*Author

KyuubisSlave

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114055#msg114055
« Reply #108 on: July 14, 2010, 03:41:26 am »
is it really 50,000??? Hmm, I dont seem to remember that, nevertheless, as Ive pointed out, it is easily disturbed. Now, when it comes to Radio-Isotopes, God created everything in an adult form, and so the radio-isotopes of everything would already be off, and especially if you dont believe it is a literal 7 days, it explains the Isotopes as well.
you really have very little understanding of the way we date things do you?
nope not at all. This is actually one of the more scientific hard data things that I looked at. Tell me, how am I missing it? I never said the data was innacurate, all I simply pointed out is that it doesnt in any way contradict the bible.
according to the bible everything was created 6000 years ago, yet we have fossils that date back, millions of years.

Offline Boingo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1605
  • Reputation Power: 26
  • Boingo is a proud Wyrm taking wing for the first time.Boingo is a proud Wyrm taking wing for the first time.Boingo is a proud Wyrm taking wing for the first time.Boingo is a proud Wyrm taking wing for the first time.Boingo is a proud Wyrm taking wing for the first time.
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114058#msg114058
« Reply #109 on: July 14, 2010, 03:50:37 am »
is it really 50,000??? Hmm, I dont seem to remember that, nevertheless, as Ive pointed out, it is easily disturbed. Now, when it comes to Radio-Isotopes, God created everything in an adult form, and so the radio-isotopes of everything would already be off, and especially if you dont believe it is a literal 7 days, it explains the Isotopes as well.
you really have very little understanding of the way we date things do you?
nope not at all. This is actually one of the more scientific hard data things that I looked at. Tell me, how am I missing it? I never said the data was innacurate, all I simply pointed out is that it doesnt in any way contradict the bible.
according to the bible everything was created 6000 years ago, yet we have fossils that date back, millions of years.
I'm interested to read the Bible part about the 6000 years.  Can you send me a link referencing that number?
Bring back Holy Cow!

KyuubisSlave

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114067#msg114067
« Reply #110 on: July 14, 2010, 04:11:21 am »
is it really 50,000??? Hmm, I dont seem to remember that, nevertheless, as Ive pointed out, it is easily disturbed. Now, when it comes to Radio-Isotopes, God created everything in an adult form, and so the radio-isotopes of everything would already be off, and especially if you dont believe it is a literal 7 days, it explains the Isotopes as well.
you really have very little understanding of the way we date things do you?
nope not at all. This is actually one of the more scientific hard data things that I looked at. Tell me, how am I missing it? I never said the data was innacurate, all I simply pointed out is that it doesnt in any way contradict the bible.
according to the bible everything was created 6000 years ago, yet we have fossils that date back, millions of years.
I'm interested to read the Bible part about the 6000 years.  Can you send me a link referencing that number?
my bad, I meant 8000


Nowehere in the Bible is the age of the Earth mentioned. Bishop Ussher, in a remarkably scholarly attempt well before the advent of modern day geological thnking, estimated the age of the Earth by counting up all the generations in the Old testament, plus a few adjustments here and there. He came up with a date for Genesis at just over 6000 years BC

Offline BluePriestTopic starter

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Reputation Power: 46
  • BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.BluePriest is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • Entropy Has You
  • Awards: Slice of Elements 5th Birthday Cake
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114364#msg114364
« Reply #111 on: July 14, 2010, 03:46:28 pm »
is it really 50,000??? Hmm, I dont seem to remember that, nevertheless, as Ive pointed out, it is easily disturbed. Now, when it comes to Radio-Isotopes, God created everything in an adult form, and so the radio-isotopes of everything would already be off, and especially if you dont believe it is a literal 7 days, it explains the Isotopes as well.
you really have very little understanding of the way we date things do you?
nope not at all. This is actually one of the more scientific hard data things that I looked at. Tell me, how am I missing it? I never said the data was innacurate, all I simply pointed out is that it doesnt in any way contradict the bible.
according to the bible everything was created 6000 years ago, yet we have fossils that date back, millions of years.
I'm interested to read the Bible part about the 6000 years.  Can you send me a link referencing that number?
my bad, I meant 8000


