PDA

View Full Version : Origin of Man


Pages : [1] 2

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 20:52
How do you believe we came to exist as we are today? How did you come to decide this?

For bonus points, explain what it would take to change your opinion.

kooky
15-08-08, 20:56
Creation. :wve:

Mr.Burns
15-08-08, 20:58
Evolution. The only way I would change my view is if there was a blatantly obvious example of divine intervention that would be next to impossible to deny.

TombRaiderCool
15-08-08, 21:00
well I would have to go for "evolution" It seems the most believable and realistic " Origin of Man" theory I have heard.
I would change my mind if I saw a God before my eyes.

Mad Tony
15-08-08, 21:01
Personally, I believe in creation.

Even if evolution was proven to be true, it doesn't mean there is no God. Science explains how and religion explains why. That's how I think of it anyway.

DREWY
15-08-08, 21:05
OK, hands up who's great great...... great relations were monkeys or primordial ooze?
Although, looking around, I can see why the idea would get a foothold.....




(Personally, I don't really know what to believe, but I'd prefer this version over the other, and apparently even Charles Darwin changed his mind in latter life)

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 21:05
a blatantly obvious example of divine intervention that would be next to impossible to deny

What like?

Agent 47
15-08-08, 21:12
Evolution

i don't subscribe to religious overtones that we were put here by some all powerful being. might aswell say an alien invading force put us here :D

Mr.Burns
15-08-08, 21:12
What like?

Since I don't put much stock in the old fables of floods, plagues or angels from heaven, I would find it difficult to find anything that I could accept without a hint of doubt. My faith is more of a spiritual one. The stories in the Torah are just that, stories. In other words: I have no idea :p

pEhouse
15-08-08, 21:12
Evolution. I share the opinion that most parts of creationism are myths.

Nausinous
15-08-08, 21:13
Evolution :wve: Science is a marvellous thing.

Clara [CA]
15-08-08, 21:15
Evolution. And I won't change my mind because it's a fact, not a matter of opinion.

jackali
15-08-08, 21:19
Evolution.

First, I'd need to believe in God. If that happened it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to believe in creationism.

But even then it would probably be a mix of creationism and evolution.

Endow
15-08-08, 21:20
Well I believe in evolution as a scientific generally agreed theory, just like a lot of other stuff I was taught at school and have no way to know for sure. I'm no biologist anyway.

But Darwin wasn't trying to prove the creation of the universe and for that my limited human mind can find no explanation. Big bang, sure. But how did it happen and what was there before? Is space really infinite or is it in fact expanding? etc etc

Nitro Typhoon
15-08-08, 21:24
Evolution ktnxbai :wve:

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 21:26
Someone had to create that pond of muck for us to evolve out of.

Admles
15-08-08, 21:28
Evolution.

IMHO creatiniosm is just a myth, like the rest of the bible stories.

The only way I could ever change my mind on the existence of god and his whole collaboration would be to meet him in person, which can't happen as I don't believe he exists anyway!

Nitro Typhoon
15-08-08, 21:29
Someone had to create that pond of muck for us to evolve out of.

Yes; Science ;)

But everyone has their own opinion.

Benguitar
15-08-08, 21:33
Creation. :wve:

:hug:

:)

I agree!

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 21:34
Yes; Science ;)

But everyone has their own opinion.

Or the unmoved mover. But I don't have the energy to go through this same old song and dance again.

Shrantellatessa
15-08-08, 21:41
Creation.

stereopathic
15-08-08, 21:45
i want to say legos. why isn't there a legos option?

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 21:47
i want to say legos. why isn't there a legos option?

because legos are the foundation on which mankind was built, not the origin.
:rolleyes:



;)

stereopathic
15-08-08, 21:50
because legos are the foundation on which mankind was built, not the origin.
:rolleyes:



;)

good point. legos are from Denmark so the Danes obviously created man. bang. thanks a million, Denmark. :tmb:

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 21:52
good point. legos are from Denmark so the Danes obviously created man. bang. thanks a million, Denmark. :tmb:

gotta love Danes...so brilliant. so sexy.
;)

stereopathic
15-08-08, 21:53
gotta love Danes...so brilliant. so sexy.
;)

...so giving of life.

p.s: italians invented sexy. word to your moms.

Ward Dragon
15-08-08, 21:55
Evolution. It's the most reasonable and logical explanation I've seen so far. In order to change my mind, someone would have to come up with a better explanation which can accurately predict what will happen next.

I don't rule out the possibility of God setting things in motion, of course, since that cannot be proven or disproven with our current level of knowledge/technology/etc. Incidentally, why isn't Intelligent Design a separate option on the poll? I'm pretty sure it's different from outright "the world is only 6,000 years old" creationism.

george_croft
15-08-08, 21:56
Evolution.

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 21:57
...so giving of life.

p.s: italians invented sexy. word to your moms.


eh.
they're alright.




:tea:

I mean...the italians would never have invented sexiness if it weren't for the Danes and their legos :mis:

Drone
15-08-08, 21:57
Creationism. Nothing will change my mind and I ain't gonna explain anything here :wve:

dream raider
15-08-08, 21:58
Evolution.

peffect
15-08-08, 22:00
Evolution?! :rolleyes:

Creation!

And I dare all those who're on the side of evolution to prove they're right.

Dingaling
15-08-08, 22:01
Evolution?! :rolleyes:

Creation!

And I dare all those who're on the side of evolution to prove they're right.

How can you prove Creationism right? Both are only theories.

ChingKong
15-08-08, 22:02
Creationism I stand by my faith :D

Dixie
15-08-08, 22:04
Someone had to create that pond of muck for us to evolve out of.

Exactly. No matter what you believe about the creation of man/ the earth, it had to start somewhere. It's hard to explain. Like, if you believe in the 'big bang' theory. Something had to spark the big bang, or something had to spark the spark that sparked the big bang, etc.

EDIT: forgot to put my answer- Creationism.

peffect
15-08-08, 22:04
How can you prove Creationism right? Both are only theories.

No. Qu'ran proves that we're God's creation.
What d'you have to prove Evolution?

Dingaling
15-08-08, 22:06
I never said anything of my belief peffect.

How does the Qu'ran prove Creationism? If it offers divine proof there would be no need for this discussion as we would have our answer :).

peffect
15-08-08, 22:10
I never said anything of my belief peffect.

How does the Qu'ran prove Creationism? If it offers divine proof there would be no need for this discussion as we would have our answer :).

It sure does offer divine proofs, halas, I don't seem to notice other Muslims discussing. :)

jackali
15-08-08, 22:11
No. Qu'ran proves that we're God's creation.
What d'you have to prove Evolution?

To be fair, it doesn't "prove" anything. All it does is offer evidence for that argument.

Just like all we people who believe in evolution only have evidence to support it.

At the end of the day, technically, nothing can be proven.

Angelus
15-08-08, 22:13
Evolution. ;)

peffect
15-08-08, 22:13
To be fair, it doesn't "prove" anything. All it does is offer evidence for that argument.

Just like all we people who believe in evolution only have evidence to support it.

At the end of the day, technically, nothing can be proven.

Have you read the Qu'ran?

trXD
15-08-08, 22:14
Evolution. The only way I would change my view is if there was a blatantly obvious example of divine intervention that would be next to impossible to deny.
Ditto.

There is only evidence that shows the complete opposite of creation.

rickybazire
15-08-08, 22:14
I put Creationism when I should have put other. I believe that God created the first humans and they reproduced, but evolution also occured, but from near-human apes.

dream raider
15-08-08, 22:15
No. Qu'ran proves that we're God's creation.
What d'you have to prove Evolution?

Qu'ran? Anyway, not everyone is a follower of God and it would be great if this could be acknowledged.

Science proves evolution (for me).

Have you read the Qu'ran?

I am Paris Hilton. Does this prove I am Paris Hilton?

jackali
15-08-08, 22:15
Have you read the Qu'ran?

No, I haven't. I've read a translation of it.

trXD
15-08-08, 22:16
Evolution?! :rolleyes:

Creation!

And I dare all those who're on the side of evolution to prove they're right.
That was extremely rude!

MiCkiZ88
15-08-08, 22:16
Other - both. I do not believe in creatonism as it's mentioned in the bible, but I do believe some force (be it God, or what not) caused things to start. Meh, too hard to explain really.

Dakaruch
15-08-08, 22:21
Evolution. It seems unlikely to me that some god-like entity created Earth and life on it as we know it.
When i see irrefutable evidence that God exists and that he/she/it created it, then i will believe in Creationism. Until then... Evolution! :wve:

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 22:21
Exactly. No matter what you believe about the creation of man/ the earth, it had to start somewhere. It's hard to explain. Like, if you believe in the 'big bang' theory. Something had to spark the big bang, or something had to spark the spark that sparked the big bang, etc.

You should pick up The Goldilocks Enigma by Paul Davies, who, incidentally, is also the author of The Mind of God. It's a very intelligent read for those who are interested in the theory of the big bang and (scientifically backed) explanations of how it--yes, it, the big bang--came to be.

In The Goldilocks Enigma, he explains the ideas that underline the uncanny and undeniable fitness of the universe for life with a basic introduction to the concepts of modern physics and their relation to cosmology, tackling deep philosophical questions with even more puzzling scientific ones.

He also conjectures rather succinctly on the subject of the multiverse theory (which, by the way, is only compounded by the recent discovery of water on mars) and presents both the arguments for and against it.

Really--can't say enough about it.
It's a great book. :tmb:

peffect
15-08-08, 22:22
Qu'ran? Anyway, not everyone is a follower of God and it would be great if this could be acknowledged.

Science proves evolution (for me).

I'll be more than thankful if you share those proofs.

No, I haven't. I've read a translation of it.

If the translation was really true to the Holy book, I'm sure you'd get your proofs.

That was extremely rude!

Awww, how so?

CAISACO
15-08-08, 22:22
well I would have to go for "evolution" It seems the most believable and realistic " Origin of Man" theory I have heard.
I would change my mind if I saw a God before my eyes.

:tmb: I agree.

stereopathic
15-08-08, 22:24
You should pick up The Goldilocks Enigma by Paul Davies, who, incidentally, is also the author of The Mind of God. It's a very intelligent read for those who are interested in the theory of the big bang and (scientifically backed) explanations of how it--yes, it, the big bang--came to be.

In The Goldilocks Enigma, he explains the ideas that underline the uncanny and undeniable fitness of the universe for life with a basic introduction to the concepts of modern physics and their relation to cosmology, tackling deep philosophical questions with even more puzzling scientific ones.

He also conjectures rather succinctly on the subject of the multiverse theory (which, by the way, is only compounded by the recent discovery of water on mars) and presents both the arguments for and against it.

Really--can't say enough about it.
It's a great book. :tmb:

have you read the new Dora the Explorer book? it's awesome, i think you'd like it. she learns a couple of new words and also a lesson on the importance of eating a balanced breakfast.

jackali
15-08-08, 22:30
If the translation was really true to the Holy book, I'm sure you'd get your proofs.

Of course the translation can't be entirely true to it. The translation doesn't even count as the word of God, since it's in another language.

Believe me, if I could understand Arabic I'd read it in Arabic. However, I don't so I can't.

But the point of the matter is I'm certainly not ignorant of religion, I've read plenty of translations of various different holy books.

I personally just don't believe that it really is the word of God. Therefore whether it was a good translation or not I still wouldn't believe it. I'm an atheist, not an ignorant atheist but an informed atheist.

