a very short time ago, various religious people thought rainbows were the path to heaven. it's unclear if any of them ever climbed one and made it to heaven. many other religions believed the rainbow was some sort of sign from their god. of course, as people got smarter and science came into the picture to provide facts, rainbows were known to be caused simply by light refracted by water.
and many other religious beliefs were dispelled as people got smarter and many more will be in the future as people get smarter and learn more and have greater access to information. we're just at one point on the continuum between creating explanations for things like rainbows, lightning, the shape of the earth, biogenesis, etc out of nothing and proving facts through evidence and science.
and of course, evolution, a scientific fact, is behind us on that continuum for the most part, not in front of us.
but most people believed rainbows were the path to heaven because it felt comfortable to believe that and people tend to do things that make them feel comfortable. it's not mentally comfortable to say, "I don't know" or one day we'll all just disappear. it's much better to think of things like 72 virgins and heaven, etc and until someone can prove there those 72 virgins aren't waiting up there for us, religious people can easily turn their brains on to that belief and those similar.
It still amazes me how big a role religion plays in societies all over the world
...even in this day and age.
It only actually bothers me when it gets in the way of scientific progress
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
a very short time ago, various religious people thought rainbows were the path to heaven. it's unclear if any of them ever climbed one and made it to heaven. many other religions believed the rainbow was some sort of sign from their god. of course, as people got smarter and science came into the picture to provide facts, rainbows were known to be caused simply by light refracted by water.
and many other religious beliefs were dispelled as people got smarter and many more will be in the future as people get smarter and learn more and have greater access to information. we're just at one point on the continuum between creating explanations for things like rainbows, lightning, the shape of the earth, biogenesis, etc out of nothing and proving facts through evidence and science.
and of course, evolution, a scientific fact, is behind us on that continuum for the most part, not in front of us.
but most people believed rainbows were the path to heaven because it felt comfortable to believe that and people tend to do things that make them feel comfortable. it's not mentally comfortable to say, "I don't know" or one day we'll all just disappear. it's much better to think of things like 72 virgins and heaven, etc and until someone can prove there those 72 virgins aren't waiting up there for us, religious people can easily turn their brains on to that belief and those similar.
It still amazes me how big a role religion plays in societies all over the world
...even in this day and age.
It only actually bothers me when it gets in the way of scientific progress
Humans used to think that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it
As Humans evolve and their intelligence grows, facts are now becoming myths.
One of the few constants in our short history.
However most of the intellectuals in this thread seem to believe this trend has ended. We now know everything and no one in our future will laugh at us.
I doubt that.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Crowkillers:
Humans used to think that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it
As Humans evolve and their intelligence grows, facts are now becoming myths.
One of the few constants in our short history.
However most of the intellectuals in this thread seem to believe this trend has ended. We now know everything and no one in our future will laugh at us.
However most of the intellectuals in this thread seem to believe this trend has ended. We now know everything and no one in our future will laugh at us.
I doubt that.
That is actually the exact opposite of science.
Science - unlike religion - constantly says "we dont know". Science doesnt make up answers when there are none.
There are TONS of holes in our current science, we know a sliver of what will be known. Religion is the one that knows everything, and that everything was written 2000 years ago.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tikitom:
One of the few constants in our short history.
However most of the intellectuals in this thread seem to believe this trend has ended. We now know everything and no one in our future will laugh at us.
I doubt that.
That is actually the exact opposite of science.
Science - unlike religion - constantly says "we dont know". Science doesnt make up answers when there are none.
There are TONS of holes in our current science, we know a sliver of what will be known. Religion is the one that knows everything, and that everything was written 2000 years ago.
yeah, what tikitom said truly is the opposite of the concept of science.
the reason why science is such an effective learning method is it constantly questions what is "known" and experiments and through increasing and accumulating knowledge, more and more is known. nothing known (or very few things) in the past is presumed to be an absolute certainty and when a new experiment or observation changes the current thinking, scientific knowledge, like humans, evolves.
0
yeah, what tikitom said truly is the opposite of the concept of science.
the reason why science is such an effective learning method is it constantly questions what is "known" and experiments and through increasing and accumulating knowledge, more and more is known. nothing known (or very few things) in the past is presumed to be an absolute certainty and when a new experiment or observation changes the current thinking, scientific knowledge, like humans, evolves.
