• 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!

Why I believe God Created Life.

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Evolution has not been proven - there is absolutely no real evidence - only theory.

So puhleaze - don't wax nonsense.

If it was a fact - it would be called the fact of Evolution - so why is it still a theory? because it remains unproven - DUH

As for you thnking I am a proponent of the 24hour day of creation theory lol, no I'm not. The context provide clear evidence that the YOM in genesis refers to extended periods of time akin to an age - and not a day.

Let's not forget that in Genesis, God created the 2 lights (the sun and moon) which would have set the 24 hour clock - so how long were the first three days? and was the fourth day only 24 hours? NO. It was only 24 hours on earth... Look, I'm serious about study, I've put in the time, and i've done the research, and understood it contextually - yet what I find here is that people are ready to ask questions to people they dont know on the web - and when the answers are given, the questioner wants an argument from the point of authority? Hypocritical here isn't it?

So next time you reply to my post, be aware that I am aware.



ITS A PROVEN FACT!!! Its also a working scientific theory, but you don't know what a scientific theory is, you think its a hypothesis, its not.

Evolution is based on Billions of facts that make the scientific theory.

National academy of Sciences.

"Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

© PhotoDisc In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.

In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions."

From Science, Evolution, and Creationism, National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine. © 2008 National Academy of Sciences


Evolution Resources from the National Academies


a joint statement of IAP by 68 national and international science academies lists as established scientific fact that Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old and has undergone continual change; that life, according to the evidence of earliest fossils, appeared on Earth at least 3.8 billion years ago and has subsequently taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve; and that the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicates their common primordial origin



DNA Agrees With All the Other Science: Darwin Was Right

Molecular biologist Sean Carroll shows how evolution happens, one snippet of DNA at a time




One of the great triumphs of modern evolutionary science, evo devo addresses many of the key questions that were unanswerable when Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, and Carroll has become a leader in this nascent field. Now a professor of molecular biology and genetics at the University of Wisconsin, he continues to decode the genes that control life’s physical forms and to explore how mutations in those genes drive evolutionary change. These days, Carroll also devotes increasing energy to telling the public about his field’s remarkable discoveries through a series of books—Endless Forms Most Beautiful, The Making of the Fittest, and the brand-new Remarkable Creatures. He spoke with DISCOVER senior editor Pamela Weintraub about what his work has taught him about Darwin, the nature of evolution, and how life really works.

It has been 150 years since Charles Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in On the Origin of Species, yet in some ways the concept of evolution seems more controversial than ever today. Why do you think that is?
It is a cultural issue, not a scientific one.
On the science side our confidence grows yearly because we see independent lines of evidence converge. What we’ve learned from the fossil record is confirmed by the DNA record and confirmed again by embryology. But people have been raised to disbelieve evolution and to hold other ideas more precious than this knowledge. At the same time, we routinely rely on DNA to convict and exonerate criminals. We rely on DNA science for things like paternity. We rely on DNA science in the clinic to weigh our disease risks or maybe even to look at prognoses for things like cancer. DNA science surrounds us, but in this one realm we seem unwilling to accept its facts. Juries are willing to put people to death based upon the variations in DNA, but they’re not willing to understand the mechanism that creates that variation and shapes what makes humans different from other things. It’s a blindness. I think this is a phase that we’ll eventually get through. Other countries have come to peace with DNA. I don’t know how many decades or centuries it’s going to take us.

DNA Agrees With All the Other Science: Darwin Was Right | DiscoverMagazine.com


They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To
Our species—and individual races—have recently made big evolutionary changes to adjust to new pressures.


They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To | DiscoverMagazine.com


Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving

A comprehensive scan of the human genome finds that hundreds of our genes have undergone positive natural selection during the past 10,000 years of human evolution.


Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving | LiveScience


New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution

Homo sapiens originated in Africa 150,000 years ago and began to migrate 55,000 to 60,000 years ago. It is thought he arrived in Australia around 45,000 years before present (BP). Australia was, at the time, already colonised by homo erectus. This dispersal, from Africa to Australia through Arabia, Asia and the Malay peninsula, could have occurred at a rate of 1km per year. (Credit: Image courtesy of University Of Cambridge)

New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution -- ScienceDaily

The empirical evidence is overwhelming and its a done deal, supported by all the sciences. Some people just refuse to get it or really look into it.


Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving

A comprehensive scan of the human genome finds that hundreds of our genes have undergone positive natural selection during the past 10,000 years of human evolution.


Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving | LiveScience
 

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
Darwin was a racist, therefore evolution is false. :sarcastic

Scimitar, how old do you believe the Earth to be (and more importantly, why)?
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution's Human

Human Evolution Evidence

Evidence of Evolution

Scientists have discovered a wealth of evidence concerning human evolution, and this evidence comes in many forms. Thousands of human fossils enable researchers and students to study the changes that occurred in brain and body size, locomotion, diet, and other aspects regarding the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years. Millions of stone tools, figurines and paintings, footprints, and other traces of human behavior in the prehistoric record tell about where and how early humans lived and when certain technological innovations were invented. Study of human genetics show how closely related we are to other primates – in fact, how connected we are with all other organisms – and can indicate the prehistoric migrations of our species, Homo sapiens, all over the world. Advances in the dating of fossils and artifacts help determine the age of those remains, which contributes to the big picture of when different milestones in becoming human evolved.

