1. 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!

Featured God and Evolution

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Vaziri, Jul 9, 2019.

  1. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,802
    Ratings:
    +1,170
    Religion:
    Catholic
    It would be better if it didn't include my name in it -because it makes it sound like I was unaware of it.
     
  2. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    6,659
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    Religion:
    atheist
    Who are these people who hate thinkers, philosophers and the religious alike?

    From what I see many religious people do not like thinkers and philosophers and disparagingly lump them into "elites".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,659
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Religion:
    Christian
    Why dear girl are lots of defenseless apes still around, yet all of the alleged ancestor species of humans are not.

    You would think that one isolated population might exist, on some island covered with jungle, somewhere, after all, their abilities to survive were superior to the apes.

    Cro Magnon man simply out populated Neanderthal man, yet there are vast tracts of tropical forest that have never had encroachment from homo sapiens.

    These alleged early hominids seemed to be very poor at survival.
     
  4. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    6,659
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    Religion:
    atheist

    Microevolution is what happens in the short term. It is a subset of the Theory of Evolution.
    • Your comment is like saying you believe in taking steps but you don't believe in walking or hiking.
    • Your comment is like saying you believe in arithmetic but you don't believe in mathematics.
    • Your comment is like saying you believe in the solar system but you don't believe in the universe.

    That all sounds pretty silly, doesn't it?
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    11,145
    Ratings:
    +5,296
    Religion:
    None
    By "defenseless" I mean w/o the teeth, claws, speed etc that
    say a baboon has.

    Those that I refer to obviously had some ways of protecting
    themselves. They lived with such as leopards, pythons,
    hyaenas. So, it seemed to me, they were probably handy
    with stick and rock. Monkeys throw things, why not
    those guys.

    Alleged early hominids? You are not denying their
    existence are you? "Poor at survival". I guess
    old T rex and the sabre tooth tiger were too.
    But non human bipedal apes were around for
    hundreds of thousands of years, certainly longer
    than modern man. Let us not speak too soon, of
    who is good at what!

    As for tropical forest, that is about the worst place
    there is for fossils. There is maybe one specimen of
    a fossil chimp. Hard to say who did or did not
    live there.

    there are vast tracts of tropical forest that have never had encroachment from homo sapiens.

    I dont know why you say that, as all such areas did have
    and do have human population as far back as any records
    can show.

    Anyway...there are a good many fossils of "organisms"
    (called that here so as to avoid saying just who they
    may be related to) that are definitely not "Homo sapiens"
    but that walked upright. Several species, of different
    sizes and characteristics.

    You do agree to that?
     
    #325 Audie, Jul 12, 2019 at 2:56 PM
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2019 at 7:58 PM
  6. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,205
    Ratings:
    +11,796
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Nor is there even one shred of evidence that indicates that there's this supposed magical wall between micro- and macro.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    23,644
    Ratings:
    +13,028
    Religion:
    Atheist

    A law person should know how to use the word "alleged" correctly. I guess Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgway are just "alleged murderers" in his book since their is more evidence of evolution than their is of their crimes. Meanwhile he asks questions that only demonstrate a lack of understanding of the concept that he hates. Which tells us his opposition is irrational.
     
  8. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,659
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Religion:
    Christian
    How do you know they walked upright ? What methodology was used to determine that Lucy walked upright ? Or any of them ?

    Why do none of them exist today, and why are there huge gaps of millions of years between they and the next creature up the line ?
     
  9. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    23,644
    Ratings:
    +13,028
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Which is one of the reasons that it was dropped. It is not a very useful term. Nor can it handle cases of ongoing speciation such as we see with ring species. One cannot even tell where the micro evolution ends and the macro evolution starts.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. 1213

    1213 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    1,007
    Ratings:
    +150
    Religion:
    Disciple of Jesus
    I don’t believe silly ideas. But I am not against real scientific findings. All true observations are ok. And actually, there is no need for belief in observations that can be confirmed, they are true facts. All real scientific facts are nice and I accept them. But I don’t accept silly “scientific” beliefs that can be compared to old mother earth religion.
     
  11. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    23,644
    Ratings:
    +13,028
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Seriously, how old is your information?

    Human Evolution Timeline Interactive

    If you look at that interactive chart you will see a lot of overlap. About Lucy, her skeleton tell us that she walked upright. Her hips alone do that. But that is confirmed by her knees and her foot (not hers but that of another Australopithecus).
     
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    23,644
    Ratings:
    +13,028
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That is good to hear. For a while I thought that you were a science denier. When did you accept the theory of evolution?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. Evangelicalhumanist

    Evangelicalhumanist "Truth" isn't a thing...

