Why does evolution not make sense to you?

[Girder of Loins]

Well science at the most basic of terms is simply making observations. You have to make observations to even have a though process. Religion would be part of science as you have to make observations to believe in religion.

It is still a circular argument. If we observe based on our perception, and our perception comes form science, and science is the same thing as observing, then science is true because we observe the world around us.

Now onto religion. IF religion is true(let us assume god=X), then X would have made everything factual and objective. X will also give us words or some form of communication from Him about His whereabouts and about the Creation He made. So if you come from religion, it is a science, but it comes objectively rather than subjectively, as we have been given information and perspectives from an objective source.

Like finding our point on a graph relative to another point. If we know those coordinates, and the slope that connects us, we can find our coordinates. Otherwise, we are aimless, floating, and without any relation to anything. We could be (1,1) or (.000001, 900090900090405045634).

In science, all is subjective. There is no "objective" viewpoint of our universe, as our universe is infinite(theoretically).

 

[Wolf24]

Evolution. The crowning achievement in human history. I would like to know why most people here do not believe in this amazing discovery even with all of the proof and evidence that makes this "theory"(In some people thinking) basically a fact. So please explain to me why you don't believe in evolution and why it does not make sense to you. If you could I would also like you to explain what you believe and why it makes more sense than evolution, if it makes sense at all.
Extreme detail would be nice.

I find it compleately logical. Personally I feal like the people who don't accept it either havn't had it properly explained to them or have no desire to hear it. Ive the only arguement I've ever heard agains evolution that was even logical was about the conditions on early earth for life to form in the "primordial soup". But I don't subscribe to that particular idea (I support the deep sea vent idea) so it didn't change my opinion.

The worst arguement I've ever heard against evolution was a kid screaming about how obvious it was that evolution and domestication were false because wolves don't give birth to schnauzers and irish setters.

 

[Shane Plew]

It is still a circular argument. If we observe based on our perception, and our perception comes form science, and science is the same thing as observing, then science is true because we observe the world around us.

Now onto religion. IF religion is true(let us assume god=X), then X would have made everything factual and objective. X will also give us words or some form of communication from Him about His whereabouts and about the Creation He made. So if you come from religion, it is a science, but it comes objectively rather than subjectively, as we have been given information and perspectives from an objective source.

Like finding our point on a graph relative to another point. If we know those coordinates, and the slope that connects us, we can find our coordinates. Otherwise, we are aimless, floating, and without any relation to anything. We could be (1,1) or (.000001, 900090900090405045634).

In science, all is subjective. There is no "objective" viewpoint of our universe, as our universe is infinite(theoretically).

Nothing comes from science. Science is just observations. Observations did not come from science but it can be explained through the scientific method..

 

[Girder of Loins]

Nothing comes from science. Science is just observations. Observations did not come from science but it can be explained through the scientific method..

Wait, science is observations, but observations don't come from science? That makes no sense...

 

[Wolf24]

Evolution. The crowning achievement in human history.

Ummmm Evolutionary theorie isn't even close to the crowning acheivment of human history. While it is impressive and important nothing man has ever done rivals putting a man on the moon and returning him safely, nor will anything untill we reach mars.

 

[RareLight]

I see nothing wrong with the theory of evolution. God created the universe using the big bang, He created the earth from a water world that formed from a dusty disk, then created life by some unknown process and guided evolution to produce the array of life we see today.

Just because we can discover how God accomplished something doesn't make it any less miraculous. Nor does it discount the need for God to get it all started.

 

[Shane Plew]

Wait, science is observations, but observations don't come from science? That makes no sense...

How so?

 

[Girder of Loins]

How so?

It is circular reasoning. I originally asked you how you know science is true. You all responded that we know it is true because it explains reality. I then asked where your perception comes from, and you all said observations of the universe. Then you both(Chris and you, Shane) said that observations=science. Therefore, according to this logic, science is true because we perceive it to be true through science, and science is true because it lines up with our perception of reality, and our perception comes from science, and science is true.... You get the idea.

But if you guys wanna use circular reasoning: God is real because the Bible says He is, and the Bible is true because its God's Word, and God wouldn't lie, and God is true because the Bible says He is..." See the problem?

 

[Shane Plew]

I never said that observation came from science. I said it can be explained through science and what I meant by that is that the process in which we observe and perceive stimuli can be explained using the scientific method. As previously stated, there is a certain leap of faith where we have to assume that our minds are actually connected to reality. There is also a leap of faith when it comes to believing religious doctrine as well but that leap of faith requires that we through our senses and logic out the window for comfort in ignorance. To disregard science is unreasonable, as is believing in any religious doctrine.

 

[Wolf24]

There is also a leap of faith when it comes to believing religious doctrine as well but that leap of faith requires that we through our senses and logic out the window for comfort in ignorance. To disregard science is unreasonable, as is believing in any religious doctrine.