Nowehere in the Bible is the age of the Earth mentioned. Bishop Ussher, in a remarkably scholarly attempt well before the advent of modern day geological thnking, estimated the age of the Earth by counting up all the generations in the Old testament, plus a few adjustments here and there. He came up with a date for Genesis at just over 6000 years BC
do you know what the "Gap Theory" is? Ive had tons of debates about genesis being taken literally or not. Ive talked to friends that are biblical scholars and they seem to agree that when you look at it in the hebrew the language is very poetic, and therefor not meant to be taken literally, so the bible isnt restricted to 8000 years. It could very will be several million or even billion years.
This sig was interrupted by Joe Biden

Offline Chemist

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Reputation Power: 4
  • Chemist is a Spark waiting for a buff.
  • New to Elements
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114647#msg114647
« Reply #112 on: July 14, 2010, 11:25:42 pm »
is it really 50,000??? Hmm, I dont seem to remember that, nevertheless, as Ive pointed out, it is easily disturbed. Now, when it comes to Radio-Isotopes, God created everything in an adult form, and so the radio-isotopes of everything would already be off, and especially if you dont believe it is a literal 7 days, it explains the Isotopes as well.
you really have very little understanding of the way we date things do you?
nope not at all. This is actually one of the more scientific hard data things that I looked at. Tell me, how am I missing it? I never said the data was innacurate, all I simply pointed out is that it doesnt in any way contradict the bible.
according to the bible everything was created 6000 years ago, yet we have fossils that date back, millions of years.
I'm interested to read the Bible part about the 6000 years.  Can you send me a link referencing that number?
my bad, I meant 8000


Nowehere in the Bible is the age of the Earth mentioned. Bishop Ussher, in a remarkably scholarly attempt well before the advent of modern day geological thnking, estimated the age of the Earth by counting up all the generations in the Old testament, plus a few adjustments here and there. He came up with a date for Genesis at just over 6000 years BC
do you know what the "Gap Theory" is? Ive had tons of debates about genesis being taken literally or not. Ive talked to friends that are biblical scholars and they seem to agree that when you look at it in the hebrew the language is very poetic, and therefor not meant to be taken literally, so the bible isnt restricted to 8000 years. It could very will be several million or even billion years.
Just as there's no reason to take it seriously either. Evolution has a lot of evidence going for it. The Bible, on the other hand, is proven true by God... the existence of which is proven by the Bible.

And face it: one can't extract anything of real value from the Bible. Sure, it helps historians, but is about as factual as the Illiad and the Oddyssey - whereas the theory of evolution helps give us new vaccines (among other things). If you're looking for facts on how the Universe works then reading the Bible is a waste of time.

PuppyChow

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114685#msg114685
« Reply #113 on: July 15, 2010, 12:38:41 am »
Quote
And face it: one can't extract anything of real value from the Bible. Sure, it helps historians, but is about as factual as the Illiad and the Oddyssey - whereas the theory of evolution helps give us new vaccines (among other things). If you're looking for facts on how the Universe works then reading the Bible is a waste of time.
Sure, you shouldn't be looking to the Bible to explain how the universe works. But saying you can't extract anything of real value from it is bogus. It is first and foremost a book used to provide a set of moral codes (particularly the new testament) and provide God's teachings for you. If you don't count acting morally as anything of real value, then I don't know what to tell you. The Illiad/the Oddyssey do no such thing.

