My apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Usually mods are labeled as such.
My bad.
But I still feel I was not the one crossing any lines…feel free to close my account if you feel I’ve breeched forum contract…
Printable View
My apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Usually mods are labeled as such.
My bad.
But I still feel I was not the one crossing any lines…feel free to close my account if you feel I’ve breeched forum contract…
If anyone feels that I have personally affronted them in any way, please accept my sincere apologies. But I will still defend my beliefs and statements, for I believe they have merit. Once again, for the record, that is that God created everything. Evolution has taken it from there, each species evolving independtly, no "ape into man" type of thing. I base this on the fact that if man hasn't changed since Eden, then why are there so many diffrent races of man? Thus I believe in both, with limitations. I discount chance as mathmatically unsound. That's all. :cool:
Pendragon, I wonder if you've heard of the Uncertainty Principle? Read Hawking or Davies and you're bound to come across it. "God" does play dice, after all.Quote:
I discount chance as mathmatically unsound.
Loki out
Pendragon,
I presume then that you think that the chances of there being a god are greater than the chances of there not being one? That the chances of there being a god are greater than the chances of there being a purely deductive scientific explanation for the birth of the Universe and the development of life within it?
I hope I made it clear that I didn’t feel that way but I _do_ see the fabrication of a person is far more “personal” than me saying, for example, “generally believing in invisible people and fictional places/things is, under several entries in the DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel for Mental Disorders), not…healthy.”Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
Um, what “fact” are you calling upon when your source material is 1) lifted from far older (and better written, more interesting) texts and 2) completely and utterly mythologyQuote:
I base this on the fact that if man hasn't changed since Eden,
You seem to like to question.
Sometimes.
You may actually enjoy reading some religious texts. And here I mean scholarly work, not mythology.
You base your math games in a closed system.Quote:
I discount chance as mathmatically unsound. That's all
[looking outside the window, reflectioning on, ohhhhhhhhhh, millions and millions of years of Earth]
Last I heard Earth is pretty gawdamn open.
-For those not grasping this open/closed thing, feel free to glance at a textbook that is probably taught (unless the education system has crumbled far more than I speculate) in 7th grade…
I respect your **NEED**, and that’s all it is (barring any chemical imbalance or misfiring of neurons), to believe in fantasy figures, but please don’t place them out as “fact”.
Yes, I've read Hawking, with intrest. At one point he stated that there was no room for God in the Universe, and in a later work, seemed to modify the statement, allowing for the possibility. A brilliant man. It's sad to see him trapped in his own body by illness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Why not? It's my choice to make, after all. I find no reason to find fault with those who believe the other way. Infinate universe with infinate possibilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
Well, you're persistant, anyway. I will answer no more posts from you, as you seem to think me loony anway. No hard feeling, mon ami. Shall we agree to disagree? I shake hands with a worthy opponet, (in spirit, anyway!) Touche! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeestained
heh. As I said, I’m not ‘after you’ nor would my world be affected in any way if you all of a sudden came to your senses, I mean didn’t believe in Elves, Orcs and the Cheshire Cat. (more of a joke than a jab, I just hate smiley-things)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
When I said I “respect” your need, it was truthful, not just a setup for a slag or joke. Hell, the world is one miserable, dark place. To me embracing a baseless theory/figure/book as excuse isn’t soothing in the least, to others, many others, it is.
CNN, which seemingly stands for Christian News Network, broadcasts this pap every day.
I will probably hold off on this thread myself, I’m much more interested in talking books, but even that, sadly, isn’t done with much conviction in this Stephen King, Hairy Punter world…
I’ll close, however, by mentioning some books.
I’d hope at either end of the spectrum of thought on this subject one would like to have some knowledge in the area. Be it out of personal curiosity, the desire to learn or even a more spiteful ‘know you’re enemy’.
So, for those that like to read about the potential behind a “creator”, while this is not an area I’m an expert in, I’ve read, and I _believe_ he’s dubbed as the go-to guy on the subject:
Michael J. Behe’s Darwin’s Black Box ever-present scientific subtitle is “The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution”
For the opposite side, more of the “evolution” stuff I’d say, Daniel Dennett’s Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, the you-know-what-being, “Evolution and the Meanings of Life”.
These are excellent books in the field(s) and both authors have written others, and the astute reader will, from there, be able to also look into other writers in the respective theories from notes, citations and quotes.
Cheers
Well, I won't cite you on your spelling and grammar either as it would be presumptuous and rude of me :) we are very happy with the fact that there are many people here with english as secondary language who feel welcomed and comfortable enough to participate in these forums. Please try to discuss ideas, not posters.Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeestained
Jezuz, it never stops…Quote:
Originally Posted by Logos
If you think I haven’t been pretty damn on-topic most of the time nor can you pick up the irony of defending Americans while butchering the language (which is an idea, and not a person), along with not noticing yourself as *completely* countering your own request with your very post, especially as I just stated, basically, I’ll ‘get out of your hair’, I _highly_ question your “moderating” ability.
