Evolution vs Creation
- Thread starter PacificBlue
- Start date
Blindinthedark
Meh
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2002
- Posts
- 2,779
I like this tread
I'm an evolutionist. Too much proof of it in my eyes. If GOD or a greater power started it they have had their hands out of the pot for a long time ... say 5 to 16 billion years depending on what theory you believe
As for all the talk that science is based on faith. Well kinda, but it's provable faith. There is enough supporting evidence that science is a theory that works in a way that religion can't.
Religion didn't get us the modern conviences that we have now.
Faith is a great thing but science is the foundation of our lives today.
I'm an evolutionist. Too much proof of it in my eyes. If GOD or a greater power started it they have had their hands out of the pot for a long time ... say 5 to 16 billion years depending on what theory you believe
As for all the talk that science is based on faith. Well kinda, but it's provable faith. There is enough supporting evidence that science is a theory that works in a way that religion can't.
Religion didn't get us the modern conviences that we have now.
Faith is a great thing but science is the foundation of our lives today.
Oilpainter
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Posts
- 511
I dont believe they are mutually exclusive and my own belief is that evolution does in fact take place even in homo sapiens and I also believe that everything that exists was created by a force. Call it what you want-God or Allah or whatever.
Lost Cause
It's a wrap!
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Posts
- 30,949
What? The two theories can't exist.....
..the same space? What the fuck is wrong with you people? Can't you let one side think one way, and the other side, another? Jeebus! You both have to WIN!? That is you're major malfunction, and you disappoint me..wah! Evolution is cool, and I see it in the present day all around me. Theology is equally as cool, because it gives an explanation to what I don't see around me. I don't care if it's Darwin, God, Odin, Thor, Loki, Zeus, Posidon, or Apollo! If it provides me with a conclusion to a question, I'm happy.
*If we get a confirmed, on tv, visitor from beyond, well they better start rewriting the scriptures, theories, and science books!
*I promise, we'll all know the answer when we die....I'm sure of it!
..the same space? What the fuck is wrong with you people? Can't you let one side think one way, and the other side, another? Jeebus! You both have to WIN!? That is you're major malfunction, and you disappoint me..wah! Evolution is cool, and I see it in the present day all around me. Theology is equally as cool, because it gives an explanation to what I don't see around me. I don't care if it's Darwin, God, Odin, Thor, Loki, Zeus, Posidon, or Apollo! If it provides me with a conclusion to a question, I'm happy.
*If we get a confirmed, on tv, visitor from beyond, well they better start rewriting the scriptures, theories, and science books!
*I promise, we'll all know the answer when we die....I'm sure of it!
Marquis
Jack Dawkins
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
- Posts
- 10,462
I hate getting to a thread like this so late. All the really dumb points have already been thoroughly humiliated, and all thats left is fairly reasonable debate.
Since I probably won't be adding to this conversation in a meaningful way, I thought I would shamelessly name drop. I met Richard Leakey (Louis Leakey's son) once and he told me about how Creationists were so pissed off with his dad for finding that skeleton.
A few random facts about Richard Leakey:
1 He ran for president of Kenya
2 He was present when his dad dug up the skeleton in Olduvai gorge
3 He is fucking hilarious
4 He has no legs
Since I probably won't be adding to this conversation in a meaningful way, I thought I would shamelessly name drop. I met Richard Leakey (Louis Leakey's son) once and he told me about how Creationists were so pissed off with his dad for finding that skeleton.
A few random facts about Richard Leakey:
1 He ran for president of Kenya
2 He was present when his dad dug up the skeleton in Olduvai gorge
3 He is fucking hilarious
4 He has no legs
Susano
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2002
- Posts
- 898
I think it's pretty obvious what really happened. Some time in the future, someone used an infinite improbability generator, the probability distortion waves moved back in time, and when they converged however many years ago, the universe was created in a scintillating burst of impossibility. Modify slightly for abiogenesis and the evolution of intelligence.
Jedi_Outcast
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2002
- Posts
- 419
Susano said:
look for the last time the answer is 42!!!
celiaKitten
pseudo-masochistic
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2001
- Posts
- 11,634
dreamer0919 said:
Really - come over here and have some cheese-it's and lemonade with me. It's really funny to watch people beat their heads on a stone wall repeatedly.