Offline Chemist

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Reputation Power: 4
  • Chemist is a Spark waiting for a buff.
  • New to Elements
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114901#msg114901
« Reply #114 on: July 15, 2010, 06:25:11 am »
Quote
And face it: one can't extract anything of real value from the Bible. Sure, it helps historians, but is about as factual as the Illiad and the Oddyssey - whereas the theory of evolution helps give us new vaccines (among other things). If you're looking for facts on how the Universe works then reading the Bible is a waste of time.
Sure, you shouldn't be looking to the Bible to explain how the universe works. But saying you can't extract anything of real value from it is bogus. It is first and foremost a book used to provide a set of moral codes (particularly the new testament) and provide God's teachings for you. If you don't count acting morally as anything of real value, then I don't know what to tell you. The Illiad/the Oddyssey do no such thing.
It provides a set of morals, but justifies them by divine authority - which is simply ridiculous. No matter what your religion teaches you, believing that morals are absolute and set in stone by a creator deity is dangerous.

It's what makes suicide bombers possible. Would you kill someone if the Bible told you to? No? And yet the Bible is telling you to... you just choose to ignore that part. Which is good: we should use our own heads and (collective) judgment to determine what is and what isn't moral.

(Note that the Bible has been reinterpreted to reach certain moral standards (e.g. Don't kill a Jew -> Don't kill a human being) so that people in the developed world would still listen to it ... much like the Qur'an has been reinterpreted in some parts of the world to make suicide bombers.)

Artois

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114954#msg114954
« Reply #115 on: July 15, 2010, 09:28:26 am »
I read with interest that a new fossil has been found, that may link man's ancestors to Old World Monkey's & Apes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science+environment-10633640 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science+environment-10633640)

Innominate

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg114990#msg114990
« Reply #116 on: July 15, 2010, 12:20:46 pm »
If we are the result of intelligent design, then why have we got a stupid appendix that we don't need?  That's not intelligent... in fact it looks rather like a random flaw that is more likely the result of evolution.
As BluePriest pointed out, the appendix is actually useful. Of course, it is more likely that it is an evolutionary adaptation for an organ that we evolved not to need than that it was created to serve a purpose that could easily be done by a smaller organ that would take less energy to maintain and wouldn't be prone to inflammation that can cause death.

A quote by David Attenborough on intelligent design:
Quote from: David Attenborough
I tell them they ought occasionally to think less of beautiful things like hummingbirds and orchids and sunflowers and think of other, less attractive things. They might, for example, think of the parasitic worms that live only in the eyeballs of human beings. Think of that worm boring its way through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa. A worm that’s going to make him blind. Are you telling me that God or an intelligent designer created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child’s eyeball?
Now the stock creationist response is that it used to have more functions and it "lost" them (specialisation in evolutionary terminology). This conveniently explains other deficiencies of creation, like the female human's hips being too close together to accommodate a baby (so they need to be forced apart, sometimes tearing the muscles and tendons in that region, and occasionally causing a vesicovaginal fistula - which is when the flesh between the vagina and the bladder is ripped apart, causing it to leak out the opening, which in turn causes infection and death) - when pushed apart for birth, the hips are then too far apart to walk. Actually, pregnancy has dozens of horrible design 'features'. The enlarged uterus presses on the bladder, causing incontinence (and a caesarian section does not circumvent this problem unless done prematurely). If humans had quadrupedal ancestors, then gravity would cause the foetus to avoid squeezing any important organs. Presumably when god created humans, he held the diagram the wrong way up.

Then there's ovulation, which for some women is excruciatingly painful for up to 8 days in a month. Nausea, cramps, hormonal fluctuations; some women get it all. Men aren't much better off; we have external testes that cause great pain when jolted or twisted, a prostate that in later years (after reproductive age, so not evolutionarily selected against) becomes highly prone to cancer (1 in 11 over a lifetime - not as bad as the 20% of women who experience Mittelschmerz, or painful ovulation) and swells - making urination difficult or painful. Our hearts (more on average than women's) build up lipid (fat) deposits which the body tries to "plaster over", and eventually the 'plaster' fails and a huge clot blocks off an artery and causes a heart attack (once again, evolutionarily not selected for, as it mainly occurs in people after the age of reproduction in our ancestors - 12-25). The same thing happens in the brain and causes stroke. Sometimes the pancreas doesn't produce the right amount of insulin, or the body develops a resistance to it, causing diabetes. We breathe, eat and drink through the same aperture, with the oesophagus and larynx being right next to each other.

