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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Well said PW. The point isn’t even to convince him that evolution is true, it is to help him to understand evolution. And as long as he is listening, even a little bit, then I applaud your efforts. And if eselam decides to reject the theory of evolution despite the evidence then that is his decision, but at least he will know that he is rejecting it despite the evidence.Who says he's the only one who can learn from this?
I don't expect to win him over... I want a civil discussion of the subject.
I'm sick of people on either side pretending to be so much better than the other side... I'm sick of atheists insulting the intelligence of the faithful as much as I'm sick of the faithful assuming that you need to be an atheist to support evolution.
I want both sides to grow up and start trying to respect one another...
If I'm going to try to teach people about evolution and what it is and is not, then I need to start somewhere don't I?
This is as good a place as any... and I'm not about to start trying to teach people by insulting them right off and telling them they are blinded by faith and/or ignorant/stupid.
That only makes the attacker look ignorant. There are a lot of reasons to have problems with evolution (I don't agree with them, but you have to try to understand them to address them).
So I suggest that everyone on both sides has something to learn from a reasoned discussion on the issue of evolution/creation.
wa:do
No one, as far as I can tell.Who says he's the only one who can learn from this?
I don't think I've seen anyone "insult the intelligence of the faithful" as a whole. I have seen specific people have their intelligence insulted, but in some cases I think it was perfectly warranted. You have to admit, we've had a rash of rather ignorant creationists here lately. And for whatever reason, they seem to be quite proud of their ignorance.I'm sick of atheists insulting the intelligence of the faithful
Both sides of what? The evolution debate? Atheism and theism?I want both sides to grow up and start trying to respect one another
I'd say the place to start is finding out whether the person you're trying teach is willing to be taught. IMO, someone who says "I'm only trying to disprove evolution" does not fall into the "willing to be taught" category.If I'm going to try to teach people about evolution and what it is and is not, then I need to start somewhere don't I?
Agreed. However, any discussion with Eselam isn't starting right off; he's already established a bit of a history here.I'm not about to start trying to teach people by insulting them right off and telling them they are blinded by faith and/or ignorant/stupid.
I think I have a pretty good grasp of several of the reasons people deny evolution. It's been my experience that the folks who take something similar to AIG's position of "If it disagrees with our beliefs, it is wrong by definition" are not the sort of people you try and teach the subject to. As I said before, you may as well try and convince the conservative Muslims here of the virtues of a roasted pig barbecue kegger.There are a lot of reasons to have problems with evolution (I don't agree with them, but you have to try to understand them to address them)
Providing that a "reasoned discussion" is possible.o I suggest that everyone on both sides has something to learn from a reasoned discussion on the issue of evolution/creation
I'm sorry, but that flies in the face of my years (over a decade) of experience discussing and debating this issue with people from all walks of faith.And as long as he is listening, even a little bit, then I applaud your efforts. And if eselam decides to reject the theory of evolution despite the evidence then that is his decision, but at least he will know that he is rejecting it despite the evidence.
Jose,
remember, eselam is not the only one reading this thread. If someone else, who has been fed the Creationist story, but has doubts, comes across this thread, it may open their eyes to the truth.
PW is providing education for everyone, I have learned a lot from her and applaud her tenacity and patience.
So eselam, now that you have been shown several examples of transitional forms between birds and dinosaurs, do you agree that the two groups are closely related?
So after having been presented with data that he initially claimed doesn't exist, a guy responds with "i am trying to dissprove evolution" rather than any mention at all of the data people went through the effort of providing him, and to you that = "He'll discuss the subject honestly"?
And on another thread the same guy repeats fundamental errors that have been pointed out to him countless times over a period of months (Big Bang, abiogenesis), and to you that's an opportunity for him to learn?
Either you're ridiculously optimistic or very bored....or maybe some of both?
how can i answer you if i haven't srtudied that yet. thats why i'm asking for links, and if there is nothing wrong in the links then you will hear from me.
but if there is, then i will show you what it is. i'm not going to accept this blindly just because some scientists have found a bird like creature.
