Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#95173 Jul 8, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, you are completely wrong. You are an idiot because you are denying facts and ignoring evidence, yep, it's that simple.
Here's a list of facts:
1. Life changes over time, in other words, it evolves.
2. The universe is expanding, which means it had to be very small at one point.
3. Life is what we call a collection of chemical reactions.
The evidence is too much to include in one post, but you have denied it all.
KK your dogmatism shows in this and many other posts. Its hard, since we basically agree, to call you up on it but you do have a consistent record of overstating the claims of science.

1. Life changes over time, evolves. Yes, we have evidence of both, though they are not quite the same thing.

2. The universe is expanding...yes...which means it had to be very small at one point...not necessarily. Luckily though, we have other evidence that suggests this.

3. Life is a collection of chemical properties. Well, the sustenance of living organisms is, we can say with confidence. However, few who argue the point would confine their arguments to Krebs cycle and photosynthesis. They might ask how it is we are conscious. And no science to date can answer that adequately.

The proper mode of scientific thinking is humility.

Its kinda religious that way!

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#95174 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
KK your dogmatism shows in this and many other posts. Its hard, since we basically agree, to call you up on it but you do have a consistent record of overstating the claims of science.
1. Life changes over time, evolves. Yes, we have evidence of both, though they are not quite the same thing.
2. The universe is expanding...yes...which means it had to be very small at one point...not necessarily. Luckily though, we have other evidence that suggests this.
3. Life is a collection of chemical properties. Well, the sustenance of living organisms is, we can say with confidence. However, few who argue the point would confine their arguments to Krebs cycle and photosynthesis. They might ask how it is we are conscious. And no science to date can answer that adequately.
The proper mode of scientific thinking is humility.
Its kinda religious that way!
You are mistaken, I understated, not overstated. I did not include a bunch of details because I am still unclear about all of them, and yet .... you accuse me of lacking humility and being dogmatic. However,#3 demonstrates that it is you who is dogmatic, not I. We do understand that makes things "conscious," it's called the brain.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#95175 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, I take your concern seriously too. Nobody wants to foist a science on people that is going to cause misery.
My first point though, is that its an argument from consequences. i.e. "I don't like the potential societal implications of people accepting evolution, therefore we should reject evolution". Its not a valid way to argue a point of science.
Now, if your brother committed suicide I am truly sorry for your loss. However I have to point out that there are suicides among the religious, not to mention crime and corruption. In fact the countries with the lowest corruption rates and the highest happiness index scores are in many cases the most atheistic (Scandinavia etc).
Which leads to the question, is it your religion that prevents misery and crime, or is it something else? Perhaps churchgoers in the US have a sense of community and belonging, and these same things are also provided by some other mechanism in these "happy atheist" countries! Are you jumping to conclusions in assuming its loss of faith in a Judeo-Christian version of God?
I personally think humans are up to the truth, and can accommodate it. I know many happy, well adjusted and moral people who do not believe they are going to exist in any form after they kick the bucket.
<quoted text>
I dispute that a moral compass requires belief in the Bible or even in God. On the contrary, simply being good out of fear of God or hope for a heavenly reward is a kind of cheap, counterfeit morality. True morality is based on concern for other humans, not fear of deities.
<quoted text>
No, its not dogma. Its the independently converging lines of evidence from geology, physics, astronomy, and biology. Even archeology. Genesis does not fit empirical reality. If you really studied the science instead of focusing only on what I regard as the sham hatchet job on science that you seem focused on, you might come to see that.
Anyway, you are a good sport and at least you bring arguments to the table rather than the mere bluster that is all too common here. All the best.
I have an acquaintance Dr that has a clinic with 100 or so other doctors and many more support staff. 20 years ago they were seeing hundreds of teens and a minor # of suicides, then it jumped, and jumped again to 1/month. They went back and started a more in-depth questioning of their patients. Self-worth was over the top poor, further questioning, "star stuff" and Sagan supported in the class by frog to man Godless evolution was a big factor. They felt their net worth was near zero because "science" was telling them their existence is near meaningless so live life now like there is no tommorrow. So you have a percentage of kids with low esteem, other damage in the family, abuse, divorce for 2 generations now and maybe not athletic, not in the "in" crowd, watching garbage and further damaging their God given compassionate lobe, and the end result is not only suicide, but murder/suicide. This Dr jumped into the fray. If this Earth is young, as I feel it is as the Ten Commandments teach ("in six days"), and heaven is a reachable goal, you see life becomes more vibrant, finite, worth living and serving mankind for.

I have spent time in Sweden, and have found as you said, but also an underlying sense of apathy and a hopelessness to get anywhere. Divorce rate is high, childbirth low and they seem to be tredding water. They often plied me with hopeful questions of how life was in the US all the time. They seemed stuck. My thoughts back to you, thanks.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#95176 Jul 8, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You are mistaken, I understated, not overstated. I did not include a bunch of details because I am still unclear about all of them, and yet .... you accuse me of lacking humility and being dogmatic. However,#3 demonstrates that it is you who is dogmatic, not I. We do understand that makes things "conscious," it's called the brain.
No, I don't think so. We understand that there is a brain, and that complicated things go on there. But we have no idea how an actual consciousness arises from that, how there is an "I" that experiences blue and green and the subjective taste of peanut butter or the feel of a hand running through your hair.

I could describe red to a blind man in terms of wavelengths of light but he would still have no idea what it means to experience RED.

That is a mystery science is not even close to explaining. Calling it the brain is merely a marker for our lack of understanding.

And yes, you do dogmatically overstate the true understanding of science at times.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#95177 Jul 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I have an acquaintance Dr that has a clinic with 100 or so other doctors and many more support staff. 20 years ago they were seeing hundreds of teens and a minor # of suicides, then it jumped, and jumped again to 1/month. They went back and started a more in-depth questioning of their patients. Self-worth was over the top poor, further questioning, "star stuff" and Sagan supported in the class by frog to man Godless evolution was a big factor. They felt their net worth was near zero because "science" was telling them their existence is near meaningless so live life now like there is no tommorrow. So you have a percentage of kids with low esteem, other damage in the family, abuse, divorce for 2 generations now and maybe not athletic, not in the "in" crowd, watching garbage and further damaging their God given compassionate lobe, and the end result is not only suicide, but murder/suicide. This Dr jumped into the fray. If this Earth is young, as I feel it is as the Ten Commandments teach ("in six days"), and heaven is a reachable goal, you see life becomes more vibrant, finite, worth living and serving mankind for.
I have spent time in Sweden, and have found as you said, but also an underlying sense of apathy and a hopelessness to get anywhere. Divorce rate is high, childbirth low and they seem to be tredding water. They often plied me with hopeful questions of how life was in the US all the time. They seemed stuck. My thoughts back to you, thanks.
Again, you are arguing consequences. Meaning, the depression rate in Outer Mogolia is not evidence for the truth or falsehood of an old Earth or evolution.

I have been to Sweden too. I did not see a lot of people living "like there is no tomorrow". On the contrary, they seemed to be overly concerned with tomorrow with all their do gooding desire to help the Africans, fear of global warming (they should love it!) and so on.

Its time for me to sleep. But consider that.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#95178 Jul 8, 2013
replaytime wrote:
You still are avoiding the question.
I don't know what question you specifically think he's avoiding, but I'd like to pose one to you:

Are you genetically identical to every person you're related to? Or do you have differences?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#95179 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think so. We understand that there is a brain, and that complicated things go on there. But we have no idea how an actual consciousness arises from that, how there is an "I" that experiences blue and green and the subjective taste of peanut butter or the feel of a hand running through your hair.
I could describe red to a blind man in terms of wavelengths of light but he would still have no idea what it means to experience RED.
That is a mystery science is not even close to explaining. Calling it the brain is merely a marker for our lack of understanding.
And yes, you do dogmatically overstate the true understanding of science at times.
To say we don't any idea is understating it though Chimney, we do know much about how the neural correlates of consciousness developed memory and the senses make us conscious, the mystery is how it first arose. The advent of consciousness is as baffling as the advent of life itself, and indeed synonymous one with the other, if we ever solve how one came to be, we will have solved the other. The answer we as best can tell is even more mysterious , how did DNA come to be?
I don't propose it was magically poofed into existence, but we are missing a piece to the puzzle to figure it out. Which I can only guess has something to do with the special abilities or organic matter and the carbon atom.
Ordinary Average Guy

Portland, OR

#95180 Jul 8, 2013
I'd like to find out who created the concept of evolution (it wasn't Charles Darwin, but someone who later on bastard eyes to his original ideas of natural selection) and once having decided who created evolution, accepting that evolution itself was created then we could study be evolution of creationism! Away from its most basic truths, to the much debated subject it is today. First came the creation of evolution, then came evolution of creation!

