• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Creation and Evolution Compatible...Questions

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Its called indoctrination. The vast majority of people are educated in a system that does not allow for any other thought. From High School to University, kids are taught nothing but evolution. Why would you think indoctrination doesn't work? It is taught as verifiable fact, but there is nothing verifiable about it. It seems as if no one is game to challenge it...afraid of the derision that will inevitably follow.

You just seem to have a very cynical view of science and knowledge - probably garnered from your religious beliefs - since few others would ever see education this way. Indoctrination is what religions do. Education is hopefully there to make you think, and the information is what one should think about. It doesn't necessarily mean one has to accept any particular thing. The ToE just happens to be the best available explanation at the moment - from the vast consensus of those involved and/or who understand the concept.

The end of all world religions is not something new....God has actually been warning about it for centuries.
Depicting the world's failed religious systems under one designation (Babylon the great) the Bible warns that God will put it into the minds of the political powers to turn on this former consort (described as a harlot) and completely destroy her. Original Babylon was the place where all false religions got their start. This "greater Babylon" is representative of all religions that fall outside of the one prescribed by the Creator in the Bible.
Along with that description, God also warns his own people to "get out of her" (Revelation 18:4-5) or else share in her fate.

If you recall, there was actually no religion in Eden. There was no need for one....there will be no need for one in the future when all false religion is gone.

Great - did you read that somewhere - like a comic or such?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
You just seem to have a very cynical view of science and knowledge - probably garnered from your religious beliefs - since few others would ever see education this way.

I have a cynical view of evolution......but I love science and I incessantly take in knowledge about a lot of things....I just don't believe that science is entirely truthful when it comes to educating young people about life on this planet. If you ask them to verify evolution, or to provide knowledge about it, its a bit like asking a young person raised in Christendom what the Bible says? They probably can't tell you because they rely on others to know that for them.
They have a sketchy outline and will proudly tell you that they believe in evolution, but if evolution was a fact, it would not require belief....and there would be no way to disprove it. These forums would lie vacant.

When you realize that science for some people is a substitute for religion, you can see that they approach it in a somewhat similar fashion. I know, because I used to believe in evolution myself because of the way it was taught in school....and I was convinced of its validity because of the way it was presented with all the diagrams in the textbooks that made it look like an established fact. But only when I examined the evidence for myself in my twenties, did I realize that its like the Bible....very open to interpretation. In fact science relies solely on interpretation of their evidence to support their theory. If their interpretation is questioned, wait for the barrage of derisive comments about one's educational background and how little they know about the subject.

I have read every link presented by the evolutionists here and I can tell you right now that they are a load of old cods. Long on imagination and very short on facts. You have to remove the lens that screens out the supposition to see it.

Indoctrination is what religions do.

Or so you've been led to believe. :rolleyes: Institutions of higher learning are good at it too.
They call it education. :p

Education is hopefully there to make you think, and the information is what one should think about. It doesn't necessarily mean one has to accept any particular thing. The ToE just happens to be the best available explanation at the moment - from the vast consensus of those involved and/or who understand the concept.

Well, to me it isn't the best explanation at all. In fact its a very poor explanation if you have to use huge amounts of imagination to even suggest how it works. Its "the best available explanation" for those who need to ditch God.

The concept is built on what scientists want to believe but cannot prove. Without their graphics and charts, what do they have really?

Evolution-the-LIE-Also-where-are-all-the-fossils-of-all-the-missing-Species.jpg


That is a valid question....isn't it?
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I have a cynical view of evolution......but I love science and I incessantly take in knowledge about a lot of things....I just don't believe that science is entirely truthful when it comes to educating young people about life on this planet. If you ask them to verify evolution, or to provide knowledge about it, its a bit like asking a young person raised in Christendom what the Bible says? They probably can't tell you because they rely on others to know that for them.
They have a sketchy outline and will proudly tell you that they believe in evolution, but if evolution was a fact, it would not require belief....and there would be no way to disprove it. These forums would lie vacant.