Darwin... that explains bigfoot then! Where are the half breeds? Yeah, that explains evolution much better than a creator! Dumb asses.
your first problem is that you think the idea of a creator and evolution are mutually exclusive. you don't understand either concept. your second problem is that you are assuming a creator is a who and not a what. my guess is you think it's a He who writes books and helps kurt warner in the super bowl while innocent people and children are slaughtered and starving on this earth daily with no help from Him.
but, to address your post, are you looking for half breeds to solidify your belief in evolution (a concept you clearly don't understand)? you're going to be on this earth about 80 years, give or take? how many years are you giving us to show you actual examples of living things evolving before your eyes? anything less than a billion years and you're not going to see it.
0
Quote Originally Posted by disco20:
Darwin... that explains bigfoot then! Where are the half breeds? Yeah, that explains evolution much better than a creator! Dumb asses.
your first problem is that you think the idea of a creator and evolution are mutually exclusive. you don't understand either concept. your second problem is that you are assuming a creator is a who and not a what. my guess is you think it's a He who writes books and helps kurt warner in the super bowl while innocent people and children are slaughtered and starving on this earth daily with no help from Him.
but, to address your post, are you looking for half breeds to solidify your belief in evolution (a concept you clearly don't understand)? you're going to be on this earth about 80 years, give or take? how many years are you giving us to show you actual examples of living things evolving before your eyes? anything less than a billion years and you're not going to see it.
Science - unlike religion - constantly says "we dont know". Science doesnt make up answers when there are none.
There are TONS of holes in our current science, we know a sliver of what will be known. Religion is the one that knows everything, and that everything was written 2000 years ago.
I think you missed his point, i took it as him making a rub at those that weight too heavily the term 'scientific fact'
as far as
and through increasing and accumulating knowledge, more and more is known.
the plural of data is not anecdote
0
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
That is actually the exact opposite of science.
Science - unlike religion - constantly says "we dont know". Science doesnt make up answers when there are none.
There are TONS of holes in our current science, we know a sliver of what will be known. Religion is the one that knows everything, and that everything was written 2000 years ago.
I think you missed his point, i took it as him making a rub at those that weight too heavily the term 'scientific fact'
as far as
and through increasing and accumulating knowledge, more and more is known.
I swear this thread was once debating evolution. But 95 percent of these posts are instead debating religion. I came in and put up a challenge to evolution based on Darwin's very own findings. The only response I received was to lump my beliefs in with Noah's ark and burning bushes. I really just don't understand crusading evolutionists... you defend The origin of species as righteously as Priests defend the bible.
Lets face it people there are giant holes in evolution as proposed by Darwin that have never been patched up. Darwin had an entire chapter entitled " Difficulties on theory." He hypothesized that further advanced scientific research would patch up these holes. In fact further science has only widened these holes.
A couple easily identifiable holes he foresaw.
1. How could natural selection explain complex organs, such as eyes, ears or wings? How can it be advocated that these organs evolved gradually, bearing in mind that they would fail to function if they had even a single part missing?
At the time of his writing Darwin believed that each organ was relatively simple and could "adapt" from one species to the next or within a species over many generations. Since his writing the evidence has compiled against him so dramatically its borderline silly to discuss. The human body is so complex and precise that even the slightest tinkering results in death without advanced medical science intervening. to imagine the human stomach, eyes, brain, vascular system advancing "randomly" is an exercise in stupidity.
If a man is walking in the woods and finds a timex watch he naturally looks at it and thinks wow who created this. We have a very difficult time imagining this watch randomly created itself to keep time accurately. Yet when faced with a machine infinitely more complex we assign a random device to have created it.
2. Darwin asserted that "Living beings evolved gradually." In this case, there should have lived millions of "transitional forms." Yet there was no trace of these theoretical creatures in the fossil record. Darwin gave considerable thought to this problem, and eventually arrived at the conclusion that "further research would provide these fossils."
In Darwin's time there really wasn't much of a fossil record. Today there is. Remember the millions of lizards with wings we have found? Do we have one? Of fish with little feet? No you don't. We haven't. The fossil record lines up squarely against Darwin.
Yet he still has millions of followers. No idea why I actually took ten moments of my time to write this as I'm sure it will be met with the same "bah bah bah" retorts and lumped in with homosexuality references. But anyone actually interested in challenging their own beliefs in evolution is welcome to take five minutes out of their day. (It's not an amazing site but it'll do pig, it'll do)
I swear this thread was once debating evolution. But 95 percent of these posts are instead debating religion. I came in and put up a challenge to evolution based on Darwin's very own findings. The only response I received was to lump my beliefs in with Noah's ark and burning bushes. I really just don't understand crusading evolutionists... you defend The origin of species as righteously as Priests defend the bible.
Lets face it people there are giant holes in evolution as proposed by Darwin that have never been patched up. Darwin had an entire chapter entitled " Difficulties on theory." He hypothesized that further advanced scientific research would patch up these holes. In fact further science has only widened these holes.