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#95181 Jul 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I have an acquaintance Dr that has a clinic with 100 or so other doctors and many more support staff. 20 years ago they were seeing hundreds of teens and a minor # of suicides, then it jumped, and jumped again to 1/month. They went back and started a more in-depth questioning of their patients. Self-worth was over the top poor, further questioning, "star stuff" and Sagan supported in the class by frog to man Godless evolution was a big factor. They felt their net worth was near zero because "science" was telling them their existence is near meaningless so live life now like there is no tommorrow. So you have a percentage of kids with low esteem, other damage in the family, abuse, divorce for 2 generations now and maybe not athletic, not in the "in" crowd, watching garbage and further damaging their God given compassionate lobe, and the end result is not only suicide, but murder/suicide. This Dr jumped into the fray. If this Earth is young, as I feel it is as the Ten Commandments teach ("in six days"), and heaven is a reachable goal, you see life becomes more vibrant, finite, worth living and serving mankind for.
I have spent time in Sweden, and have found as you said, but also an underlying sense of apathy and a hopelessness to get anywhere. Divorce rate is high, childbirth low and they seem to be tredding water. They often plied me with hopeful questions of how life was in the US all the time. They seemed stuck. My thoughts back to you, thanks.
A clinic with 100 or so doctors and support staff. Isn't that a hospital? Was this published anywhere? What country was this? This seems like a crock to me.

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#95182 Jul 8, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I have an acquaintance Dr that has a clinic with 100 or so other doctors and many more support staff. 20 years ago they were seeing hundreds of teens and a minor # of suicides, then it jumped, and jumped again to 1/month. They went back and started a more in-depth questioning of their patients. Self-worth was over the top poor, further questioning, "star stuff" and Sagan supported in the class by frog to man Godless evolution was a big factor. They felt their net worth was near zero because "science" was telling them their existence is near meaningless so live life now like there is no tommorrow. So you have a percentage of kids with low esteem, other damage in the family, abuse, divorce for 2 generations now and maybe not athletic, not in the "in" crowd, watching garbage and further damaging their God given compassionate lobe, and the end result is not only suicide, but murder/suicide. This Dr jumped into the fray. If this Earth is young, as I feel it is as the Ten Commandments teach ("in six days"), and heaven is a reachable goal, you see life becomes more vibrant, finite, worth living and serving mankind for.
I have spent time in Sweden, and have found as you said, but also an underlying sense of apathy and a hopelessness to get anywhere. Divorce rate is high, childbirth low and they seem to be tredding water. They often plied me with hopeful questions of how life was in the US all the time. They seemed stuck. My thoughts back to you, thanks.
I don't know these dudes, but I heard this story from a friend who was mad sick about it that it gave him headaches. Seems like he came across this situation where people were being persecuted for their beliefs. They were being harassed like feeder goldfish in a marine aquarium. Straight up. Anyway he says it wasn't long before they were being killed for their beliefs. By the time it was all said and done maybe something like 2000 people had been rounded up by this guy Torquemada, tortured and put to death. Now this is a true story even though I didn't see it myself. Now these people were feeling bad because this religion was telling them they were scum and their lives were worthless. So worthless that the religion put them to death like rabid dogs. Real sick. I bet you can relate.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#95183 Jul 8, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
To say we don't any idea is understating it though Chimney, we do know much about how the neural correlates of consciousness developed memory and the senses make us conscious, the mystery is how it first arose. The advent of consciousness is as baffling as the advent of life itself, and indeed synonymous one with the other, if we ever solve how one came to be, we will have solved the other. The answer we as best can tell is even more mysterious , how did DNA come to be?
I don't propose it was magically poofed into existence, but we are missing a piece to the puzzle to figure it out. Which I can only guess has something to do with the special abilities or organic matter and the carbon atom.
I reckon the mystery is deeper. I can imagine a program that responds to the environment correctly, that makes "intelligent" choices, that differentiates the sensor input of blue vs red, but has no inside... It that still does not touch the internal, conscious feeling I have, the sight of blue and red. Science and philosophers have done their best to explain WHY its a good idea, but not explained how IT can arise from carbon bonds. How, why, it can be there.

Of course...perhaps our own view of materialism is at fault and I could turn the whole argument inside out. We are conscious beings and the material world is merely our expression of what we internally experience. How we PICTURE carbon bonds is primary. But both views have to conform to what we experience.

