Skip to comments.Does evolution contradict creationism?
Posted on 11/30/2004 3:53:55 PM PST by shubi
There are two parts to creationism. Evolution, specifically common descent, tells us how life came to where it is, but it does not say why. If the question is whether evolution disproves the basic underlying theme of Genesis, that God created the world and the life in it, the answer is no. Evolution cannot say exactly why common descent chose the paths that it did.
If the question is whether evolution contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis as an exact historical account, then it does. This is the main, and for the most part only, point of conflict between those who believe in evolution and creationists.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkorigins.org ...
They don't care. They want to share their "faith" with anyone who wants to join the effort to stop science teaching in our schools.
Ahhhhhh! Not again!
G: I want you to build me an Ark.
Noah: What's an Ark?
G: Thunder and Lightening
Oh, I understand too well what they are doing. What appalls me is their willingness to embrace Full Monty dishonesty in order to accomplish it. This latest case of plagiarism is but a trifle in the litany of bogus, manipulated, and out-of-context quotes used by anti-Evo/anti-science fanatics to misrepresent scientific thinking.
He should be praying that God doesn't get disgusted with him and ZOT!!! Don't you just love ignorance. It is a form of terrorism. Creationists are "science terrorists".
"They don't care. They want to share their "faith" with anyone who wants to join the effort to stop science teaching in our schools.
Oh, I understand too well what they are doing. What appalls me is their willingness to embrace Full Monty dishonesty in order to accomplish it. This latest case of plagiarism is but a trifle in the litany of bogus, manipulated, and out-of-context quotes used by anti-Evo/anti-science fanatics to misrepresent scientific thinking."
Their list of rhetorical tricks is unmatched. Sometimes, I even fail to see them. I have one guy on another thread that posted some kind of Science article talking about a mutation in Drosophila. I think he added a sentence to it at the end, to make it seem scientists are concerned about deleterious mutations in the population.
I keep trying to explain that if it is deleterious it won't be selected, so no worries. But he calls me stupid in various ways, thinking,I guess, the audience will think he is beating me in the debate.
That is why it is necessary to get fairly nasty with these
Creator of the universe,
send your Ruach haKodesh
to warm the heart of shubi
and remove the scales from his eyes
to your word as it is written.
I ask these things in the
Holy Name of Your Son
The Word of G-d:
PP: Why is your religion any better than anyone elses?
I do not belong to any religion.
I am a follower of Yshua haMaschiach, the Word of G-d.
Religions are mans attempt to define god.
I am a broken vessel totally sold over to the Christ
I cover my sins with the blood of the Lamb
His willing bondslave
f-dot lives! placemarker
Yeah, yeah-its a fraud. And it ain't biology.
enough of your sudo science
If evolution was true there would be no monkeys cuz they woulda all turned into people by now.
See? I dont even have school grade but i has unproved all the evolution by thinking outside the box.
In several cases we have found creationists who it was difficult to tell if they were monkeys or not.
Yes we know about those "sciences". And surely those "sciences" have plausible explanations for how water runs thousands of feet uphill to form the Grand Canyon and the presence of aquatic fossils on tall mountain peaks far from any body of water. (sigh)
Records from many other cultures that predate the supposed deluge show no evidence of such happening.
Of course the presence of so many records from diverse cultures around the globe claiming a massive flood (global or superregional) at about the same time in history doesn't raise any red flags - must be coincidence. Why is it do the God haters always believe the records of other cultures and always reject the Scriptural account? Is it because the Jewish Torah is by orders of magnitude the best honored and faithfully preserved document in all of world history?
The fact that the Noah story was written around 600BCE
So you one of the dozen or so people who believe that. And I have this great ocean front property in Arizona.
Both Babylonian and Sumerian myths which predate the noachian flood tell pretty much the same story, indicating that the story of Noah was borrowed by the Biblical authors, with appropriate changes of course, and used as a fable.
Let's see your reasoning here. You gratuitously presuppose that the Genesis narratives were written after a certain convenient date, then you declare by fiat that the unknown author of Genesis looted these ideas from Babylonians and Sumerians. Then you just happen to know that these stories are fables. And, we can't also forget that the prevalence of this theme being kept around by so many different cultures is clear proof that it never happened. (Using the Up is Down and Cold is Wet hermeneutic)
The technology of the time could not have successfully accomplished what Noah was credited with.
Oh, now you happen to have a garage filled with technology of that era.
Hey, if you hate God and wish to think that you are nothing more than an accident of Chance, go right ahead. You are nothing but an deterministic animal. Your thoughts are nothing but chemical reactions. If you had a pizza for lunch, then your thoughts are based on whatever toppings you ordered.
If you are stupid enough to feel that you can pass off this anti-Semitic garbage as fact, then more power to you and your fellow travellers. I don't care to waste any more time with bigoted racists and Christophobes.
XS>His willing bondslave
PP: You are truly one confused human being. Well, welcome to the monkey-house.
I am truly sorry you are lost and confused.
I pray one day you find and accept the creator of the universe.
Bondslave to the Christ
I dont wish to engage in your debate directly since I am not a Young Earth Creationist per se nor am I an evolutionist per se - so I cannot take either side. But I would like to provide a bit of information for the discussion in response to your remark at post 203 where you said:
Here's the tidbit for the discussion: the evidence is that about the proper time for the Noah flood, a large number of the major civilizations around the world collapsed suddenly:
At some time around 2300 BC, give or take a century or two, a large number of the major civilisations of the world collapsed, simultaneously it seems. The Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Early Bronze Age civilisation in Israel, Anatolia and Greece, as well as the Indus Valley civilisation in India, the Hilmand civilisation in Afghanistan and the Hongshan Culture in China - the first urban civilisations in the world - all fell into ruin at more or less the same time. Why?
Some decades ago, the hunt for clues passed largely into the hands of natural scientists. Concentrating on the earlier set of Bronze Age collapses, researchers began to find a range of evidence that suggested that natural causes rather than human actions, may have been initially responsible. There began to be talk of climate change, volcanic activity, and earthquakes - and some of this material has now found its way into standard historical accounts of the period.
Agreement, however, there has never been. Some researchers favoured one type of natural cause, others favoured another, and the problem remained that no single explanation appeared to account for all the evidence .
The hunt for natural causes for these human disasters began when the Frenchman Claude Schaeffer, one of the leading archaeologists of his time, published his book Stratigraphie Comparee et Chronologie LAsie Occidentale in 1948. Schaeffer analysed and compared the destruction layers of more than 40 archaeological sites in the Near and Middle East, from Troy to Tepe Hissar on the Caspian Sea and from the Levant to Mesopotamia. He was the first scholar to detect that all had been totally destroyed several times in the Early, Middle and Late Bronze Age, apparently simultaneously.
Since the damage was far too excessive and did not show signs of military or human involvement, he argued that repeated earthquakes might have been responsible for these events. At the time he published, Schaeffer was not taken seriously by the world of archaeology. Since then, however, natural scientists have found widespread and unambiguous evidence for abrupt climate change, sudden sea level changes, catastrophic inundations, widespread seismic activity and evidence for massive volcanic activity at several periods since the last Ice Age, but particularly at around 2200BC, give or take 200 years.
Areas such as the Sahara, or around the Dead Sea, were once farmed but became deserts. Tree rings show disastrous growth conditions at c 2350BC, while sediment cores from lakes and rivers in Europe and Africa show a catastrophic drop in water levels at this time. In Mesopotamia, vast areas of land appear to have been devastated, inundated, or totally burned...
Yet what was the cause of these earthquakes, eruptions, tidal waves, fire-blasts and climate changes? By the late 1970s, British astronomers Victor Clube and Bill Napier of Oxford University had begun to investigate cometary impact as the ultimate cause. Then in 1980, the Nobel prizewinning physicist Luis Alvarez and his colleagues published their famous paper in Science that argued that a cosmic impact had led to the extinction of the dinosaurs.. He showed that large amounts of the element iridium present in geological layers dating from about 65 million BC had a cosmic origin.
Alvarezs paper had immense influence and stimulated further research by such British astronomers as Clube and Napier, Prof Mark Bailey of the Armagh Observatory, Duncan Steel of Spaceguard Australia, and Britains best known astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle. All now support the theory of cometary impact and loosely form what is now known as the British School of Coherent Catastrophism.
These scholars envisage trains of cometary debris which repeatedly encounter the Earth. We know that tiny particles of cosmic material penetrate the atmosphere every day, but their impact is insignificant.
Occasionally, however, cosmic debris measuring between one and several hundred metres in diametre strike the Earth and these can have catastrophic effects on our ecological system, through multimegaton explosions of fireballs which destroy natural and cultural features on the surface of the Earth by means of tidal-wave floods (if the debris lands in the sea), fire blasts and seismic damage
The extent to which past cometary impacts were responsible for civilisation collapse, cultural change, even the development of religion, must remain a hypothesis. But in view of the astronomical, geological and archaeological evidence, this giant comet hypothesis should no longer be dismissed by archaeologists out of hand.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the entropy of a closed system will decrease or remain constant.
The key word is "closed".
If anything can pass into, or out of, a system, we say it is an open system. If only matter can pass into, or out of, a system, but not energy, then we call it a closed system. If neither matter nor energy can pass into, or out of, a system, then we call it an isolated system.
Biological systems are not isolated or closed systems as they depend on the energy from an outside source: .......... Sunlight.
"Order" in biological systems is only made possible by the consumption of energy that is produced at the cost of increasing entropy in the Sun.
For example, truckloads of lumber, cement and hardwear are delivered to a vacant lot you own. Through your muscle power, which comes from your food energy, which comes from photosynthesis, which is made possible by sunlight which is made possible by increasing the entropy of the Sun, you can take that material and build a house.
You arrived at order (a house) from disorder (a pile of building material) by supplying energy.
The Sun is the source of energy input to the Earth's living systems and allows them to evolve, hunt, breed, construct, Freep, etc.
Why would they turn into people? First, evolution doesn't in any way involve one species transforming into another already-existing species. Second, monkeys are much better adapted to a jungle environment than humans are.
Definitely the missing link. lol
"If you are stupid enough to feel that you can pass off this anti-Semitic garbage as fact, then more power to you and your fellow travellers. I don't care to waste any more time with bigoted racists and Christophobes"
Since when is it anti-Semite to advocate correct translation of the Torah?
Since when is it being a "Christophobe" to fight the cult of idolatry that is creationism?
If you are not going to waste any more time spouting your nonsense-we who still have brains thank you.
Slowly it will be shown by science itself, (as more and more) it is shown to not be credible
This is a LIE. Show us scientific evidence that the TOE is not credible. First, explain what an allele is, so all the other cretins can follow your logic (or lack thereof).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.