When you realize that science for some people is a substitute for religion, you can see that they approach it in a somewhat similar fashion. I know, because I used to believe in evolution myself because of the way it was taught in school....and I was convinced of its validity because of the way it was presented with all the diagrams in the textbooks that made it look like an established fact. But only when I examined the evidence for myself in my twenties, did I realize that its like the Bible....very open to interpretation. In fact science relies solely on interpretation of their evidence to support their theory. If their interpretation is questioned, wait for the barrage of derisive comments about one's educational background and how little they know about the subject.

I have read every link presented by the evolutionists here and I can tell you right now that they are a load of old cods. Long on imagination and very short on facts. You have to remove the lens that screens out the supposition to see it.



Or so you've been led to believe. :rolleyes: Institutions of higher learning are good at it too.
They call it education. :p



Well, to me it isn't the best explanation at all. In fact its a very poor explanation if you have to use huge amounts of imagination to even suggest how it works. Its "the best available explanation" for those who need to ditch God.

The concept is built on what scientists want to believe but cannot prove. Without their graphics and charts, what do they have really?

Evolution-the-LIE-Also-where-are-all-the-fossils-of-all-the-missing-Species.jpg


That is a valid question....isn't it?

And religion is?

End of!

:rolleyes:

evolution.jpg


Valid question - as per the image? Why on earth would we expect to find a continuous record? It is just beyond conceit to think that history owes us any favours! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I have a cynical view of evolution......but I love science and I incessantly take in knowledge about a lot of things....I just don't believe that science is entirely truthful when it comes to educating young people about life on this planet. If you ask them to verify evolution, or to provide knowledge about it, its a bit like asking a young person raised in Christendom what the Bible says? They probably can't tell you because they rely on others to know that for them.
They have a sketchy outline and will proudly tell you that they believe in evolution, but if evolution was a fact, it would not require belief....and there would be no way to disprove it. These forums would lie vacant.

I am sorry, but one cannot believe the myths of Genesis and claim to love or understand science. The two do not go together.

When you realize that science for some people is a substitute for religion, you can see that they approach it in a somewhat similar fashion. I know, because I used to believe in evolution myself because of the way it was taught in school....and I was convinced of its validity because of the way it was presented with all the diagrams in the textbooks that made it look like an established fact. But only when I examined the evidence for myself in my twenties, did I realize that its like the Bible....very open to interpretation. In fact science relies solely on interpretation of their evidence to support their theory. If their interpretation is questioned, wait for the barrage of derisive comments about one's educational background and how little they know about the subject.

That may be, but that only reflects that they were taught what science is, how it is done, what is and what is not evidence etc, rather poorly. This may have been your problem. Though a fear of learning the sciences is common among those that believe in myths that they know deep down inside are not true. If they truly learned how science is done they would have to give up those cherished myths.

Making false claims about those in the sciences does your side no good. Now people that accept reality might get a bit frustrated with people that are afraid to learn at times. But that does not make their responses to the ignorant wrong.

[quote[

I have read every link presented by the evolutionists here and I can tell you right now that they are a load of old cods. Long on imagination and very short on facts. You have to remove the lens that screens out the supposition to see it.[/quote]

You may have read, you have not understood. The fear instilled inside of you by your cult may be the reason that you cannot learn.

Or so you've been led to believe. :rolleyes: Institutions of higher learning are good at it too.
They call it education. :p

The educated can support their claims. Something that creationists cannot do.

Well, to me it isn't the best explanation at all. In fact its a very poor explanation if you have to use huge amounts of imagination to even suggest how it works. Its "the best available explanation" for those who need to ditch God.

Just because you do not understand does not mean that "huge amounts of imagination" are used. Once again, explanations must always be fully supported by the evidence in the sciences. Can you bring up a valid example that supports your claim?

The concept is built on what scientists want to believe but cannot prove. Without their graphics and charts, what do they have really?

Again, this is patently false. Scientists, unlike creationists, have to be able to support their claims with actual evidence.

