The Believabliltiy of Evolution

[rrobs]

That entirely depends on how you read it.
If, for example, the Noah story or genesis is to be read literally, then those scriptures most definatly have been proven wrong.

Try to imagine you lived 3,000 years ago in a very different culture. That may help you understand why they didn't speak of an expanding universe, DNA, etc. It's written according to their ancient worldview, not our's.
[/QUOTE]Why did you capitalize and bolded the word "theory"?[/QUOTE]
As opposed to truth.

 

[rrobs]

Yeah, it seems like that is the basis for your attempts to rant on science: things that you imagine.

Well, I thought that given all the rants on the scriptures, science ought to get equal time. BTW, you seem to have a loose definition of "rant." I think we are just having a friendly discussion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's about how old the books are that Moses was inspired to write.

No. You need to study the history of the Bible. Most realize that Moses was a fictional character.

 

[rrobs]

"when you jump from the empire state building without a parachute, you'll die"

"there is no way of knowing that for certain. it is only an inference".

There's your "logic" applied to an idea that doesn't conflict with your a priori religious views. I bet that suddenly, you'll agree that the exact same logic doesn't apply when it doesn't contradict your religious views. Right?

Yeah. So?

Or do you feel like the above has any merrit?

Gravity and evolution are two different animals.

 

[tas8831]

This is what ALL OF THE OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE, EXPERIMENT, AND LOGIC SUGGESTS. We merely misinterpret the evidence because very little of it is based on experiment. We see what we expect. Look and See Science doesn't work.

Repeated assertion, repeated instance of your inability to present evidence for a claim.

You've, literally, got nothing.

 

[rrobs]

No. You need to study the history of the Bible. Most realize that Moses was a fictional character.

Of course. Most people don't believe in the Bible. Nothing new there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah. So?


Gravity and evolution are two different animals.

Yes, we have more evidence for evolution and understand it better.

 

[tas8831]

Nope.

Homo Dunning-Kruger doesn't work on any level and Homo Argumentum Rotundum doesn't really capture the spirit of Homo Omnisciencis. Humans need a name as expansive as we think we are and that separates us from mere animals like the "wise men" who came before.

I am open to suggestions though.

Still waiting for your evidence re: all change is sudden.

Or at least an acknowledgement that I met your challenge.

But, given your history, I expected you to do what you have done so far - just ignore it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course. Most people don't believe in the Bible. Nothing new there.

It is not a matter of believing, it is a matter of reality.

Why insult Christians? One does not need to believe the myths of the Bible to be a Christian.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You are trying to insist that an ancient people have the same worldview. Just try to consider their basic mindset. How could they possibly understand the "big bang" theory? To them God, as well as any god of any culture, created everything. The scriptures are no different in that regard than the creation account held by Hinduism. Are you as critical of the Hindus as the Christians? Maybe, but most people seem to admire the Hindu ascetics.

I have a question, since you make an interesting point.
Why follow ancient texts at all then?

 

[rrobs]

The 10s of thousands of christian denominations interpreting the same bible differently, disagree.

No fault of the scriptures. As a matter of fact, Paul said everybody turned against the things he said in the NT before he even died. Christianity was infiltrated by the Roman, Greek, and Egyptian religions. Most of our present day doctrine is based on that and not the scriptures.

An example may help; most people have the idea that when someone dies, they don't really die, but that God called them to be with Him. If that were true, you might as well say God murdered the newborn baby. That's about what it amounts to anyway. However, even a casual reading of Genesis will show that the dead are not really dead is the exact lie the devil used to trick Adam and Eve (consider it a fairy tale if you will, but at least you should know the story). There are several verses that clearly say dead is dead, no thoughts, consciousness, feelings, etc. If you are interested, I'll show you the verses which require no more interpretation than the daily newspaper. They both simply say what the mean and mean what they say.

Another huge problem, probably worse than death, is the nature of Jesus. I'm pretty sure about 95% of Christians think he is God.

