Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
And I asked one.
-
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!
"Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse"
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
And I asked one.
Alceste
Vagabond
Questions like "where is the missing link" don't come off like real questions. They come off like well-practiced barriers to protect yourself from any effort by others to explain evolution to you. They come off that way because that's what they are, pretty much 100% of the time I've come across them in this forum, which is a lot.
But on the off chance you were sincere, I will try to explain why there is no "missing link" (paraphrasing The Greatest Show on Earth)
Imagine a photo was taken of you every day since the day you were born. If you put three consecutive days side by side, you'd see no visible or measurable difference between them. With me so far?
OK, now imagine you have a picture of you as a pimply teenager and a picture of you as a newborn. HUGE difference, right? But you could still line up every picture from one to the other and see no measurable difference between any two consecutive pictures.
Now imagine you only had one picture taken a year. Suddenly, you can begin to see big changes between consecutive years (some of them, anyway).
Your "missing link" is all those daily photos in between. But we don't need those, since we have loads of other evidence we can use to conclude they're all pictures of the same guy. For example, maybe they're all in your mom's photo album, with things like "Rick, 1986" scrawled in ballpoint pen in the back.
So maybe you want to argue that only finding one picture that fits in precisely between the two years could prove they're the same guy. Say you find it. All you've done is make TWO missing links.
When we find fossilized remains fitting between one stage of development and another, all denialists have to do is keep on claiming we haven't found "the missing link", because there are now two brand new spaces between the newly discovered fossil and the previous and next fossil on the record.
I hope you understand a little better now, and let me know if you have any other questions.
Thats a bit condescending don't you think? I am retired, my children are raised, I have an MBA and have designed my own off grid home which I am building right now. To imply that I lack the intelligence to understand the answers by asking me that is a loaded question at best. I apply science to know which way my home should face and how much overhang my roof should have to shade me when the sun is high and use solar gain when the sun is low on the horizon. I plant things that will provide shade in the summer but let the sun in in winter. I apply geothermal and solar energy to heat and cool my home.fantôme profane;3234245 said:
Is that not science as well? Yes, I understood the answers but can be skeptical about what is said as well. Science acts like it has all the answers but then changes it's position at any given discovery which means it was not 100% correct last time nor will it be correct for any given length of time in the future.
To me, science has some sound principles which are forgotten many times when reaching a conclusion. You want to impress me, turn an ape into a man.
Does not science have to replicate something before it is fact?
If you tell me water will freeze at 32 degrees and we test that theory it is sound science. If you tell me I come from apes, where is the test for that?
Evolution is not proven theory is it?
Why are people skeptical of religion but blindly follow science?
outhouse
Atheistically
Fact as gravity Rick.
It has been observed, and no where in over 3 billion years of evolution on this planet has a hand of one of many thousands of deities people worship, had a visible hand in any process.
Rick. We dont blindly follow science. Many of us are involved in science directly.
Religion however is traceable in every aspect, we see how and why different people defined and changed their beliefs as their cultures changed.
Rick we have fossils that show us exactly where our past lied. We have DNA that backs this up to T.
Not one fossil is out of place in over 3 billion years worth of fossils, every last one is as where it should be.
Last edited:
. No I didn't think it was condescending. Honestly I just wanted to know if you found the explanations adequate.
Actually evolution is an extremely well proven theory.
Really please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence, but I want to know if you understand that in scientific terms an idea does not get to be called a theory until it has a substantial body of evidence supporting it. And in the case of the theory of evolution there is an overwhelming mountain of evidence from a wide variety of scientific disiplines.
I agree that people shouldn't follow science blindly. But I think it is important to consider the evidence.
Walkntune
Well-Known Member
When science comes to its final conclusion on truth, I will just push a button to see what this truth is. Until then I will live a life of true love, joy and peace. You know, all of the richness in life that science doesn't bring!
Me Myself
Back to my username
The apes that turned into us no longer exist here but... as us.
We do have fossil evidence of the transitional life forms. The "missing link" you mentioned is something left out long ago. We have many links. There is no "need" for a "missing" one. We have found apes equal in inteligence to us that where not even part of our evolutionary chain, namely the Neardenthals. What does religion say about that?
Evolution has way more than enough evidence to pass falsifiability.
Asknig you if you understood does not necessesarily mean we think you are stupid. One can be brilliant and be in denial, it is quite common. It is simple to be a genius and not understand something easy... when you don`t want to understand.
LOL what happened to our tail? Having a tail was pretty useful for primates. I don't see it not being used along the way.
Do apes have tails?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Generally practical sciences only, you know, I have a point, because the American system used to and in some cases still does put too much influence on one topic, and it effects the overall gpa negatively without even having much of a indication of other topics. anyways I don't really care enough either way, evolution generally I would believe have to be explored outside school curricullum anyway
take it in college
I guess I was thinking of monkeys.
Ok. So do you really want to know why apes(including humans) don't have tails or was that just a rhetorical question? I think it is an interesting question, and we could get into it if you are interested.
I have to admit, I really have had no science since middle school. I took algebra, geometry, trig, calculus. In business I could do percentages and tables in my head, but the last time I dissected a frog was in 6th grade. I can tell you about isobars and weather and clouds, I know all about electrical theory, but science, I don't know crap.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
I don't care; you were the one who pretended to ask me a question only to decide to decide to answer it on my behalf, and then you still have the gall to get uppity when I've told you it's rude and not to do it? Seriously? :areyoucraFirst, don't tell me not to "ask [you] something then say 'no need to answer'," it's arrogant.
I'm not going to play nice guy to people who're not being nice to me. Play nice and I will.
Is there something wrong with that.
Why bring it up if you don't want to discuss it?
But I didn't say that; I said flashbacks (among other things) as part of the result of events which cause physical or mental discomfort.
You, not I, claimed that I said flashbacks are a form of abuse and discussed that. I didn't say it, so you either misunderstood me or twisted my words.
In the same way, others, not I, have decided that my belief that creationism is not a form of abuse means this limits my view of what abuse is to only physical and sexual abuse, even though I didn't say that, and would vehemently disagree with that if asked.
Rick, having intelligence is no guarantee of understanding.
I have an IQ of 137, and am capable of quickly comprehending most forms of literature, mythology, etc. Yet I don't understand why a person who dresses up all fancy-pants is more likely to get a job than a more qualified person who isn't all that well-kept, even though it's been explained to me a thousand times by EVERYONE.
That's not because I lack intelligence; it's simply because my intelligence is focused elsewhere.
And was never intended to bring in the first place.
Actually, all of those are forms of science in their own right.
What you're talking about is biological science.
For the record, I didn't fully understand how evolution and natural selection worked until after primary school, when I discussed it on these forums, thought about it more, saw it brought up in various videos, and then suddenly came to this realization: biological evolution via natural selection operates on almost the exact same abstract process as all other forms of evolution, including economic.
Your right RW, I scored like 75% in the science test we had here a while back here at RF. What I am ignorant of is biology. I did crack open an anatomy book my kid was taking in college. No way could I have passed that course but my IQ is in the high 120's.
Yes, I am interested.fantôme profane;3234328 said: