Evolution vs. Creation

[Wintermute]

well...evolution has a book as proof, creationism has a book as proof...

Hehe, this nonsense almost makes me believe in God. The theory of evolution is based in part on the principal of survival of the fittest, and this statement certainly contradicts this predicate.

There is a ton more proof for evolution than 'a book', lol. Check it out. I dare you!

[Stanislaw]

Hehe, this nonsense almost makes me believe in God. The theory of evolution is based in part on the principal of survival of the fittest, and this statement certainly contradicts this predicate.

There is a ton more proof for evolution than 'a book', lol. Check it out. I dare you!

*double sigh* dare me to discover something I already know?

the point I was making is that, there is a physical proof for creation as there is for evolution...there is a book, and infact many books, that indicate a divine creator...but these are not counted...I was just saying, that to state that there is no proof is bunk. So there is human proof of a divine creator, its just not counted... If there was no proof, there would be no tales of creation, and therefore, we wouldn't even be having this chat.

Consider the definition of proof.

[Stanislaw]

its not a proof. anyone can recreate the data for evolution. no one can find out for themselves if the bible is true.

they could die.

There is also a universal idea o creationism, something included in each society, seperate from eachother, maybe the proof for a creationistic ideal lies in anthropology.

[Redzeppelin]

omg... you just stated so many (incorrect) opinions as fact. by its nature the universe tends towards complexity. you cant use cars as an example. if you leave life in a desert it adapts to live there more efficiently. i hate when christians use ridculous arguements like that. cars are not designed to do that. when you leave a plant in a desert, or a tree in the forest it grows. from a tiny seed.

Fair enough - I knew the car analogy would get slammed - but it was only used as an example of the degrading force of nature - things left alone collapse into a simpler state. Your plant/tree example is clever, but flawed in two ways: 1) the seed came from the tree - that's how it got encoded with the proper information; as such, the "simple" seed came from the complex tree - so simplicity (relatively speaking - I don't think a seed is less complex than a tree except in appearance) came from complexity; 2)The tree, left on its own, will eventually die and decay into basic elements; that it has "offspring" to perpetuate itself doesn't change the fact that the brief progression from simple to complex is eventually reversed.

they could die. .

Oh that is so good.

[Wintermute]

*double sigh* dare me to discover something I already know?

the point I was making is that, there is a physical proof for creation as there is for evolution...there is a book, and infact many books, that indicate a divine creator...but these are not counted...I was just saying, that to state that there is no proof is bunk. So there is human proof of a divine creator, its just not counted... If there was no proof, there would be no tales of creation, and therefore, we wouldn't even be having this chat.

Consider the definition of proof.

the point I was making is that books are proof of nothing! Goodness! I could write a book this afternoon saying that I could turn water into wine. That don't make it so! Books, including the bible, are only proof that someone knew how to write.

Now, as for your last sentence: If there was no proof, there would be no tales of creation, and therefore, we wouldn't even be having this chat.

Do the tales of Zeus, Ra, Quisquadle, Thor, Santa, the Easter Bunny, Bugs Bunny, Paul Bunyan and Babe, etc. constitute proof of their existance!! Please!

[hyperborean]

the point I was making is that books are proof of nothing! Goodness! I could write a book this afternoon saying that I could turn water into wine. That don't make it so! Books, including the bible, are only proof that someone knew how to write.

Now, as for your last sentence: If there was no proof, there would be no tales of creation, and therefore, we wouldn't even be having this chat.

Do the tales of Zeus, Ra, Quisquadle, Thor, Santa, the Easter Bunny, Bugs Bunny, Paul Bunyan and Babe, etc. constitute proof of their existence!! Please!

Exactly. This argument can go on forever because all these conservative Christians actually believe that the tale of Adam and Eve is a historical fact. This topic displays the downfall of western civilization.

[Stanislaw]

the point I was making is that books are proof of nothing! Goodness! I could write a book this afternoon saying that I could turn water into wine. That don't make it so! Books, including the bible, are only proof that someone knew how to write.

Now, as for your last sentence: If there was no proof, there would be no tales of creation, and therefore, we wouldn't even be having this chat.

Do the tales of Zeus, Ra, Quisquadle, Thor, Santa, the Easter Bunny, Bugs Bunny, Paul Bunyan and Babe, etc. constitute proof of their existance!! Please!

These tales are not universal...where as every culture has a creation myth, with similar ideals.

[Stanislaw]

Exactly. This argument can go on forever because all these conservative Christians actually believe that the tale of Adam and Eve is a historical fact. This topic displays the downfall of western civilization.

Exactly. This argument can go on forever because all these liberal scientists actually believe that the tale of Adam and Eve is a historical falsehood. This topic displays the downfall of western civilization.


hmm

I think the difference between sicentists and christians (don't include muslims, or any other group...their myths are probably more true than christian ones) is that one group lends a possiblity to everything, and the other still wants revenge...you can decide which you are.

[Redzeppelin]

Exactly. This argument can go on forever because all these conservative Christians actually believe that the tale of Adam and Eve is a historical fact. This topic displays the downfall of western civilization.

Prove the story of the Garden of Eden is a hoax, please. You'll have about as much luck as proving that I evolved from pond scum.

"Downfall" - that's funny. Evidence, please?

[hyperborean]

Well hmmmm...god is imaginary...there is no proof of his existence...you follow a bible that was edited and filtered by the government. You have ZERO evidence proving that adam and eve is a real story.

Read this: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/zi...damandeve.html
...and then we'll continue the conversation. Debunk the archaeological evidence presented in that article.

[Redzeppelin]

Well hmmmm...god is imaginary...there is no proof of his existence...you follow a bible that was edited and filtered by the government. You have ZERO evidence proving that adam and eve is a real story.

You're right: I never claimed I had evidence. I asked you for yours. Claiming that something you have no perception of as "imaginary" is not an argument - it is a refusal to recognize something. Any ancient manuscript is in the same position as the Bible - how many of those are you willing to dismiss? Evolution is as imaginary to me - despite your mounds of evidence. Fill in all the gaps and I might be interested.

As well, I've already covered the fact that the Bible won't speak to those who's only desire is to slice it up. It's truths will remain hidden. Sorry.

[hyperborean]

So, what do you creationists have to say about fossils? Especially fossils of Homo Erectus and the Neanderthals.

[Redzeppelin]

So, what do you creationists have to say about fossils? Especially fossils of Homo Erectus and the Neanderthals.

Uh, things died, their bones got buried, turned to stone and got dug up by someone who examined them and interpreted these fossils to say something that they may/may not actually say? What would you like me to say about them?

[Lily Adams]

I think we want some elaboration. You didn't answer the question. I'd love to hear the Creationist view on this; I did mention this before and I didn't get a response from anyone.

Can we quit making this so personal? Both sides. It's bugging me. I'd just like to hear the Creationist side and the Evolutionist side. That's it. No insults, no spitting in each other's faces, just the argument itself.

[hyperborean]

See, lily, they can't answer the question because it goes against their "beliefs". They dismiss and avoid posts presenting evidence. All in all, it's beating around the bush.