Evolution-the-LIE-Also-where-are-all-the-fossils-of-all-the-missing-Species.jpg


That is a valid question....isn't it?

No, it is not. You do not seem to understand that fossilization is an extremely rare event. If a body is not preserved in some fashion it quickly decays. After a few years even the bones are gone. What you won't face up to is the fact that every fossil found fits the evolutionary paradigm and that creationists cannot even form one. Creationists have no explanation at all that has not been refuted concerning the fossil record.

When millions of fossils are found and they all support the theory of evolution and there is no alternative explanation which one do you go with?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
LOL.....I can't imagine why we would expect evidence for a continuous process if it never happened. :rolleyes:
OTOH there should be ample evidence if it did. Too much to ask eh?

Deeje, you know that is now what he said or implied. Once again, fossilization is a very rare event. Many species leave no fossil record at all. Nor were they expected to.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Stars represent actual masses of burning hydrogen.
But do any religion or any religious scripture can explain what a star is, or how they work.

And as to your own answer - "burning hydrogen" that's not strictly true.

There are no "burning" involved in a star.

And the actual masses are hydrogen atoms.

Burning mean combustion which involved fuel and oxygen or oxidant agent. And when mixed together, chemical reaction occurred between fuel and oxygen.

In chemical reaction of combustion (or burning as you would call it), you have a fuel, to give you an example, methane.

Methane, like most oil and gas, are hydrocarbon-based compound, meaning it a number of 4 hydrogen atoms bonded together with 1 carbon atom, hence looking like compound of hydrocarbon (methane) may look something like this:

CH4

When combustion of methane occurred it will require oxygen, so you will get this:

CH4 + 2O2 ===> 2 H2O + CO2 + heat (or energy)​

Above, methane and air combust, and you will get chemical action that produce heat energy, water vapour (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2).

It start with 4 hydrogen atom, 1 carbon and 2 oxygen, and there are same number of atoms AFTER COMBUSTION.

What occurred in the star is a very different process, and don't require combustion or chemical reaction. And you need to have some basic understanding of nuclear physics, more specifically nuclear fusion, to understand the concept of "Stellar Nucleosynthesis".

Basically, Stellar Nucleosynthesis, used the same concept as nuclear fusion, so in the nutshell, the star is turning a number of hydrogen atoms into a single helium.

Where chemical reaction of any type (including combustion) occur, the nature of atoms and total numbers of atoms remain unchanged. But in a star's nucleosynthesis, you are changing lighter elements into a newer heavier element.

If you remember what chemistry teacher or textbook has taught you about the Periodic Table, hydrogen (H) has 1 electron, 1 proton and no neuton, while helium has 2 electrons, 2 protons and 2 neutrons.

To make a single helium atom, which include 2 neutrons, you would require a total of 6 hydrogen atoms. This form of nucleosynthesis or nuclear fusion, is called "proton-proton chain reaction".

It is too hard to explain in detail, about this so I will show you a graphic of turning 6 hydrogen protons to make 2 protons and 2 neutrons with helium nucleus:

250px-Fusion_in_the_Sun.svg.png


(Source Proton-proton chain reaction, Wikipedia.)

The nuclear fusion of hydrogen causes high temperature, high energy and illumination. High heat application is what required to fuse lighter elements together, to form new helium nuclei.

Do you understand what I am saying here on how star heavier elements from lighter elements?

The Sun has no fire, because there are no combustion going on, and there are no carbon and no oxygen involved. When you look closely at the Sun, you think it is spitting out fire, but that is not what the star is doing.

What you are really seeing is plasma of hydrogen gas, being superheated, that the gas is being "incandescent", which provide light and heat.

Once the sun, run out of hydrogen into helium, if the sun core will collapse enough, to increase the temperature so that hot enough to fuse helium protons into heavier elements, like carbon, nitrogen or oxygen. If this happen, our yellow dwarf star will grown in size, turning into red giant star.

I would suggest that you read up star formation, stellar nucleosynthesis, nuclear fusion, to understand what I am talking about, and how the Sun don't "burn" hydrogen, or so you have claimed.
 