They asked for evidence... it was given.This is classic. What you're saying is that you don't know anything about it, and hope to get up to speed by spending a few minutes on the internet, but you're sure when you do you'll be able to show those dumb scientists, thousands of the world's best and brightest who have devoted their lives to studying this, just where they've gone wrong.
I'm sorry to have to point this out to you... but you are looking a little over vehement.Please listen: Not some scientists, all the scientists who've looked. Not a bird-like creature, but several different instances of several bird-like creatures. But I'm sure that you, with no training or education in the matter, will be able to set them straight, as soon as you figure out what the heck they're talking about.
I think the precise relationship between birds and therapods is not well-established. I don't think there is any controversy among Biologists about whether they are closely related by evolutionary relationships, which is what eselam is trying to show, as soon as he learns thing one about the issue.They asked for evidence... it was given.
If any more questions come up, I'm sure those of us who know about the research will be happy to deal with them.
It takes time to look over evidence and try to absorb it... It needs to be mulled over and given deep thought.
If eselam finds any fault with the evidence I've given so far, I will be happy to address that when the time comes. I'm not perfect and I'm sure that there are aspects of the research I may have missed... or that will need more explanation to clear up.
I'm sorry to have to point this out to you... but you are looking a little over vehement.
This is an area of active debate... the BAND (birds are not dinosaurs) crowd is still active and while they have yet to produce any good evidence to support their views, they are hardly non-scientists. (many of them are very highly qualified Ornithologists!)
So no... not "all the scientists who've looked" agree. And even among those who do support the dinosaur-bird link, there is healthy debate as to which of these critters are genuinely in the dinosaur-bird linage and which are offshoots, dead ends and which are the results of parallel or convergent evolution.
The ultimate point is... that this is healthy in science. Without debate there can be no growth and no further progress. There are a few instances where the BAND camp has made some valid arguments and these arguments have spurred much of the research into bird origins and that research backs up the dinosaur origin.
So you may want to take care in how you present your argument...
wa:do
And I'm telling you that the BAND camp is genuine, they are scientists and they disagree with the bird-theropod relationship. They promote that birds are descended from an as yet unidentified archosaur group. (Birds Are Not Dinosaurs)I think the precise relationship between birds and therapods is not well-established. I don't think there is any controversy among Biologists about whether they are closely related by evolutionary relationships, which is what eselam is trying to show, as soon as he learns thing one about the issue.
On this you are correct.All biologists on both or all sides of the debate agree that ToE is correct and is the tool to use to figure out the precise relationship between birds and therapods.
Regardless of what eselam's position is... your misrepresentation of the false monolith of thought on dinosaur-bird relations is damaging to the argument for evolution.eselam is attempting to launch "ToE is false" from the platform of "birds are not direct descendants of dinosaurs," which is not a valid conclusion. That is, as often happens with creationists, any evidence of healthy scientific debate is treated as an admission that ToE is not a valid theory.
Oh yes, I know that, I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that there is disagreement about whether birds are descended from dinosaurs or whether the divergence happened earlier, but no controversy about whether the two groups are related--right?And I'm telling you that the BAND camp is genuine, they are scientists and they disagree with the bird-theropod relationship. They promote that birds are descended from an as yet unidentified archosaur group. (Birds Are Not Dinosaurs)
The vast majority of scientists are unconvinced by their arguments... but it does not mean that they don't exist.
What virtually all biologists agree on is ToE, that's my point. I think it's something like 99+%. Disagreement about details does not change this. Creationists have trouble grasping this. That's the point of this thread for eselam. (stay tuned and watch.)I realize you likely don't know much about the BAND group and their role in the dinosaur-bird debate... but that is why you need to be extra careful, however well intentioned you are.
You are right... but that isn't what you said.Oh yes, I know that, I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that there is disagreement about whether birds are descended from dinosaurs or whether the divergence happened earlier, but no controversy about whether the two groups are related--right?
You are right... but that isn't what you said.
You said that all scientists agreed on the dinosaur-bird link.
wa:do