• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The God, Evolution, Darwin, Science debate - a different starting point

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
  1. What is a "god" and by inverse what is not a "god?"
  2. How far back does this definition go and is it authoratitive?
  3. Please define what is existance.
  4. Please define what is natural selection.
    1. How does it work or why doesn't it work?
  5. Who was Darwin, what were his credintials, and skill set?
  6. How do you personally define evolution?
  7. How does your oponent define evolution?
  8. Is there such a thing as macro evolution or micro evolution in your mindset?
  9. How would one factually prove any concept of evolution?
  10. How would one factually disprove the concept of evolution?
  11. Have you studied, at a high level - university or above, the various concepts that can be termed "evolution" or "Darwin's concepts of evolution?"
  12. Have you actually "personally" performed experimentation to prove out your ideas for or against any form of evolution?
  13. What literature have you studied to come to your conclusions?
If the debates, on this topic, started from the above you would find the disucssion would be a bit more focused than these debates normally are.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
  • What is a "god" and by inverse what is not a "god?"
  • How far back does this definition go and is it authoratitive?


There is no coherent definition of a god, each person has their own idea.

The various ideas are started about 15,000 years ago with the first organised religion. There may have been previous ideas but on a much smaller, family/tribal scale.

No time to go into the rest, maybe later
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
  1. What is a "god" and by inverse what is not a "god?"
  2. How far back does this definition go and is it authoratitive?

1. I don't know and you don't know either. (First introduced to modern western society in the 19th century by Thomas Huxley but much older. Agnosticism - Wikipedia)

But that doesn't help us so I suggest that, for the discussion of the ToE, we can focus on one alleged aspect of "god": a life creating force.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."

Please define what is existance.

5 Planes of Existence
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
  1. Please define what is natural selection.
    1. How does it work or why doesn't it work?
Natural selection - Wikipedia
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
Who was Darwin, what were his credintials, and skill set?

Charles Darwin - Wikipedia
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
How do you personally define evolution?

Evolution is incremental change over time.

But when the word "evolution" appears near the name "Darwin", it is an indicator that the topic is not evolution but the Theory of Evolution.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
How does your oponent define evolution?


But seriously, I don't assume an interlocutor has a specific definition, I usually ask when it becomes clear that we don't share the textbook definition.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
Is there such a thing as macro evolution or micro evolution in your mindset?
Macroevolution - Wikipedia
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
How would one factually prove any concept of evolution?
How would one factually disprove the concept of evolution?
Have you actually "personally" performed experimentation to prove out your ideas for or against any form of evolution?

If evolution is meant as a more abstract concept than the ToE, then prove or disprove is possible - but not for the ToE.
I have dabbled in genetic algorithms. I have personally seen that functions can evolve with the mechanisms of descent with variation and selection.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
Have you studied, at a high level - university or above, the various concepts that can be termed "evolution" or "Darwin's concepts of evolution?"
No. (The experiments with evolutionary algorithms was during my study of CS but it was a private endeavor and not part of the curriculum.)
What literature have you studied to come to your conclusions?
Too much and from too many sources to list or even remember. I'm a lover of science and read anything I stumble upon that interests me.
If the debates, on this topic, started from the above you would find the disucssion would be a bit more focused than these debates normally are.
As you may have noticed, my answer was often a link to a Wikipedia page. It would help if people could agree upon definitions that are so widely used that they have an entrance in an encyclopedia.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
  1. What is a "god" and by inverse what is not a "god?"
  2. How far back does this definition go and is it authoratitive?
  3. Please define what is existance.
  4. Please define what is natural selection.
    1. How does it work or why doesn't it work?
  5. Who was Darwin, what were his credintials, and skill set?
  6. How do you personally define evolution?
  7. How does your oponent define evolution?
  8. Is there such a thing as macro evolution or micro evolution in your mindset?
  9. How would one factually prove any concept of evolution?
  10. How would one factually disprove the concept of evolution?
  11. Have you studied, at a high level - university or above, the various concepts that can be termed "evolution" or "Darwin's concepts of evolution?"
  12. Have you actually "personally" performed experimentation to prove out your ideas for or against any form of evolution?
  13. What literature have you studied to come to your conclusions?
If the debates, on this topic, started from the above you would find the disucssion would be a bit more focused than these debates normally are.
A bold effort, but I don't think you need half of these. The ones you can dispense with are 2, 3, 5, 9, 11 and 12.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member

But seriously, I don't assume an interlocutor has a specific definition, I usually ask when it becomes clear that we don't share the textbook definition.
Oh no, not Kent Hovind; making up his own definitions that no scientist recognises.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Please define what is existance.

Unlike the god concept existence is well defined as "the fact or state of living or having objective reality."

Please define what is natural selection.
  1. How does it work or why doesn't it work?

There are many texts on the subject and not enough space on an RF comment to do it justice.

Who was Darwin, what were his credintials, and skill set?

Well documented already. Anti evolutionist cherry pick his record to deny evolution. Unfortunately for them, his ideas have since been, with only slight adjustments, been repeatedly shown to be valid.

How do you personally define evolution?

Mutation causing change

How does your oponent define evolution?

Not my problem

Is there such a thing as macro evolution or micro evolution in your mindset?

Yes, macro evolution is just lots of micro evolution


How would one factually prove any concept of evolution?

There are several animals evolving as we speak, the Langkawi bent-toed gecko for example. The pygmy sloth has only existed as a species for less than 10,000 years. The covid virus is mutating.

How would one factually disprove the concept of evolution?

Given the evidence i would say its impossible. But who knows, new evidence may modify the theory

Have you studied, at a high level - university or above, the various concepts that can be termed "evolution" or "Darwin's concepts of evolution?"

No

Have you actually "personally" performed experimentation to prove out your ideas for or against any form of evolution?

???

What literature have you studied to come to your conclusions?

Scientific papers
 

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
Change the word 'god' to, say, 'house' or 'gate' and re ask the question.
The first half makes some sense, the second half, "...what is not a gate?" is bonkers.

So, the question is flawed IMHO

Let's try.

What is a house and what is not a house?

A house can, for example, be defined by some as a shelter or dwelling place. There are some who could say that a house is not a cloud. Yet, there could be someone who comes from left field and claims that if you think of a cloud this way or that way a cloud could be a house because it shelters you from the sun and there are some people who live under the cloads. Thus, the definition, for the left field person, may need to include what is considered to be a house and what is not a house. I.e. keeps the silliness to a minimum.

The same could apply to someone's concept of a god. For example,
  1. Someone could say that a god is a "creator of all things."
  2. Someone could also say that for them, or for everything, a god is not made up of parts or different persons.
  3. Someone could also say that for them, or for everything, a god is not a physical being.
That in short is what I mean. i.e. there is a consideration that some things can only be described in negeatives (what they are not) when they aren't fully understood.
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate.

Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will need both sides to address the following."
  1. What is a "god" and by inverse what is not a "god?"
  2. How far back does this definition go and is it authoratitive?
  3. Please define what is existance.
  4. Please define what is natural selection.
    1. How does it work or why doesn't it work?
  5. Who was Darwin, what were his credintials, and skill set?
  6. How do you personally define evolution?
  7. How does your oponent define evolution?
  8. Is there such a thing as macro evolution or micro evolution in your mindset?
  9. How would one factually prove any concept of evolution?
  10. How would one factually disprove the concept of evolution?
  11. Have you studied, at a high level - university or above, the various concepts that can be termed "evolution" or "Darwin's concepts of evolution?"
  12. Have you actually "personally" performed experimentation to prove out your ideas for or against any form of evolution?
  13. What literature have you studied to come to your conclusions?
If the debates, on this topic, started from the above you would find the disucssion would be a bit more focused than these debates normally are.
Nah.

What is actually needed is for creationists to go to the trouble of informing themselves. All their arguments are based on ignorance. Strawmen, nonsense, misrepresentations.

Show us, ye creationists, ONE datum point
contrary to TOE, if such ye have.

Otherwise its nothing but noise.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Nah.

What is actually needed is for creationists to go to the trouble of informing themselves. All their arguments are based on ignorance. Strawmen, nonsense, misrepresentations.

Show us, ye creationists, ONE datum point
contrary to TOE, if such ye have.

Otherwise its nothing but noise.
If they did that they would no longer be creationists. Look at the example of the missing population bottleneck. He said God could.have added it during the Tower of Babel myth. Of course he does not realize that he is once again claiming that God is dishonest with this hand waving nonsense since we still have a much milder bottleneck than the mythical Flood one. Planting false evidence is lying.
 
Top