Creation vs. Evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

6days

New member
alwight said:
...creationists...who seem to like to think that science conspires to deny a creator

Creationists claim science affirms our Creator.

alwight said:
Scientists otoh have no interest in denying anyone's God or gods, which would be outside of material reality and the scope of science.

Science is the search for knowledge and truth. If the evidence leads to an Intelligent Designer, it would be anti-science to not consider a Creater as a possible explanation.

Also.. your point about scientists having no interest in denying the Creator is false. Atheist, agnostics, Muslims, Christians all have a biased starting position. Putting a white lab coat on an atheist does not magically turn them into a blank slate
 

alwight

New member
Creationists claim science affirms our Creator.
Creationists also claim that the Earth is only a few thousand years based entirely on a literal interpretation of an ancient scripture, whatever the physical evidence and science may otherwise suggest.

Science is the search for knowledge and truth. If the evidence leads to an Intelligent Designer, it would be anti-science to not consider a Creater as a possible explanation.

Also.. your point about scientists having no interest in denying the Creator is false. Atheist, agnostics, Muslims, Christians all have a biased starting position. Putting a white lab coat on an atheist does not magically turn them into a blank slate
Except that creationists have already reached their pre-conclusions from said scripture that then have to be force fitted into reality somehow or simply ignored.
The scientific method has no place for the miraculous or the supernatural else science may as well be abandoned as a pointless exercise, which is something that theistic scientists accept just as much as those without any theistic beliefs.
 

6days

New member
The scientific method has no place for the miraculous or the supernatural else science may as well be abandoned as a pointless exercise, which is something that theistic scientists accept just as much as those without any theistic beliefs.
We agree of course. The scientific method involves observation and repeatable experiments.
God finished creation at the end of the 6th day, including establishing natural laws to uphold His creation.
Evolutionism is simply as belief about the unobservable, non repeatable past.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
We agree of course. The scientific method involves observation and repeatable experiments.
God finished creation at the end of the 6th day, including establishing natural laws to uphold His creation.
Evolutionism is simply as belief about the unobservable, non repeatable past.

"If you know from the beginning not only what you are looking for, but what you are going to find, you will find it, whether or not it exists."
Bengston in 'A Merciful Death for the Earliest Bilaterian'

This post a few days back discredits any YEC claims as scientifically valid. YECs start with an assumption that God created everything 6000 years ago. As Bengston said, if you set out to find evidence for something, you inevitably twist anything you can to fit your preconceived notion.

Scientific method requires a logical conclusion drawn based on results, no matter what one's hypothesis was originally.

Every single scientist that is a young Earth supporter is also a member of an Abrahamic religion. If YEC was plausible then you'd see scientists of ALL religions and/or no religion supporting it. But only scientists with a religious belief in young Earth do. The Bible is not scientific evidence, despite what AiG might tell you. Due to preconceived "truth" based only on interpretation of scripture, YEC isn't science.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
Thank you Kdall. I thought I might have upset you last time we chatted. Sometimes, I am too snippy. Yep, I never heard about the Piltdown man til yesterday or so. What does Piltdown mean? File down?



Yes, Kdall, I can see what you mean. Don't some of these viruses contain different strains, like a stomach virus or a sinus virus, or a flu virus, or a hanta virus or a Legionnaires virus, etc. My sister Diana got a swine flu vaccine and it gave her Multiple Sclerosis. She's been suffering for decades now because of it. Now, she can't have any virus shot with eggs in it and she is also allergic to eggs, and many other foods and drugs.

Did you go to college Kdall? You see, I did not. I took some pre-med classes in high school because I wanted to be a doctor. But then when I found out that I would go in debt for years and have to go to school for 6 years, I changed my mind. But I did have Human Physiology, Chemistry, and Biology. So it's not like I am foreign to Science. Had my share of cadavers and dissecting. The stench! Phew!! Well, those days are long gone. Yes, and when I changed my mind about being a doctor, I thought I would be a Pharmacist, until I found out that I would go in debt for years and have to go to school for 6 years. I changed my mind on that too!! So do you see how they both went down the tubes. It's been a good life though, regardless. I hope the same for you, dude! Well, I'll get going. Let me know what city you live in or how old you are, if you want to. I am in Phoenix, AZ and am 59 years old. I've learned quite a lot in my life and enough to know that I don't want to go through it again. But I feel like I'm 18 years old inside. I have a lot of love inside also. God taught me that. And Jesus, and the Holy Ghost!

May God Replenish Your Spirit And Countenance,

Michael

:sam:

I did go to college, yes. I'm 27 and live in Colorado.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
Check It Out:

6 Ways Science Reveals God’s Truth

Having a conversation regarding the intersection of faith and science with a rocket scientist, and corporate astronaut is remarkable. Dr. Leslie Wickman is more than a scientist--she’s a believer who explains science does reveal God, and how faith and science can coexist. We want to believe that there is something greater than ourselves, and that there is a bigger plan. Wickman affirms that modern science does reveal there is a bigger picture that starts with our vast universe.

