An unreasonable debate...

[Sir_Loin]

How can mythology create a universe?

You're asking the wrong person..

If so, then you have the burden of proof showing that one day is the short amount of time you claim it is.

Of course. A day is the interval of light between two successive nights. Is that not obvious enough? Why are people complicating things?

The Bible also says that plants were created before the Sun,

Actually The Bible says that the Light (morning and day) was created before plants..

2 Peter 3:8

Wat.

It says: "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
This is called a metaphor..

Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night"
^Another metaphor..

---
/day

 

[Parsimony]

Evolution is incompatible with a literal reading of creation, true, but I don't take it literally anyway. I think it matches up with the world better if it is written at least partially in metaphor. You don't even need evolution to prove that the Earth is old, radiometric dating techniques alone do that much. If you'd like to know how radiometric dating works and how we know it is accurate, I'd be happy to explain (although it would probably make quite a lengthy post).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

How does it not? The First Law of Thermodynamics encompasses several principles one of them being the law of conservation of energy.

This states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. However, energy can change forms, and energy can flow from one place to another. The total energy of an isolated system does not change.

"Energy can neither be created nor destroyed", therefore the universe could not have created itself, correct?

EDIT: I know, I know, Evolution is a biological process and I'm talking about origins, but just think about it this way.
We have established that the universe could not have created itself- that's absurd. So, the only other alternative would be a God. (Which also doesn't make sense, but to me makes more sense than a "Big Bang". If the only other alternative is a "God" then the Bible would be correct and Evolution could not have taken place.

P.S: I'm not denying Evolution, in fact, I believe that creatures adapt to their environment, but I don't agree with the claims of one-celled beings evolving into clever, "soul-containing", humans that we are.
Which brings up another question- what about a human's soul? Where could that have possibly come from?"

I'm an atheist and an animist. I don't believe that there's some god that created anything. It's perfectly possible and reasonable to be an atheist who believes that we have an eternal consciousness and that this consciousness survives brain death. I also hardly believe that only humans possess such a consciousness.

 

[outhouse]

I also hardly believe that only humans possess such a consciousness.

They had a great show on PBS showing how this applies to other animals.

Dolphins and elephants recognize theirselves in a mirror.
A human child before 2 years of age does no see theirselves in a mirror.

Elaphants have burial rituals, and recognize their dead, where other animals ignore this.

Monkeys get ticked off when another monkey gets a treat better then his.

Bonobo's show compassion, when in two cells bonobo #1 get food, and bonobo two watches and is upset, bonobo #1 who is a stranger to bonobo #2 will go and open the gate letting bonobo #2 into his cell to share his food.


All animals do, its just what level of consciousness do they possess that is the current question.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

They had a great show on PBS showing how this applies to other animals.

Dolphins and elephants recognize theirselves in a mirror.
A human child before 2 years of age does no see theirselves in a mirror.

Elaphants have burial rituals, and recognize their dead, where other animals ignore this.

Monkeys get ticked off when another monkey gets a treat better then his.

Bonobo's show compassion, when in two cells bonobo #1 get food, and bonobo two watches and is upset, bonobo #1 who is a stranger to bonobo #2 will go and open the gate letting bonobo #2 into his cell to share his food.


All animals do, its just what level of consciousness do they possess that is the current question.

Yup. We're all animals. Humans really aren't any different from other mammals, except for maybe our tool-making abilities allowing us to make all the things we have. I despise ideologies that create a gulf between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. We're all brothers and sisters on this Earth.

 

[outhouse]

Yup. We're all animals. Humans really aren't any different from other mammals, except for maybe our tool-making abilities allowing us to make all the things we have. I despise ideologies that create a gulf between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. We're all brothers and sisters on this Earth.

that and two million year ago are braincase and brain size increased advancing intellect.

 

[Pegg]

Hello,
I just wanted to post on here my thoughts about the whole Evolution v Creation thing- IT'S UNREASONABLE.
Let me elaborate.

Evolution is a theory on how modern man came to be today- today meaning long ago, of course. Evolutionists (yes it's a word) believe in changes in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift can create new species. Creationists (also a damn word for you etymological geniuses) believe that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.

An Evolutionist and Creationist step up to the pulpit to debate their ideals.
We now have a predicament. The problem being that one is supporting their theory by examining the world around us and carrying out experiments to support this theory by finding old fossils and carrying out dating techniques such as carbon dating (Side note: Dating techniques aren't exactly accurate anyway) and what-not. This is the Evolutionist.
The Creationist supports their theory by using a piece of Script written a long long time ago. Period. (To the creationists out there, I'm not trying to demean this theory because, who knows, you could ultimately be right).

And this is the problem. The two just aren't compatible. It would make sense for an Evolutionist to debate another scientific theory, but Creationism isn't a scientific theory it is a spiritual theory. And that's the problem.
The Evolutionist asks the Creationist: "Explain [this]" and the Creationist responds: "Well the Bible says this about [this]. And that's the problem! The Evolutionist will never understand the Creationist and vice-versa.

What are your thoughts on this?

I think you'll find that not all who believe in 'creation' are 'creationists'
Creationism holds that the earth was created in 6 literal 'days'... but many who believe that God created the earth and all life do not believe it happened in just 6 days but over 6 epochs of time.