Well, until they start bleeding .. then it's just gross.
I think we're getting to gross.
Originally posted by Me:
Isn't it odd that Creationism and some form of Racial Supremacy always go hand in hand?
Well obviously the word "always" was a flippant generalized response to what was one post indicating a connection between someone's racist overtones and their belief in creationism. And to be honest when I was typing that I wasn't particulary happy with the choice of the term "racial supremacy" in that context. But when you're being flip in a generalized sort of way you just go with it.
Anyways.
What I really meant to say is that when you find a belief in Creationism, in general you find a belief in the Primacy of one group of people over all overs in the general scheme of things. And I imagine that this is because when you're building the belief structure for your particular brand of Mysticism there has to be some sort of reward for believing in this or people are going to go join some other group that does offer them some kind of reward.
So, of course, the answer to your question is 'No' to always, but sometimes 'Yes' and certainly it seems that it is more common in those that are most vocal. But of course that's just another generalization based on intuition and appearance and not supported by any empirical data.
Isn't it odd that Creationism and some form of Racial Supremacy always go hand in hand?
Shy Tall Guy said:
Well obviously the word "always" was a flippant generalized response to what was one post indicating a connection between someone's racist overtones and their belief in creationism. And to be honest when I was typing that I wasn't particulary happy with the choice of the term "racial supremacy" in that context. But when you're being flip in a generalized sort of way you just go with it.
Anyways.
What I really meant to say is that when you find a belief in Creationism, in general you find a belief in the Primacy of one group of people over all overs in the general scheme of things. And I imagine that this is because when you're building the belief structure for your particular brand of Mysticism there has to be some sort of reward for believing in this or people are going to go join some other group that does offer them some kind of reward.
So, of course, the answer to your question is 'No' to always, but sometimes 'Yes' and certainly it seems that it is more common in those that are most vocal. But of course that's just another generalization based on intuition and appearance and not supported by any empirical data.
Shy Tall Guy
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2001
- Posts
- 5,735
I would agree with the "sometimes" characterization, but I am rather sensitive to such issues as I am always on the look out for bigots and such, and I don't think that with regards to Christian Creationism there is anything included in it that is inherently racist. The basic premise of the Judeo-Christian story of Creation is that all people are decendants of the same two people, so in that sense all peoples are equal racially.Lasher said:
Sure, some have warped some parts of Judeo-Christian mythology (usually using the "curse of Ham" theory) to support their twisted notions of racial supremacy but these are definitely in the minority and not the general case - and that has little if anything to do with the story of Creation, rather with something that happened much later. The Judeo-Christian Creation story does inherently have gender issues though, with Eve being created from Adam and as a servant, but that is a different issue from racial supremacy.
I would be interested in hearing how or where such racial supremacy is endemic to Judeo-Christian Creation mythology.
deliciously_naughty
One Sexy Mama
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2002
- Posts
- 4,765
I believe in Evolution. Ok...deep breath...however, I do not find it impossible that the first speck of dust that eventually caused or participated in the Big Bang etc wasn't created by some "higher Power". I do not subscribe to a Christian mythology of 6 days of creation and 1 day of rest. However, of course we must then beg the question of who created that Higher Power. Which can lead in circles of thought that make my head hurt.
However, when it comes to the creation of Earth and humans....Earth was created by the Big Bang. Humans evolved from the primate family (this has been proven by science). It is likely that we evolved sucessfully in the fertile crescent area of Africa...however, we might have evolved simultaneously in other parts of the world, but did not survive b/c of various environmental factors. The oldest human remains were found in Africa (and are now on display at the NYC museum of natural history) which supports this theory.
Every religion has its own version of the creation myth. We are compelled to explain "why we are here." However, when the men who wrote the bible sat down, concepts of science were not advanced enough to comprehend a spherical planet, much less planetary and special evolution. Of course they explained our existence through creation by a diety. We must consider many factors when understanding literature like the bible, the koran, and the oral histories of other peoples.
Just my 2 cents...and before people start attacking me...I am expressing MY opinions...I do NOT expect any of you to buy into them. They are just mine.
