Jimmy
King Phenomenon
U have your facts I have my truths. It’s all good. Diversity. That’s what makes the world go round
-
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!
The problem of Creationism in Islam rejecting the science of evolution.
- Thread starter shunyadragon
- Start date
Jimmy
King Phenomenon
It’s totally cool that you don’t think that there’s anything spiritually mystical beyond human explanation and understanding. But I do. Diversity. That’s what makes the world go around
justaguy313
Active Member
We share DNA also with pigs, bananas, chickens, cats, mice and slugs, but does this mean that we developed from them?
This is a strawman argument.
How Much DNA Do Humans Share With Other Animals and Plants?
beenhereKey Takeaways: Nearly 99.9% of human DNA is identical to that of other humans. Cats and humans share about 90% of their genetic makeup. Around 85% of human DNA is shared with mice. Humans and pigs share a substantial portion of DNA, about 98%. Over half of human DNA, or…
thednatests.com
justaguy313
Active Member
I will always apply logic first before any science. Have you asked yourself if the science today is really independent? I mean they still teach physics in High schools from the 50's, despite all the breakthroughs in quantum mechanics.
At the end of the day, human being must figure out things alone, there's no science magic wand with all the answers and mostly there's compromises in Academia by mainstream scientists that decide what is true and what is not. You have clear example of that with covid 19 vaccines when they outlawed all the doctors that dared to question the official narrative
Please give an actual example of such evidence?
The whole world and the Bible is the evidence for it.
Please give one example of such evidence.
Make no mistake. Sometimes what appears to be silly, meaningless or just plain entirely wrong indeed is.
No. It is a barebones argument.We share DNA also with pigs, bananas, chickens, cats, mice and slugs, but does this mean that we developed from them?
This is a strawman argument.
How Much DNA Do Humans Share With Other Animals and Plants?
beenhereKey Takeaways: Nearly 99.9% of human DNA is identical to that of other humans. Cats and humans share about 90% of their genetic makeup. Around 85% of human DNA is shared with mice. Humans and pigs share a substantial portion of DNA, about 98%. Over half of human DNA, or…
The science of it exists and isn't all that difficult to find, even though most people are badly undereducated to attempt to understand it.
To call that a "strawman" is misleading - or maybe it is just a misunderstanding of strawmen?
justaguy313
Active Member
The theory of it exists. It's a theory which was established as granted by the educational system.
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
Anyways, I don't believe that homo erectus, cromagnon and further down the rabbit hole of Darwin's evolution were our common ancestors. I believe they were extraterrestrials some of which still exist today on planet Earth. Haytan or Sasquatch are a clear proof of that.
Oh. Ok then. Or not.
All it takes is refusing to accept the evidence that exists. So much for your authority of calling strawmen.
justaguy313
Active Member
I could say the same about majority of people not accepting that Sasquatch exists. Most humans that believe that we come from God can't accept the theory of evolution. And that is far from that we are being stupid and that we don't accept evidence. And if you research the history of Darwin and eugenicists you will find some interesting things. Also the term social darwinism didn't come up out of the blue.
Episode 074 – The Inbred Elite’s Million Year Plan | The Corbett Report
www.corbettreport.com
Last edited:
Sorry, not lending significance to that ... thing.I could say the same about majority of people not accepting that Sasquatch exists. Most humans that believe that we come from God can't accept the theory of evolution. And that is far from that we are being stupid and that we don't accept evidence. And if you research the history of Darwin and eugenicists you will find some interesting things. Also the term social darwinism didn't come up out of the blue.
Episode 074 – The Inbred Elite’s Million Year Plan | The Corbett Report
In terms of Noah's flood there is absolutely no evidence of regional or world wide flood deposits of sediments that date to the time the Bible describes. In the region of the Levant there is no evidence of even local catastrophic floods. Evidence of Local Catastrophic floods around the world in geologic history have known causes, such as river floods, Tsunamis, and Ice Age floods. None match the age of the Biblical account.
Did Noah's flood really happen?
Noah's flood is a story much older than the Bible, and researchers are still learning about its roots.
