Why I believe in God?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I wish to believe the evidence that the earth is about 6,000 years old and designed by a supernatural Being that is greater and more intelligent that what we see around us.

---

That's totally cool. Have at it. Just don't expect to not be criticized when you say that. I'll speak for myself, but those who attack statements like that aren't attacking you or demanding that you change your mind, but rather as a means of presenting an opposition for those reading or listening. If I were to make a thread and announce "Copernicean astronomy is nonsense and the earth is the center of the universe!" one would expect our fellow intellectuals to discredit such a statement, not for the sake of the one who stated it, but for those who are being fed non-facts.

You may keep your faith, and we may be allowed to criticize it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OrphanPip

Lion and tigers can breed, but aren't the same species. So can horses and donkeys. Interbreeding amongst different plant species is even more common.

---

A lot of words, but really nothing...

Lions and tigers...both cats...let's try a...Wolf and a Lion...what happens?

Horse and donkey....BAD example....mules which result are sterile...the end of the line in that "evolution"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

A lot of words, but really nothing...

Lions and tigers...both cats...let's try a...Wolf and a Lion...what happens?

Horse and donkey....BAD example....mules which result are sterile...the end of the line in that "evolution"...

---

Evolution doesn't occur via hybridization, I don't see your point.

I was just pointing out that the notion that species are perfect breeding isolates is not as true as is thought by the general public. Like I said before, speciesation occurs out of a breeding group isolated from it's parent group.

e.g.

You have a group of wombats who live happily in a field, then a rift in the Earth opens up in the middle of the group. The group has now been divided in two, you now have two breeding groups. Just by genetic drift alone there is a chance that these two groups will become biological breeding isolates. Over time both groups are likely to change and become two new separate species. Where one or the other might go extinct, they might both live on, or they might both go extinct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OrphanPip

You have a group of wombats who live happily in a field, then a rift in the Earth opens up in the middle of the group. The group has now been divided in two, you now have two breeding groups. Just by genetic drift alone there is a chance that these two groups will become biological breeding isolates. Over time both groups are likely to change and become two new separate species. Where one or the other might go extinct, they might both live on, or they might both go extinct.

---

Likely?

But we have never witnessed anything like this...therefore it is NOT science... and no better than something based on religious faith. Your ideas are based more on faith than what I base my beliefs on...

So....EVERY evolutionary link...has gone extinct...and you think that my faith is far fetched...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Likely?

But we have never witnessed anything like this...therefore it is NOT science... and no better than something based on religious faith. Your ideas are based more on faith than what I base my beliefs on...

So....EVERY evolutionary link...has gone extinct...and you think that my faith is far fetched...

---

Organisms change constantly, life isn't static, it is not possible for species that existed 1 million years ago to be identical today.

We may not see this today because it takes millions of years. However, you are ignoring the evidence we have of this occurring. The fossil record and phylogenetics both support this happening. Moreover, you're ignoring the fact of ring species, which is an example of this in process today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OrphanPip

Organisms change constantly, life isn't static, it is not possible for species that existed 1 million years ago to be identical today.

We may not see this today because it takes millions of years. However, you are ignoring the evidence we have of this occurring. The fossil record and phylogenetics both support this happening. Moreover, you're ignoring the fact of ring species, which is an example of this in process today.

---

How does the fossil record prove that?
I don't believe that the earth is millions of years old. There is very conflicting evidence that makes the age of the earth inconclusive. Carbon dating isn't accurate past about 6,000 years....oh, that's how old some think that the earth is...

We will never solve this without some real conclusive evidence...not just the statement that evidence exists either. I grow tired of the mere statements that there is tons of evidence. Nor does telling me that I 'don't understand' evolution prove itself as a viable argument.

I am done here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanielBenoit

Besides, what ever happened to faith? Why must the existence of God come down to a little puzzle so that it can compete with evolution?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I wish to believe the evidence that the earth is about 6,000 years old and designed by a supernatural Being that is greater and more intelligent that what we see around us.