A couple easily identifiable holes he foresaw.
1. How could natural selection explain complex organs, such as eyes, ears or wings? How can it be advocated that these organs evolved gradually, bearing in mind that they would fail to function if they had even a single part missing?
At the time of his writing Darwin believed that each organ was relatively simple and could "adapt" from one species to the next or within a species over many generations. Since his writing the evidence has compiled against him so dramatically its borderline silly to discuss. The human body is so complex and precise that even the slightest tinkering results in death without advanced medical science intervening. to imagine the human stomach, eyes, brain, vascular system advancing "randomly" is an exercise in stupidity.
If a man is walking in the woods and finds a timex watch he naturally looks at it and thinks wow who created this. We have a very difficult time imagining this watch randomly created itself to keep time accurately. Yet when faced with a machine infinitely more complex we assign a random device to have created it.
2. Darwin asserted that "Living beings evolved gradually." In this case, there should have lived millions of "transitional forms." Yet there was no trace of these theoretical creatures in the fossil record. Darwin gave considerable thought to this problem, and eventually arrived at the conclusion that "further research would provide these fossils."
In Darwin's time there really wasn't much of a fossil record. Today there is. Remember the millions of lizards with wings we have found? Do we have one? Of fish with little feet? No you don't. We haven't. The fossil record lines up squarely against Darwin.
Yet he still has millions of followers. No idea why I actually took ten moments of my time to write this as I'm sure it will be met with the same "bah bah bah" retorts and lumped in with homosexuality references. But anyone actually interested in challenging their own beliefs in evolution is welcome to take five minutes out of their day. (It's not an amazing site but it'll do pig, it'll do)
I agree that humans are very complex but almost any living thing is equally complex, so how is it impossible to assume that we evolved from an origin?
Even primitive reptiles which have eyes that only see motion, black and white, and aren't very intelligent at all have a complex brain and other organs. You even refer to our stomach as being so complex that it could not have advanced from a primitive species which similarly has a vascular system that uses an electric current to pump blood with the heart through the body, to the lungs, eyes and stomach while being coordinate by lightning-fast nerve stimulators from the brain. That's pretty complex. And if you take one of these creatures and "tinker with it" as you say - IT WON"T LIVE. Give a prehistoric turtle a labotomy and let me know what happens.
0
I agree that humans are very complex but almost any living thing is equally complex, so how is it impossible to assume that we evolved from an origin?
Even primitive reptiles which have eyes that only see motion, black and white, and aren't very intelligent at all have a complex brain and other organs. You even refer to our stomach as being so complex that it could not have advanced from a primitive species which similarly has a vascular system that uses an electric current to pump blood with the heart through the body, to the lungs, eyes and stomach while being coordinate by lightning-fast nerve stimulators from the brain. That's pretty complex. And if you take one of these creatures and "tinker with it" as you say - IT WON"T LIVE. Give a prehistoric turtle a labotomy and let me know what happens.
Alligators are modern day dinosaurs. "Only the strong survive" and they keep living. There have been reports or Alligators/crocs being able to live in acidic water that should eat through their skin but doesn't; Thats the species adapting to modern day situations.
0
Cheeseteam-
The inner ear of humans are almost identical to the gills of fish. Every species can be traced back to fish.
Alligators are modern day dinosaurs. "Only the strong survive" and they keep living. There have been reports or Alligators/crocs being able to live in acidic water that should eat through their skin but doesn't; Thats the species adapting to modern day situations.
[Quote: Originally Posted by Spitfire15] I agree that humans are very complex but almost any living thing is equally complex, so how is it impossible to assume that we evolved from an origin?
Spitfire the fact that each individual being is extremely complex is an argument for a creator, not against it. Yes even primitive reptiles have EXTREMELY complex inner workings. They were designed that way. Just as a bird was designed with wings. Its impossible to argue against adaptation, but evolution? How did a lizard learn to fly? how could a lizard spontaneously grow wings? Do you actually believe that this could be done without epic fail?
0
[Quote: Originally Posted by Spitfire15] I agree that humans are very complex but almost any living thing is equally complex, so how is it impossible to assume that we evolved from an origin?
Spitfire the fact that each individual being is extremely complex is an argument for a creator, not against it. Yes even primitive reptiles have EXTREMELY complex inner workings. They were designed that way. Just as a bird was designed with wings. Its impossible to argue against adaptation, but evolution? How did a lizard learn to fly? how could a lizard spontaneously grow wings? Do you actually believe that this could be done without epic fail?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Darwin... that explains bigfoot then! Where are the half breeds? Yeah, that explains evolution much better than a creator! Dumb asses. 
Hot Forum Topics