Personally, I find it ignorant of you to say that you'd be so sure that I'd feel it was proof if the translation was true to the word of God. I can accept that you believe in this, but you don't have to push your beliefs on others.

Also, it's noteworthy that if there was real "proof" there would be universal agreement about something. Therefore, since there's anything but universal agreement it's fair to say that this "proof" you speak of is nothing more than "evidence". It gives evidence towards the claim of creationism, but it can't prove it if people don't believe it. If it was "proof" then I'd be a believer.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 22:32
Evolution (Via Natural Selection) is a prove FACT.

The evidence is astronomical and irrefutable the only reason why some do not want to believe the theory is that it nocks man of his divine pedestal to roam on the ground with the rest of the animal kingdom.

Creationism is a ridiculous claim and should just be silence, fundamentally its like knowing what you are going to observe before you have observed it, but the observations proved incorrect to the creationist theories.

Twilight
15-08-08, 22:32
other.

Lara's home
15-08-08, 22:33
Evolution.
We are too much alike other species, Especially monkeys to be "Created by god alone" or anything.
One example/question: Why do men have nipples? We don't need them, but we have them. It's because we all come from the same thing.
We have all developepd seperate ways.

MiCkiZ88
15-08-08, 22:33
Believing is different from knowing. Knowing something doesn't make you an believer... just wanted to point that out.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 22:35
I put Creationism when I should have put other. I believe that God created the first humans and they reproduced, but evolution also occured, but from near-human apes.

Did you put God in your theory just so he remains? Just because you want to believe he exist's does not mean that he does.

ANoDE
15-08-08, 22:38
Evolution.

I do beleive that there is something though, that is beyond our capabilities of understanding. I'm undecided if that something is a creature with a conciousnes or just a natural phenomenon.
But nonetheless, I am quite sure, that the human race evolved from something as small as a molecule since that "something" created the universe we now beleive to know.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 22:40
Evolution.
We are too much alike other species, Especially monkeys to be "Created by god alone" or anything.
Why do men have nipples? We don't need them, but we have them. It's because we all come from the same thing.
We have all developepd seperate ways.

Man has a "Common ancestor" with apes and is now classified as one.

May i just point out to the people that are arrogant of Evolution.

We did not descend from apes we ARE apes. Other species of ape share a common ancestor with humans. Humans did not evolve from a species of ape that exists today but All species of Ape evolved from an other form of mammal or reptile therefore that is why apes exist today as-well as humans. Your silly oh well then why are "monkeys" here today theory is unfound and inadequate.

Feather Duster
15-08-08, 22:41
Creationism: Aliens

Cochrane
15-08-08, 22:45
14 creationists? That's shocking. I'll be honest with you all: I don't think believe in creationism is something one should respect. I'm not more outspoken against it because a lot of folks would stone me, but I absolutely cannot comprehend how someone who knows what he/she's talking about can seriously think that creationism is a better explanation. The problem of course is that most people don't know what they are talking about. If "my holy book says so" was a valid argument in any other discussion, we'd still be living in the middle ages.

What would it take to change my opinion... more bonus points maybe?

Seriously: You'd need a theory of creation that uses all available evidence, that can be adapted when new evidence appears and, most importantly, that requires less unproven assumptions than evolution. Since there is the unproven assumption that there is a creator who is outside the scope of the theory, I don't see that happening. Like, ever.

Explorer
15-08-08, 22:48
I went for Creationism, even though I could in principle believe that humans and chimps diverged from a common ancestor in the past, I'm skeptical of Darwinian selection and random variations being a mechanism for that. Oh and I also went for Creationism because you can get labeled a creationist even if you believe life came about by accident but believe the universe itself was no accident.

Archetype
15-08-08, 22:50
Creationism (christian)

makes a lot of sense to me, evolution seems like a theory concocted in the basement of a 44 year old man who still lives with his parents. Trekkie anyone?

Cochrane
15-08-08, 22:52
Creationism (christian)

makes a lot of sense to me, evolution seems like a theory concocted in the basement of a 44 year old man who still lives with his parents. Trekkie anyone?

You win the price for funniest argument against evolution I've ever heard! :D:D:D

(Although on the convincing side, it's a little lacking...)

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 22:54
Creationism (christian)

makes a lot of sense to me, evolution seems like a theory concocted in the basement of a 44 year old man who still lives with his parents. Trekkie anyone?

funny, a lot of people would say the same thing about Christianity--except that this "man" lives in the dark ages, can't perform simple arithmetic, believes in talking flaming bushes and doesn't live beyond thirtyfive. ;)

Christi
15-08-08, 22:55
Evolution. All life came from little living space bugs...rofl...and different things came to be depending where they were on earth like Wolves and Humans. Completely different because they eveolved in different parts of the world

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 22:56
Creationism is a Joke, its is like getting a large sheet of evidence and then asking which verses agree with Genesis (1.1) and then saying the ones that do not are false or there was some sort of anomaly.

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 22:57
14 creationists? That's shocking. I'll be honest with you all: I don't think believe in creationism is something one should respect.

Whatever happened to respecting the beliefs of others?

Lara's home
15-08-08, 22:58
Whatever happened to respecting the beliefs of others?

This is the interwebzz. Nobody respects religion.
:p

dream raider
15-08-08, 22:59
14 creationists? That's shocking. I'll be honest with you all: I don't think believe in creationism is something one should respect.

I honestly would not expect that coming from you, Cochrane.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:00
funny, a lot of people would say the same thing about Christianity--except that this "man" lives in the dark ages, can't perform simple arithmetic, believes in talking flaming bushes and doesn't live beyond thirtyfive. ;)

:jmp::jmp::jmp::jmp: That is great, May i just point out to the person whom said that about evolution, Evolution was "concocted" by an observation of nature where is God when all these defenseless animals are being ripped to shreds.

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb191/Ladyblue72/kot-szczur.jpg

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:02
Whatever happened to respecting the beliefs of others?

Whatever happened to not telling lies?

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:02
This is the interwebzz. Nobody respects religion.
:p

To tell you the truth, Cochrane's statement came off as hateful as some homophobic statements that would be bashed by 100% of the forum.

Whatever happened to not telling lies?
Grow up. I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't respect my beliefs.

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 23:02
No. Qu'ran proves that we're God's creation.
What d'you have to prove Evolution?

If I wrote a book called "The Complete Guide to Alien Languages" and told people it was absolutely 100% true, nobody could disprove my claim because we don't know any aliens to find out about their languages. My alien languages might be so convincing that people doubt I could have made it all up by myself, but there would be no way to prove or disprove any of it, short of going out and finding some aliens to ask. Same case with gods. They're unreachable for comment. Thus, the books supposedly written under divine inspiration can't be used as proof of anything but their writers' imaginations.

Evolution, on the other hand, is proven through actual observation of the world. It's not a case of Darwin having written the theory of evolution and everyone else following it like scripture. Everything we know about evolution has been found by going out and digging up fossils, taking samples from rock cores, comparing fossils with modern plants and animals, etc. If we ever found something that contradicted the theory of evolution then the whole theory would be binned and we'd have to start looking for some other explanation.

Whatever happened to respecting the beliefs of others?

Your right to believe is what should be respected. Not your actual beliefs.

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:03
Whatever happened to respecting the beliefs of others?

Respecting the beliefs of others implies that the beliefs are in some way equally valid. Creationism and Evolution are, however, not equally valid. Simple as that.

A key point is that creationism can be labelled a belief, because it comes directly out of religion and is connected to it. It requires blindly accepting certain dogmas. Evolution and in general science is not a belief, and people who think it is are wrong. Science does rely on dogmas, or on assumptions that haven't been proven, it's true. However, science actively works to reduce these and get rid of such dogmas wherever possible. Science is not based on making a leap of faith, it's based on making a rational decision on what you think requires the least or least unlikely unproven assumptions.

Respecting other beliefs is only done because no belief is considered superior to any other, at least not in polite company. When it comes to explaining the world, though, science is, thanks to the way it's methodology works, always superior to religion.

Andariel
15-08-08, 23:03
funny, a lot of people would say the same thing about Christianity--except that this "man" lives in the dark ages, can't perform simple arithmetic, believes in talking flaming bushes and doesn't live beyond thirtyfive. ;)
http://i38.************/33nylg5.gif Very observant and great point.

Personally I believe in neither. I haven't been given enough evidence to be persuaded.

Shrantellatessa
15-08-08, 23:05
14 creationists? That's shocking. I'll be honest with you all: I don't think believe in creationism is something one should respect.

17 now :yah:

And who laughs last laughs best :wve:

Archetype
15-08-08, 23:07
You win the price for funniest argument against evolution I've ever heard! :D:D:D

(Although on the convincing side, it's a little lacking...)

Yeah, I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I'll respect others if people respect mine.

Thats why threads like these are really not a good idea.

funny, a lot of people would say the same thing about Christianity--except that this "man" lives in the dark ages, can't perform simple arithmetic, believes in talking flaming bushes and doesn't live beyond thirtyfive. ;)

But flaming bushes.. pretty weird.. strange things do happen ;)


- Edited due to 'ignorance' .. *sigh*

xRikux89
15-08-08, 23:09
Other - Both

I'm just trying to think logically, although that could also be called thinking limited, but here goes.

We are here, because something was here before us. And something before those. In the course of this, evolution has happened. But things, not only living, are being constructed over and over using the same physical matter that's been around for so long. Where did the stuff come from? I believe something of no physical form created that stuff first. I'd also like to believe that being wasn't cruel enough to outright create a life form that would be asking "What just happened?".

Then again, I only thought of all that because this thread made me think about. (In other words, I have no idea what I'm talking about lololol hiiiii I'm on your computer screen!)

Andariel
15-08-08, 23:09
I wouldn't want to talk to anyone who talks klingon about religion
If that was reversed then it'd make more sense instead of ignorance.

Archetype
15-08-08, 23:11
If that was reversed then it'd make more sense instead of ignorance.

Just no..

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:12
I voted Creationism but I do believe Evolution took its course after that. (Although I do have a different view of Evolution)

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:14
I'm sorry if offend anyone with my statements, but I'm not really sorry about their contents. Respecting other's beliefs? Fine. Respecting other's nationality, sexuality, whatever? Fine. Respecting other's belief that 2+2=5 or Pi=3 because their holy book says so? No way.

The main reason I don't do that is because I actually consider clinging to these beliefs harmful. Working on the basis that man happened through some natural process can bring up new answers about how humans appeared, or many other interesting things. Working on the basis that man was created by divine intervention is, in the most extreme case, not possible. Why would anyone grant you research money or publish your findings if all the answers are supposed to be in your holy book already anyway? We went through this once already, it was called the middle ages, and I don't exactly want to go back there.

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 23:14
If I wrote a book called "The Complete Guide to Alien Languages" and told people it was absolutely 100% true, nobody could disprove my claim because we don't know any aliens to find out about their languages. My alien languages might be so convincing that people doubt I could have made it all up by myself, but there would be no way to prove or disprove any of it, short of going out and finding some aliens to ask. Same case with gods. They're unreachable for comment. Thus, the books supposedly written under divine inspiration can't be used as proof of anything but their writers' imaginations.

Evolution, on the other hand, is proven through actual observation of the world. It's not a case of Darwin having written the theory of evolution and everyone else following it like scripture. Everything we know about evolution has been found by going out and digging up fossils, taking samples from rock cores, comparing fossils with modern plants and animals, etc. If we ever found something that contradicted the theory of evolution then the whole theory would be binned and we'd have to start looking for some other explanation.



Your right to believe is what should be respected. Not your actual beliefs.

precisely.
well written and simply excellent.