My apologies for being off topic here, but then again ignorance *is* a bit of an issue within this thread…
And my apologies for not seeing your post above mine as I was in the process of typing mine when you posted yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeestained
But yes I can point out when someone is out of line with their comments about anothers' grammar and spelling, it's my job here. It is rude and presumptious to make it an issue. A person may have dyslexia, be using vision-impaired software or have english as secondary language and again, we try to have these forums welcoming to all, of all ages.
Please no more discussion of moderating in topic. If you or anyone ever has an issue or questions with/about the Moderators you can take it up with said Moderator or Admin via PM. We're just trying to maintain an atmosphere of civil, respectful discussion. This is the longest (36 pages) topic in this forum yet and I'm very happy it's mostly been postive and constructive.
As I’ve said in the past: no blood, no foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Logos
If anything, *you’ve* made it an issue. Adults can generally take care of themselves, and can see the coloured lights (i.e. debating/moderating device).Quote:
But yes I can point out when someone is out of line with their comments about anothers' grammar and spelling, it's my job here. It is rude and presumptious to make it an issue. A person may have dyslexia, be using vision-impaired software or have english as secondary language and again, we try to have these forums welcoming to all, of all ages.
The day after my jibe I believe I stated I meant it as no harm and that I was using it in a situation by mentioned that I fully understood the first W in www was for world.
And I don’t think I outright offended anyone as clearly many haven’t felt the need to re-read their own posts or run them through a spell-checker before hitting “post”.
And keep on top on all this I have never stated on a numerical value where English is on my CV; I never will state I am perfect in any way. I do, however, during the course of my work day (as most of us are probably doing, much to our employer’s chagrin) try to make my posts pretty readable.
Occasionally, as we all do, I make a flub.
Much like your original post should have been handled?Quote:
Please no more discussion of moderating in topic. If you or anyone ever has an issue or questions with/about the Moderators you can take it up with said Moderator or Admin via PM.
[and sorry for keeping at this but I find it intolerable that you try to unjustly (for I’d guess that Edmond made no formal complaint and this all happened days before and was pretty much rendered moot) paddle my bottom in public…]
Back spot-on topic: here’s a bizarre article that takes “evolution” to silly levels. “Evolutionary Psychology”…
http://www.latimes.com/features/heal...la-home-health
You have been PMed, Coffeestained; however, since you have not yet read your PM, we had to bring this matter here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coffeestained
Hmmm, indeed. I guess I don’t get email alert or a pop-up that there is a new message.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Although the message is bull****, as CLEARLY argued (although there *is* no argument) within this thread.
Forget it kids, do me a favour and delete my account or render it to “guest”. Pretty please. With metaphorical sugar on top.
If you want your account deleted, you have to PM Admin about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeestained
Hello to evryone still interested in this thread. I've learned a lot here, and I kind of hate to see this thread die. Here is what I learned from talking with all of you, and remember, this is only my opinion.
1.) Question everything until you find something you are comfortable with believing.
2.) Once you do this, to quote the Eagles "You better hang on tooth and nail, the wolf is always at the door."
3.) You should consider yourself under no obligation to explain to anyone why you believe what you believe.
4.) If you do try to explain yourself remember this:
a.) There is no proof that will not be called into question by someone
b.) There is no point without a counterpoint
c.) This debate is older than any of us, and will likely survive us all
d.) It is better to agree to disagee and remain friends than agrue pointlessly over what none of us are willing to change, and indeed, should not change, our own convictions. For if we are truly convinced, then we should stand on that, and respect the other's right to do the same.
I wish all of you happiness in all that you do. As Paul says in the Bible, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherein Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." Galatians 5:1 Being free to belive what you will, then exercise your freedom, as I will mine. But as I said, I'd hate to see this thread close. It's been so interesting...ya know? :)
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherein Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."
Unless that bondage is Christianity itself, I take it.
<3.) You should consider yourself under no obligation to explain to anyone why you believe what you believe.>
No doubt this kind of principle was a contributing factor to the Jonestown Massacre.
Let me give some principles:
1) Question everything, especially those things you feel most comfortable in believing.
2) If you enter a debate with a belief, you should always feel obliged to give an explanation for your belief, otherwise you are little more than a propagandist.
3) If you are unwilling to change a belief, no matter what, then at least recognise that you have an extreme bias.
4) Never be truly convinced of something, unless you can logically defend your belief. The only open minded question, should be the one that has yet to be logically answered.