But what if more than the water in the "heavens" were considered? If all the world's glaciers and ice sheets were to melt, then sea levels would rise by more than 195 feet (60 meters), according to NASA, which would add a bit more water. Moreover, a 2016 study published in the journal Nature Geoscience estimated that there's 5.4 million cubic miles (22.6 million cubic kilometers) of groundwater stored in the upper 1.2 miles (2 km) of Earth's crust, which is enough to cover the land to a depth of 590 feet (180 m). That's a lot of water, but there are cities thousands of feet above sea level, and Mount Everest, the highest mountain on Earth, is more than 29,000 feet (8,849 m) above sea level. On top of that, geologists don't see evidence for a global flood in the rock record.
It is likely that the Noah's flood record in the Bible is a rewrite and redacted version of an earlier local catastrophic flood of the Tigris Euphrates River recorded by the Sumerians. Versions of this flood story appears in Babylonian, Ugarit/Canaanite/Phoenician writings, and appears later in the Pentateuch in a Hebrew version after 660 BCE.
The Hebrew language did not exist before 600 BCE. All we have is scrapes of the use of primitive Pre-Canaanite writing among the Hebrews for trade and legal reasons common to the Levant cultures.
Actually Most Americans 52% do accept the sciences of evolution as either Theistic Evolution (TE) or Natural Causes, and do not accept the literal Biblical record of the Pentateuch. By far only a relatively few people believe in the Sasquatch. Yes literal Creationism remains popular among Christians 42%.I could say the same about majority of people not accepting that Sasquatch exists. Most humans that believe that we come from God can't accept the theory of evolution. And that is far from that we are being stupid and that we don't accept evidence. And if you research the history of Darwin and eugenicists you will find some interesting things. Also the term social darwinism didn't come up out of the blue.
Episode 074 – The Inbred Elite’s Million Year Plan | The Corbett Report
What's New
FDU What's New keeps you up-to-date on all the latest news and stories from Fairleigh Dickinson University.
www.fdu.edu
Only 22% Americans believe in Sasquatch is 2020.
Social Darwinism has no acceptance and standing in contemporary science..
The Bible is not independent evidence by definition. There are no records in the Bible recorded at the time they occured. There needs to independent evidence to be accepted by science and academic history. The Noah flood and other supernatural events recorded in the Bible lack any independent evidence. Even the existence and live of Jesus does not have any independent historical records during his lifetime much less the supernatural events in the NT during his life. Academic history accepts the existence of a historical Jesus, but the religious claims of Jesus remain religious claims, and not historical facts.
Scientific evidence - Wikipedia
Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis,[1] although scientists also use evidence in other ways, such as when applying theories to practical problems.[2] Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with the scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls.
As far a ancient scripture is considered. The supernatural and undocumented sources It is considered as the history of religious belief of the different religions. The religious and supernatural claims of the different religions whether Buddhist, Hindu or Christian cannot be considered factual history. Virtually all ancient scripture including the Bible lacks first person records at the time the scripture was edited and compiled.
Academic History and the supernatural
Critical History and the Supernatural
Abstract. A variation on the epistemological objection to special acts of God (miracles) investigated in the previous chapter is the claim that such acts c
8 Critical History and the Supernatural
Abstract
A variation on the epistemological objection to special acts of God (miracles) investigated in the previous chapter is the claim that such acts cannot be recognized by anyone who is committed to critical, historical investigation. This kind of argument, which rests on the nature of historical knowledge and critical historical method, is considered in this chapter. If the incarnational narrative necessarily includes such divine actions, then the argument claims that we cannot have historical knowledge of it. The different sections of the chapter are: rationalism about religious knowledge; can the rationalist conception of religious knowledge be defended?; Hans Frei and the character of the biblical narrative; the assumptions of the ‘critical historian’; Troeltsch’s principles of correlation and analogy; and the sociology of knowledge and appeals to authority.
Last edited:
Jimmy
King Phenomenon
Not in this case
justaguy313
Active Member
Suit yourself, but that doesn't mean that you refuted arguments presented in the attachments.
Without further coherent posts it is the case.