Respecting the beliefs of others implies that the beliefs are in some way equally valid. Creationism and Evolution are, however, not equally valid. Simple as that.

A key point is that creationism can be labelled a belief, because it comes directly out of religion and is connected to it. It requires blindly accepting certain dogmas. Evolution and in general science is not a belief, and people who think it is are wrong. Science does rely on dogmas, or on assumptions that haven't been proven, it's true. However, science actively works to reduce these and get rid of such dogmas wherever possible. Science is not based on making a leap of faith, it's based on making a rational decision on what you think requires the least or least unlikely unproven assumptions.

Respecting other beliefs is only done because no belief is considered superior to any other, at least not in polite company. When it comes to explaining the world, though, science is, thanks to the way it's methodology works, always superior to religion.

again, well written and simply brilliant.
:tmb:

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:15
Other - Both

I'm just trying to think logically, although that could also be called thinking limited, but here goes.

We are here, because something was here before us. And something before those. In the course of this, evolution has happened. But things, not only living, are being constructed over and over using the same physical matter that's been around for so long. Where did the stuff come from? I believe something of no physical form created that stuff first. I'd also like to believe that being wasn't cruel enough to outright create a life form that would be asking "What just happened?".

Then again, I only thought of all that because this thread made me think about. (In other words, I have no idea what I'm talking about lololol hiiiii I'm on your computer screen!)

The Multiverse theory explains many of your doubts.

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:15
I'm sorry if offend anyone with my statements, but I'm not really sorry about their contents. Respecting other's beliefs? Fine. Respecting other's nationality, sexuality, whatever? Fine. Respecting other's belief that 2+2=5 or Pi=3 because their holy book says so? No way.



Well it is called the theory of Evolution.

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 23:17
Well it is called the theory of Evolution.

http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html

As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Likewise, gravity is a theory. Care to argue against gravity?

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 23:18
The Multiverse theory explains many of your doubts.


:tmb: The Goldilocks Enigma by Paul Davies
An excellent addition to any free-thinker's library ;)
(it explains the Multiverse theory and its relation to religion)

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:18
Well it is called the theory of Evolution.

You are getting Theory and hypothesis mistaken.

Theory:

An explanation for some phenomenon that is based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning.
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/glossary.php3

General principles derived from a body of scientific data to explain a natural occurrence.
www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:18
How do you believe we came to exist as we are today? How did you come to decide this?

For bonus points, explain what it would take to change your opinion.

You started this thread for the http://bestsmileys.com/eating1/1.gif, didn't you? ;)

EgyptianSoul
15-08-08, 23:21
Evolution.

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:24
Well it is called the theory of Evolution.

That's a common argument, and it's wrong.

Okay, it's not, it can indeed be called the theory of evolution. But when people point out that it's "just a theory", I always get the feeling that there is an underlying argument that this makes it less valuable, or that each and every theory is equally likely to be correct, or that it could be disproved at any time by a particularly nasty bone. This assumption is what's wrong.

Evolution is the theory that explains the world as we know it today best. Best means, at least for me, that we have the fewest white spots and lacks of knowledge, that we need to make the fewest unproven assumptions possible to explain the world as it is. There was already a huge process of disproving, and evolution is what came out top. Creationism didn't.

Also, it's not easy to completely disprove evolution. It is easy to completely disprove parts of evolution of varying size, and it's being done on a daily basis all around the world. Then the theory gets altered so that it matches evidence again. This is not cheating, this is the way science works: The theory gets refined more and more to explain more and more evidence. Modern evolution is a very, very different beast from what Charles Darwin invented already (which is why quoting him is hardly ever relevant in discussions like this).

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:24
http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html

Oh no, external links with black fonts and white background, that is beyond my mental capacity...

But seriously now, I do agree that Evolution is real, although I do have a different view towards it. I still believe it all started with creation though, I find it hard to believe that "First there was nothing and then it exploded". Your "facts" are as fragile as ours.

EDIT: post directed at Cochrane (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=17993) too.

Drone
15-08-08, 23:27
14 creationists? That's shocking. I'll be honest with you all: I don't think believe in creationism is something one should respect.

and what will you do ? shoot us dead?

darwinism deserves less respect

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:27
Oh no, external links with black fonts and white background, that is beyond my mental capacity...

But seriously now, I do agree that Evolution is real, although I do have a different view towards it. I still believe it all started with creation though, I find it hard to believe that "First there was nothing and then it exploded". Your "facts" are as fragile as ours.

EDIT: post directed at Cochrane (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=17993) too.

Evolution doesn't state how the universe started and never did. The Big Bang theory complex does that, which is physics instead of biology. It's all very interesting, but it's not a single soup and never has been. There is nothing in the theory of evolution that requires the world to have happened through the Big Bang.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:29
and what will you do ? shoot us dead?

darwinism deserves less respect

That is ridiculous, if we are truly products of evolution as i believe we are and our minds by-products then we should use them and try to live in harmony. no matter what the belief.

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 23:30
Personally, I would drop the theory of evolution if we found some species of creature that has absolutely no place in it - for example, animals with metal skeletons. I wouldn't look for a supernatural or spiritual solution though; I'd just hang tight without an opinion until we came up with a better theory.

Likewise, I don't have an opinion on how the universe was created because we don't have enough evidence to know. All I know for certain is that it wasn't god. :p

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:30
and what will you do ? shoot us dead?
Way too lazy.

darwinism deserves less respect
You're right, it does. Believing in the original form of a theory that has been altered and changed many times and does, in the original form, fail to describe things nearly as well as the modern variation, takes a special kind of stupidity.

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:32
Evolution doesn't state how the universe started and never did. The Big Bang theory complex does that, which is physics instead of biology. It's all very interesting, but it's not a single soup and never has been. There is nothing in the theory of evolution that requires the world to have happened through the Big Bang.

I thought this was going to turn into a Religion vs Science. I'm a big fan of both BTW.

Big bang and Evolution are a little bit related, they both explain how thing have come to be what they are now through stages, but they never explain how it all started. Time doesn't go back, there is no minus infinity here, there is an exact point when things came to existence.

All I know for certain is that it wasn't god. :p

Not even a tiny fraction of a possibility? :P

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:33
Personally, I would drop the theory of evolution if we found some species of creature that has absolutely no place in it - for example, animals with metal skeletons. I wouldn't look for a supernatural or spiritual solution though; I'd just hang tight without an opinion until we came up with a better theory.

Likewise, I don't have an opinion on how the universe was created because we don't have enough evidence to know. All I know for certain is that it wasn't god. :p

How do you know for certain that it wasn't god if you don't have enough evidence to know either way? :p

Dakaruch
15-08-08, 23:33
Since you seem to be saying that since Evolutionism is just a theory, then how do you prove that you're Gods are nothing more than "theories"?
I find it just as irrelevant that someone is trying to prove that the evolution theory is wrong simply because it is a theory.
Besides people tend to think that what was written in the bible or any book of the same sort, is an absolute truth. It was written by humans just like you and me, and therefore it can't be taken too seriously or viewed in a unique point of view. I can say that i've read the bible, and ,to me, most of it's sentences are nothing more than parables to what happens on the World, as it was back then, and how it is today somehow. Corruption, racism, segregation, you name it, it is all there written in parables.
Other than that, there are things that are considered as irrefutable "true" and are labelled as theory.
Try to find better arguments than that, because those are just a weak attempt of trying to say that Science is wrong about everything. And i can't believe how some of you label some scientists, and how you call evolutionists narrow minded and sceptics. People who believe so blindly on Creationism is just as sceptical!



Edit:

How do you know for certain that it wasn't god if you don't have enough evidence to know either way? :p
That argument works the other way around as well! ;)
How can you say that it was God if you don't have enough evidence to know?

Drone
15-08-08, 23:34
That is ridiculous, if we are truly products of evolution as i believe we are and our minds by-products then we should use them and try to live in harmony. no matter what the belief.

what is ridiculous? there won't be harmony. people are too different to live in one planet and love each other, your evolution won't help

Way too lazy.


You're right, it does. Believing in the original form of a theory that has been altered and changed many times and does, in the original form, fail to describe things nearly as well as the modern variation, takes a special kind of stupidity.

rather too powerless.


changing doesn't mean evolute. fly stays the same within million yers now so what?

Lara Croft Fan Joe
15-08-08, 23:34
Someone had to create that pond of muck for us to evolve out of.
I'm with you Quasi, if evolution were the case, we still had to come from somewhere, and where did that come from?

oocladableeblah
15-08-08, 23:35
I put other because I believe both creation and evolution. I don't think we evolved from apes, but I do think that cavemen or whatever were created and we evolved from them.

kooky
15-08-08, 23:35
Well, I don't believe that we humans evolved from some kind of ape-like creatures, I mean come on I learned about evolution just last school year & I still don't believe it. According to Jewish, Christian & Islamic scriptures, Adam & Eve were the first man & woman created by God, But I don't believe in evolution until the theory is proven. Period.

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 23:36
How do you know for certain that it wasn't god if you don't have enough evidence to know either way? :p

Because if something can't be disproven, I'm not going to bother accepting it as a possibility. Falsifiability is king.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:37
what is ridiculous? there won't be harmony. people are too different to live in one planet and love each other, your evolution won't help



rather too powerless.


changing doesn't mean evolute. fly stays the same within million yers now so what?

And how many people do you know whom have lived millions of years? You truly have not done your research on evolution. it does not matter what evolution suggest about man and his "destiny" if the pieces of the puzzle fit its the truth that matters not the outcome.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:39
I put other because I believe both creation and evolution. I don't think we evolved from apes, but I do think that cavemen or whatever were created and we evolved from them.

according to modern evolutionary theory. We did not evolve from Apes, we share a common ancestor and we are apes

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:39
Since you seem to be saying that since Evolutionism is just a theory, then how do you prove that you're Gods are nothing more than "theories"?

The holy books and miracles are proof enough.

I know well that you're not gonna buy that :P, but that is why they call us "believers".

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:40
Because if something can't be disproven, I'm not going to bother accepting it as a possibility. Falsifiability is king.

What if evolution were disproven? Because it can.

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:41
The holy books and miracles are proof enough.

I know well that you're not gonna buy that :P, but that is why they call us "believers".

The so-called miracles are far from proof and the holy books are just books.

Its like believing that the lord of the rings is non-fiction because my parents told me so.

...But what about Elrond and Gandalf?

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:42
What if evolution were disproven? Because it can.

There is more than one theory of evolution and even if it was that does not me we immediately turn to creationism.

jackali
15-08-08, 23:42
What if evolution were disproven? Because it can.

That's her point. There are circumstances in which it could be seen as false.

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:43
I thought this was going to turn into a Religion vs Science. I'm a big fan of both BTW.

Big bang and Evolution are a little bit related, they both explain how thing have come to be what they are now through stages, but they never explain how it all started. Time doesn't go back, there is no minus infinity here, there is an exact point when things came to existence.
Frankly, I don't know whether we can ever know how things started. If all we know is based on how things change over time, I don't see how we can ever know what happened before there was time, or even what "before there was time" actually means. Assuming that void is filled with one or multiple gods is as good as any explanation. However, I think everything after that looks like it can be explained scientifically, to the point where a god that had existed before there was time could not interfere with the universe after that. Which means a god is, for me, irrelevant.

Well, I don't believe that we humans evolved from some kind of ape-like creatures, I mean Come on I learned about evolution just last school year & I still don't believe it. According to Jewish, Christian & Islamic scriptures, Adam & Eve were the first man & woman created by God, But I don't believe in evolution until the theory is proven. Period.

Then you'll never believe in evolution, because proving theories is not the way science works. Never has been.

what is ridiculous? there won't be harmony. people are too different to live in one planet and love each other, your evolution won't help



rather too powerless.


changing doesn't mean evolute. fly stays the same within million yers now so what?
I'd be much better able to give you an answer to that if I actually understood what you want to say. Evolution does not require change. If something works well the way it already is, then it stays. On the other hand, constant change for the better is basically the key part of evolution.

Dakaruch
15-08-08, 23:44
The holy books and miracles are proof enough.

I know well that you're not gonna buy that :P, but that is why they call us "believers".

I see your point. It's obvious that that sentence isn't proof enough. That's why i posted that question. Religion isn't an absolute truth, and i don't see how some people can't see that. If you say that you're a believer i can understand why, and respect it, i just don't respect someone's opinion when they say that Science is based in theories, when Theology is based on theories as well. Miracles can't be proven scientifically, but why should those be proven as work of an all powerful entity? I could say that that person was cured by aliens, and somewhat it would be as true as saying that that person was cured by God.

Drone
15-08-08, 23:44
And how many people do you know whom have lived millions of years? You truly have not done your research on evolution. it does not matter what evolution suggest about man and his "destiny" if the pieces of the puzzle fit its the truth that matters not the outcome.

every living creature has similar dna (difference only in some %) it doesn't mean that worm or bear are the same. people just become more clever from age to age. it's same with computers. can anyone say that pc evoluted from abacus? of course nope

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:45
The so-called miracles are far from proof and the holy books are just books.

Its like believing that the lord of the rings is non-fiction because my parents told me so.

...But what about Elrond and Gandalf?

The thing about Religion is that its greatest boost in popularity happens when it is fresh. There has got to be a great reason why people would accept a religion back in the day when there was far less open-mindedness and people simply didn't want to change their lifestyles and accept new things.

Lara Croft Fan Joe
15-08-08, 23:45
I would not say I do not believe in evolution, but I have voted creationalist because for us to even come into existence, even be it evolving from some jelly or some long lost bacteria, some creation had to take place.

Also, I think shouting down, and not respecting other people beliefs on the matter is both ignorant and downright rude.

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:47
What if evolution were disproven? Because it can.

Depends on how it was disproved, wouldn't it? We might alter it. We might create two separate theories for different things. What would you consider an absolute proof that evolution was wrong?

siouxsiecrux
15-08-08, 23:47
every living creature has similar dna (difference only in some %) it doesn't mean that worm or bear are the same. people just become more clever from age to age. it's same with computers. can anyone say that pc evoluted from abacus? of course nope

They do not have "similar" DNA, they have DNA and RNA just coded in a different sequence, May i also point out that computers are not biological animals.

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:48
Depends on how it was disproved, wouldn't it? We might alter it. We might create two separate theories for different things. What would you consider an absolute proof that evolution was wrong?

Anything but creationism, though, right?

Drone
15-08-08, 23:48
If something works well the way it already is, then it stays. On the other hand, constant change for the better is basically the key part of evolution.

what works well? where? how? do you want to say that every creature is perfect?

everything changes and sometimes even mutates. is it an order or chaos no one can say.
neither of theories

Encore
15-08-08, 23:48
Probably evolution. However that's for the scientific part of the expression "origin of man", it doesn't cover the metaphysical debate. Even if evolution is right which I think it is, it doesn't exclude the possibility of a God. Though maybe it discredits the God as seen by christians and some other major religions.

As for the second question, I would obviously change my opinion if the scientific community came up with enough evidence to discredit the evolution theory.

All I know for certain is that it wasn't god. :p

Now if only you could show the entire world the undeniable proof you obviously have seen...

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:49
Probably evolution. However that's for the scientific part of the expression "origin of man", it doesn't cover the metaphysical debate. Even if evolution is right which I think it is, it doesn't exclude the possibility of a God. Though maybe it discredits the God as seen by christians and some other major religions.

As for the second question, I would obviously change my opinion if the scientific community came up with enough evidence to discredit the evolution theory.



Now if only you could show the entire world the undeniable proof you obviously have seen...
*claps* :tmb:

Geck-o-Lizard
15-08-08, 23:51
Now if only you could show the entire world the undeniable proof you obviously have seen...

FALSIFIABILITY.
Eh?
Got one other thing. What makes you certain that no other gods than your own exist?

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:51
FALSIFIABILITY.
Eh?

:vlol:

kooky
15-08-08, 23:52
Never mind...

Encore
15-08-08, 23:52
woah :eek:

Edit: double woah :eek: :eek:

WALL OF TEXT!

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:53
FALSIFIABILITY.
Eh?
Got one other thing. What makes you certain that no other gods than your own exist?

Faith.
gotta love them F words

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:54
what works well? where? how? do you want to say that every creature is perfect?

everything changes and sometimes even mutates. is it an order or chaos no one can say.
neither of theories
Look, I'm not sure if I understood correctly what you were saying, so I'm not going to reply to that for the time being because it might only lead to confusion. Sorry.

Anything but creationism, though, right?
If you mean true-to-form "my holy scripture say so" creationism then yes, anything but that, since it's not a scientific theory. If you mean creationism as in the assumption that some big guy, even some particular big guy, created all this, no, that would be a possibility to be evaluated, and if it was the best explanation found, it would be used. It's just so unlikely that it's not really interesting. I couldn't think of any proof that would make such creationism the most likely explanation. What would you consider to be such proof.

Titanium
15-08-08, 23:55
Scientists can do all the research they like, preachures can do all the preaching they like.
We humans are clueless to how we and the world was created, we both believe in the theories. But for good solid evidence, neither side will ever get anything worthy.

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:56
Frankly, I don't know whether we can ever know how things started. If all we know is based on how things change over time, I don't see how we can ever know what happened before there was time, or even what "before there was time" actually means. Assuming that void is filled with one or multiple gods is as good as any explanation. However, I think everything after that looks like it can be explained scientifically, to the point where a god that had existed before there was time could not interfere with the universe after that. Which means a god is, for me, irrelevant.

I believe God is who keeps the balance (Which is studied scientifically), because if that balance is lost then our minds simply can't accept it, but of course God can break that balance (Miracles) so he could prove to us that he is out there. There is a saying that says: "It is all part of God's great plan". Science isn't an enemy of God, he created the universe and all its physics laws. Science studies God's creation. I also don't believe in multiple gods because all hell would break loose if they ever argued, literally.

[/preachy :P]

iamlaracroft
15-08-08, 23:56
The thing about Religion is that its greatest boost in popularity happens when it is fresh. There has got to be a great reason why people would accept a religion back in the day when there was far less open-mindedness and people simply didn't want to change their lifestyles and accept new things.

...because there was nothing else to do?
I mean, seriously, what else was there to do back then?
Sit around a fire, sand blowing all up in your eyes and nether regions, nothing but oppressive heat and direct sunlight, scarce food and sustenance...
It makes the most sense that religion is a byproduct of the overactive, hopeless and bleary eyed imaginations of story tellers...folks looking to entertain the day away to distract themselves and others from the misery and blandness that surrounded and consumed them.
It would be very easy to become the village superstar overnight by running back to town crying all these nonsensical absurdities like talking flaming bushes and some man 'speaking' to you in the desert--it's called heat stroke, seeing mirages, like in the cartoons.
Oppressive heat makes you see things, dehydration and famine make you hallucinate.
These 'miracles' are nothing more than a combination of tomfoolery, boredom and desperate times.

Encore
15-08-08, 23:56
Got one other thing. What makes you certain that no other gods than your own exist?

Oh right, I forgot to say this, in case the question was meant for me - I have no "God of my own". I follow no religion whatsoever. I just don't discard the possibility of the existance of something that I call "God" for convenience.

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:57
FALSIFIABILITY.
Eh?
Got one other thing. What makes you certain that no other gods than your own exist?

He is almighty, the rest would be smote easily. :D

Quasimodo
15-08-08, 23:57
Look, I'm not sure if I understood correctly what you were saying, so I'm not going to reply to that for the time being because it might only lead to confusion. Sorry.


If you mean true-to-form "my holy scripture say so" creationism then yes, anything but that, since it's not a scientific theory. If you mean creationism as in the assumption that some big guy, even some particular big guy, created all this, no, that would be a possibility to be evaluated, and if it was the best explanation found, it would be used. It's just so unlikely that it's not really interesting. I couldn't think of any proof that would make such creationism the most likely explanation. What would you consider to be such proof.
What would prove "such creationism" to you?

Drone
15-08-08, 23:59
FALSIFIABILITY.
Eh?
Got one other thing. What makes you certain that no other gods than your own exist?

if you have some math basics you should know the word uniqueness

Muhammad
15-08-08, 23:59
...because there was nothing else to do?

You'd have to be living back then to know that, people used to work much harder back in the day, there weren't enough time for anything else to do, but then again they did produce culture, so perhaps they had enough time. ;)

Cochrane
15-08-08, 23:59
I believe God is who keeps the balance (Which is studied scientifically), because if that balance is lost then our minds simply can't accept it, but of course God can break that balance (Miracles) so he could prove to us that he is out there. There is a saying that says: "It is all part of God's great plan". Science isn't an enemy of God, he created the universe and all its physics laws. Science studies God's creation. I also don't believe in multiple gods because all hell would break loose if they ever argued, literally.

[/preachy :P]

Actually that's quite an interesting point of view, thank you for sharing it! While I think that miracles can, in general, be explained better in different ways, I'd say this doesn't really contradict anything in my world view.

oocladableeblah
16-08-08, 00:00
according to modern evolutionary theory. We did not evolve from Apes, we share a common ancestor and we are apes
So we are just a different race of an ape? According to you.

Dakaruch
16-08-08, 00:00
Faith ISN'T proof to anything. It doesn't prove that there can't be several gods and it isn't proof that evolution isn't real, and we just started walking on this world by god's work.

I find it hard to believe how some of you can be still so narrow minded toward religion issues nowadays...

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:01
Faith ISN'T proof to anything. It doesn't prove that there can't be several gods and it isn't proof that evolution isn't real, and we just started walking on this world by god's work.

I find it hard to believe how some of you can be still so narrow minded toward religion issues nowadays...

OMG, me too! :eek:

Cochrane
16-08-08, 00:01
What would prove "such creationism" to you?

Wait a second. I just said that I couldn't think of any evidence for that. Do you think that changed in the past five minutes?

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:01
Wait a second. I just said that I couldn't think of any evidence for that. Do you think that changed in the past five minutes?

Think some more. What could prove it for you?

Muhammad
16-08-08, 00:02
Actually that's quite an interesting point of view, thank you for sharing it! While I think that miracles can, in general, be explained better in different ways, I'd say this doesn't really contradict anything in my world view.

You're very welcome, I'm glad you got my point, I thought I didn't clarify it sufficiently. :)

Ward Dragon
16-08-08, 00:03
We propose that the burden of evidence should be upon the Evolutionists, since Creation has been the historic and inherent default throughout virtually all cultures and religions until roughly the last 200 years. Of course, Evolutionists, who view themselves as the only "scientists" in the debate, insist that the burden of evidence be upon the Creationists.

How about they both have a burden of proof? Disproving one does not prove the other.

Creationists retort, we cannot see, hear, touch, taste, or smell the human mind.

I think Hannibal Lecter would disagree XD (Sorry, I just got a really bad mental image from the movie Hannibal when reading that sentence :p)

Evolutionists theorize that the universe, with all that it contains (space, time, matter and energy), exploded from nothing.

Nope, that's the Big Bang Theory. It's completely separate and independent from biological evolution.

Typically, scientists observe evidentiary data and then formulate their conclusions. Evolutionists have formulated their conclusion, and now look for the missing data.

I think that description fits Creationists much more than evolutionary biologists.

However, hard science tells us that time is the enemy of complexity. This fact has been so well documented that it has obtained the stature of a physical law, the "Second Law of Thermodynamics."

Entropy only applies to closed systems. The earth is not a closed system -- energy is constantly being introduced, for example sunlight entering the earth's atmosphere and warming the land, fueling photosynthesis, etc.


Anyhow, I said it before and I'll say it again -- evolution makes absolutely no claims about whether or not God exists. It is entirely possible that God created everything, including the physical laws which are responsible for evolution.

Encore
16-08-08, 00:05
Anyhow, I said it before and I'll say it again -- evolution makes absolutely no claims about whether or not God exists. It is entirely possible that God created everything, including the physical laws which are responsible for evolution.

Exactly. What created an otherwise unexistant antagonism between God and evolution, is the narrow concept of "God" certain religious people have. IMO.

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:06
Exactly. What created an otherwise unexistant antagonism between God and evolution, is the narrow concept of "God" certain religious people have. IMO.

Yup. Now who or what created that puddle of life goo?

Cochrane
16-08-08, 00:07
Think some more. What could prove it for you?

Look, if you have any particular goal where you are going with this then it might be best if you just said this straight away.

What could prove it... I think the best way would be absolute certain evidence that all species have been around the way they are, or very, very close, since the beginning of life one earth, or at least that they came to be in a time window that is way too short to make evolution likely (only a hand full of generations between different species). If that was proven, then I'd certainly accept that they haven't evolved on Earth.

Apofiss
16-08-08, 00:09
Neither. Perhaps we don't fully (part of our genetical material) come from here, Earth. :D ...even tho natural evolution sounds enough comfortable.

Geck-o-Lizard
16-08-08, 00:12
Yup. Now who or what created that puddle of life goo?

Why can't we be honest and say "I haven't got the faintest idea", then follow it up with "let's find out!" ?

Btw:
zZVRpqm0Cl0

I don't believe in any of them. You don't either. I just don't believe in one more god than you.

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:14
Why can't we be honest and say "I haven't got the faintest idea", then follow it up with "let's find out!" ?

We all have our theories.

siouxsiecrux
16-08-08, 00:17
So we are just a different race of an ape? According to you.

Yes, a different Species.

MadCroy101
16-08-08, 00:19
I think its a combonation of both. I think its like god created an animal that was supposed to evolve in the ultimate creature that will overpopulate the world, and that created a monkey-like creature that wasn't populating, so god created an animal that evolved very quickly, so that creature evolved into us.:D Just my theroy.

Encore
16-08-08, 00:22
Why can't we be honest and say "I haven't got the faintest idea", then follow it up with "let's find out!" ?


Exactly. Most religious people (that follow a given, organized religion) settle for their vision because it's based in their faith. Good for them, everyone's entitled to.

However, other people are interested in thinking deeper about this subject (like me). Now, does "being inquisitive about the origin of men" immediately mean "not believing in God"? Because we simply don't know if at the very end of our search for answers we will or won't find God.

This is the core of my point of view: that we can't know. Therefore, we can't exclude the option.

Besides, IMO, it is extremely arrogant of a human being to assume he/she knows the truth about everything.

tampi
16-08-08, 00:22
I think ever more, that this is a canoe trip.

http://i34.************/2rw6qs4.jpg

Geck-o-Lizard
16-08-08, 00:29
We all have our theories.

Enough with the "theories". You're completely misusing the word. It has two meanings in this discussion - the scientific meaning and the colloqual (everyday) meaning.

Scientific theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly testedor is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Colloqual theory: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:31
Enough with the "theories". You're completely misusing the word. It has two meanings in this discussion - the scientific meaning and the colloqual (everyday) meaning.

Scientific theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly testedor is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Colloqual theory: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
Just messin' with ya. Could be that we're all completely off the mark - we'll never know until the afterlife, or simply not find out at all.

stereopathic
16-08-08, 00:31
I think ever more, that this is a canoe trip.

http://i34.************/2rw6qs4.jpg

great metaphor, tampi. it's a lovely ride. sit back and enjoy the beauty and wonder of it all. :)

Encore
16-08-08, 00:34
* watches her reply getting ignored *

http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/popcorn.gif

xRikux89
16-08-08, 00:34
we'll never know until the afterlife, or simply not find out at all.

You're saying that if there's afterlife, it gives the answer? :p
Sorry I just had to. :tea:

Quasimodo
16-08-08, 00:35
You're saying that if there's afterlife, it gives the answer? :p
Sorry I just had to. :tea:

"What the heck does a sentient being have to do around here to get some answers, huh?" :p

Geck-o-Lizard
16-08-08, 00:43
* watches her reply getting ignored *

http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/popcorn.gif

I don't know how to respond to you, lol. You didn't say anything I particularly agree or disagree with.

Inquisitiveness should mean saying "I don't know what happened, and god might not have had anything to do with it. Let's see if we can learn more."

Muhammad
16-08-08, 00:44
Just messin' with ya. Could be that we're all completely off the mark - we'll never know until the afterlife, or simply not find out at all.

Nah that isn't a good plan. The more we learn the more we will be able to appreciate God's creation.

(Listen to me I sound like an epic troll here)

Encore
16-08-08, 00:47
I don't know how to respond to you, lol. You didn't say anything I particularly agree or disagree with.

Inquisitiveness should mean saying "I don't know what happened, and god might not have had anything to do with it. Let's see if we can learn more."

How is that inquisitive? That's an assumption. Inquisitive is "I don't know what happened, let's see if we can learn more". Period.

tampi
16-08-08, 00:47
:hug:* watches her reply getting ignored *

http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/popcorn.gif:hug:

ben croft
16-08-08, 00:52
Magic?

siouxsiecrux
16-08-08, 00:53
Magic?

God is just as credible as Magic.

just croft
16-08-08, 00:53
Luck (earths environment) + Evolution

Get me a meeting with the creator and I'll possibly change my mind.

Geck-o-Lizard
16-08-08, 00:53
How is that inquisitive? That's an assumption. Inquisitive is "I don't know what happened, let's see if we can learn more". Period.

How about I capitalise that G in God, then point back to that 9-minute youtube video I posted which is an incomplete list of all the deities from human history. If we're being inquisitive here, we might as well do it properly. All of those gods, evaluated equally.

siouxsiecrux
16-08-08, 00:54
Luck (earths environment) + Evolution

Get me a meeting with the creator and I'll possibly change my mind.

But perhaps even the creator can be doubted, how do we truly now that this creator is the true creator.

Muhammad
16-08-08, 00:55
How about I capitalise that G in God, then point back to that 9-minute youtube video I posted which is an incomplete list of all the deities from human history. If we're being inquisitive here, we might as well do it properly.

God isn't just a name dude, there is a whole library of text aimed at defining him. Every group of believers believe in the god or gods that make the greatest sense to them.

just croft
16-08-08, 00:55
But perhaps even the creator can be doubted, how do we truly now that this creator is the true creator.

Make him create something so I can see... but I still don't think I'll change my mind...

siouxsiecrux
16-08-08, 00:55
http://www.lowchensaustralia.com/names/gods.htm

siouxsiecrux
16-08-08, 00:56
Make him create something so I can see... but I still don't think I'll change my mind...

Even if God did exist, should we truly worship him?

Encore
16-08-08, 00:56
How about I capitalise that G in God, then point back to that 9-minute youtube video I posted which is an incomplete list of all the deities from human history. If we're being inquisitive here, we might as well do it properly.

Well, yes, you're being inquisitive - about religions. The human concept of God which has changed in various times and cultures can't certainly be used as an argument for or against the existance of a God, whatever it is. And like I said, I use the word "God" for convenient purposes, because there's no better word to describe what we're talking about. In fact I don't believe that God is something that can be fully described in human terms.

It seems confusing God with religion is pretty common in these type of debates.

tampi
16-08-08, 01:01
How about I capitalise that G in God, then point back to that 9-minute youtube video I posted which is an incomplete list of all the deities from human history. If we're being inquisitive here, we might as well do it properly. All of those gods, evaluated equally.

But that video works against your theory.:o

What does it mean if not?

All humanity in all periods of its existence has been wrong?
Can you say me something that does not exist?;)

stereopathic
16-08-08, 01:01
the problem with religion is that through history it has been forced upon conquered peoples, meaning that beliefs have far more to do with oppression than truth.

how do you know that your religious beliefs are the truth, or just the socialization of generations of ancestors dating back to some poor soul who was told what he now believed by foreign conquerors?

if religion can be fact, if the earth's history is really entwined into some dogma, how can you possibly know that yours is the right one? maybe the assyrians had it right? but because their beliefs were wiped off of the earth through military might and ruling oppression, that truth is lost.

but through it all, through the rise and fall of countless systems of belief, evolution silently continues.

Muhammad
16-08-08, 01:01
http://www.lowchensaustralia.com/names/gods.htm

ARABIC AND ISLAMIC GODDESSES (http://www3.sympatico.ca/chartreuse/AvatarsOfTheGoddess/html/Content_ArabicIslam.htm)
Unusual names with full descriptions & meanings!

Arabs probably have had goddesses, but Muslims believe in only one God. I think the link is inacurate, mate.

just croft
16-08-08, 01:02
Even if God did exist, should we truly worship him?

:confused:

there is no proof of god........ theres has much proof of it as of virgin girls wanting to loose their virginity to a chinese sex guru which name I don't know or of guys in the US saying that it's a good thing that soldiers die protecting others and that it is supposly god punished them....... nop there are huge amounts of people believing this or that. Those concepts are way too forced and supported by believing... I'm pure for facts. so no.....

Muhammad
16-08-08, 01:05
Even if God did exist, should we truly worship him?

This is rather off-topic, because now you've started discussing Heaven and Hell.

Dakaruch
16-08-08, 01:05
God isn't just a name dude, there is a whole library of text aimed at defining him. Every group of believers believe in the god or gods that make the greatest sense to them.


That's why the creationism seems dubious to me. How can anyone believe that God created life, if there are countless religions, some with a unique God, while others with multiple ones... If every of those believe that each of their gods created the Universe, and the life on it, then we would probably end having multiple Earths.

Encore
16-08-08, 01:11
the problem with religion is that through history it has been forced upon conquered peoples, meaning that beliefs have far more to do with oppression than truth.

how do you know that your religious beliefs are the truth, or just the socialization of generations of ancestors dating back to some poor soul who was told what he now believed by foreign conquerors?

if religion can be fact, if the earth's history is really entwined into some dogma, how can you possibly know that yours is the right one? maybe the assyrians had it right? but because their beliefs were wiped off of the earth through military might and ruling oppression, that truth is lost.

but through it all, through the rise and fall of countless systems of belief, evolution silently continues.

Yes. Like I said religions are human constructions and can't be used as an argument either for or against the existance of God.

Off topic: It's interesting that the totalitarian ideologies of the XXth century are sometimes called the new human religions. If you look at a strict organized system of beliefs (I'm obviously excluding more liberal versions of religions here), and an ideology such as fascism or communism, and compare them both, you'll find some similarites. That's because they're both social constructions designed for mass-appeal. Based on faith.

It seems humans have a standard set of mechanisms with which to feel safer in the midst of the chaos of life, be it by placing their faith on a political leader and an historic mission of their nation, or by placing it on the intermediaries of their religion who shield them by instructing them about "God".

[This is all just my opinion. I don't want to insult any religious person]

Muhammad
16-08-08, 01:13
That's why the creationism seems dubious to me. How can anyone believe that God created life, if there are countless religions, some with a unique God, while others with multiple ones... If every of those believe that each of their gods created the Universe, and the life on it, then we would probably end having multiple Earths.

Not every single religion is the true one of course, or else people would have had multiple faiths, right? ;)
About the first question, I think you'd have to do a research and find which religion satisfies your spiritual needs.
Although I was born Muslim, I did read and study about many of this world's religions and I found that Islam made the most sense to me personally, or else I would have converted to other religions. Not only that but it also strengthened my faith.

I am, however, not perfect, so I do occasionally "sin" :whi:

Sedge
16-08-08, 01:17
.. How would I know? :p

I always love to read about new scientific researches/discoveries though as I find it extremely.. fascinating! Glamorous! .. Clever, almost makes me feel as if it has to have been intellectually designed by.. someone/something(that could indeed have been an option, by the way~ ^__^).. And whoever owned the copyright is now watching and laughing at us trying to figure everything out. Heehee, I sorta like the idea. :D

..But in a way I really don't care, to be honest. Too.. serious of a subject for me. Yeah. , The present doesn't really change whether you considered yourself as a descendant of apes or one loved by God, no? :cool:

(In other words, I'll just excuse myself and continue to http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/ernaehrung/food-smiley-007.gif as everyone else.)

stereopathic
16-08-08, 01:21
Yes. Like I said religions are human constructions and can't be used as an argument either for or against the existance of God.

Off topic: It's interesting that the totalitarian ideologies of the XXth century are sometimes called the new human religions. If you look at a strict organized system of beliefs (I'm obviously excluding more liberal versions of religions here), and an ideology such as fascism or communism, and compare them both, you'll find some similarites. That's because they're both social constructions designed for mass-appeal. Based on faith.

It seems humans have a standard set of mechanisms with which to feel safer in the midst of the chaos of life, be it by placing their faith on a political leader and an historic mission of their nation, or by placing it on the intermediaries of their religion who shield them by instructing them about "God".

[This is all just my opinion. I don't want to insult any religious person]

good stuff, Encore.

there was an article i read in Newsweek a long time ago about hoe the brain has a specific set of functions that make up a spiritual experience. the scientist who was doing the research found that people subconsciously activate these routines during meditation or prayer and other "spiritual" experiences.

of course, there no way to really prove that the brain is causing the experience or something else is causing the brain to do this.

the guy went on to suggest that evolution selected those with a capability for spirituality, as it made coping with self-awareness and the seeming injustice found in a literal dog-eat-dog world.

interesting stuff. after a brief search, i think this may be the article: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-29-2001/0001480762&EDATE=

anyway, if we did share a physical trait that made us spiritual by nature, governments and other organizations who could take advantage of it would certainly profit.

Dakaruch
16-08-08, 01:23
Not every single religion is the true one of course, or else people would have had multiple faiths, right? ;)
About the first question, I think you'd have to do a research and find which religion satisfies your spiritual needs.
Although I was born Muslim, I did read and study about many of this world's religions and I found that Islam made the most sense to me personally, or else I would have converted to other religions. Not only that but it also strengthened my faith.

I am, however, not perfect, so I do occasionally "sin" :whi:

Exactly! :)
I was raised in Christianity. Although i did found out at the age of 16/17 that i truly couldn't understand why did my life had to be ruled by an entity that is all powerful. I then started to look for answers to my doubts, and i saw that i couldn't agree with the hypothesis of existing entities that were all powerful. Sincerely i don't have the need of having someone who "dictates" my life, and how i should behave. I do what i want without caring if i go to hell or heaven due to that. Because i don't believe in afterlife or any religion related stuff! :p

Lara Croft!
16-08-08, 01:26
Evolution for me.....

http://blogs.sun.com/ChinaExperience/resource/evolution.jpg

oocladableeblah
16-08-08, 01:27
^ lol that is kind of funny.

Encore
16-08-08, 01:31
Thanks for that article stereopathic!! Mystical experiences are one of the things that fascinates me the most, not so long ago I used to write long big thoughts (in my "diary" mostly :o) about the things people experience be it in meditation or using mind expanding drugs (the drugs are interesting because they are creating a chemical impulse that often gives the same reaction as a mystical experience). But the things these people describe.... :eek: Where DO they come from? It's a subject that I like very much.

It's interesting that the scientists admit themselves they can't know if what they see in these experiments is merely a reaction to an external impulse or if the brain itself is creating the reaction. It seems we always fall short of answering the million dollar questions. :o


anyway, if we did share a physical trait that made us spiritual by nature, governments and other organizations who could take advantage of it would certainly profit.

I'm not sure we can all be reduced to that particular trait but I think humans have a tendency to converge in this type of faith, and that mechanism was and is used by totalitarian ideologies.

Muhammad
16-08-08, 01:35
Exactly! :)
I was raised in Christianity. Although i did found out at the age of 16/17 that i truly couldn't understand why did my life had to be ruled by an entity that is all powerful. I then started to look for answers to my doubts, and i saw that i couldn't agree with the hypothesis of existing entities that were all powerful. Sincerely i don't have the need of having someone who "dictates" my life, and how i should behave. I do what i want without caring if i go to hell or heaven due to that. Because i don't believe in afterlife or any religion related stuff! :p

It is a good thing you decided for yourself, I applaud you :tmb:

But aren't governments "dictating" people when they set laws that would ensure FREEDOM (but for the whole group and not each person on his/her own)?
Don't Parents "dictate" their children in order to raise them well?
Think about it :)

Evolution for me.....
img


What the hell are you talking about? I was CREATED infront of this very PC I'm using right now :mis:

stereopathic
16-08-08, 01:43
Thanks for that article stereopathic!! Mystical experiences are one of the things that fascinates me the most, not so long ago I used to write long big thoughts (in my "diary" mostly :o) about the things people experience be it in meditation or using mind expanding drugs (the drugs are interesting because they are creating a chemical impulse that often gives the same reaction as a mystical experience). But the things these people describe.... :eek: Where DO they come from? It's a subject that I like very much.

It's interesting that the scientists admit themselves they can't know if what they see in these experiments is merely a reaction to an external impulse or if the brain itself is creating the reaction. It seems we always fall short of answering the million dollar questions. :o

I'm not sure we can all be reduced to that particular trait but I think humans have a tendency to converge in this type of faith, and that mechanism was and is used by totalitarian ideologies.

i'd love to get a hold of that diary. :D

i'm also fascinated my these mystical experiences, so much so that i took a lot of those mind-expanding drugs :o, and they never cease to amaze me. some of the primitive rituals where people are clearly doing things that should freaking HURT and seem totally unaffected just blow my mind. diseases healed, extreme physical challenges conquered, the list goes on and on. i wish i could bottle up the power of the mind (or spirit or whatever) and just drink it whenever i needed it. :D

Encore
16-08-08, 01:49
^ I guess it wouldn't be any less amazing if we discover all these capacities are held inside our brains. In fact, those who believe the perfect aspect of creation as a proof of an "architecht", would even be more compelled by such a fact. .. I guess...

Ps.: I never took such drugs myself. I'm scared my mind couldn't handle such a thing. Descriptions of bad trips terrify me.. :o So I guess you could say my interest is purely academic (aka nerdish)

Ward Dragon
16-08-08, 02:39
* watches her reply getting ignored *

http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/popcorn.gif

Sorry about that. I was busy making this :D


http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f214/WraithStar/Game%20Pictures/HarleyTDK1-1.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f214/WraithStar/Game%20Pictures/HarleyTDK2-1.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f214/WraithStar/Game%20Pictures/HarleyTDK3-2.jpg

Well, yes, you're being inquisitive - about religions. The human concept of God which has changed in various times and cultures can't certainly be used as an argument for or against the existance of a God, whatever it is. And like I said, I use the word "God" for convenient purposes, because there's no better word to describe what we're talking about. In fact I don't believe that God is something that can be fully described in human terms.

It seems confusing God with religion is pretty common in these type of debates.

Yes. Like I said religions are human constructions and can't be used as an argument either for or against the existance of God.

Off topic: It's interesting that the totalitarian ideologies of the XXth century are sometimes called the new human religions. If you look at a strict organized system of beliefs (I'm obviously excluding more liberal versions of religions here), and an ideology such as fascism or communism, and compare them both, you'll find some similarites. That's because they're both social constructions designed for mass-appeal. Based on faith.

It seems humans have a standard set of mechanisms with which to feel safer in the midst of the chaos of life, be it by placing their faith on a political leader and an historic mission of their nation, or by placing it on the intermediaries of their religion who shield them by instructing them about "God".

[This is all just my opinion. I don't want to insult any religious person]

^ I guess it wouldn't be any less amazing if we discover all these capacities are held inside our brains. In fact, those who believe the perfect aspect of creation as a proof of an "architecht", would even be more compelled by such a fact. .. I guess...

I totally agree with everything you just said :tmb: :D

Ps.: I never took such drugs myself. I'm scared my mind couldn't handle such a thing. Descriptions of bad trips terrify me.. :o So I guess you could say my interest is purely academic (aka nerdish)

Same here :vlol: My dad was an alcoholic who quit before I was born, and he always used to tell me that my very existence is proof that there is no "perfect" drug out there, because otherwise he'd have found it and been too happy to bother with a family :p

Encore
16-08-08, 02:57
Woah nice mod! :D

But actually my "ignored" post was only directed at Geck because I had replied to her, but it's solved now. :)

Ward Dragon
16-08-08, 03:02
Woah nice mod! :D

Thanks :D

But actually my "ignored" post was only directed at Geck because I had replied to her, but it's solved now. :)

Good, I'm glad everything is resolved :)

rowanlim
16-08-08, 03:04
Evolution. Darwin got it right IMO :D :tmb:

Tyrannosaurus
16-08-08, 03:27
It's time for Tyrannosaurus rex to bring Armaggeddon to this thread. That way, everyone loses and I win. The crime? 20 pages of inspid assumptions and pointless debating.

Now as for the intial questions?

I do not "believe" in evolution. I have knowledge of evolution in the same manner that I have knowledge of gravity. The human species is an animal, and everything in our biology, anatomy, and physiology says this. Anyone who contests this part doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, but hence flows the logical conclusion: We are not over or above nature, but part of it, and came about in more or less the same process that begat all other forms of life on this planet.

Regarding the human species as an animal, no one has done it better than Desmond Morris, in the opening to his book, The Naked Ape:

"There are one hundred and ninety-three species of monkeys and apes. One hundred and ninety-two of them are covered with hair. The exception is a naked ape self-named Homo sapiens. This unusual and highly successful species spends a great deal of time examining his higher motives and an equal amount of time studiously ignoring his fundamental ones. He is proud that he had the biggest brain of all the primates, but attempts to conceal the fact that he also has the biggest *****, preferring instead to accord this honor falsely to the mighty gorilla. He is an intensely vocal, acutely exploratory, over-crowded ape, and it is high time we examined his basic behavior."