4 Arguments

Here are the four arguments made regarding science and God. There is the cosmological argument which says there is a cause and effect. So there must have been a creator. The ontological argument says we have the idea in us there is a God, so God is the cause. The anthropological argument points to the universal absolute moral values because people experienced God, hence he exists. The teleological is the argument regarding order and design, so there had to be creator.

Big Bang

“When I look at what science tells us about the existence of God, What I’m looking for is what evidence we have that suggests that God is the best explanation,” Wickman said. “There has been a growing body of evidence accumulation for the big bang model of the universe, which basically says there was a beginning to all of this. At that beginning, space, matter, time came basically into existence.” In Genesis God created the heavens and the earth, and the big bang model tell us that in fact there was a beginning. "People of faith might cringe because it sounds naturalistic, but the reality the big bang model is God friendly.”

A Beginning

Astronomical discoveries show a vast universe that is beautifully woven Wickman wrote, and consistently points us to an orderly and consistent creator. Before the big bang model there was the steady state model that the universe always existed in the same state. Many scientists and philosophers were comfortable with this because it didn’t necessitate any explanation. “When evidence started mounting for the big bang, it made a lot of people uncomfortable in the sense now we have to deal with this beginning. Obviously, if there was a beginning there had to be a beginner or a cause for it.”

The Goldilocks Principle

Just look at the earth. The temperature, the water, and the vast lands, and how they are all interdependent on each other. The earth’s finely tuned characteristics as complex as it is, make the planet habitable for creation. The Goldilocks principle is the observation that something must fall into certain margins instead of extremes. The earth's distance from the sun, size, atmosphere, magnetic field, 24-hour rotation, and the axial tilt that gives us the four seasons are perfect. This is just a small list as it goes into the dozens of parameters that need to happen for the earth to be just right for us.

Order

Getting the earth so fine tuned explains a creator. “Some people have tried to count the probability of getting it just right is one chance in 10^250th power.” It’s like picking one atom from the entire universe, and statisticians say it is improbable, unless it’s rigged, Wickman explained. Meaning, it was designed by a creator and gain order. “The fact we have laws of the universe to study is remarkable.”

Intelligence Elsewhere

Wickman said she would be surprised if there was no life on other planets as God is a lot bigger than we could imagine. “I’d be a little surprised that we are the only intelligent beings created apart from heaven. It would be really arrogant of us to think that we're the only ones.” The universe is a really big place, and a possible multiverse is immeasurably bigger, so “I’m not threatened at all by the idea of a multiverse.” But there is always a period of an adjustment the faith community has, when there is a new discovery. Scientists once believed the earth was flat and at the center of everything. "The thought of the unknown scares people."

Think About All Of This,

Michael

I like this post. It makes clear that scientific evidences of a very old universe are not contradicting faith. Unfortunately I doubt 6days would ever even admit that YEC is even possibly wrong
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I did go to college, yes. I'm 27 and live in Colorado.

I'm very glad for you Kdall. College is wonderful and so is being young. CO is also beautiful. I loved being 27, but now I am older and have learned a lot. I cannot say OEC is correct, but I am a YEC. If I'm wrong about it, it doesn't much matter. At least I'll have my close belief and friendship, loving God, and my Savior Jesus Christ. So you see, it doesn't matter if it's 6,000 years or not. I love Him and He Loves Me, and everything is growing well in my garden.

God Be With You,

Michael
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I like this post. It makes clear that scientific evidences of a very old universe are not contradicting faith. Unfortunately I doubt 6days would ever even admit that YEC is even possibly wrong

Dear Kdall,

Thank you. It took me a bit of work to put that together. I do not see how it necessarily supports a very old universe. And like I said about an old earth or a young earth, earlier, I still have My Father, God, and His Son, My Savior, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, and all of the angels. I've got it made! I'm 59 years old now, but I know what to believe. And yes, I like you very much also.

Michael
 

alwight

New member
We agree of course. The scientific method involves observation and repeatable experiments.
God finished creation at the end of the 6th day, including establishing natural laws to uphold His creation.
Evolutionism is simply as belief about the unobservable, non repeatable past.
No, evolution is the best scientific explanation from the observable evidence. Supposing supernatural shortcuts simply encourages wilful ignorance, not better understanding and science.
"Goddidit" is not science 6days. :nono:
 

6days

New member
kdall said:
As Bengston said, if you set out to find evidence for something, you inevitably twist anything you can to fit your preconceived notion.
The interesting thing about Bengston is that he is an evolutionist criticizing another evolutionist. *If you start with a preconceived notion about evolution, you will twist interpretations to fit that.*
 

6days

New member
alwight said:
No, evolution is the best scientific explanation from the observable evidence.

We disagree.

alwight said:
*Supposing supernatural shortcuts simply encourages wilful ignorance, not better understanding and science.*

We disagree on that too. Much of modern science was founded on the Biblical belief that God created and sustains creation in logical. This belief encouraged and continues to motivate many scientists to discover the how and why.*

alwight said:
"Goddidit" is not science 6days.*
We agree. (Nothing created everything is not science either)
 

alwight

New member
We disagree.
We disagree fundamentally about many things 6days, not least the role you choose to allocate for your YEC version of God simply because an ancient scripture says so, regardless of science.

We disagree on that too. Much of modern science was founded on the Biblical belief that God created and sustains creation in logical. This belief encouraged and continues to motivate many scientists to discover the how and why.
Before science there only was the Bible and the belief surrounding it. Science and knowledge only developed after it was realised that testable evidence based conclusions would lead to greater knowledge beyond a simple adherence to something somebody anonymously wrote in antiquity, pretty much without the aid any evidential or testable support.

We agree. (Nothing created everything is not science either)
Not claiming to know the ultimate cause of creation seems rather more honest than claiming to know that a specific Abrahamic God-did-it. :rolleyes:
 

Stuu

New member
What does Piltdown mean? File down?
piltmap2.gif


Stuart
 

6days

New member
Thanks to Stuu for pointing out this gem!

Michael Cadry: "*Yep, I never heard about the Piltdown man til yesterday or so. What does Piltdown mean? File down?"


Haa HA. Thanks Michael. I think I might use that for my signature line... love it. :)

Michael... Piltdown man was a mythological missing link used to promote evolutionary beliefs. Someone had claimed to discover the skull in an area caĺled Piltdown in England. The skull used to promote this belief was a human skull but an orangutan jaw that had been filed down to fit. Some evolutionists claimed it was a PROOF of Darwinian evolutiin. This mythological man made its way into high school and college textbooks as well as peer reviewed journals.
 
Last edited:

Hedshaker

New member
We agree. (Nothing created everything is not science either)

Classic Creationist Straw man****

Of course "Nothing created everything is not science" any more than God created everything is not science.

I'm no scientist by any stretch but I'm an avid enthusiast and advocate for the scientific method and in all my years I have never heard any scientist or fellow enthusiast claim that, "(Nothing created everything)".

What caused the formation of the universe is not known, nor can it be assumed that here has ever been this magical "nothing". There is no beginning in "nothing" and there is no always in "nothing".

The only honest answer to what caused or preceded the BB is, we don't know. You don't know either and the Genesis authors certainly didn't know.
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Thanks to Stuu for pointing out this gem!

Michael Cadry: "*Yep, I never heard about the Piltdown man til yesterday or so. What does Piltdown mean? File down?"


Haa HA. Thanks Michael. I think I might use that for my signature line... love it. :)

Michael... Piltdown man was a mythological missing link used to promote evolutionary beliefs. Someone had claimed to discover the skull in an area caĺled Piltdown in England. The skull used to promote this belief was a human skull but an orangutan jaw that had been filed down to fit. Some evolutionists claimed it was a PROOF of Darwinian evolution. This mythological man made its way into high school and college textbooks as well as peer reviewed journals.


Dear 6days,

Thanks so much for the truth and facts about this "Piltdown" man in England. I do hope I gave you a chuckle!! Be sure to thank Stuu for me!! I'm most likely NOT going to answer any posts here that are not directed to me. If you need any help 6days, just let me know.

God Bless Your Dear Heart!

Michael

:sam:
 
Last edited:

Simon Baker

BANNED
Banned
Dear 6days,

Thanks so much for the truth and facts about this "Piltdown" man in England. I do hope I gave you a chuckle!! Be sure to thank Stuu for me!! I'm most likely not going to answer any posts here that are not directed to me. If you need any help 6days, just let me know.

God Bless Your Dear Heart!

Michael

:sam:


Michael, I Read In Chatbox About L.A./Hollywood ~ When ?
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER


Dear Stuu,

Thanks for going to the trouble of answering me and provided a map. I don't know how you do that. I don't know how to upload any photos or maps, etc. onto a post. It looks like you're banned again. You must quit doing that. We would like to talk with you instead of you being gone. Bye Buddy!

Wishing You The Best!!

Michael

:doh:
 

alwight

New member
Michael... Piltdown man was a mythological missing link used to promote evolutionary beliefs. Someone had claimed to discover the skull in an area caĺled Piltdown in England. The skull used to promote this belief was a human skull but an orangutan jaw that had been filed down to fit. Some evolutionists claimed it was a PROOF of Darwinian evolutiin. This mythological man made its way into high school and college textbooks as well as peer reviewed journals.
I think our genuine evolutionary scientific knowledge and evidence has increased immensely in the last 60 years. Sometimes even dishonest hoaxes and wild guesses made without much evidence can sometimes turn out to be more or less in the right general direction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top