Please do not put words into my mouth.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
The Jonestown Massacre was a shameful and shocking example of what happens when people follow a man who advises them to seperate themselves from society and form their own "utopia." It almost always ends badly, like out in Waco, under similiar circumstances. As to whether my principle 3 would be a factor, I would say isolation and a messiah complex had more to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
I really don't feel that it is propaganda to state what you believe, nor that refusal to change is a show of bias. One thing for certain, there is no proof that will not be questioned by someone, or called "illogical" by someone. Don't take this as a personal attack, for that is not my intention. I will agree to disagree, shake hands, and move on with no hard feelings. We're all adults here, correct? So my best to you, hold on to your beliefs tightly, for who knows but what in the end you may be correct and myself wrong. Cheers! Dragon out. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
Yes. That's if you count teenagers as adults....:brow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon
Ah, yes, *everything* is possible, remember. But it is highly improbable that the Christian god in particular should be true. Maybe some god, who started off the Big Bang and then decided to disappear...but that still doesn't solve the problem, I mean, where did the god come from? If you say "he has always existed" well then it's the same as the universe, the universe has also existed for as long as there has been time.Quote:
Yes, I've read Hawking, with intrest. At one point he stated that there was no room for God in the Universe, and in a later work, seemed to modify the statement, allowing for the possibility.
I'm glad you enjoy Hawking. Have you read his The Universe in a Nutshell? Wonderful book, with very interesting concepts.
What boggles me is, if you have read Hawking, surely you must have come across the Uncertainty Principle...*somewhere*? Or have you perhaps read a more specialised work that didn't go into detail about this? Or were you merely joking when you said that there is no room for chance in this universe...
No time. Must run.
Loki
Sure. Who am I to argue with our court system, that consistantly tries them as adults? :brow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
It was a condensed version of The Universe in a Nutshell that I read first, then an article he wrote for Science Digest. What I meant was that chance is not the answer to evolution. If I remember correctly, there are two more schools of thought on evolution other than mere chance. As I said, although I still see no reason to have to defend the statement, I believe God created the earth and everything in it. Then due to the cataclyclisms and things (such as the breaking up of the supercontinent), man and the animals have been forced to adapt to different environments, and so have evolved into what they are today. I was interested to read only yesterday that science now believes that neantherthals and homo sapiens existed at the same time but homo sapiens erradicated them. Can't they ever make up their minds?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Actually.. this site has members of all ages, over 13 years of age and younger ;) a big reason why we try to keep things as civil as possible regarding swearing and flaming/trolling etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
I said Evolution. Because I prefer evolution rather than saying "God created Adam and Eve"
Best Regards...
<Can't they ever make up their minds?>
Fortunately for us, most of the scientific community are always revising their work, open to new interpretations, etc. Unlike the religious communities whose minds were made up for them 2000/1500/2500/4000+ yrs ago.
yeh i agree with her the thing is no they dont ever make up their minds because theyre always changing unlike your views no matter what peole say
You're assuming again, that every religious person has no mind of their own. If this were true, I would not believe in evolution in any form, but I do, just not mere chance. Cheers! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
Well technically Darwin never stated that he disagreed with a creationist theory, all he said that life was breathed into this matter (paraphrased). So implying a God does exist. AND Genisis does state that God breathed life into man (the breath of life/God into adam. (again paraphrased).
And theoretically Genisis does mirrior the evolutionary stages in the evolution theory. So one is not concrete disproof of the other, however they do coincide. Perhaps Genisis is a metaphor fro creation, putting the concept into simpler terms so that early people could have some grasp of their origins, not to mention the Bible has been translated multiple times, aswell as revised multiple times. So it is possible that our present bible is slightly muddled.
That is why one should prey for disernment before reading the Bible, also another factor is personal interpretation. after all "everything is truee, from a certain point of view"
btw. nice darwin pic! :thumbs_up :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adelheid
There used to be a famous scientific system for the identification of criminals called "The Bertillon System." Bertillion based his system on sound fact--probability mathematics. He postulated that if you took one measurement of a man, his exact height, the possibility of duplication was 1 in 4. But add in another measurement, the circumference of the head, and the odds increase to 16 to 1. His system used 14 measurements, and had odds of 286,435,456 to 1 odds of a duplication. Yet it failed in 1903 when a convict named Will West was being processed for entry into Leavenworth. According to his measurements, he was already behind bars in the prison. When the officals checked, their Will West was in his cell. The two might have been twins. Indeed, it turned out that they were. But their fingerprints were different. This really doesn't bear much on our discussion, but it does demonstrate (hopefully) the point I was trying to make about how the more factors that must come true to make chance come out right, the greater the odds of it ever occuring. But it can, I will concede that. It can, indeed.
I don't think it's right to say that Religion and Science are opposed, in fact I believe that they complement each other. I can't remember who said this, but he was a scientist and a Christian, and he said that 'we once believed that God was so great that he created the world, now we believe he is even greater than that; he created a world that could create itself'.