It can be totally reasonable to believe a religious doctrine so long as it dosn't conflict with proven reality. Almost any religion is reasonable in the purely logical sense when it's sacred scriptures are interpreted rather than taken literally. I know my religion is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Girder of Loins]

I never said that observation came from science. I said it can be explained through science and what I meant by that is that the process in which we observe and perceive stimuli can be explained using the scientific method. As previously stated, there is a certain leap of faith where we have to assume that our minds are actually connected to reality. There is also a leap of faith when it comes to believing religious doctrine as well but that leap of faith requires that we through our senses and logic out the window for comfort in ignorance. To disregard science is unreasonable, as is believing in any religious doctrine.

Excuse me, but why would I have to throw logic and our senses out the window? I am going to college for a degree in nuclear engineering, and I believe that uses a lot of my senses and logic.

If our perception comes from our minds, and we use science to prove that, but our minds may not be connected to reality, then you use the same amount of faith that we do. In the end, you cannot say that "disregarding science is unreasonable," as you are making a statement of faith: that science is true. And science only comes from our perspective(you said that).

 

[Chris Blanks]

Excuse me, but why would I have to throw logic and our senses out the window? I am going to college for a degree in nuclear engineering, and I believe that uses a lot of my senses and logic.

If our perception comes from our minds, and we use science to prove that, but our minds may not be connected to reality, then you use the same amount of faith that we do. In the end, you cannot say that "disregarding science is unreasonable," as you are making a statement of faith: that science is true. And science only comes from our perspective(you said that).

There is no statement of faith. Science is everything, to disregard science would be impossible. You can disregard studies, theories, hypotheses, et cetera, but not science.

 

[GrizzlyMonKeH]

Science is everything

Can you prove this statement using the scientific method?

If you can't, it is a statement of faith.

 

[Wolf24]

Can you prove this statement using the scientific method?

If you can't, it is a statement of faith.

Everything in the known universe is made up of matter. Molecules, atoms, sub atomic particles, which is studied in the field of chemistry. Even your thoughts and mindset are studied in the scientific field of psychology. Science is used to understand the universe. Just because something is beyond our current understanding dosn't make it beyond science, a cave man would beleave a zippo lighter was magic when infact there are very basic principles behind it. The only thing science can't test is faith. It can test your thought process and the signals in your brain, but it can't prove or disprove dietys who are omnipotent because if its omnipotent I can be as inperceavable as it wants.

Science is the study of the universe around us, so everything you see, feal, taste, touch, and do can be studied through science.

 

[Girder of Loins]

There is no statement of faith. Science is everything, to disregard science would be impossible. You can disregard studies, theories, hypotheses, et cetera, but not science.

Everything in the known universe is made up of matter. Molecules, atoms, sub atomic particles, which is studied in the field of chemistry. Even your thoughts and mindset are studied in the scientific field of psychology. Science is used to understand the universe. Just because something is beyond our current understanding dosn't make it beyond science, a cave man would beleave a zippo lighter was magic when infact there are very basic principles behind it. The only thing science can't test is faith. It can test your thought process and the signals in your brain, but it can't prove or disprove dietys who are omnipotent because if its omnipotent I can be as inperceavable as it wants.

Science is the study of the universe around us, so everything you see, feal, taste, touch, and do can be studied through science.

Problem. Your statement of faith is this: that science can study the universe around us and those results line up with reality.

Now, I don't want to create a strawman, but as I've been thinking about this topic, that is the core belief. That science is real. How can we use science to determine if our mind is connected to reality, when we use our mind to use science???? It becomes circular reasoning.

 

[Wolf24]

Problem. Your statement of faith is this: that science can study the universe around us and those results line up with reality.

Now, I don't want to create a strawman, but as I've been thinking about this topic, that is the core belief. That science is real. How can we use science to determine if our mind is connected to reality, when we use our mind to use science???? It becomes circular reasoning.

Well we COULD all be brains in tanks being fed sensory information. The is no way to prove anything with absolute 100% certainly. But we can prove stuff is so incerdibly likely and logical that it can be accepted and treated as fact.

The classic paradox is that 1/3 x 1/3 = 1 but 1/3= .3 repeating and .3 repeating
x 3= .999999999999999... It dosnt equil 1, but the difference is so incredibly inumerably small that it is simply is considered non existant.

Science makes logical observations with the best data avaleable.

 

[ChristianT]

I know what you're trying to say, but wouldn't 1/3 * 1/3 = 1/9 ?
and the result would also be ".111111111111...09" whereas 1/9 = ".111111111111..."
Same idea, just... lol your math was off for some reason...

 

[Girder of Loins]

I agree with you on that, I just dislike it when people(of any religion) seem to think their basic view is right. Everything is said with a hint of faith(even that statement, possibly).

 

[Wolf24]

I know what you're trying to say, but wouldn't 1/3 * 1/3 = 1/9 ?
and the result would also be ".111111111111...09" whereas 1/9 = ".111111111111..."
Same idea, just... lol your math was off for some reason...

Haha sorry I ment to say 1/3 x 3

 

[Wolf24]

I agree with you on that, I just dislike it when people(of any religion) seem to think their basic view is right. Everything is said with a hint of faith(even that statement, possibly).

I can agree with that. This conversation brings a great quote to mind,

"What is real Neo? If real is what you can see and taste and touch then real is norhing more than electrical signals in your brain."
-Morphius, The Matrix