Seems we experience evidence that accords with evolution, so our consciousness evolved too...

“The strength of science is”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

founded in facts.

#95184 Jul 8, 2013
Ordinary Average Guy wrote:
I'd like to find out who created the concept of evolution (it wasn't Charles Darwin, but someone who later on bastard eyes to his original ideas of natural selection) and once having decided who created evolution, accepting that evolution itself was created then we could study be evolution of creationism! Away from its most basic truths, to the much debated subject it is today. First came the creation of evolution, then came evolution of creation!
Evolution is a process of nature. Theory was formulated based on observations from nature as well as from human activities. The idea predates Darwin and was a part of Greek, Roman and Chinese philosophy.

The theory of today was synthesized by Darwin from earlier work. Darwin came up and added the original idea of natural selection to show what drives evolution. In the 1930's and 1940's the theory was synthesized with genetics to bring about the theory we use now. The theory has not varied from its basics, but has been brought up to date. It is only much debated by those that fear it or don't understand it. Science generally accepts the theory as it stands now.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#95185 Jul 8, 2013
Ordinary Average Guy wrote:
I'd like to find out who created the concept of evolution (it wasn't Charles Darwin, but someone who later on bastard eyes to his original ideas of natural selection) and once having decided who created evolution, accepting that evolution itself was created then we could study be evolution of creationism! Away from its most basic truths, to the much debated subject it is today. First came the creation of evolution, then came evolution of creation!
I think you are taking the wrong tack. Evolution was known to occur and the Darwin provided a theory to explain HOW evolution could occur. With minor modifications, his theory has proven to be extremely successful in that.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#95186 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I reckon the mystery is deeper. I can imagine a program that responds to the environment correctly, that makes "intelligent" choices, that differentiates the sensor input of blue vs red, but has no inside... It that still does not touch the internal, conscious feeling I have, the sight of blue and red. Science and philosophers have done their best to explain WHY its a good idea, but not explained how IT can arise from carbon bonds. How, why, it can be there.
Of course...perhaps our own view of materialism is at fault and I could turn the whole argument inside out. We are conscious beings and the material world is merely our expression of what we internally experience. How we PICTURE carbon bonds is primary. But both views have to conform to what we experience.
Seems we experience evidence that accords with evolution, so our consciousness evolved too...
Exactly and is still evolving.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#95187 Jul 8, 2013
Ordinary Average Guy wrote:
I'd like to find out who created the concept of evolution (it wasn't Charles Darwin, but someone who later on bastard eyes to his original ideas of natural selection) and once having decided who created evolution, accepting that evolution itself was created then we could study be evolution of creationism! Away from its most basic truths, to the much debated subject it is today. First came the creation of evolution, then came evolution of creation!
Saying that an idea is "created" relegates all knowledge to the point of opinion.

If I kill you, you aren't actually dead. Someone finds you and claims that you are dead. They have "created" the "idea" of you being dead. Therefore, THEY are the guilty party in your demise.

Since: Jul 13

Colorado Springs, CO

#95188 Jul 8, 2013
So tell me, all you creationism fans, which creation story would you like taught? There are literally hundreds out there. That's right. Not only Christianity has a creation story and many of them predate Genesis.

Let's be honest here. What most of you who say you want creationism in the schools are saying is that you want the Jewish/Christian creation story taught.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#95189 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
KK your dogmatism shows in this and many other posts. Its hard, since we basically agree, to call you up on it but you do have a consistent record of overstating the claims of science.
1. Life changes over time, evolves. Yes, we have evidence of both, though they are not quite the same thing.
2. The universe is expanding...yes...which means it had to be very small at one point...not necessarily. Luckily though, we have other evidence that suggests this.
3. Life is a collection of chemical properties. Well, the sustenance of living organisms is, we can say with confidence. However, few who argue the point would confine their arguments to Krebs cycle and photosynthesis. They might ask how it is we are conscious. And no science to date can answer that adequately.
The proper mode of scientific thinking is humility.
Its kinda religious that way!
Well said.