Last edited:

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
LOL.....I can't imagine why we would expect evidence for a continuous process if it never happened. :rolleyes:
OTOH there should be ample evidence if it did. Too much to ask eh?

As I said - do you really expect things to be laid out so conveniently for us to inspect? I think it might be that most sensible people would label that as being exceptionally optimistic - life isn't like that - not realise that yet? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
And this nicely demonstrates what happens when evidence is presented to those with a particular mindset that disagrees with their habitual practices. If it was clearly demonstrated that the simple act of washing hands saved lives, why was that a challenge to the medical profession? Was the simplicity of the remedy a blow to their egos? Why did people have to die unnecessarily because of their refusal to acknowledge the clear evidence that a simple procedure was saving lives?
Religious people are letting their children suffer and die unnecessarily. Letting them die: parents refuse medical help for children in the name of Christ
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
I have a cynical view of evolution......but I love science and I incessantly take in knowledge about a lot of things....I just don't believe that science is entirely truthful when it comes to educating young people about life on this planet.
I suppose we could teach them all the creation myths including yours instead of the theory of evolution. I like this one:

"The Bushongo tribe of Africa believed that even the gods could get tummy aches. One god in particular, named Bumba, had one of the worst cases of upset stomach in existence. Back when the world was only darkness and emptiness, the god Bumba noticed he was having some digestion pain, but given there was nothing to treat his problem, he had to just live with it until the situation sorted itself out. It eventually did so in the way of a lot of vomit. The first thing he vomited up was the sun. Then it was the moon, the stars, animals, plants, and even eventually some very bile-coated and confused humans. So, without indigestion, the Boshongo believe we wouldn't even be here."

https://listverse.com/2014/01/11/10-creation-myths-as-strange-as-the-bible/
https://www.ranker.com/list/weirdest-creation-myths/laura-allan?var=7&utm_expid=16418821-388.8yjUEguUSkGHvlaagyulMg.1&utm_referrer=https://www.google.no/

Oh I almost forgot this one:
"Raëlism (also known as Raëlianism or the Raëlian movement) is a UFO religion that was founded in 1974 by Claude Vorilhon (b. 1946), now known as Raël. The Raëlian Movement teaches that life on Earth was scientifically created by a species of extraterrestrials, which they call the Elohim."
Raëlism - Wikipedia
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Religious people are letting their children suffer and die unnecessarily. Letting them die: parents refuse medical help for children in the name of Christ

Seriously mate, what has this got to do with what we are discussing?

Washing your hands is not rocket science. Doctors did not want to acknowledge that something that simple could prevent the spread of disease. Israel's law if followed could have saved the lives of a lot of people. They washed their hands before a meal....didn't touch dead bodies and quarantined those who had leprosy. That was written 1500 years before Christ.

What religious people do with their kids has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
I suppose we could teach them all the creation myths including yours instead of the theory of evolution.

Your posts are degenerating into absurdity now.....just when I was beginning to think there was some sense finally surfacing.

No one said we have to teach any religion to kids at school.....just don't teach them lies. Own the fact that science proposes a theory for which there is no proof and can never be any. No one was around that long ago to document the process except the Creator.......and you don't believe him! o_O

I wish kids had more access to alternative material, (just for balance) but they are so brainwashed by the time they leave High School that they don't see the need to investigate anything different. That is a great pity IMO.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
What religious people do with their kids has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

It does, since it is child abuse to teach children stuff that they are essentially unable to question due to lack of knowledge and/or maturity. And especially when it is just a 'faith' rather than being evidentially backed. :rolleyes: And it is especially so in some schools and definitely faith schools. Ban the lot!
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
Seriously mate, what has this got to do with what we are discussing?
You said and I quote: "And this nicely demonstrates what happens when evidence is presented to those with a particular mindset that disagrees with their habitual practices. If it was clearly demonstrated that the simple act of washing hands saved lives, why was that a challenge to the medical profession? Was the simplicity of the remedy a blow to their egos? Why did people have to die unnecessarily because of their refusal to acknowledge the clear evidence that a simple procedure was saving lives?"