Do we have evidence (i.e. fossil remains, footprints, stone tools) that there existed other species of humans that preceeded our own? Yes, and more than enough. The only people to contest this at all are creationists. They are perfectly willing to claim that all hominid remains are either nonhuman apes or modern humans (though perhaps deformed ones), that evolutionists see only what they want to see, and that the adherents of evolutionary theory are biased atheists who are part of some sort of conspiracy to rid the world of faith, that in order for Christian theology to have any importance at all, we must believe that all of our personal problems came about because two people ate some fruit from a tree they had no right to go near some 6,000 years ago, and that acknowleding the fact of evolution will lead to social entropy.

Can you tell how bored I am aready? Go read Augustine:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, . . . and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. (Augustine 1982, 42-43)

That was some 1500 years before Darwin, but he sure wouldn't be a creationist if he were around today.

Nothing else about the origin of humanity needs to be said. And of course, this says absolutely nothing about whether or not there is a God, a divine plan, the meaning of life, or any sort of moral/ethical absolute.

Now the second part puts me in an odd conundrum, since I'm on both sides of this fence that I seek to destroy.

What would convince me that evolution is false? A better and more complete theory, and one which is not only supported by peer-reviewed journals, but by the majority of the scientific community.

What would convince me that God is false? Nothing, because God isn't a scientific hypothesis and therefore cannot be falsified. Anyone who approaches God thusly is too silly for words, because no evidence could possibly suffice, and any god that could be scientifically proven would ultimately be a deity of no religious or even spiritual signficance to anyone. Not everyone would agree that it's God, and in the end, we'd all end up praying to whatever deity suits our needs anyway.

But blind faith sucks. I much prefer reasonable faith, and pragmatic faith as well. Therefore, I would have to ask myself what I would gain from:

Creationism? A new and complicated paradigm that would appeal to my imagination but which I would have to expend and awful lot of energy, worry, and anguish in exploring and maintaining. Perhaps a few new friends along the way, you never know.

What would I lose? My intellectual honesty, the capacity to explore the full richness of the history and theology of my religion, and to fully appreciate the complex, terrifying, sublime and subtle ways the natural world works. No thanks.

Atheism? Nothing. I'd be more or less the same, except a little more wounded and depressed, and wouldn't be found in church. I would still be impeccably idealistic and imaginative, but with less justification for either. My nature is as such that I would effectively be a christain anyway. I would still identify so strongly with my religon that there would really be no point in losing it.

What about honesty, then? "Reality?" "Truth?" I laugh in your face. If I were truly honest with myself and my own human nature I would be acknowledging what my reality is, what works for me, what I believe in, why I believe in it, and most importantly, why it is worth believing in.

What would I lose? Masses. A broader intellect. Any personally satisfying means of enriching my idealism and spirituality. A solid foundation for trusting morals, ethics and rationality in the first place. The value of an entire spectrum of human experience. A beautiful, exciting, complex, and liberating view of the world that suits me much better.

I've decided to nix my FAQ and save the answers for when people start asking.

rowanlim
16-08-08, 03:31
^I can only say that that's one of the coolest things I've ever read, I truly believe more in the idea that we are mere animals who evolved to become something truly different & unique on Earth. The idea that we were created out of thin air doesn't convince me that much :)

Ward Dragon
16-08-08, 03:33
@Tyrannosaurus: :hug:

Tihocan9
16-08-08, 03:39
Personally, I believe in creation.

Even if evolution was proven to be true, it doesn't mean there is no God. Science explains how and religion explains why. That's how I think of it anyway.

Very good point. I beleive in Creation and I really don't think there is anyway to actually change it from that unless God was to come and tell me and I really don't think that will be happening. People seem to think that evolution completely dismisses any religion when really all it means is that God/Gods (whatever you beleive) created creatures and let nature run its coarse.

Natey168
16-08-08, 03:41
Evolution... even though I was raised Catholic. I just find religion stuff really hard to believe. =\ (*shifty eyes* Don't tell anyone.)

Bonus points: Proof?

Andariel
16-08-08, 04:04
Perhaps the world, meaning everything that exists, is a part of "God". So maybe creation doesn't exist and all matter/God is ever-changing. That's just one theory.

NightWish
16-08-08, 05:01
I...don't know :p

But to be frank I really believe life here started with a little nudge if you know what I mean :pi:

takamotosan
16-08-08, 05:14
Evolution.

Adam and Eve are a bedtime story. nothing more.

kryptonite23
16-08-08, 05:21
Creationism ;)

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 05:50
Creation. :wve:

Agreed :D

Draco
16-08-08, 05:54
I think the whole argument is pretty much moot. God is a relative term, and even if we were created, there is no reason to think it was some supreme being who arbitrarily wanted to create us...no a much more likely scenario is that we were contracted to be created for an experiment to carried out on us by mice.

Say hi to the Vogon Deconstruction Fleet.

Tyrannosaurus
16-08-08, 05:54
Evolution.

Adam and Eve are a bedtime story. nothing more. Oh, they're more than that. But they're not history either.

AODdigger
16-08-08, 06:54
Thus extremely strong radiation, which came to Earth via an asteroid or volcanic activity, or someone that came to show them... A species, that is now extinct, who was the father of both man and ape.. That was long before scientists still believe, split in two seperate species: primates and humans or, as Darvin explains it: The first apeman who could stand up as a normal human was called pitekantropus or something.... then he finds the antropolises...then in Asia he found the synantropus... to neanderthals and homo sapiens (intelligent humanoid...).................... to what we are today... monkeys :p

Andromeda66
16-08-08, 07:10
In the words of Fred Hoyle,

"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way(creation) is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein"

I believe in natural selection.

Additional: I would change my belief if there was sufficient evidence to the contrary.

Nannonxyay
16-08-08, 08:26
I believe in Evolution. :wve:

Drone
16-08-08, 08:29
and I believe in revolution
and creation of course

scion05
16-08-08, 08:55
Evolution :wve:

pEhouse
16-08-08, 10:04
It's obviously pretty pointless to discuss such a topic because I don't see anybody on the last 22 pages who changed their mind. Everybody sticks to what they believed in in the first place. But if Eve & Adam really were how we started, I guess that would make all of us incest-children, which is kinda gross :rolleyes:

Dakaruch
16-08-08, 10:23
It is a good thing you decided for yourself, I applaud you :tmb:

But aren't governments "dictating" people when they set laws that would ensure FREEDOM (but for the whole group and not each person on his/her own)?
Don't Parents "dictate" their children in order to raise them well?
Think about it :)


Not necessarily. Government makes laws, but you don't necessarily have to follow some of those. You'll have to deal with the consequences of it though, but that only happens if you're caught. It is obvious that you need to abide within certain laws, but those are very different than religious "laws" as written in the holly books.
My parents never made my education as a dictatorship, or whatever it is called. :vlol:
They never forbid me from doing anything, and i always did things my way, as long as i don't kill, etc. It is me that decides if i either do good to a fellow human. It is a personal choice, not a necessary thing because i'm afraid of Hell, or something of the like.
I'm free at my own way. I abide by the government laws, or otherwise i would go to jail, but i don't do it for fear of going to hell! :p

Alex Fly
16-08-08, 10:39
Evolution. :)

patriots88888
16-08-08, 13:04
God created man in his own image. No IMO after this one, sorry. ;)

It is my belief and my faith and there is zero chance that it will ever change. I know who I am. :D

Drone
16-08-08, 13:06
God created man in his own image. No IMO after this one, sorry. ;)

It is my belief and my faith and there is zero chance that it will ever change. I know who I am. :D

*shakes hand* :D

Domino
16-08-08, 13:15
Evolution. No IMO here, sorry. :)

Won't ever change my opinion, I just don't think there's a god out there. At all. :wve:

Neteru
16-08-08, 13:37
Other:

Ever evolving self-creation.

ANoDE
16-08-08, 14:01
@Tyrannosaurus:
You got my respect. Very elaborately and well put.

iamlaracroft
16-08-08, 16:36
It's obviously pretty pointless to discuss such a topic because I don't see anybody on the last 22 pages who changed their mind. Everybody sticks to what they believed in in the first place. But if Eve & Adam really were how we started, I guess that would make all of us incest-children, which is kinda gross :rolleyes:

Not just gross, but wildly impractical and impossible.
The human race could not have sustained and prevailed this long on the DNA of one man and woman for so many obvious reasons, the most being that all subsequent spawns would be riddled with fatal genetic mutations, mental and physical anomalies (read: defects) and crippling physiological disorders that, inevitably, would make reproducing on their own a lethal sentence in and of itself.

Wiki-Inbreeding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding)
Results of inbreeding

Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_relationship) within a population than would normally be expected.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding#cite_note-0) As a result, first-generation inbred individuals are more likely to show physical and health defects, including:


reduced fertility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility) both in litter size and sperm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spermatozoon) viability
increased genetic disorders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_disorder)
fluctuating facial asymmetry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_%28physical_attractiveness%29)
lower birth rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_rate)
higher infant mortality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_mortality)
slower growth rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_rate)
smaller adult (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult) size
loss of immune system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_system) function.

Natural selection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection) works to remove individuals who acquire the above types of traits from the gene pool. Therefore, many more individuals in the first generation of inbreeding will never live to reproduce.

Encore
16-08-08, 16:36
The crime? 20 pages of inspid assumptions and pointless debating.


Woah, gold medal for biggest jerk of the thread.

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 16:38
The whole idea of everyone being incest children is off, actually.

I do not believe Adam and Eve were the first people ever created, the Bible is very clear about God making people before Adam and Eve were created. Therefore, no incest involved. ;)

EmeraldFields
16-08-08, 16:41
Other:

I'm kinda on the fence, so I can't choose. I think that it could possibly be a mixture of both.:confused:

Larapink
16-08-08, 16:44
Evolution. :D

iamlaracroft
16-08-08, 16:50
The whole idea of everyone being incest children is off, actually.

I do not believe Adam and Eve were the first people ever created, the Bible is very clear about God making people before Adam and Eve were created. Therefore, no incest involved. ;)


lol i think we learned our lesson from that last religious debate thread--agreeing on what we each think is considered "clear" and self-evident in relation to the bible and its parables is really a debate in itself. ;)
There are a good many people, though, who do believe that "Adam" and "Eve" are the human nexus responsible for impregnating and birthing all subsequent human life.
Being included in the first three chapters of the book of Genesis sorta has a lot to do with that assumption.
:tmb:

TR93
16-08-08, 16:50
Not sure,
I'd say creation,
maybe cos my dad is religious;)
I'm honestly not sure

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 17:15
Being included in the first three chapters of the book of Genesis sorta has a lot to do with that assumption.
:tmb:

The first three chapters of Genesis talk about Adam and Eve, but it never says they were the first people ever created. Moreover, those same three chapters specifically mention people being created before Adam and Eve. So yes, my evidence is directly from the Bible, has nothing to do with a different interpretation, it's right there in black and white.

When you have time perhaps you can read over the very first few chapters and see for yourself. :D

EmeraldFields
16-08-08, 17:30
The first three chapters of Genesis talk about Adam and Eve, but it never says they were the first people ever created. Moreover, those same three chapters specifically mention people being created before Adam and Eve. So yes, my evidence is directly from the Bible, has nothing to do with a different interpretation, it's right there in black and white.

When you have time perhaps you can read over the very first few chapters and see for yourself. :D

I'm intrigued! Can you point these passages out! I can't find a Bible at the moment.:)

iamlaracroft
16-08-08, 17:36
The first three chapters of Genesis talk about Adam and Eve, but it never says they were the first people ever created. Moreover, those same three chapters specifically mention people being created before Adam and Eve. So yes, my evidence is directly from the Bible, has nothing to do with a different interpretation, it's right there in black and white.