---

So there you have it, plain as day. This isn't an argument about facts or evidence, it's wishful thinking. I debated creationists for years, refuting every one of their shopworn talking points, until I realized that when they talked about evidence, they meant something completely different than what it means to scientific researchers. Creationism isn't a search for tentative knowledge, it's a search for comfortable certainty.

Does anyone still believe faith is a good thing if it motivates people to celebrate their ignorance of modern scientific research? Does anyone still believe credulity is just as valid a path to knowledge about the universe as empirical evidential inquiry?

As for "Why I Believe In God," I've said before that I doubt anyone believes because of logical "proofs" and creationist propaganda. These are just the rationalizations that come afterward.

Regards,

Istvan

Personally I believe that the whole creationist-evolutionist debate is ridiculous. It doesn't matter how you believe the world got here in the first place, as long as you believe that it was created. The bible has been stated as spiritual truth, rather than scientific, and the whole "seven days" analogy is simply an attempt to put time on a being who is by definition, timeless. To put it simply, if God is timeless, as most people believe, couldn't his ""seven days" be billions of years to us? Anyway, shouldnt we be debating whether God exists or not, rather than how he created everything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

We will never solve this without some real conclusive evidence...not just the statement that evidence exists either. I grow tired of the mere statements that there is tons of evidence. Nor does telling me that I 'don't understand' evolution prove itself as a viable argument.

I am done here...

---

You're not going to like me very much but...

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/vid...-1404585051071

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/vid...-1403619443814

And finally, for all you people who don't mind Bill Mahr and humorous critiques on fundamentalism...

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/vid...-1596167291434

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy North

You're not going to like me very much but...

---

After watching the first video, I concluded that the content has nothing to do with evolution at all. The assumptions made are far reaching. Especially to stretch the observances to humans and primates.

There is nothing really offered here worth consideration as evidence toward evolution.

Actually, it's another common example of ring species, it shows how speciesation and breeding isolation occurs gradually.

I wrote in my satire few moths ago, that is funny, that "human being is usually very proud. But still he wants to be more from apes than God."

Why? Because if we admit that God exists, it also means, that we have to make very serious decisions about our life and way how do we live it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OrphanPip

Actually, it's another common example of ring species, it shows how speciesation and breeding isolation occurs gradually.

---

Again...it's not evidence. I don't buy into their conclusions....there are still Grand Canyon size gaps in the evidence...far more than these hypothetical conclusions can account for...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JommiL

Why? Because if we admit that God exists, it also means, that we have to make very serious decisions about our life and way how do we live it.

---

One can say the same for theists who refuse to believe that they are a result of natural selection because to them it would make them deal with questions such as the meaning of their life in this new and different perspective. Bienevu admitted himself that he'd rather believe that he was created by a divine being rather than believe that he came about by "random chance". (which is not how evolution works if you know the meaning of natural selection.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Again...it's not evidence. I don't buy into their conclusions....there are still Grand Canyon size gaps in the evidence...far more than these hypothetical conclusions can account for...

---

Please, show me where these "Grand Canyon size gaps" are. Yes like all scientific theories, evolution does have gaps. You know why? Because science isn't like religion and learns more and evolves as it progresses.

Orphan Pip and Katy North have taken the trouble to link you all of this information, at least you could give us your objections to it instead of just outright saying there are a ton of gaps, without even having the courtesy to point out to us where these gaps are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Again...it's not evidence. I don't buy into their conclusions....there are still Grand Canyon size gaps in the evidence...far more than these hypothetical conclusions can account for...

---

I don't get how it isn't evidence. If you ask the question, how does one breeding population become two isolated populations over time? Then ring species are a clear example of how it happens.

Edit: All it would take is for the salamander species in the North to go extinct, to leave you with two genetically isolated populations incapable of interbreeding.