You say that the medical profession let people die unnecessarily, you theists do the same because of your beliefs. So you are hardly in any position to point a finger. Letting them die: parents refuse medical help for children in the name of Christ
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
Your posts are degenerating into absurdity now.....just when I was beginning to think there was some sense finally surfacing.
My posts always make sense.
I wish kids had more access to alternative material, (just for balance)
Yes and that was exactly what I was proposing in my post number 630. Let us teach them evolution, and all the creation myths in the world, and Raëlianism, teach them what all the sacred texts in the world say and let them sort it out for themselves. I completely agree with you.
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
It does, since it is child abuse to teach children stuff that they are essentially unable to question due to lack of knowledge and/or maturity. And especially when it is just a 'faith' rather than being evidentially backed. :rolleyes: And it is especially so in some schools and definitely faith schools. Ban the lot!
When I was a child in Norway back in the sixties and seventies we had religious education. A large book containing all the important information about all the major and a lot of the smaller religions in the world taught completely neutrally. It left me with a sense of wonder about all the weird and wonderful and illogical and irrational and contradictory things people are capable of believing and a love for science and the scientific method as a way to arrive at truth instead of the miserable failure of belief.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
When I was a child in Norway back in the sixties and seventies we had religious education. A large book containing all the important information about all the major and a lot of the smaller religions in the world taught completely neutrally. It left me with a sense of wonder about all the weird and wonderful and illogical and irrational and contradictory things people are capable of believing and a love for science and the scientific method as a way to arrive at truth instead of the miserable failure of belief.

Quite reasonable too - I had already said bye-bye to religions by secondary school, and seeing our RI teacher sexually abusing some of the girls once (bra-pinging whilst giving them some additional tuition) hardly inspired any confidence in his teaching methods. :oops: The hands-on approach is just so inappropriate often, but then quite a lot of girls were sexually abused at our school, and at my friend's Grammar school too apparently. Not nice at all.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
The concept is built on what scientists want to believe but cannot prove. Without their graphics and charts, what do they have really?

Evolution-the-LIE-Also-where-are-all-the-fossils-of-all-the-missing-Species.jpg


That is a valid question....isn't it?

No, it isn't. There are NOT millions of the ancestral species! There are millions of *other* child species, like chimps and other apes, but NONE of the modern species are the ones ancestral to modern humans.

So your picture is badly misleading and doesn't pose a *valid* question.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Seriously mate, what has this got to do with what we are discussing?

Washing your hands is not rocket science. Doctors did not want to acknowledge that something that simple could prevent the spread of disease. Israel's law if followed could have saved the lives of a lot of people. They washed their hands before a meal....didn't touch dead bodies and quarantined those who had leprosy. That was written 1500 years before Christ.

What religious people do with their kids has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
You do realize that one of the mistakes that Jesus made was to declare that handwashing was unneeded. It may have been the reason that doctors resisted washing their hands in the west for so long. That was not the wisest example to use.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Your posts are degenerating into absurdity now.....just when I was beginning to think there was some sense finally surfacing.

No one said we have to teach any religion to kids at school.....just don't teach them lies. Own the fact that science proposes a theory for which there is no proof and can never be any. No one was around that long ago to document the process except the Creator.......and you don't believe him! o_O

I wish kids had more access to alternative material, (just for balance) but they are so brainwashed by the time they leave High School that they don't see the need to investigate anything different. That is a great pity IMO.


Sorry, but you are of course wrong. That there is "proof" at least in the legal sense of the word for the theory of evolution has been shown to be the case time after time in U.S. courts. I don't know if creationists ever made the error of forcing this into trial in Australia, but I am pretty sure that your legal system would find for evolution as well. You are the one that wants to "teach lies" since your claims have been shown to be false time after time.

But thanks for telling us that you do not understand the nature of evidence again. I will gladly help you with your inability to understand that simple topic when you are ready to learn.
 
Top