Acts 2:22,

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
​

1Tim 2:5,

For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
​

Why the vast majority of Christians miss that is frankly way beyond me. Do you think anything said in these two verses need "interpretation?" I don't think so. I think I read somewhere that the scriptures are written to a 5th to 8th grade grammar level.

It is not difficult to learn church history and see where, as Paul said, the vast majority left truth in favor of tradition. Hence 10,000 denominations. But most make Jesus God which is the most sure fired way of screwing up the entire narrative.

 

[rrobs]

It is not a matter of believing, it is a matter of reality.

Why insult Christians? One does not need to believe the myths of the Bible to be a Christian.

I suppose. I won't be doing the judging in the end.

 

[cladking]

Right, because physics and biology are totally exactly the same and have the exact same issues.

Real science works, your imaginary science where you are king is just a laugh.

Real biology and real physics are "totally exactly the same and have the exact same issues" but far more of biology, and especially "evolution", are just Look and See Science.

I was and am a generalist for many years. I am what some would call a 'nexialist" except my specific knowledge of every branch of science (other than "egyptology") is shallow. As a nexialist I just stumbled on the answer of how the great pyramids were built (stones were pulled up one step at a time) and in so doing happened to discover ancient science that was based on Ancient Language and is virtually identical to the means that animals survive and invent. I am king of no science whatsoever. I am in the unique position of understanding two different complex metaphysics. Nobody has ever been in this position before me. But I'm not even "king of metaphysics" because many understand modern metaphysics better than I and my understanding of ancient metaphysics (language) is pretty shallow. I am "king" of perspective but will be surpassed about as soon as my theory is proven (which may be as soon as Egyptology finally releases old data about G1 imaging).

I have been attending to "evolution" since the mid-'50's. I never believed in evolution and still don't. I could never subscribe to any theory that suggests humans are different in any substantial way from other animals or that consciousness isn't far more important to evolution than intelligence, strength, stamina, or any nonsense that has been proposed as the root of evolution in species. You can't imagine my surprise when I found ancient scientists were on the same page I am. TTBOMK all experiment supports our version of "change in species". Ancient science had no experiment but relied on the logic of reality as expressed in a metaphysical language.

 

[rrobs]

I have a question, since you make an interesting point.
Why follow ancient texts at all then?

They do have messages that would serve our modern life in a very positive way. It just requires a bit of work to understand it as they would have understood it. It's work, but certainly not impossible, especially considering the knowledge available on the internet. Tons of info on ancient cultures and way of thought. Learn that, apply it to the ancient writings, and much can be gained to enrich one's life. Anyway, that's just me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No fault of the scriptures. As a matter of fact, Paul said everybody turned against the things he said in the NT before he even died. Christianity was infiltrated by the Roman, Greek, and Egyptian religions. Most of our present day doctrine is based on that and not the scriptures.

An example may help; most people have the idea that when someone dies, they don't really die, but that God called them to be with Him. If that were true, you might as well say God murdered the newborn baby. That's about what it amounts to anyway. However, even a casual reading of Genesis will show that the dead are not really dead is the exact lie the devil used to trick Adam and Eve (consider it a fairy tale if you will, but at least you should know the story). There are several verses that clearly say dead is dead, no thoughts, consciousness, feelings, etc. If you are interested, I'll show you the verses which require no more interpretation than the daily newspaper. They both simply say what the mean and mean what they say.

Another huge problem, probably worse than death, is the nature of Jesus. I'm pretty sure about 95% of Christians think he is God.

Acts 2:22,

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
​

1Tim 2:5,

For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
​

Why the vast majority of Christians miss that is frankly way beyond me. Do you think anything said in these two verses need "interpretation?" I don't think so. I think I read somewhere that the scriptures are written to a 5th to 8th grade grammar level.

It is not difficult to learn church history and see where, as Paul said, the vast majority left truth in favor of tradition. Hence 10,000 denominations. But most make Jesus God which is the most sure fired way of screwing up the entire narrative.

