BF2S Forums Evolution vs. Creationism (Revisited)

Turquoise wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Agreed...  there are great morals in the Bible, but yes, the Baptists down here are ALL about the Rapture and Revelations...  Don't even mention the Pentecostals either...  my God (no pun intended).

There are things I don't understand about Catholics (like how some of them view birth control and abortion), but when it comes to science, I think they understand it far better than many Protestants.

Define protestant...

Southern Baptists argue that science is the Devil's work

We Lutherans love science (makes us rich )

Touche...  I was raised Methodist, and they were actually pretty sensible about it too.  The funny thing is...  I befriended an atheist and an agnostic in our youth group before I became an atheist myself.  These guys had been forced to go to church because of their parents, but they didn't want to tell their parents their lack of belief...  lol

Whatever the case, you make a good point.  I should have said Baptist rather than Protestant.

American churches have more divisions than my calc final, I usually just group them all together too...

1. Southern crazies
2. Catholics
3. Mormons
4. other (I fall here)

Since most liberal/moderate religions don't really go nuts when you question their beliefs, I doubt they get too much press time, which explains why so few know about them

edit: I suck at speilng

Last edited by S.Lythberg (2007-07-09 18:54:47)

Good points...  I was good friends with a Lutheran guy in high school.  He was pretty open-minded and rational.  Most Methodists and Lutherans seem more levelheaded than their Baptist counterparts.

Now...  Mormons are an interesting bunch.  I don't quite understand how they can be so easygoing and mild mannered on the surface but still have such...  strange rituals "on the inside" of their culture.  I remember when Bill Maher once referred to one of them as the "magical underwear" ritual.  He was referring to the "garments" of some ritual of adulthood.

oug wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Oug...  What's the typical outlook of the Greek Orthodox Church on evolution?  I know they have some similarities to the Catholic Church, but I really don't know much about them....

You mean like an official stance of the Church? I really don't know man... I try to keep away from them as much as possible!

But generally speaking, I just don't see the same level of debate about creationism vs evolution around here. The way I see it, the clergy probably agree on the "correctness" shall we say of Evolution, yet I guess if you were to ask a priest you'd probably get the creationism poem for appearances' sake and how evolution doesn't necessarily disprove anything. But I could be wrong...

One of my coworker's boyfriends is 2nd-generation Greek, and his parents are very traditional, so I was just wondering.  She mentioned how they insist that they get married in a Greek Orthodox Church, while her parents insist that it's in a Catholic Church.

I'm like, does God honestly care?

Turquoise wrote:

One of my coworker's boyfriends is 2nd-generation Greek, and his parents are very traditional, so I was just wondering.  She mentioned how they insist that they get married in a Greek Orthodox Church, while her parents insist that it's in a Catholic Church.

I'm like, does God honestly care?

Did you tell that couple to watch the how-to film My Big Fat Greek Wedding?

DesertFox- wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

One of my coworker's boyfriends is 2nd-generation Greek, and his parents are very traditional, so I was just wondering.  She mentioned how they insist that they get married in a Greek Orthodox Church, while her parents insist that it's in a Catholic Church.

I'm like, does God honestly care?

Did you tell that couple to watch the how-to film My Big Fat Greek Wedding?

LOL... maybe I should

Actually, I just want someone to explain how they found dino bones with soft tissue still inside??
I mean I figure after a few million years and it being a rock and all it shouldnt have any soft matter at all.
And I personally have experiance with the problems of carbon dating. A.) It only works for known time periods and B.) They make the date fit the estimated period that the dinosaur lives. For example, they take a large number of samples, all of them produce varing results then the look at their time line, and place the fossil where they think it should be and throw out any counter evidence as "contaminated". I mean if you want to be a REAL scientist at least analyze every fucking angle dont assume based on an accepted model. And quick question, if human evovled from chimps why are there chimps?? And seriously is it possible human exisited beside dinosaurs and we just havent found any fossil evidence to support that theory?? Or do we just dismiss something becuase we cant or havent seen it? Seriously, horrible science in this entire feild. Its like playing war (with cards) who ever can draw the best card at the time wins.

SGT.Mays wrote:

Actually, I just want someone to explain how they found dino bones with soft tissue still inside??
I mean I figure after a few million years and it being a rock and all it shouldnt have any soft matter at all.

How many dinosaurs have humans seen? Seriously. The dinosaur may have been trapped in certain anoxic or very dry areas (e.g. desert caves or swamps). The soft tissue could easily have been preserved that way.

And I personally have experiance with the problems of carbon dating. A.) It only works for known time periods and B.) They make the date fit the estimated period that the dinosaur lives. For example, they take a large number of samples, all of them produce varing results then the look at their time line, and place the fossil where they think it should be and throw out any counter evidence as "contaminated".

For someone who has 'experience' with carbon dating, you seem to know very little about it.

E.g. REAL scientists don't use carbon dating to date dinosaurs. It's just dumb. It's like finding out how old somone is based on their hair length - I mean, seriously.