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,537
    Ratings:
    +3,339
    Religion:
    None, a humanist who doesn't even worship humans
    Let me try to clarify something for you: first, I am certainly not a "scientist." And while I'm also an atheist, I think of myself (or perhaps I should say fancy myself) a thinker, with a leaning towards philosophy. I am the first person to tell you that science, to be useful and not harmful in human hands, has to be paired with some moral philosophy or other, whether that be religious or not is hardly the point.

    But in my view, any philosophy (or religion) that ignores the findings of science, or tries to claim them to be false because they contradict some assumption or belief, betrays itself. And in doing so, betrays all of us.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,802
    Ratings:
    +1,170
    Religion:
    Catholic
    So then we agree. This is the second time though, that you mistook me as a religious fanatic. The other was in a thread about homosexuality.
     
  15. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,802
    Ratings:
    +1,170
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Fundamentalists do not like thinkers. There are religious and scientific fundamentalists -people who reject anything new that is not already proven.

    Mostly all of the greatest scientists were at some point heckled by their peers. I suppose such a thing is useful, but taken too far, it does more harm than good... Just like all radicalism.
     
  16. Evangelicalhumanist

    Evangelicalhumanist "Truth" isn't a thing...

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,537
    Ratings:
    +3,339
    Religion:
    None, a humanist who doesn't even worship humans
    That may be a problem with how we've communicated with each other. I certainly have not mistaken you for a religious fanatic. On the other hand, based on what I've read so far, I'm not really sure where you're coming from. That's not a bad thing, and nobody's to blame. These things take time, and more conversation.
     
  17. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    11,145
    Ratings:
    +5,296
    Religion:
    None
    Dear Ol' boy,
    I guess if you actually wanted to know you
    would look into it. Your "millions of years" is
    not true, and as for biped? There is no possible
    doubt that there were nonhuman bipedal primates,
    of several sorts.
    If you dont wish to know that, then do not
    look into it for yourself.

    I kind of hope you will, there is a lot there
    that is of interest! Far more than you are
    guessing.
     
  18. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    11,145
    Ratings:
    +5,296
    Religion:
    None
    Re why did other hominid species die out

    Who knows. Extinction is rather
    mysterious.

    But an empirical rule of survival is,
    you do not get coexisting species in the
    same ecological niche.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,205
    Ratings:
    +11,796
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Science is not a "silly idea", nor is the ToE a "silly idea". However, many people, although not me, consider any religion to be a "silly idea".

    Science is based on objectively-derived evidence using the "scientific method", whereas religion is based on neither of these, so if one really wants to seriously question which is more likely to be a "silly idea", guess which one logically would most likely be as such?

    However, imo, neither the ToE nor one's belief in God(s) is a "silly idea". But what is truly a "silly idea" is to try and negate what scientists the world over know what has happened to life forms over billions of years, namely that they have evolved. I used to belong to a church decades ago that taught that evolution was a "silly idea", and I left it and now be.belong to a church that actually doesn't consider science, nor the ToE, to be a "silly idea".
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    6,659
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    Religion:
    atheist
    First off, you stated;
    ...but everyone who hates thinkers, philosophers and the religious alike.​
    I raised the question;
    Who are these people who hate thinkers, philosophers and the religious alike?​
    Now you have changed that a little to state that;
    Fundamentalists do not like thinkers.​
    But then you qualify that with;
    There are religious and scientific fundamentalists -people who reject anything new that is not already proven.
    Your definition is, at best, confusing. I am well aware of the what a religious fundamentalist is: One who takes holy scripture literally (although many retain the right to pick and choose).

    I was not familiar with the term "scientific fundamentalism".

    After doing some digging, I found this on a site that supports
    acupuncture, homeopathy, Ayurveda, and holistic medicine;


    The Rise of Scientific Fundamentalism

    The fascist impulses of scientific fundamentalism serve first and foremost to restrict freedom of thought. Scientism is an abuse of scientific authority that justifies just about any claim that one wishes to make, all in the name of science. Scientism is, in actual fact, anti-science. Mainstream medicine would do itself a big favor by separating itself from all scientistic influences.​

    Have you forgotten, or did you just choose to ignore, that science is not in the business of "proving" anything. So, "people who reject anything new that is not already proven" is really meaningless in terms of trying to apply it to people who support science. To label them "scientific fundamentalists" is nonsensical, unless one has an agenda.

    It seems that the people who coined and use the terms "scientific fundamentalism" and "scientism" do so in a vain attempt to try to disparage people who despise woo. Does this apply to you?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...