There is room for a gradual development of life on earth, but the vast difference between Evolution and Creation is that for those of us who believe God created life, we believe (as the bible says) that God created the first of all the 'kinds' of creatures and animals. A 'kind' is the equivalent to a 'family', ie the Equine family, Feline family, Canine family....these have a wide variety of species within each family. So its very likely that the change over time as described by evolution is perfectly accurate. Animals within families do change over time. We can see that in the human family too....there are many different nationalities who are all related biologically.


The problem i see is that Evolutionists blanket the term 'evolution' to include the 'origin of LIFE' and that is a problem. Even though there is no proof as to how life actually started, they will still claim that it started through the process of evolution where single cells 'emerged' by natural means and began to divide and diverge until we have millions of varieties of different lifeforms on the plant.

A person who believes that God created life can and does believe that life can adapt and diverge as described by evolution. But we simply dont believe that life developed here unaided and without direction.

 

[Parsimony]

The problem i see is that Evolutionists blanket the term 'evolution' to include the 'origin of LIFE' and that is a problem.

Whatever evolutionist told you that told you a falsehood. Evolution is about changes in populations over time, not the origin of life. It was not intended to explain the origin of life anymore than relativity was intended to explain the origin of space-time.

 

[Skwim]

Whatever evolutionist told you that told you a falsehood. Evolution is about changes in populations over time, not the origin of life. It was not intended to explain the origin of life anymore than telativity was intended to explain the origin of space-time.

Absolutely. It's far, far more typical for the creationist to insist that evolution addresses the origin of life. In fact, it's one of their favorite straw men.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

So your position is that anyone who challenges the ToE, for whatever evidential reason, is "religiously motivated to further their non-scientific agenda"? Is that what you are saying?

I'm saying I've never witnessed someone who opposed it who didn't have religious motivations behind it. Nor have I actually heard any arguments that actually posed problems against ToE.

I'm sure there is someone out there who doesn't think god created the universe who also has problems with evolution. But the overwhelming vast majority and I would say it would be correct to say its functionally unanimous that all scientists that oppose evolution are funded by things like the Christian science association or the Hermitage foundation.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

that and two million year ago are braincase and brain size increased advancing intellect.

Which is a two-edged sword and I don't think it makes us much better. Despite the positive possibilities, it's made us a neurotic, tragic species with delusions that we're somehow special and set apart from the other beings on this planet.

 

[Pegg]

Whatever evolutionist told you that told you a falsehood. Evolution is about changes in populations over time, not the origin of life. It was not intended to explain the origin of life anymore than relativity was intended to explain the origin of space-time.

Oh really?

So how did the first living organisms get here and how did they bring all other living things into existence?

 

[Sir_Loin]

I'm saying I've never witnessed someone who opposed it who didn't have religious motivations behind it. Nor have I actually heard any arguments that actually posed problems against ToE.

I'm sure there is someone out there who doesn't think god created the universe who also has problems with evolution. But the overwhelming vast majority and I would say it would be correct to say its functionally unanimous that all scientists that oppose evolution are funded by things like the Christian science association or the Hermitage foundation.

Hello? Right here! I have so many problems with Evolution but I'm not a God person.

So how did the first living organisms get here and how did they bring all other living things into existence?

That's one of the problems I have, and no one can explain it to me..

 

[Sir_Loin]

^that and the fact that there are no transitional species..

 

[ImmortalFlame]

That's one of the problems I have, and no one can explain it to me..

That has nothing to do with evolution theory.

^that and the fact that there are no transitional species..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

 

[Pegg]

That has nothing to do with evolution theory.


List of transitional fossils - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and that is the cop out.

Is it scientific to proceed with a belief without a foundation for the belief?

Because in my mind, there needs to be a basis for the belief in the first place. Without a basis for the belief, how can it be taken so seriously???

 

[ImmortalFlame]

and that is the cop out.

Is it scientific to proceed with a belief without a foundation for the belief?

Because in my mind, there needs to be a basis for the belief in the first place. Without a basis for the belief, how can it be taken so seriously???

I don't know many times I have to explain this, but I will nontheless endeavor to do so again.

Abiogenesis: The study of how life formed initially through natural, biological means.
Evolution: The study of how life changes and diversifies over time.

Abiogenesis is not the "foundation" of evolution - it's a separate subject of study. You don't need to know how a ball is made in order to observe and understand how a ball rolls down a hill. What you are basically saying now is akin to saying "unless you know exactly how wheat is formed, you cannot cook a loaf of bread". It's nonsense - growing wheat and cooking it are two different processes, just as abiogenesis and evolution are different processes, and therefore our understanding if one does not depend on the other.

 

[Pegg]

I don't know many time I have to explain this, but I will nontheless endeavor to do so again.

Abiogenesis: The study of how life formed initially through natural, biological means.
Evolution: The study of how life changes and diversifies over time.

so then why all the debate about where life came from? Why can't it be possible that God created all the different types of plants and animals we see?

Why is this belief so challenged by evolutionists??

 

[Thief]

God made Man in His own good time....Day Six.
Made an alteration in a garden AFTER Day Seven.

I don't have a problem putting it all together.

God did it.....altogether.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

so then why all the debate about where life came from?

Because that's a subject still heavily debated within the scientific community.

Why can't it be possible that God created all the different types of plants and animals we see?

Where have I ever said that it couldn't be possible? Evolution says no such thing.

Why is this belief so challenged by evolutionists??

It isn't. Evolution says nothing whatsoever about the existence of God, only that life diversifies over time through natural means.