under accusation of not being a true Christian - try being a TE for a day.

Thats hysteria man,noone is against flu vaccinations.Just because i believe Adam was created by God directly?

 

[Cabal]

Thats hysteria man,noone is against flu vaccinations.

Well, you'd be surprised, but that's neither here nor there.

Just because i believe Adam was created by God directly?

No, my point is you are quite happy to derive all the benefits of a theory you decry.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Thats hysteria man,noone is against flu vaccinations.Just because i believe Adam was created by God directly?

Pretty much. You've shown that you deny evolution occurs, so you must therefore deny that viruses can evolve immunity to our vaccines. Thus, you must reject the idea that we need booster shots: according to you, one vaccine is sufficient.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, my point is you are quite happy to derive all the benefits of a theory you decry.

Like I said, God gives us doctors.

 

[Cabal]

You mean 70 or 80 as the Psalms say?

Ha! Knew it! If the Bible is going to "back up" science, it has to be buried in some ambiguous poetry somewhere. Hardly can pretend to find any backup anywhere else!

 

[interested in life]

No, my point is you are quite happy to derive all the benefits of a theory you decry.

I decry the incorrect application of it leading to a false teaching.Its almost like you want it to be true.I know atheists want it to be true.God is good,dont ever doubt that.But the idea of something super powerful being the ultimate judge over us,im sure thats actually quite a scary thought for some.Or a delusion to others.We shall see.
Ive said before i think its christians duty to preserve Genesis as the factual account of our history.It happened ,despite what current secular thinking says.
I have spent a fair part of my life attempting to prove christianity wrong.I ended up being one.

 

[tanzanos]

I have a feeling you don't even know what I mean by that tag line,

Now unless you mean: "Science can go on an extended walk for pleasure or exercise".
Then I am inclined to believe that you meant: "science can get lost" (based on
take a hike Slang To leave because one's presence is unwanted. Often used in the imperative).

 

[AV1611VET]

Pretty much. You've shown that you deny evolution occurs, so you must therefore deny that viruses can evolve immunity to our vaccines. Thus, you must reject the idea that we need booster shots: according to you, one vaccine is sufficient.

I would say flu vaccinations work on the principle of adaptation, not macroevolution.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ha! Knew it! If the Bible is going to "back up" science, it has to be buried in some ambiguous poetry somewhere. Hardly can pretend to find any backup anywhere else!

Oh, well, if you want us to use backup outside of the Psalms, how about Adam living to be 950? or Methuselah to 969?

Or this doosey:

De 34:7 And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.

 

[tanzanos]

I would say flu vaccinations work on the principle of adaptation, not macroevolution.

Adaptation is the outcome of change. Evolution means Change; Thus adaptation is a result of evolution.

 

[Cabal]

Like I said, God gives us doctors.

Yup. And? Doesn't change the fact that one of their key tools comes right out of evolutionary theory.

But hey, I'm sure these things don't matter when you're benefitting from it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Now unless you mean: "Science can go on an extended walk for pleasure or exercise".
Then I am inclined to believe that you meant: "science can get lost" (based on
take a hike Slang To leave because one's presence is unwanted. Often used in the imperative).

75