Exciting scientific discoveries continually add to the broader and deeper public knowledge of human evolution. Find out about the latest evidence in our What’s Hot in Human Origins section.

Image of paleoanthropologist Dr. Potts surveying archaeological site.
Behavior
Explore the evidence of early human behavior—from ancient footprints to stone tools and the earliest symbols and art – along with similarities and differences in the behavior of other primate species.

Image of Skhūl V, 3D scan, 3/4 view
3D Collection
Explore our 3D collection of fossils, artifacts, primates, and other animals.

Image of STS-5 fossil skull
Human Fossils
From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. Look into our digital 3-D collection and learn about fossil human species.

Looking at DNA model
Genetics
Our genes offer evidence of how closely we are related to one another – and of our species’ connection with all other organisms.

Image of stratigraphic layers.
Dating
The layers that contain fossils and archeological clues can be dated by more than a dozen techniques that use the basic principles of physics, chemistry, and Earth sciences. Some techniques can even estimate the age of the ancient teeth and bones directly. Advances in dating have made human evolution very exciting!

Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program


Of course its your religion that right as well, but

"Let's not forget that in Genesis, God created the 2 lights (the sun and moon) "

Nor did birds come before land animals we know birds evolved from Dinosaurs. We also know the first plants flower around 125,000 million years ago.

The first flower

NOVA | First Flower | PBS

The moon is not a light source. The moon formed by a collision with the Earth by a planet the size of mars. We know how the sun and solar system formed by stellar evolution, the entire universe has evolved.

By the way where did the dinosaurs go? Or all the animals that lived 300 million years ago on Pangea that also disappeared?
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
Yes, I have. It has vast undertones of racism and imperial breeding. being the best of natural selection etc... and that the white race is the superior race - these undertones make this book subjectively racist and a work of loose fiction posing as science... even darwin himself said that the theory was unlikely in his opinion, near the end of the book.


Darwin was a Christian at the time of its writing, too. So I wouldn't try to get too righteous by taking this route, if I were you.

So. You picked up everything that pinged your cognitive bias, but the actual information contained therein was lost upon you. Good to know.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Rusra02, as I'm about the only one somewhat on your side in this debate, I'm curious to hear more about what you do believe about life on earth. I'm pretty clear you are not an evolutionist but how do you think humans came to exist in our current form? Did we get created in our current form by God in a sudden event? Or what?

For example, I believe in abiogenesis and evolution fostered by Nature Spirits who are far beyond us in intelligence and abilities but not omniscient and omnipotent.

The Bible explains that "God is a Spirit" and that he has created millions of spirit sons. (John 4:24, Psalm 104:4) The Bible describes in simple language how the first human was created. Genesis 2:7 states: "And Jehovah God went on to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living person." Man was Jehovah's crowning earthly masterpiece, comprised of elements found on earth. One would not inspect a painters masterpiece and then claim the painting just happened by chance or 'natural selection'. Yet, the greatest masterpiece ever created by man is as nothing in comparison to the surpassing brilliance of design in the human body, IMO.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
rusra02, how old do you believe the Earth to be and why?

I really do not know how old the earth is. I do believe YECs are grossly in error, and bring unwarranted disrepute upon the Bible. The Bible simply states that God created the earth and heavens "In the beginning." The 14 billion years currently estimated may be correct or it may not. I think it is noteworthy that what the Bible says has been confirmed by science, that the universe indeed had a beginning.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Then why do you know so little about it all. Evolution is a SCIENTIFIC FACT and a working scientific theory.

ALL OF BIOLOGY IS BASED ON IT!!!

In 150 years of and its only gained more evidence.

The Human DNA genenome proves a comment decent from bacteria and viruses. You might also want to find better resources then the JW website and articles from 1999.

I know you didn't look at the entire Smithsonian human orgins program and the information there.

"I consider these questions to be of paramount importance"

If you do why don't you learn about it and the earth?

I do not agree with your assertion that all biology is based on the ToE. There are many biologists and other scientists who publicly reject the ToE. I believe many more keep their doubts to themselves.
In many cases, IMO, the blind faith put in the ToE has led researchers down many dead-end paths. Two examples are so-called vestigial organs and "junk" DNA. Thus, true science has been hindered by this theory. Repeating over and over that macro "evolution is a fact" doesn't make it so. That is propaganda.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I do not agree with your assertion that all biology is based on the ToE. There are many biologists and other scientists who publicly reject the ToE.

Define "many". You may not be lying intentionally, but you are lying all the same.

I believe many more keep their doubts to themselves.

Not if they actually understand biology at all, which they would need to do useful work.


In many cases, IMO, the blind faith put in the ToE has led researchers down many dead-end paths. Two examples are so-called vestigial organs and "junk" DNA. Thus, true science has been hindered by this theory. Repeating over and over that macro "evolution is a fact" doesn't make it so. That is propaganda.

Sorry, but we are entering delusional territory now.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Evolution has not been proven - there is absolutely no real evidence - only theory.
You have the wrong idea of what a scientific theory really means.

A scientific theory is build upon facts, evidence, research, and such.

A theory is essentially a model of something. The theory of evolution is the model of how evolution works and why. The fact that evolution is happening is true. Evolution is a fact. It is happening. We know it. We can see it and study it. But we're still trying to figure out how it works, and that's where the model (theory) comes in. The theory explains the parts and how they work together, but there are still things missing in it, but it doesn't make evolution as such wrong or false.

So puhleaze - don't wax nonsense.
Your comment above was nonsense.


If it was a fact - it would be called the fact of Evolution - so why is it still a theory? because it remains unproven - DUH
Because there's a difference.

Evolution is a fact. We know that it is happening.

The theory of evolution is the model that tries to explain how and why it is happening. The model will never be called "The Fact" since it is built upon millions of pieces of facts. It's like calling the library "A Book".

As for you thnking I am a proponent of the 24hour day of creation theory lol, no I'm not. The context provide clear evidence that the YOM in genesis refers to extended periods of time akin to an age - and not a day.
Sure. The day concept doesn't work that's for sure. And I have no problem reading Genesis as a mythological religious text with some very deep insights into the human condition.

Let's not forget that in Genesis, God created the 2 lights (the sun and moon) which would have set the 24 hour clock - so how long were the first three days? and was the fourth day only 24 hours? NO. It was only 24 hours on earth... Look, I'm serious about study, I've put in the time, and i've done the research, and understood it contextually - yet what I find here is that people are ready to ask questions to people they dont know on the web - and when the answers are given, the questioner wants an argument from the point of authority? Hypocritical here isn't it?
Well... I don't think the literal day works in Genesis simply because our planet is a sphere and we're rotating which means we have day and night, dusk and dawn, all around the planet at all times. There's no single "day" or "night" to refer to.

So next time you reply to my post, be aware that I am aware.
It's good that you're aware. Keep it up.
 

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
So, what directs it, in your opinion? How do you define "natural selection"?
You don't know how natural selection works? It is an inherently directional process in itself because it selects in favor of some traits and not others. Those genetically-derived traits which increase the likelihood of survival and reproduction are selected for and become more common.

I really do not know how old the earth is. I do believe YECs are grossly in error, and bring unwarranted disrepute upon the Bible. The Bible simply states that God created the earth and heavens "In the beginning." The 14 billion years currently estimated may be correct or it may not. I think it is noteworthy that what the Bible says has been confirmed by science, that the universe indeed had a beginning.
If you don't know how old the Earth is, then how are you so sure that the YECs are wrong about their estimates of the Earth's age?
 

McBell

Unbound
Evolution has not been proven - there is absolutely no real evidence - only theory.

So puhleaze - don't wax nonsense.

If it was a fact - it would be called the fact of Evolution - so why is it still a theory? because it remains unproven - DUH

As for you thnking I am a proponent of the 24hour day of creation theory lol, no I'm not. The context provide clear evidence that the YOM in genesis refers to extended periods of time akin to an age - and not a day.

Let's not forget that in Genesis, God created the 2 lights (the sun and moon) which would have set the 24 hour clock - so how long were the first three days? and was the fourth day only 24 hours? NO. It was only 24 hours on earth... Look, I'm serious about study, I've put in the time, and i've done the research, and understood it contextually - yet what I find here is that people are ready to ask questions to people they dont know on the web - and when the answers are given, the questioner wants an argument from the point of authority? Hypocritical here isn't it?

So next time you reply to my post, be aware that I am aware.

:biglaugh:

Kent?
Kent Hovind?

Is that you?

:biglaugh:
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You don't know how natural selection works? It is an inherently directional process in itself because it selects in favor of some traits and not others. Those genetically-derived traits which increase the likelihood of survival and reproduction are selected for and become more common.


If you don't know how old the Earth is, then how are you so sure that the YECs are wrong about their estimates of the Earth's age?

So, natural selection is a directional process that selects which traits a plant or animal needs to survive and/or reproduce? And what mechanism controls this selection process? Is it your belief that this process is responsible for all the designs evident in nature? The molecular machines in cells, for example?

I believe science has proven the earth is far older than six thousand years. True science and the Bible are not incompatible.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Define "many". You may not be lying intentionally, but you are lying all the same.



Not if they actually understand biology at all, which they would need to do useful work.




Sorry, but we are entering delusional territory now.

Happily, people can search the Internet for information on this for themselves, and can determine for themselves who is lying and who is not.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I believe science has proven the earth is far older than six thousand years. True science and the Bible are not incompatible.

If you define True science as consisting of only those parts that do not contradict the Bible, then this sentence is tautological.

Ciao

- viole
 

nazz

Doubting Thomas
If you define True science as consisting of only those parts that do not contradict the Bible, then this sentence is tautological.

Ciao

- viole

Indeed. It really annoys me when people say they believe in "true science" when in fact they do not. Either one accepts the scientific method or one does not. You can't cherry pick.
 
Top