However, when it comes to the creation of Earth and humans....Earth was created by the Big Bang. Humans evolved from the primate family (this has been proven by science). It is likely that we evolved sucessfully in the fertile crescent area of Africa...however, we might have evolved simultaneously in other parts of the world, but did not survive b/c of various environmental factors. The oldest human remains were found in Africa (and are now on display at the NYC museum of natural history) which supports this theory.
Every religion has its own version of the creation myth. We are compelled to explain "why we are here." However, when the men who wrote the bible sat down, concepts of science were not advanced enough to comprehend a spherical planet, much less planetary and special evolution. Of course they explained our existence through creation by a diety. We must consider many factors when understanding literature like the bible, the koran, and the oral histories of other peoples.
Just my 2 cents...and before people start attacking me...I am expressing MY opinions...I do NOT expect any of you to buy into them. They are just mine.
Shy Tall Guy said:
Well, now I thought I had discounted the importance of or the phrase "racial supremacy" in my previous post, but I'll give things another go here.
I never meant to indicate that a feeling of Racial Supremacy was inherent to the belief structure of the Judeo-Christian Mythos (all though you could probably make a case for the all the talk of the Jews as "God's chosen people", but I'd rather not, lol). What I was trying to point out was that IN GENERAL those who are vocal in their belief in Creationism and also active in attempting to force their belief on others tend to be on the extremist, fundamentalist end of the spectrum and IN GENERAL there tends to be an apparent connection between these people and people of vocally racist tendencies. I'm sure that a majority of KKK members are also Creationists... BUT You will notice I DID NOT say that a majority of Creationists are in the KKK. Because I don't believe that to be true.
Again, the original statement I made was a sweeping generalization made to bring to attention an apparent inconsistency and was done with flippancy and obvious disregard to detail.
Just call it one of those things that are supposed to make you go "Hmmmm...."
Shy Tall Guy
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2001
- Posts
- 5,735
Okay, that explanation makes things clearer.Lasher said:
Ishmael
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 84,005
My two cents
First of all, life is probably spontaneous and exists in more unlikey forms than we can imagine. It is quite possible for what we consider the definitions of life to exist in complex molecules that could not exist in earths environment. This might be due to gravitational restrictions, heat, or other limiting factors. So, when you speak of life, you are speaking only of the conventional life as we know it.
Darwin. Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species" not as an attack on the church but rather as an attack on the 'catastrophists' that held sway at the time. Darwin was repentent to his dying breath about the firestorm he brewed in religious circles.
There is certain evidence for evolution. The fact that we can find historical precursors for life forms living today is a fact. However, all species have a missing link. Hundreds of thousands, even millions of years, will pass without any noticable change in a specie, then almost spontaneously, in geologic terms, a next level appears. Within Darwin's world, there should be a continuous and incremental record. There isn't.
The first scientist to reintroduce catastrophism was Andreas Velikovsky. Andreas was a contemporary of Einsteins and they corressponded continuously until Alberts death. Regardless, Andreas was a pschiatrist who studied under Jung. Then obtained a PhD in literature, then astrophysics, then geology. Busy boy, Andreas. His first book, "Worlds in Collision" was a result of his research into ancient tales of catastrophes and the creation. He explained these events in terms of astro-physics. He is the modern father of the "end of the dinosaurs" theory.
How does that relate to this thread?
The universe as we know it exists within certain physical laws that we have tested and have shown that they hold true. (At least for the time being.) All physical evidence points to the universe coming into being via 'the big bang'. It also appears that the universe is ever expanding, therefore it has an end as well.
Both of these known(?) facts are in agreement with the scriptures if you strip out the 'reasons' given and deal with only the facts.
From the very simple, and well established, formula of E=MC^2 we know that energy and matter are interchangable. The 'big band' theory postulates that an infinite amount of energy at a specific point in known space underwent a spontaneous conversion to matter. (Of course it's more complex than that, but that is the essential.)
Man being limited in what he is, we will probably never be able to see beyond zero time and will always be left with the question of 'why'. God is as plausible an answer as any that will be given in this thread, or by scientists of reknown.
Literalists will always abound within religious circles. Religion is conservative and dogmatic by nature. But that still does not obviate the possibility of a 'creator'. Afterall, what is a day in the life of a God?
Ishmael
First of all, life is probably spontaneous and exists in more unlikey forms than we can imagine. It is quite possible for what we consider the definitions of life to exist in complex molecules that could not exist in earths environment. This might be due to gravitational restrictions, heat, or other limiting factors. So, when you speak of life, you are speaking only of the conventional life as we know it.
Darwin. Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species" not as an attack on the church but rather as an attack on the 'catastrophists' that held sway at the time. Darwin was repentent to his dying breath about the firestorm he brewed in religious circles.
There is certain evidence for evolution. The fact that we can find historical precursors for life forms living today is a fact. However, all species have a missing link. Hundreds of thousands, even millions of years, will pass without any noticable change in a specie, then almost spontaneously, in geologic terms, a next level appears. Within Darwin's world, there should be a continuous and incremental record. There isn't.
The first scientist to reintroduce catastrophism was Andreas Velikovsky. Andreas was a contemporary of Einsteins and they corressponded continuously until Alberts death. Regardless, Andreas was a pschiatrist who studied under Jung. Then obtained a PhD in literature, then astrophysics, then geology. Busy boy, Andreas. His first book, "Worlds in Collision" was a result of his research into ancient tales of catastrophes and the creation. He explained these events in terms of astro-physics. He is the modern father of the "end of the dinosaurs" theory.
How does that relate to this thread?
The universe as we know it exists within certain physical laws that we have tested and have shown that they hold true. (At least for the time being.) All physical evidence points to the universe coming into being via 'the big bang'. It also appears that the universe is ever expanding, therefore it has an end as well.
Both of these known(?) facts are in agreement with the scriptures if you strip out the 'reasons' given and deal with only the facts.
From the very simple, and well established, formula of E=MC^2 we know that energy and matter are interchangable. The 'big band' theory postulates that an infinite amount of energy at a specific point in known space underwent a spontaneous conversion to matter. (Of course it's more complex than that, but that is the essential.)
Man being limited in what he is, we will probably never be able to see beyond zero time and will always be left with the question of 'why'. God is as plausible an answer as any that will be given in this thread, or by scientists of reknown.
Literalists will always abound within religious circles. Religion is conservative and dogmatic by nature. But that still does not obviate the possibility of a 'creator'. Afterall, what is a day in the life of a God?
Ishmael
Ishmael
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 84,005
Marquis said:
Biblicaly, man's creation was but one of six creationism events. There is a sequence to the events. One cannot be seperated from the others. To do so would immediately initiate the postulate that God created the universe, but not man.
Ishmael
Marquis
Jack Dawkins
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
- Posts
- 10,462
Ishmael said:
Except for the fact that:
A) the first 5 events have nothing to do with the common evolution vs. creationism debate.
B) The bible and god are not intertwined in anyones mind but christians. It is totally possible to believe that God created man and to engage in the evolution vs. creationism debate without any biblical involvement.
Wolf_Song
__________-
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2002
- Posts
- 1,160
PacificBlue said:
I dont buy in to creation, nor that the big bang was the initial part of evolution to current. This thread supports my view point with both sides of this historically debated for centuries. As neither side has irrefutable proof over the other with inconsistencies present in both.
Science being able to date information for millions of years in the past is always being challenged. With only thus far carbon dating in periods of thousands of years having been tested in duration far lesser than that period of time.. isnt fully tested. This is only one area that science is still maturing in.
Religion has ultimately been written and changed by man repeatedly through out history. With of course the societal and political undertakings that have changed religions views through history to. Thus it isnt infallible either and alike science is still maturing.
Though many interesting figures have popped up historically.. Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed to name but three of many world faiths. Each have many colorful titles whether looking at them religiously or from stand point of history. What is consistent of them is that in their specific time periods they were reformers.
Their are also many scientists that popped up in history that proposed and were able to substantiate many theories. And they as with those named above mentioned were reformers. Alike the religious figures they brought new ideas through scientific means that brought changing views to science and religion.
Thus I dont buy fully buy in to either theory of creation or evolution as mankind still has much to learn. With currently neither god nor big bang having been proven beyond a doubt.
For those that believe they can prove either to me.. heres some questions for you.
What was there before big bang ?
What was there before god ?
My current position is that the answer to the thread question is eternal existence.
