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

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Ehav4Ever, Nov 25, 2020.

  1. Ehav4Ever

    Ehav4Ever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2020
    Messages:
    1,100
    Ratings:
    +616
    Religion:
    Torath Mosheh
    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.
     
    • Useful Useful x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  2. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    28,721
    Ratings:
    +23,125
    Religion:
    None

    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
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    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.
     
  4. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    5 Planes of Existence
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    Natural selection - Wikipedia
     
  6. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    Charles Darwin - Wikipedia
     
  7. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none


    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.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    Macroevolution - Wikipedia
     
  10. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    No. (The experiments with evolutionary algorithms was during my study of CS but it was a private endeavor and not part of the curriculum.)
    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.
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,497
    Ratings:
    +8,976
    Religion:
    Humanist
    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
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,551
    Ratings:
    +9,440
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    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.
     
  14. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,497
    Ratings:
    +8,976
    Religion:
    Humanist
    Oh no, not Kent Hovind; making up his own definitions that no scientist recognises.
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
  15. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    28,721
    Ratings:
    +23,125
    Religion:
    None
    Unlike the god concept existence is well defined as "the fact or state of living or having objective reality."

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

    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.

    Mutation causing change

    Not my problem

    Yes, macro evolution is just lots of micro 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.

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

    No

    ???

    Scientific papers
     
    • Like Like x 3
  16. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,247
    Ratings:
    +4,302
    Religion:
    none
    Oh yes, sometimes you end up debating Hovind clones. But they are easy to debunk as that has been done thousands of times.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    35,692
    Ratings:
    +21,048
    Religion:
    Atheist
    A failure of phylogeny would falsify evolution, but that is almost the same as saying "A rock falling up would refute gravity." It ain't gonna happen.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. Ehav4Ever

    Ehav4Ever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2020
    Messages:
    1,100
    Ratings:
    +616
    Religion:
    Torath Mosheh
    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.
     
    #18 Ehav4Ever, Nov 25, 2020
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    17,889
    Ratings:
    +9,002
    Religion:
    None
    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.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    35,692
    Ratings:
    +21,048
    Religion:
    Atheist
    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.
     
Loading...