I mean if you want to be a REAL scientist at least analyze every fucking angle dont assume based on an accepted model.

Which is why we have evolution - because scientists DON'T assume on accepted models.

And quick question, if human evovled from chimps why are there chimps?? And seriously is it possible human exisited beside dinosaurs and we just havent found any fossil evidence to support that theory?? Or do we just dismiss something becuase we cant or havent seen it? Seriously, horrible science in this entire feild. Its like playing war (with cards) who ever can draw the best card at the time wins.

Once again, you are demonstrating your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Evolution is not a 'ladder to perfection'. It's a few random changes in some random species - more often than not in a few members who were/are isolated from a population. THAT is how new species develop.

Last edited by Spark (2007-07-09 19:59:14)

SGT.Mays wrote:

Spark wrote:

SGT.Mays wrote:

Actually, I just want someone to explain how they found dino bones with soft tissue still inside??
I mean I figure after a few million years and it being a rock and all it shouldnt have any soft matter at all.

How many dinosaurs have humans seen? Seriously. The dinosaur may have been trapped in certain anoxic or very dry areas (e.g. desert caves or swamps). The soft tissue could easily have been preserved that way.

And I personally have experiance with the problems of carbon dating. A.) It only works for known time periods and B.) They make the date fit the estimated period that the dinosaur lives. For example, they take a large number of samples, all of them produce varing results then the look at their time line, and place the fossil where they think it should be and throw out any counter evidence as "contaminated".

For someone who has 'experience' with carbon dating, you seem to know very little about it.

E.g. REAL scientists don't use carbon dating to date dinosaurs. It's just dumb. It's like finding out how old somone is based on their hair length - I mean, seriously.

I mean if you want to be a REAL scientist at least analyze every fucking angle dont assume based on an accepted model.

Which is why we have evolution - because scientists DON'T assume on accepted models.

And quick question, if human evovled from chimps why are there chimps?? And seriously is it possible human exisited beside dinosaurs and we just havent found any fossil evidence to support that theory?? Or do we just dismiss something becuase we cant or havent seen it? Seriously, horrible science in this entire feild. Its like playing war (with cards) who ever can draw the best card at the time wins.

Once again, you are demonstrating your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Evolution is not a 'ladder to perfection'. It's a few random changes in some random species - more often than not in a few members who were/are isolated from a population. THAT is how new species develop.

Evolution is the expected model, that they try to fit the peices to, and the last few questions where just stupid things i wanted to say.

Incorrect.

Evolution is the expected model but no respected scientist would DARE twist data - no one would ever give him a job ever again

To be fair on the bible, a thorough and complete description of the exact nature of the evolution of life from single call to man would have made for an excessively long and dull opening chapter.

PureFodder wrote:

To be fair on the bible, a thorough and complete description of the exact nature of the evolution of life from single call to man would have made for an excessively long and dull opening chapter.

The Book Of Evogenesis

Chapter 1

In the begining, there was the earth and the sun.¹ The sun was dimmed, and the earth was cloacked in a hellish atmosphere of volcanic ash.² Mountains of fire dominated the landscape, and nothing was alive. ³

TBH, I think that sounds pretty good to me.

Last edited by Spark (2007-07-10 01:23:04)

Turquoise wrote:

Now...  Mormons are an interesting bunch.  I don't quite understand how they can be so easygoing and mild mannered on the surface but still have such...  strange rituals "on the inside" of their culture.  I remember when Bill Maher once referred to one of them as the "magical underwear" ritual.  He was referring to the "garments" of some ritual of adulthood.

A couple of years ago, during my school's music tour in California, a friend and I stayed with a Mormon family. They were pretty nice people, although a little weird. For instance, their eldest daughter (my age) got up at 4:30 or 5:00 every morning to go to church before school.

As for my views, I don't believe in this creationism nonesense. I look at the bible and see it as a basic "morals and that stuff" book. C'mon, many of those stories can't have possibly happened. But, if you look at the 10 commandments, most of them are pretty sensible. Even further, looking at Islam and the concept Halal foods, you can see that it was just basic food hygiene. Nothing more then stories about how to live life...

Smitty5613, I suggest next time you enter into this thread, your posts have a little more substance. A short sentence does little justice to your beliefs (Also, in the context, the full stops almost make out that you doubt your own statement).


^{(If you can follow)}

I think some of the disagreement can be attributed to the varying interpretations of the term evolution. You can look at the more extreme version of the idea and say man evolved from a "single cell". In this instance, the required time frame and probability (that it wouldn't happen) are too large for us to comprehend. On the other side, the term evolution could relate to the change within a species (over several generations) that enables them to adapt to changing conditions. It is the "survival of the fittest" idea. In this debate, many people would usually think of evolution as being the former example.

Zukabazuka wrote:

Spark any idea when the book was released? Wiki pages has been flooded by idiots and rarely been a safe source of info.

Can you clarify? I'm not quite sure what you mean by this.