What creationists need to do to win against evolution.

[46AND2]

If you do not accept standard cosmological theory of our days, how can you want creationists to accept standard biological theory?

He does accept it. You just don't understand, and misrepresent what standard cosmological theory entails.

 

[solid_core]

He does accept it. You just don't understand, and misrepresent what standard cosmological theory entails.

Standard cosmological theory - Big Bang - entails that our universe is 14 billion years old, i.e. has a beginning.

The more you are trying to dance around it, the more its obvious you are trying to be more atheistic than scientific.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I am very sorry you are taking that position. I did not say you claimed to be a scientist, but to make fundamental pronouncements about science and it findings, while being ignorant of those findings is logically and ethically questionable.

Numerous statements in your posts clearly demonstrate that your knowledge of science is very limited and in many cases simply wrong. I regret you choose to ignore that. Self imposed ignorance is an unattractive thing.

I regret even more that you reject my offer to help educate you, if only to a small extent, on some of these matters, preferring to remain ignorant of them. You were happy to accept the link to information about Paley's Creationist apology, but turn away from anything that presents the other side of the argument. That is sad.

In the context of this thread one of the things that Creationists need to do to win against evolution is to open their eyes to the massive evidence for evolution, not close them firmly as you have done.

I'm not upset with you.
I just think the conversation is over once one of the parties believes the other is too ignorant about a subject that they are familiar with...and I do mean ignorant, not stupid.

I'm not a creationist,,,I'm not trying to win anything,
my eyes are not closed but I don't see any massive evidence.

The pronouncements I make are what I believe to be true. I've asked several times for those on this thread to explain the cambrian explosion..even on other threads. So far, no explanation.

I watched the video, BTW.
I tend to believe Tour and Meyers and Lennox and Berlinski....but that's me,,,,you have your favorites.

I have the same problem when speaking to persons that know very little of theology...it's not easy...so I do understand you. And I am aware that I know very little about science.

No problem here.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Both times. The name change was merely a matter of a definition. It didn't change Pluto or what we know about it in any way.

Oh. Changes...so many changes.
So much to still learn.
So much we're not sure of.

Maybe Christianity IS a better solution after all.

 

[GodsGrace101]

It does not matter what one believes. It matters what one can support. I know that creationists do not like the fact that we are apes. The question is can they support that belief with valid arguments. Your questions about whether other animals can reason is a failed argument.

From your list other animals have the same abilities, only to a lesser degree.

And if Christians can define spirit why have you not done so? Circular definitions do not count.

Pray tell, why would I wish to explain spirit to you?
Animals have instinct....
And why are apes not becoming more human?

You know, when it was thought that the universe was eternal, there would have been an extensive amount of time for these evolutions to happen....

Now that we know it is only about 13 billion years old, and life was not even possible till about 3 billion years ago....what happens to the chances of these random and select changes taking place in such a short amount of time to be able to end up with us?

Time is a problem.

 

[46AND2]

Standard cosmological theory - Big Bang - entails that our universe is 14 billion years old, i.e. has a beginning.

The more you are trying to dance around it, the more its obvious you are trying to be more atheistic than scientific.

The Big Bang only describes what has happened back to a certain point in time nearly 14 billion years ago, at which point our current knowledge of physics can no longer describe the state the universe was in. It was the beginning of the universe AS WE KNOW IT, not the beginning of everything.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yeah, there's lots of examples of "solutions" in those creationism stories. They usually involve one group of people completely slaughtering another "in the righteous name of the Lord". I suppose those "solutions" would definitely solve our overpopulation problem if taken to a global scale.

The church isn't in the business of slaughtering people.

 

[GodsGrace101]

It is easier to believe that 223862 * 3949360 = 2. It would be wrong, but it is a lot easier than working out the correct answer.

Except that I believe I have the correct answer.

And how did math come about BTW?
How is it that science uses math for everything.
No math, no science.
Did man invent math....or does it exist throughout the universe?
Science works with methods that were pre-existant.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which God? There are so many of them.

The one that's spelled with a capital "G".

 

[GodsGrace101]

That is Ray Comfort level ignorance. Sight evolved long before people existed. To propose that as a problem only tells us that you do not even have a middle school level of understanding of the concept. One cannot debate what one does not understand. And eye evolution is well understood.

Here is a serious suggestion. If you see a "problem" in evolution that is almost certainly only a problem with your understanding. Ask questions politely. No "gotcha questions" because you really do not understand this well enough to refute it yet. If you truly show that you want to learn others will help you.refute

Remember the lesson of Galileo. He was not trying to disprove God when he claimed that the Earth moved. Those that accept the theory of evolution are not trying to disprove God either. They merely want to understand our world better.

Sure.
But you didn't explain about sight.
How did the eye evolve?
How long did whatever came first have to be blind before it could see?
Ditto for hearing.
Were the first creatures deaf?
The eye and ear are so intricate.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which SCIENCE is much better equipped to deal with than bronze age myths, fables and tall tales.

Although, I guess, a global flood that wipes out all life on Earth except for an incestuous family and a few wandering animals COULD be considered a "solution" to all of humanities problems.

We have the natural sciences with us today.

 

[MIDutch]

I know this is what you believe.
But how did a tree get to be a tree?

It is not necessary for me to "believe" anything. I accept that that is what the evidence says. There was a time in the history of our planet when terrestrial plants did not exist, as is indicated by the geological evidence.There was a time when gymnosperms did not exist. There was a time when angiosperms did not exist. I accept the evidence that trees (and all other terrestrial plants) are the products of biological evolution over the course of the past 450 million years.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which SCIENCE is much better equipped to deal with than bronze age myths, fables and tall tales.

Although, I guess, a global flood that wipes out all life on Earth except for an incestuous family and a few wandering animals COULD be considered a "solution" to all of humanities problems.

Or a man-caused disease pandemic.

 

[GodsGrace101]

It is not necessary for me to "believe" anything. I accept that that is what the evidence says. There was a time in the history of our planet when terrestrial plants did not exist, as is indicated by the geological evidence.There was a time when gymnosperms did not exist. There was a time when angiosperms did not exist. I accept the evidence that trees (and all other terrestrial plants) are the products of biological evolution over the course of the past 450 million years.

And how come there are so many variations of each TYPE of plant.....
and how did trees come into being?
Can you explain that in 25 words or less?
I don't think so because no one really knows.

 

[solid_core]

The Big Bang only describes what has happened back to a certain point in time nearly 14 billion years ago, at which point our current knowledge of physics can no longer describe the state the universe was in. It was the beginning of the universe AS WE KNOW IT, not the beginning of everything.

I will correct your statement:

The Big Bang only describes what has happened back to a certain point in time nearly 14 billion years ago, at which point our current physical laws no longer apply. It was the beginning of the universe AS WE KNOW IT, not the beginning of everything.

Sure, it was beginning of our universe, not beginning of everything. For example God falls into category of "everything", but had no beginning.

If you are 40 years old, you had a beginning. You may have been a probability or idea (or quantum fluctuation) before it, but it was not physical you.

 

[MIDutch]

I may be very ignorant...
or I may just believe that someone/thing MADE IT.

You can "believe" anything you want. Personally, I like to believe that the pixies dancing in my garden are responsible for painting the colors on the beautiful flowers that come up every spring, but I don't try to force others into "believing" that, and I certainly don't try to pass it off as science.

 

[pitabread]

how come there are so many variations of each TYPE of plant.....
and how did trees come into being?
Can you explain that in 25 words or less?

How about two words: Biological evolution.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You can "believe" anything you want. Personally, I like to believe that the pixies dancing in my garden are responsible for painting the colors on the beautiful flowers that come up every spring, but I don't try to force others into "believing" that, and I certainly don't try to pass it off as science.

Science is largely the study of the creation.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

How about two words: Biological evolution.

Got a formula for that?

 

[MIDutch]

And how come there are so many variations of each TYPE of plant.....
and how did trees come into being?
Can you explain that in 25 words or less?

Don't need to. The evidence, and scientific (human) conclusions about that evidence, is widely available in THOUSANDS of museums, universities, research laboratories, excavation sites, research hospitals, libraries, etc. in every country around the globe.

I don't think so because no one really knows.

You creationists don't know because you refuse to look at, and/or understand, the vast amount of evidence. Creationists prefer to take the easy route and merely accuse everyone else of being as willfully ignorant as they are.