I am not going to defend Trinitarians, but they tend to believe that Jesus is God and they can pick and choose verses just like you can.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I suppose. I won't be doing the judging in the end.

then it might be a good idea what parts of your Bible are mythological and which parts are not.

 

[cladking]

Right, because physics and biology are totally exactly the same and have the exact same issues.

Physics experiments have been done in the lab.

NO experiment showing large changes in complex species have been done in the lab. But observation and interpretation of selection of behavior which result in large changes have been going on for more than 10,000 years. The problem is in interpretation even more than lack of experiment. The data might literally bite us in the nose but we can't see it. I've shown repeatedly in this very thread and you couldn't find it. I could put it in this post and explain it and you still can't see it.

Everybody sees only what they expect so this sentence won't even register.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Not according to the national institute of the genome society. Their final analysis is that all life form derives from the same ancestor. This is a scientific organization mind you who gave this answer.

To answer in short it is the lungs you and I carry around that proves that their is a God who had a mind much like ours. To dispel any and all theory of evolving here first you have to ask has any human child ever been born who could feed themselves? Answer No

Then you also need to look at basic logic for example who first started to evolve the male species or the female species? Logically all life form must have evolved at the exact same time both male and female because otherwise there is no procreation correct?

Using logic we have three components our human bodies must posses oxygen, food, and water. Much like a car needs engine oil, radiator fluid and of course Gasoline. I hope a further explanation is not necessary to compare the similarities.

Nothing in this world has been made by visible hands. So according to the Judeo’s Christian Bible primarily the book of genesis which is not a science book but the word given to man to give us his creation an explanation as to how we arrived.

Therefore we could not have just landed here because if that’s the case how did we acquire lungs? And if we were planted here by an alien species then why aren’t they here? According to the Bible what you see flying around documented by millions of people
Very well could be what caused our world to be fallen. Why do I say this easy they quit cohabiting with us after the flood a warning to stop interfering with humans. Could be very well possible. To most people a theory. But if they put us here then I think it would seem more likely they would have exposed themselves to the world.

I’m sorry to but according to History and logic wars happen and if you think it will never occur again I’m sorry I’m going with scripture to much evidence exists with nuclear technology. Eventually two sides fight over money and control. It’s been going on since the first ever recorded words handed down. The Bible

There is no scientific organization with that name.

Do you mean the National Human Genome Research Institute? The Genomics Institute? National Institute of Genetics?

 

[cladking]

But, given your history, I expected you to do what you have done so far - just ignore it.

Last time!

There are countless examples of sudden change from death to birth or even marriage. There are countless examples. There are also countless examples of sudden changes in population and group behavior but I don't believe in "groups" and "species' or even "civilizations". One of the best examples of sudden change in species caused by behavior is a very modern one; 'tame minks'. Minks are hard to raise because they are mean. Someone selected sedate and friendly minks and got a new species in a single generation; SUDDEN! But their fur is no good so they won't go into production probably (at least not soon).

No matter how many times this is seen or recorded in history biologists can't see it because they already have the answers and can't imagine that nature would ever select for BEHAVIOR. But it does.

 

[rrobs]

I am not going to defend Trinitarians, but they tend to believe that Jesus is God and they can pick and choose verses just like you can.

They can't pick and choose one single verse that plainly says Jesus is God. Find one if you can. But remember, you must understand what they thought the word "god" means. Suffice it to say, it's not what we think of when we hear the word today. To them it was simply anyone with power and authority. But there is only one God Almighty, called Yahweh in the scriptures and He is declared over and over to be the one true God. There is nothing about three in the word one.

On the other hand, I quoted two very simple, clear declarations that Jesus was a man. There are actually many more that are just as clear that say he was a man.

It is not difficult to ascertain where the idea of the trinity came from. It began when early converts brought that idea from their former religions, all of which had some idea of multiple gods. It became an official church doctrine at the behest of the emperor Constantine, who himself was considered a god by their culture and beliefs. There were and are many terms used to define the doctrine (trinity, one essence, true god and true man, blah, blah, etc.). I think it telling that not a single one is found in the scriptures themselves.