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#95190 Jul 8, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are taking the wrong tack. Evolution was known to occur and the Darwin provided a theory to explain HOW evolution could occur. With minor modifications, his theory has proven to be extremely successful in that.
Chimney, did you see the story about a forest of cypress trees discovered off the coast of Alabama in the gulf? Fascinating stuff!, the trees were so perfectly preserved that when cut you could smell the sap, evidently they were buried long ago and hurricane Katrina uncovered them. I believe Livescience.com has it.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#95191 Jul 9, 2013
Ordinary Average Guy wrote:
I'd like to find out who created the concept of evolution (it wasn't Charles Darwin, but someone who later on bastard eyes to his original ideas of natural selection) and once having decided who created evolution, accepting that evolution itself was created then we could study be evolution of creationism! Away from its most basic truths, to the much debated subject it is today. First came the creation of evolution, then came evolution of creation!
Evolution has been speculated on since the times if the ancient Chinese and Greeks (perhaps, but not provably even before then). In the philosophical idea of descent with modification. Aristotle theorised that all living things desire to move from the lower to the higher.

The Romans had more or less the same ideas, much of Roman scientific thinking being based on earlier Greek ideas. Roman road building and building works brought up fossils that were discussed in the light of “Greek” wisdom.

Not until the medieval dominance of cristianity did evolution become “out of fashion” in favour for the (more profitable for priests) line “all living things came into existence in unchanging forms due to divine will”
.
This was of course not universally accepted, there is a story of a 13th century hostelry that attracted customers with a fossilised femur dredged from the Thames, the fossil bone was bigger than a man, it’s very existence cast doubt on the priestly longing for wealth.

Between this period and the rise of the modern theory of evolution there were many (for want of a better word) biologists, who looked at old, fossilised bones and compared them to the skeletons of currently living creatures.

In the late 1700’s the German philosopher Immanuel Kant developed a theory of descent that is fairly close to modern understanding.

Kant’s work along work that of Carolus Linnaeus, Erasmus Darwin (Charles Darwins granbdfather), Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Thomas Malthus and others inspired Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace. However Wallace was a spiritualist and his involvement in that movement served to downplay his role in the discovery of natural selection

From those early beginnings observation in several unrelated scientific fields have confirmed the theory of evolution to the extent that it is now known to be fact.

So there ya go, It started about the same time, perhaps even before genesis was scratched on to papyrus by a bunch of bronze age goat herders.

So who ya going to blame for blowing the “goddidit by magic” boat out of the water?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95192 Jul 9, 2013
I'll take some exception to this:
SBT wrote:
Self-worth was over the top poor, further questioning, "star stuff" and Sagan supported in the class by frog to man Godless evolution was a big factor. They felt their net worth was near zero because "science" was telling them their existence is near meaningless so live life now like there is no tommorrow.
First, where do you get the idea that science was telling them their existence is near meaningless or to live life like there is no tomorrow? I don't doubt that there may be some over-the-top scientist who might make such a claim but where is the the position of science as a discipline?

Isn't it just as possible that in learning science (AKA reality) that they may have been depressed on learning that much of what they have been taught by religion wasn't true?
SBT wrote:
abuse
Science's fault?
SBT wrote:
divorce
Science's fault?
SBT wrote:
not athletic
Science's fault?
SBT wrote:
not in the "in" crowd
Science's fault?
SBT wrote:
watching garbage
Science's fault?
SBT wrote:
and further damaging their God given compassionate lobe
Whoa! Hold on! Where exactly is the compassionate lobe?
SBT wrote:
and the end result is not only suicide, but murder/suicide.
So abuse, divorce, not being athletic, not being in the "in" crowd and watching crappy programs is all the fault of science. Sorry but I doubt even your doctor friend would take such a silly and simplistic approach to a complex problem.

BTW, you are ignoring the influence of the recent trend in decreasing the number of prescriptions for anti-depressants (such as Prozac).
SBT wrote:
If this Earth is young...
It's not.
SBT wrote:
...as I feel it is as the Ten Commandments teach ("in six days")
Enlighten me. In all the years of my Christian upbringing, I've never read the commandment that says creation took six days. Was that number 11?
SBT wrote:
...and heaven is a reachable goal, you see life becomes more vibrant, finite, worth living and serving mankind for.
So if you believe in an afterlife, life is swell. Uh-huh.

Has it ever crossed you mind that those of us who do not believe there is an afterlife that life becomes even more precious? Has it ever occurred to you that not believing in an afterlife means we are all in this together and only mankind will look out for mankind?

I expect not. We all fit neatly into your little pigeon hole.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 47 min Dogen 543
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 57 min Brian_G 13,622
How would creationists explain... 2 hr Chimney1 343
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... 17 hr nobody 7
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) Fri Zach 4
Science News (Sep '13) Fri Ricky F 2,936
Genetic entropy Thu Discord 159
More from around the web