And why are telling this to me? I believe that the earth is billions of years old and as I have said before scientific discoveries fill me with awe at the power and wisdom of our creator.
-
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!
Evolution, what evidence is there and what does creationism have?
- Thread starter Im an Atheist
- Start date
And why are telling this to me? I believe that the earth is billions of years old and as I have said before scientific discoveries fill me with awe at the power and wisdom of our creator.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Why? What is your reason for disbelief in a common ancestor for all modern primates?
Apes produce more apes, they may be deferent than those that lived in a distant past but they have always been apes, human the same and they are purposely designed to be what they are.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
So, for billions of years, apes have been apes, and humans have been humans?
Dogs have been dogs, and wolves have been wolves?
The gazelle has always been a gazelle, and the deer has always been a deer?
(With only minor changes?)
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Because that's what ToE says. As I said, I don't think you've really grasped the theory.
What is "OET?"
No, no one who understands it and has a conscience believes in ID in the sense of the Discovery Institute. It's a scam pure and simple. Theistic Evolution is I think where you're at. It means you accept all of ToE, and believe that's compatible with an omnipotent God who created the universe, using ToE to accomplish His ends.
http://www.answersincreation.org/gap.htm
Is a way to reconcile an old earth with a possible reading of Genesis, inserting gaps between the days to get to 4.56 billion years. A bit odd.
As a theological or philosophical stance, yes, O.K., fine. But as soon as it asserts that science can support this, it goes wrong, which is what modern ID tries to do. It goes wrong both scientifically and theologically, theologically because you get a puny, tinkering, miniscule, impotent God, instead of the all-powerful Maker of All. Avoid like plague. Also they're a bunch of big fat liar heads, as the Judge found at the Dover trial. They literally committed perjury, and were reprimanded by the court.
Pretty bold statements. Care to back them up with....ummm evidence?
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
This statement directly contradicts ToE, which you say you accept. You either buy it or you don't, emiliano, that's how science works.
You got it!:shout
Evedence? I presnt to you. yourself.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
You're contradicting yourself again. ToE says the exact opposite. Please answer yes or no: Do you accept the Theory of Evolution as the best current explanation for the number and diversity of species on earth?
I am only evidence of me, not how I got here. Thats not evidence, just like the bible is proof of the bible, not it's authorship. So, got any of that stuff called evidence? It might help to prove your case.
What Old Earth Theory do I contradict, there are several, and am not a scientist, I believe what scientist discover, none of their discoveries disproves ID and the creator our mighty God.
Not old earth, but evolution. We're all aware your not a scientist. It's fairly obvious. It's not science's job to disprove anything, let alone a god. It's you the claimant, who has to provide evidence for ID.
I hape that you have realised by now that this debate is going no where and is time to move on, anyway I have so, it was a pleasure but, so long, adios
I hape that you have realised by now that this debate is going no where and is time to move on, anyway I have so, it was a pleasure but, so long, adios
Are you leaving or am I supposed to leave? I'm not sure what you meant by that comment. But adios!
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
You contradict the Theory of Evolution. Do you accept it or not?
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
You're a bit slow. We've said this many times. Scientific theories do not disprove God. Nor do they prove Him. They have nothing to do with Him. Your attempt to make science prove God is as doomed as those who try to make it disprove Him.
themadhair
Well-Known Member
I always find this little factoid funny when I see people trying to make the micro/macro distinction. When Darwin published his theory and it gained acceptance it was macro that was accepted. The long term change of creatures over time was actually accepted before genetics provided evidence to accept the micro as well.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
So, apparently, emiliano accepts ToE, as long as it does not contradict his personal religious beliefs.
Picking and choosing different parts of biology to support his beliefs, and disregarding those that contradict those beliefs.
And by his constant mention of "none of their discoveries disproves ID and the creator our mighty God", he seems to be stuck on the idea that science is somehow a threat to God.
So he falls into the category of those whose faith is so weak, they ignore scientific discoveries in order to support their personal beliefs.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/80860-how-weak-your-faith.html
Picking and choosing different parts of biology to support his beliefs, and disregarding those that contradict those beliefs.
And by his constant mention of "none of their discoveries disproves ID and the creator our mighty God", he seems to be stuck on the idea that science is somehow a threat to God.
So he falls into the category of those whose faith is so weak, they ignore scientific discoveries in order to support their personal beliefs.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/80860-how-weak-your-faith.html
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Count me in among those who are totally confused as to what Emiliano's position is. When presented with a summary of one part of the chromosomal evidence that supports the common ancestry between humans and chimps, he says "I agree" and throws his support behind evolutionary theory. But now he says "apes have always been apes and humans have always been humans", completely contradicting evolutionary theory.
Maybe Emiliano should take a bit of time and contemplate his own position, thoroughly think it through, and fully understand it, so future conversations won't be so scattered and frustrating.
Maybe Emiliano should take a bit of time and contemplate his own position, thoroughly think it through, and fully understand it, so future conversations won't be so scattered and frustrating.