0 registered members (),
1,397
guests, and 7
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: Ran Man]
#66546
03/30/06 02:17
03/30/06 02:17
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535 Michigan
ICEman
Developer
|
Developer
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Michigan
|
:| Oh God, why is this still not closed ot locked or something lol.
It's a moot debate really.
I'm ICEman, and I approved this message.
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: ICEman]
#66547
03/30/06 02:59
03/30/06 02:59
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,320 Alberta, Canada
William
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,320
Alberta, Canada
|
If the earth is 4+ billion years old, then why are we, as humans, so far behind on the technical curve? Since the advent of methods for keeping history, and judging from old books, we havn't made many advancments until around 2-3 thousands years ago. What happened for the billions of years beforehand? Did we just sit and stare at a rock? That doesn't make any sense... especially considering how from birth most of us want to learn and create... Keep this in perspective, 4 billion years of knowledge, verse how far we've come in only 2000 years... we should be well beyond UFO's by now. Also, since we know humans looked like humans do today 2000 years ago, how come we never changed over 2000 years? Why don't I have 2 brains yet? Will todays monkeys become humans in a few thousand years? If we took a human and put them in the water their entire life, and their children, and so on, for lets say 1000 years, will they start to grow gills? Kinda like the Zora in Zelda.
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: William]
#66548
03/30/06 03:34
03/30/06 03:34
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535 Michigan
ICEman
Developer
|
Developer
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Michigan
|
:| Well evolution of that kind can take place but the main reason why i dont believe it did happened is because that would take billions upon billions of years. As far as why we arent as far as our length of existence would dictate we should be..well maybe the last dominant civilization was just as intelligent, but just as dumb as we are, and they blew themselves back to the stoneage; the stoneage that we know. I always believed that if you dont learn from your mistakes and you just keep trying to make them work, then history will just repeat itself. I think that there once was an advanced human civilization, or several that got further up the development ladder than us.. but still hadnt learned enough wisdom to make it last.
I'm ICEman, and I approved this message.
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: William]
#66551
03/30/06 04:06
03/30/06 04:06
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535 Michigan
ICEman
Developer
|
Developer
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Michigan
|
xD well I dunno what happened, but I dont believe all knowledge was lost.. it's slowly being recovered in the form of relics and artifacts.
Also..I dont think it'd render advancement useless...but the idea is to excercise proportional wisdom. If you advance and you dont get wiser while doing so, stuff like building superpowerful weapons of mass destruction tends to happen.. and it's really only a matter of time before you committ some collosal irreversible f***up which unintentionally cleans the slate of human civilization.
The idea to me is to advance, and become wiser,..and then you wont mess it all up, as has probably been done a few times, and is about to be done again by us.
I'm ICEman, and I approved this message.
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: NITRO777]
#66552
03/30/06 05:37
03/30/06 05:37
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
AndersA
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
Quote:
So now I'm not only "narrow minded" I'm also a moron.
I said your statement was moronic, not you. There is a big difference.
No there isn't, but you are welcome to try to show me this big difference. Since you are this broad minded person with a brilliant intellect, it shouldn't be to hard to explain; not even to a moron like me.
Quote:
Quote:
If you define a scientist as a person who adheres to the scientific method, I think it's safe to state that "[a]ll scientists accept evolution" as a reasonable way to understand life.
Your statement compares the acceptance of the theory of evolution with the acceptance of the scientific method[...]
No, it doesn't. Evolution is a broad phenomena, not only connected to the origin of life. With the evolution model you are able to predict a lot of statistic processes. I don't know if evolution is able to prove anything, but as a scientist, I really don't care, because science and the scientific method isn't about proofs, it's about understanding and being able to predict things in the world we experience. And that's why I think it's safe to state that all scientists accept evolution as a reasonable way to understand life. If you understand the scientific method and adheres to it, it shouldn't be too hard to realize that my statement isn't provoking at all.
Quote:
It also goes on to say that all scientists accept this thinking which propels your statement into the realm of ridiculous.
Oh joy! Not only am I a narrow minded moron, I'm a ridiculous narrow minded moron! And you are just brilliant. How sad...
Quote:
At that point I had to assume that noone in their right mind would make this comparison so I concluded that your understanding of the scientific method must be warped.
And from your erroneous conclusion that I didn't understand the scientific method, you concluded that I'm a moron. So in your book, people who doesn't understand the scientific method are morons?!
By the way. Do you understand the scientific method?
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: NITRO777]
#66553
03/30/06 08:47
03/30/06 08:47
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
Matt_Aufderheide
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
|
Quote:
Quote:
I say that most certified scientists are evolutionists or at least not Christians becuase they'd probably simply get fired if they were Christians
I wouldnt call these guys "certified scientists" I would call them "certified spineless jellyfish" because they are wimps which clearly do not deserve to call themselves Christians.
So why does the Pope accept scientific evolution? Is he just a spineless wimp too?
You are simply ignorant of even the mainstream of Christian faith. Maybe you should just stop posting your ideas, and poeple wont lose any more respect for you than they have already.
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: Matt_Aufderheide]
#66554
03/30/06 08:57
03/30/06 08:57
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
Matt_Aufderheide
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
|
Quote:
They came from apes and I came from God
Of course you still don't undertsand evolution, and the fact that Man didn't come from "apes".. we have a common ancestor. Get over it.
As Thomas Huxley said to a similar person:"I'd rather a monkey for a father than such a one as you."
|
|
|
Re: for doubters of God's existance
[Re: NITRO777]
#66555
03/30/06 09:57
03/30/06 09:57
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,986 Frankfurt
jcl
Chief Engineer
|
Chief Engineer
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,986
Frankfurt
|
Nitro77: I suppose your main problem is that you are confusing Christianity with creationism. The second problem is that I see from your statements that you don't know much about the methods and purposes of science. You've posted many links that you seem to think corroborate your claims, but in fact they corroborate the contrary. You should maybe read an article before posting a link to it: "Scientists almost unanimously accept Darwinian evolution over millions of years as the source of human origins." The links are mostly about how many scientists believe in God. But - and you can read this in your of own links - even the very religous scientists normally do not believe in creationism. Protestantism has accepted evolution 100 years ago, Catholizism 25 years ago. Creationism is rejected not only by mainstream science, but also by mainstream Christianity. You can believe in God and at the same time accept science, the Big Bang and the evolution theory. You can even see the "Hand of God" in Darwin's evolution if you want. Or you can believe in God and not care about science - that's also fine. But you really don't do yourself a favor attacking scientific theories and methods that you obviously do not know very well. For a beginning, look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wiki/science
|
|
|
|