Well, Mel, then my post obviously isn't directed at you, then, is it?
It's directed at the many other people who have subscribed to that myth I'm referring to. You certainly don't disagree that there are people who consider themselves creationists/christians that rely heavily on the bible as their source of dogma and ultimately have taken those parables out of context to suit and supplement their own personal agendas/beliefs, right?


When you have time perhaps you can read over the very first few chapters and see for yourself. :D

Ouch.
Who said I haven't?

Geck-o-Lizard
16-08-08, 17:42
I'm intrigued! Can you point these passages out! I can't find a Bible at the moment.:)

I think she means "God created man in his own image", which happened on day 6 in Genesis. Adam and Eve seem to have come some time after the 7th day, which suggests they weren't the first.

Mr.Burns
16-08-08, 17:43
The first three chapters of Genesis talk about Adam and Eve, but it never says they were the first people ever created. Moreover, those same three chapters specifically mention people being created before Adam and Eve. So yes, my evidence is directly from the Bible, has nothing to do with a different interpretation, it's right there in black and white.

When you have time perhaps you can read over the very first few chapters and see for yourself. :D


I'm the last one to debate the details found in the bible buuuuuuut.... Adam and Eve aren't mentioned until the second chapter, in the first chapter it merely states that man was created, nothing more specific than that. In fact the first comment where we get an idea of another land or group of people is during Cain's exile to the land of Nod. Now after that, we have Primeval Man which I always read as more of a genealogical line than anything else but I don't recall it saying that humans were created before Adam and Eve. So, where does it say that other humans were created before Adam and Eve? Also, keep in mind when you cite quotations, I'm referring to the Torah, so I'll be curious to see what differences there are, if any.

Sixth day Grace. According to the bible, G-d rested on the seventh. Hence the sabbath.

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 17:50
I'm intrigued! Can you point these passages out! I can't find a Bible at the moment.:)

Why thank you for your interest, even if you don't agree with the Bible, I do appreciate that you're wanting to hear me out rather than say, "ZOMG UR WRONGZ!" :hug:

This is the passages I'm referring to. Genesis 1:24-28 the Bible says:

And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

God created both male and female after he had created the animals, and all of this was stated before Adam and Eve were ever mentioned. These were separate people that God created, in which he commanded to go forth and multiply.

Adam and Eve were not mentioned until chapter 2. God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden (which was a separate place to be his home), and then created animals there. This is clear that the Bible is not reiterating what was said earlier, because earlier God created the animals before creating people, but in this case, God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden, and then created more animals to reside there. After that, Eve was created, and as we all know, from Adam's rib. God didn't create all women from the rib of a man, as it was not mentioned as so earlier, just Eve.

Also, another thing that always stood out to me was later, with Cain and Able, in chapter 4. After Cain killed Able, God punished him and told him he would be a homeless wanderer, and Cain said something to the effect of, "This punishment is too great for me, for is anyone finds me, they will kill me."

He says anyone. Not, "if my parents find me". If he were to wander the land homeless, it'd be pretty easy for him to avoid his family, he has way too much land to traverse. However, like I said earlier, God created more people than just Adam and Eve; therefore, he's worried about exactly what he said, if anyone finds him.

Not to mention, he did find a wife, and she was never said to be Adam and Eve's daughter, people just wrongly assume that because they think they were the only people created. There is zero indication of that, and personally, I think it would have been mentioned otherwise, as it was mentioned later on when Abraham married his half sister.

Anyways, in closing my statement, I think that a lot of the Bible stories have truly been turned into fairy tales because of what people are being taught, rather than reading the facts that are there.

Tthe Spirit
16-08-08, 17:50
I beleive in creationism...

GOD made everything... The theory of evolution itself is total idiocy...
the fish that turned into the frog is most ridiculous...

Ever since Life began man was found to worship things... not necessary God...
many gods, fire... whatever...

It is because faith is a normal need to the body just like sex, food and water...
Faith helps someone gets comfortable and releived and at most ADMIT THAT HE IS WEAK AND POWERLESS AND INCAPABLE T SURPASS THE FORCES OF NATURE...


The first three chapters of Genesis talk about Adam and Eve, but it never says they were the first people ever created. Moreover, those same three chapters specifically mention people being created before Adam and Eve. So yes, my evidence is directly from the Bible, has nothing to do with a different interpretation, it's right there in black and white.

When you have time perhaps you can read over the very first few chapters and see for yourself. :D

:tmb:

In Islam as well, in the sotries of Prophet Moses...
He once asked God about God's Age and God told him a story that the mind can never calculate and God stated that Adam was not the first man He created...

AmericanAssassin
16-08-08, 17:50
Well, I kind of believe in both of them. I find the bible to be symbolic, not literal, and I feel that Evolution has occured. :)

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 17:52
Ouch.
Who said I haven't?

I didn't say you haven't, and I never meant it to be offensive. I just thought you might like to research it. I put a smiley so it could come across nicer, and I didn't use any of the mean or condescending ones. :p

Cochrane
16-08-08, 17:55
Why thank you for your interest, even if you don't agree with the Bible, I do appreciate that you're wanting to hear me out rather than say, "ZOMG UR WRONGZ!" :hug:

This is the passages I'm referring to. Genesis 1:24-28 the Bible says:



God created both male and female after he had created the animals, and all of this was stated before Adam and Eve were ever mentioned. These were separate people that God created, in which he commanded to go forth and multiply.

Adam and Eve were not mentioned until chapter 2. God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden (which was a separate place to be his home), and then created animals there. This is clear that the Bible is not reiterating what was said earlier, because earlier God created the animals before creating people, but in this case, God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden, and then created more animals to reside there. After that, Eve was created, and as we all know, from Adam's rib. God didn't create all women from the rib of a man, as it was not mentioned as so earlier, just Eve.

Also, another thing that always stood out to me was later, with Cain and Able, in chapter 4. After Cain killed Able, God punished him and told him he would be a homeless wanderer, and Cain said something to the effect of, "This punishment is too great for me, for is anyone finds me, they will kill me."

He says anyone. Not, "if my parents find me". If he were to wander the land homeless, it'd be pretty easy for him to avoid his family, he has way too much land to traverse. However, like I said earlier, God created more people than just Adam and Eve; therefore, he's worried about exactly what he said, if anyone finds him.

Not to mention, he did find a wife, and she was never said to be Adam and Eve's daughter, people just wrongly assume that because they think they were the only people created. There is zero indication of that, and personally, I think it would have been mentioned otherwise, as it was mentioned later on when Abraham married his half sister.

Anyways, in closing my statement, I think that a lot of the Bible stories have truly been turned into fairy tales because of what people are being taught, rather than reading the facts that are there.

Thank you for all that explanation. I was always under the impression that the bible stated Adam and Eve were the first humans.

Melonie Tomb Raider
16-08-08, 18:00
Thank you for all that explanation. I was always under the impression that the bible stated Adam and Eve were the first humans.

That's what we're taught in Sunday school, and I believed it for a while, but then I thought to myself, "How could two people populate the entire world? Not only is it incest, but physically impossible." I decided to study it for myself and it's really quite clear.

There's even more debate as to the forbidden fruit as well, as I believe it was actually sexual relations rather than actual fruit, but it's hard to back this without delving deep into the actual hebrew and greek translations. I'm pretty sure the Jews have this down pat. In all reality, I like to study their translations of the old testament, as they really do understand it a lot more than the people who have fallen for the fairy tales. :p

Oh, and thanks for hearing me out. :hug:

EmeraldFields
16-08-08, 18:08
Thanks Melonie for the clarification!:)

Tthe Spirit
16-08-08, 18:08
That fruit in Eden itself doesnt relate to something forbidden...
Eden was full of trees and fruits, but the story is just a moral lesson to teach us that we have to Obey God's Oders...

All religious lessons tend to be this way...

Some say they wont beleive till they see God in front of them...
This is just so bad and represents pride IMO.

Presence of God is obvious as the sun...
The scientific resarches prove it...

Mr.Burns
16-08-08, 18:10
Presence of God is obvious as the sun...
The scientific resarches prove it...

Explain and cite with references please.

Tthe Spirit
16-08-08, 18:20
Explain and cite with references please.

The major rule that mostly some who dont beleive in God refer to is "Big Bang..."

Well Religion clearly says it and doesnt deny it at all...

God made all these rules and laws...

see for yourself...

Big Bang?

When describing the creation of the "heavens and the earth," the Qur'an does not discount the theory of a "Big Bang" explosion at the start of it all. In fact, the Qur'an says that "the heavens and the earth were joined together as one unit, before We clove them asunder" (21:30). Following this big explosion, Allah "turned to the sky, and it had been (as) smoke. He said to it and to the earth: 'Come together, willingly or unwillingly.' They said: 'We come (together) in willing obedience'" (41:11). Thus the elements and what was to become the planets and stars began to cool, come together, and form into shape, following the natural laws that Allah established in the universe.

The Qur'an further states that Allah created the sun, the moon, and the planets, each with their own individual courses or orbits. "It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon; all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course" (21:33).

Expansion of Universe

The Qur'an also does not rule out the idea that the universe is continuing to expand. "The heavens, We have built them with power. And verily, We are expanding it" (51:47). There has been some historical debate among Muslim scholars about the precise meaning of this verse, since knowledge of the universe's expansion was only recently discovered.



http://islam.about.com/od/creation/a/creation_2.htm

Mr.Burns
16-08-08, 18:24
Let me rephrase my request:

Please cite with impartial references that are not religiously biased towards one particular group. I tend not to accept something as "scientific" fact when it's main basis is from a religious doctrine.

Tthe Spirit
16-08-08, 18:30
Let me rephrase my request:

Please cite with impartial references that are not religiously biased towards one particular group. I tend not to accept something as "scientific" fact when it's main basis is from a religious doctrine.

As you wish..
Still, the site above isnt religious at all...

look at this...
this article is very interesting...
Needs time to read, but is pure awsomeness as it shows you that scientisits can not but say that Someone must have created this life...
http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm

Greenkey2
16-08-08, 18:31
The theory of evolution is not static, nor dogmatic. It's simply a damn good way of explaining the available evidence by observing the world around us, not the writings of our (not so distant) ancestors.

Just because the idea of evolution is 'scientific' doesn't mean it isn't also miraculous :wve:

Cochrane
16-08-08, 18:42
That's what we're taught in Sunday school, and I believed it for a while, but then I thought to myself, "How could two people populate the entire world? Not only is it incest, but physically impossible." I decided to study it for myself and it's really quite clear.

There's even more debate as to the forbidden fruit as well, as I believe it was actually sexual relations rather than actual fruit, but it's hard to back this without delving deep into the actual hebrew and greek translations. I'm pretty sure the Jews have this down pat. In all reality, I like to study their translations of the old testament, as they really do understand it a lot more than the people who have fallen for the fairy tales. :p

Oh, and thanks for hearing me out. :hug:

You're welcome, I'm always interested in good arguments.

By the way, if Eve was created from Adam's rib, wouldn't that be even worse than incest in later generations (not thinking morally, but concerning the size of the gene pool), since the two would be sort of clones, technically speaking?

Tthe Spirit
16-08-08, 18:44
You're welcome, I'm always interested in good arguments.

By the way, if Eve was created from Adam's rib, wouldn't that be even worse than incest in later generations (not thinking morally, but concerning the size of the gene pool), since the two would be sort of clones, technically speaking?

God doesnt need to clone... the term can also be only symbolic... just to show the importance of marriage and man and woman love relationships...