Evolution a proven fact! (ritual, Abiogenesis, creation, genesis, atheist)

[BarryPrays]

Please help me win a debate against this guy called SheepFarmer, who accuses religions of brainwashing us against the theory of evolution. I support a middle ground, where evolution and creation are not exclusive.
Thanks for the help!

Quote:
"Quite frankly I think that in this day and age, the fact that evolution is still questionned shows our society's fundamental failure to accept obvious truths. This in turn indicates to me the dangerous hold that religion has over people's minds," SheepFarmer

http://homeworkhelp.madpage.com/cgi-...?m-1156078671/

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by SheepFarmer

"Quite frankly I think that in this day and age, the fact that evolution is still questionned shows our society's fundamental failure to accept obvious truths.

I would agree with this part of his statement.

This in turn indicates to me the dangerous hold that religion has over people's minds...

I think he's being a bit superficial here. It does not indicate that religion is necessarily dangerous. Instead, what it indicates is that certain religious people in the US launched an intense, sustained campaign some decades ago to discredit both scientists and the theory of evolution, and that their campaign has paid off over time. But SheepFarmer has not demonstrated that these lunatics are representative of all religious people in general.

If SheepFarmer were accurate in his claim that the hold religion has over people's minds were necessarily dangerous, then we would expect to see no instances of when religion has been beneficial to people and society. However, there are numerous instances when religion has benefited people and society. So, SheepFarmer is wrong to assert that religion is necessarily dangerous.

[Ryan2065]

Uhh... Is he talking about evolution or ID? Some people confuse the two... You can believe in ID and still believe in evolution. You can still believe in the concepts of evolution and not believe that evolution will make a new species appear...

[Random]

Evolution remains a theory. Life arising from Non-life is in and of itself a supernatural occurence logically speaking, something which is rarely touched upon by Scientists or Atheists.

This doesn't necessarily imply the involvement of God or gods though, as a monadic force may have been the catalyst...though for me, it is appparent that consciousness and form are predicated on some aspect of intelligent design.

Religions do brainwash people, which is why the gulf between it and authentic spirituality is widening. Materialism and so-called "Naturalism" will never replace religion though, simply because Science will never be able to tell us where the atoms, molecules, and electrons that comprise the processes it decribes came from in the first place.

Cheer up. You don't need to defend yourself against SheepFarmer or anybody else.

[Ryan2065]

Originally Posted by Godlike

Evolution remains a theory.

Gravity is also a theory... I don't see you questioning that. Google the scientific definition of theory and you will find that theory pretty much means *fact*

Originally Posted by Godlike

Life arising from Non-life is in and of itself a supernatural occurence logically speaking, something which is rarely touched upon by Scientists or Atheists.

Read up on evolution please... Evolution has nothing to do with the beginning of life, it simply talks about how life adapts to its environment.

If you want to read up about theories of how life came about check out abiogenesis.

Originally Posted by Godlike

Religions do brainwash people, which is why the gulf between it and authentic spirituality is widening. Materialism and so-called "Naturalism" will never replace religion though, simply because Science will never be able to tell us where the atoms, molecules, and electrons that comprise the processes it decribes came from in the first place.

There will be theories

[JerryL]

Evolution remains a theory.

Yep. Having been proven true graduated the hypothesis of evolution to proven theory.

Life arising from Non-life is in and of itself a supernatural occurence logically speaking

Support.

This doesn't necessarily imply the involvement of God or gods though, as a monadic force may have been the catalyst...though for me, it is appparent that consciousness and form are predicated on some aspect of intelligent design.

To me it's apparent that there's no intelligence involved (unless it's a terribly inept one). I wonder if "apparent" is a good argument.

Religions do brainwash people, which is why the gulf between it and authentic spirituality is widening.

Spoken like every true believer of every other true believer. But I'm sure you are the one person in history that actually got it right.

Materialism and so-called "Naturalism" will never replace religion though, simply because Science will never be able to tell us where the atoms, molecules, and electrons that comprise the processes it decribes came from in the first place.

Virbations of quantum strings?

Religion can't even manage to tell us where humanity came from... at least not accurately.

[Random]

I am familiar with Abiogenesis and have read extensively about Evolution in general. Life arising from Non-life is the necessary supposition of Evolutionists, otherwise the whole theory is without foundation. Check out the Wikipedia articles.

BTW, I didn't say it wasn't a good theory, nor did I deny that it may be a fact.

[JerryL]

I am familiar with Abiogenesis and have read extensively about Evolution in general. Life arising from Non-life is the necessary supposition of Evolutionists, otherwise the whole theory is without foundation.

That's simply an untrue statement. Evolution requires that there was life, but makes absolutely no requirement on where it came from.

Perhaps you have been extensively studying the wrong books?

TW, I didn't say it wasn't a good theory, nor did I deny that it may be a fact.

Evolution is proven. If it were not proven, it would be a hypothesis.

[Ryan2065]

Originally Posted by Godlike

I am familiar with Abiogenesis and have read extensively about Evolution in general. Life arising from Non-life is the necessary supposition of Evolutionists, otherwise the whole theory is without foundation. Check out the Wikipedia articles.

Hrm... Looking at the wikipedia link... Don't see anything in the evolution theory that explains how life was formed... Wikipedia says this:

n biology, evolution is the change in the heritable traits of a population over successive generations, as determined by shifts in the allele frequencies of genes. Through the course of time, this process results in the origin of new species from existing ones (speciation). All contemporary organisms are related to each other through common descent, the products of cumulative evolutionary changes over billions of years. Evolution is the source of the vast diversity of extant and extinct life on Earth.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Where exactly does it say that evolution ONLY works if life began from non life? Hrm, so if evolution cannot occur without life coming from non-life, if we see examples of evolution in the modern world is that evidence of life coming from non-life?

[Random]

Originally Posted by JerryL

That's simply an untrue statement. Evolution requires that there was life, but makes absolutely no requirement on where it came from.

Perhaps you have been extensively studying the wrong books?

Evolution is proven. If it were not proven, it would be a hypothesis.

It is not an untrue statement at all. Read the oft-cited "Timeline of Evolution" online and it is plain for all to see that A) At one point as the Earth is forming there is no life, then, B) Life appears and develops allegedly from "Self-replicating RNA molecules", posssibly stimulated electrically.

Ergo, Life from Non-life.

Secondly, who has proven it? How? I have heard no formal declaration of this from the scientific community, who despite almost unanimously agreeing to the validity of Evolution, still refer to it invariably as a theory.