Centuries ago, I recall reading somewhere, the effects of theology on the comings of science. How the belief in possesion weighed heavily on the minds of the community when anything out of the ordinary happened. Epilepsy, I think, was caused by demonic possesion for your sins. Hammubari's codes were designed so that a woman may be divorced if she was "possesed" because she had sinned. See the process of blaming the victim here?
The contrast here was the scientific community who considered these afflictions of the body. Tell me again that religion and science complement each other. No more than we need a good story.
<'we once believed that God was so great that he created the world, now we believe he is even greater than that; he created a world that could create itself'.>
That's merely a belief. There is nothing scientific about that statement. If a world could create itself, who needs God?
Ah... the real wonder though is that God CREATED the world (meaning making something out of nothing- where one could make something out of something but not anything out of nothing) in such a way that it could take care of itself. (reproduction, decomposition, sanitation, etc.) See how even He created instinct in animals, which men marvel at, but refuse to acknowledge the Maker or it all! The Irony!Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
If I admired an invention of a scientist, could I then say, " Oh! I've never heard of such a scientist before, therefore He couldn't have made this splendid invention" Neither could I claim, "This scientist couldn't have done it" or say, "If you say that the scientist did really make it, then prove it to me. Let me see him at work with it myself." I could also choose to find fault with the machine and say "oh look! there is a fault of operation here... it's all wrong. the manual's wrong. this scientist is a liar!"
How could I presume to say that I, ME and MYSELF should get the honour of watching the scientist at work? How could I claim that since I've never come across of such a scientist before, that one doesn't exist? It is MY fault that I didn't know him before and not the scientist's! Yet all in all, the invention is still there for itself to prove in reality that it was made by the unknown scientist, (whether I choose to believe it or not) and that the scientist really does exist!
You see, it is the same with mankind today and God, He is the Scientist who created the universe out of nothing. He was the scientist's whose invention has lasted thousands of years old, millions of days old. He was the One who caused His work to reproduce after it's own kind and dispose after itself. He is the I AM who made the beauty of the looming majestic mountains that we so admire, and the fragile breath of the lily. It was Himself, indeed who gave us ungrateful wretches life and breath.
Yet after all this, mankind starts to say, "where is such a God, the scientist?" I have never heard of Him, myself! I have never seen Him. He doesn't exist!" They start to say "I've found a fault in the manual- God's Word. He's a liar!" Man has started to doubt the Creator and His Word, even while the creation is still before them! They've put holes in the testimony of the creation where none was before, and spread lies to everyone around... lies that in this world could have been sued after.....
The creation of the Maker is BEFORE your very eyes, oh blinded people! Tear off the prejudice, cast the lies away and see and hear for yourself the fresh Truth! God is the only God, The Great I AM who made the world Himself. He is the scientist who you so scornfully reject and despise. Look on the world and see for yourself!!
But weren't the Ancient Egyptian gods (Atum/Ra in particular), the Norse gods (Odin and his brothers), the Greek gods (especially Prometheus and Epimetheus) P'an-ku (whose fleas became mankind after he died for the world), Kamui, Izanami and Izanagi (the latter couple created the Japanese islands, the first was the divine creator), the Aboriginal ancestors who woke and created themselves out of nothing (especially Ungambikula) and then carved people from the earth, and every other creation god, also scientists? Wasn't even the cow who "un-iced" (licked the primeval ice until he came out) Odin and the first Norse gods also, in a sense, scientists?Quote:
You see, it is the same with mankind today and God, He is the Scientist who created the universe out of nothing.
Um, just curious, but do you mean to say that you think this (sorry if a teeny bit large) is "incorrect"?Quote:
He was the scientist's whose invention has lasted thousands of years old, millions of days old.
http://www.paleoweb.net/pal-ges/bild...ion-poster.jpg
As I said just curious. And what do you make of million-year-old fossils? Hmm, what about the Stone Age people? From what I remember, humans have only been on earth for three minutes in a 24-hr day (appearing three minutes before midnight)...
Interesting subject,
Loki
Hey Loki, I am a geologist, and I totally concur with your diagram. The interesting thing is the abundant life that we as humans consider lesser forms (about 95% of your diagram). The evidence of evolution is just overwhelming. Creation is a rationalism of earlier times. When the Book of Genesis was written 7000 years represented an almost inconceivable amount of time.
I'll say one thing, Loki, mon ami. I am told that to belive that God created everything takes a lot of faith. Perhaps this is so. But for me, to believe in the events recorded on your very carefully drawn out chart takes even more faith... :nod:
I once read that it's "easier" to believe that a creator exist and created the whole universe, than to believe the whole process of evolution...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
Well, logically everything must have a beggining, and the best explenation is a divine being. something must have started it all.
Loki, How do you know that that chart is true? Evolution is not even a law. It's a theory. I'm even inclined to say it's only a hypothesis, not all of nature agrees with the facts that Evolution claims.