Bile constantly forms in the liver and is stored in the gall bladder, which can form stones which are extremely painful to pass. A woman who has both passed gall stones and children could probably tell us which is worse, but it strikes me (who has experienced neither) as about equal. The sinuses get infected because they can't drain properly in a bipedal stance (another throwback to our quadrupedal ancestry). Humans can't digest cellulose, so we get very little nutrition from some vegetables and none at all from grass or cardboard :P, both of which would make survival much easier (the vegetables and the grass, not the cardboard). Wisdom teeth are too large or our jaws are too small, take your pick, causing pain. Walking upright stresses the lumbar vertebrae and causes back problems in older people.

(many of these problems were taken from ScienceBlogs.com (http://"http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/11/ask_a_scienceblogger_which_par.php"), which ends with the additional observation that we can't regrow limbs like salamanders can, which sucks)

Offline ratcharmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 872
  • Reputation Power: 10
  • ratcharmer is taking their first peeks out of the Antlion's burrow.ratcharmer is taking their first peeks out of the Antlion's burrow.
  • I'm back, it's been a while.
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg116160#msg116160
« Reply #117 on: July 16, 2010, 05:03:40 pm »
Of interest to this topic, Dr. Francis S. Collins, one of the lead scientists in charge of the human genome project, has published a very excellent book on the perceived conflicts between evolution and religion. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the topic.

Here's a link to an article on the book:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-08-07/news/17305535_1_dr-francis-s-collins-human-genome-project-atheist

Like Dr. Collins, I've never seen a conflict between the two.

PhuzzY LogiK

  • Guest
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg116652#msg116652
« Reply #118 on: July 17, 2010, 06:49:53 am »
Of interest to this topic, Dr. Francis S. Collins, one of the lead scientists in charge of the human genome project, has published a very excellent book on the perceived conflicts between evolution and religion. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the topic.

Here's a link to an article on the book:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-08-07/news/17305535_1_dr-francis-s-collins-human-genome-project-atheist

Like Dr. Collins, I've never seen a conflict between the two.
I don't have a problem with theism, but it annoys me that he became a christian.  I've never read the book, so perhaps he elaborates there, but none of his arguments conclude exclusively in christianity.  It seems like that was just a convenient expression for his supernatural questions.

In one book I read, religion was defined as the "impulse for meaning and coherence".  I don't think that conflicts with science, but I think it's questionable to subscribe to a formalized belief system such as christianity.

Offline ratcharmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 872
  • Reputation Power: 10
  • ratcharmer is taking their first peeks out of the Antlion's burrow.ratcharmer is taking their first peeks out of the Antlion's burrow.
  • I'm back, it's been a while.
Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4398.msg116773#msg116773
« Reply #119 on: July 17, 2010, 01:26:48 pm »
I don't have a problem with theism, but it annoys me that he became a christian.  I've never read the book, so perhaps he elaborates there, but none of his arguments conclude exclusively in christianity.  It seems like that was just a convenient expression for his supernatural questions.

In one book I read, religion was defined as the "impulse for meaning and coherence".  I don't think that conflicts with science, but I think it's questionable to subscribe to a formalized belief system such as christianity.
He isn't giving arguments in the link I posted. It's an interview. Someone asked him how he became Christian and he told the story.

You can't look at everything anyone says as if it's the defining argument about their beliefs. That just doesn't make sense.

I do have to wonder why you have such a strong beef specifically with Christians, but that might be getting off topic.

On a side note, that is not how I would define religion-an atheist might claim that such an impulse is the cause of religion, but I don't think that one can claim the impulse itself is religion. Unfortunately many terms, like religion, have only vague formal definitions which allows for some people to manipulate how they define terms when making arguments, which I always thought was somewhat dishonest.

Obviously I can't say whether I think the author of your book was being dishonest or if he simply thinks of religion very differently than I do, since I don't even know which book it is let alone read it.

 

blarg: