Evolutionism.

[Btodd]

There is already a test, two actually: One that you can test God with, and one that he tests us with. Both, however, go both ways.

You can test God, by reading of him, by calling upon him to make himself known to you. Notice I said "known" to you. "Belief" is incorrect.

God also tests us. And if you decide to test him, you should know that he will be monitoring your sincerity. He doesn't like phonies either.

Do I still get to be famous?

This has nothing to do with science, the Theory of Evolution, or the entire point of the thread. So, I think we've successfully pointed out that science is not a conspiracy against Special Creation™ or a Young Earth...particularly in light of the fact that there are plenty of Christians who are scientists, and accept both the Theory of Evolution and a universe that is billions of years old. See 'Francis Collins', for example.


Btodd

 

[bhsmte]

That would work, but only if science was open to hearing information from outside their area of study and understanding.

Science is open to what it can observe and test. I highly doubt, you would want you doctor (who is basically a scientist), treating you with methods that were not tested by science.

So, if you can demonstrate how your knowledge of the super natural is can be demonstrated and tested, go right ahead and lay it on us.

 

[ScottA]

This has nothing to do with science, the Theory of Evolution, or the entire point of the thread. So, I think we've successfully pointed out that science is not a conspiracy against Special Creation™ or a Young Earth...particularly in light of the fact that there are plenty of Christians who are scientists, and accept both the Theory of Evolution and a universe that is billions of years old. See 'Francis Collins', for example.


Btodd

As I said, the conspiracy is the categorical disregard for outside information.

However, evolution is better explained with ALL the information, instead of the limited information available to science. The fact that the scientific community doesn't want to hear it, doesn't change that.

 

[bhsmte]

As I said, the conspiracy is the categorical disregard for outside information.

However, evolution is better explained with ALL the information, instead of the limited information available to science. The fact that the scientific community doesn't want to hear it, doesn't change that.

Take some time and understand how science works, if you have a desire to.

 

[ScottA]

Science is open to what it can observe and test. I highly doubt, you would want you doctor (who is basically a scientist), treating you with methods that were not tested by science.

So, if you can demonstrate how your knowledge of the super natural is can be demonstrated and tested, go right ahead and lay it on us.

If we/you pick the analogy of medicine...then I would have to clarify that medicine is the wrong type of doctor for ALL conditions. Yes, I would want my doctor to be trained in his field, but I would NOT extend the same credibility in matters outside his field, say in psychology. Do you not consider that reasonable? And if so, then why is it so hard to see that scientist have no business speculating outside their field, or that there is a field outside their field?

I just posted the test(s) in another post.

 

[ScottA]

Take some time and understand how science works, if you have a desire to.

I know how science works. It's just the wrong tool for most of the topics discussed on a Christian forum.

 

[bhsmte]

If we/you pick the analogy of medicine...then I would have to clarify that medicine is the wrong type of doctor for ALL conditions. Yes, I would want my doctor to be trained in his field, but I would NOT extend the same credibility in matters outside his field, say in psychology. Do you not consider that reasonable? And if so, then why is it so hard to see that scientist have no business speculating outside their field, or that there is a field outside their field?

I just posted the test(s) in another post.

If science can not observe and test something, how could they conclude it would be good for a person with medical or even psychological complications. Psychology is not as an exact science as medicine, but they do rely on evidence based treatments and treatments they can test and observe.

 

[bhsmte]

I know how science works. It's just the wrong tool for most of the topics discussed on a Christian forum.

It certainly isn't wrong tool to discuss science, like evolution.

 

[ScottA]

It certainly isn't wrong tool to discuss science, like evolution.

Only if you want to know the WHOLE truth.

If you want to see over the mountain, you have to go high enough to get "over" it. Science is not over ANYTHING until it is over it, and it has NOT yet arrived at the knowledge of evolution from the perspective of being "over" it, only approaching it.

 

[bhsmte]

Only if you want to know the WHOLE truth.

If you want to see over the mountain, you have to go high enough to get "over" it. Science is not over ANYTHING until it is over it, and it has NOT yet arrived at the knowledge of evolution from the perspective of being "over" it, only approaching it.

If you know a truth science is missing regarding evolution, please share and demonstrate that it is indeed, true.

 

[ScottA]

If science can not observe and test something, how could they conclude it would be good for a person with medical or even psychological complications. Psychology is not as an exact science as medicine, but they do rely on evidence based treatments and treatments they can test and observe.

Exactly. They could not test it, nor even understand it. That is my point.

That would mean that they would have to do tests like on a guinea pigs or rats.

So...when there is another Authority who has made his presence known all throughout history...why turn to guinea pig testers for the answers?

 

[bhsmte]

Exactly. They could not test it, nor even understand it. That is my point.

That would mean that they would have to do tests like on a guinea pigs or rats.

So...when there is another Authority who has made his presence known all throughout history...why turn to guinea pig testers for the answers?

If you have a truth and you desire other people to believe it, you must DEMONSTRATE it to be the truth with evidence.

If you can't, you can certainly retain this truth for yourself, as your own personal belief, no one is stopping you.

 

[Btodd]

As I said, the conspiracy is the categorical disregard for outside information.

However, evolution is better explained with ALL the information, instead of the limited information available to science. The fact that the scientific community doesn't want to hear it, doesn't change that.

You know what else is a conspiracy? Mathematics. Think about it...it only deals in numbers! it's like mathematicians don't even WANT to hear what Scientology has to say. If they would be more open to the teachings of L Ron Hubbard, they would finally have all the information. But no, they're gonna stick with the numbers thing. It's sad, really.


Btodd

 

[ScottA]

If you know a truth science is missing regarding evolution, please share and demonstrate that it is indeed, true.

Okay.

Evolution exists "within" a greater sphere of understanding than science. Science is simply a small part of something way bigger. It exists within a "created" sphere. That sphere has a Creator. He has made available more knowledge than science knows about that bigger sphere...but for some reason science doesn't want to consider anything beyond their comfort zone. If we were talking about math, why would they stop at one level when there are more levels? Why would they demand that higher math should be explained with elementary math? Answer: Because that is what they know. That is all they know, and apparently all they care about. That is unfortunate, but that leaves science in the dark on many subjects. Evolution is just one.

Within the created sphere that evolution exists, there is time. That sphere was created, and so was time. In order for evolution to exist, time must exist. However, in the bigger sphere wherein science and time are only a small part, time does not exist. Time only exist withing the smaller created sphere within the bigger sphere which was not created.

The smaller created sphere within the larger sphere, was created for a finite (limited) purpose. The larger sphere is not finite, but is infinite. Only the smaller created sphere (the universe as we know it) is finite.

Science exist within the smaller sphere, and is therefore finite (limited) also.

That is the proper perspective and the setting for fully understanding what science is missing regarding evolution. Only by exceeding the limits of this universe and its sciences, including and especially time, can the subject of evolution be properly discussed. So within time, there are no answers regarding evolution, no expertise...leaving only conjecture. The only possible means of understanding time and evolution, is if the information comes into the sphere of time, from the outside, outside the sphere of time.

If you can wrap your head around that perspective...then perhaps we can continue. But...I am about to leave town for about a week, so if I do not get back to things before I leave, I will check in after I return (not unlike the creation story)

 

[bhsmte]

You know what else is a conspiracy? Mathematics. Think about it...it only deals in numbers! it's like mathematicians don't even WANT to hear what Scientology has to say. If they would be more open to the teachings of L Ron Hubbard, they would finally have all the information. But no, they're gonna stick with the numbers thing. It's sad, really.


Btodd

I always thought those math dudes had blinders on.

 

[bhsmte]

Okay.

Evolution exists "within" a greater sphere of understanding than science. Science is simply a small part of something way bigger. It exists within a "created" sphere. That sphere has a Creator. He has made available more knowledge than science knows about that bigger sphere...but for some reason science doesn't want to consider anything beyond their comfort zone. If we were talking about math, why would they stop at one level when there are more levels? Why would they demand that higher math should be explained with elementary math? Answer: Because that is what they know. That is all they know, and apparently all they care about. That is unfortunate, but that leaves science in the dark on many subjects. Evolution is just one.

Within the created sphere that evolution exists, there is time. That sphere was created, and so was time. In order for evolution to exist, time must exist. However, in the bigger sphere wherein science and time are only a small part, time does not exist. Time only exist withing the smaller created sphere within the bigger sphere which was not created.

The smaller created sphere within the larger sphere, was created for a finite (limited) purpose. The larger sphere is not finite, but is infinite. Only the smaller created sphere (the universe as we know it) is finite.

Science exist within the smaller sphere, and is therefore finite (limited) also.

That is the proper perspective and the setting for fully understanding what science is missing regarding evolution. Only by exceeding the limits of this universe and its sciences, including and especially time, can the subject of evolution be properly discussed. So within time, there are no answers regarding evolution, no expertise...leaving only conjecture. The only possible means of understanding time and evolution, is if the information comes into the sphere of time, from the outside, outside the sphere of time.

If you can wrap your head around that perspective...then perhaps we can continue. But...I am about to leave town for about a week, so if I do not get back to things before I leave, I will check in after I return (not unlike the creation story)

Lets start with the basics.

Demonstrate this creator and demonstrate how this creator created anything.

 

[KWCrazy]

First of all, what Jesus believed about it is irrelevant to me. That should be obvious.

What's obvious to me is that you're on a Christian website attacking Christian doctrine, which makes you sound like a troll.

But the statement I made is not some absurd conclusion, the fossil record alone makes no sense without Evolution.

The fossil record doesn't demonstrate evolution. It shows animals that lived and died with no evidence of anything evolving into anything else. Personally, the fossil record makes no sense without a global flood causing a massive loss of life and encasement in sediment under millions of pounds of pressure.

If you think the scriptures do a better job, start explaining why man shows up so late in the strata.

Day six isn't that late.

According to the scriptures, fossils of man should exist in all strata, along with every other creature that has ever existed.

False claim. Fossils are formed under very specific conditions. Decay is the norm, not fossilization.

 

[wndwalkr99]

What's obvious to me is that you're on a Christian website attacking Christian doctrine, which makes you sound like a troll.

The fossil record doesn't demonstrate evolution. It shows animals that lived and died with no evidence of anything evolving into anything else. Personally, the fossil record makes no sense without a global flood causing a massive loss of life and encasement in sediment under millions of pounds of pressure.

Can you describe what you think is the extent of the fossil record? You seem to be drastically underestimating it.

Day six isn't that late

.

What? That makes no sense, unless you truly don't understand where organisms of the homo genus start showing up in the fossil record...

False claim. Fossils are formed under very specific conditions. Decay is the norm, not fossilization.

That part is true; however, that does not take away from meat of the comment, which is that all creatures, every one (I'm not saying EVERY SINGLE ORGANISM, just a good sampling of each species, as far as the concept of species goes), should be represented throughout the strata, and they are not.

 

[wndwalkr99]

That statement is so absurd it's laughable.
So prior to 1859 there was no biology?
One cannot perform a graft without bowing at the altar of molecules-to-man?

Pretty sure he didn't mean that biology didn't exist, and I think you know that. I don't want to speak for him, but it's pretty obvious to me that he meant that nothing about biology makes sense without evolution. For example, why snakes have pelvises and horses have one hoof but at least one chestnut on each leg, why our eyes are formed so inefficiently, etc etc etc. There are literally millions of examples. Each one of these makes perfect sense under the light of evolution, and zero under the mental chains of creationism.

You seriously think that humans and daffodils share an ancestor? That's not science, that's foolishness.

Only if you don't have the smallest idea what common ancestry means or how old the earth really is.

Absolutely nothing that is known about biology would be any different based on the pairs of animals from the ark.

That makes no sense to me. What do you mean?

The fact is, biology precludes molecules-to-man. It may be possible to create a protein out of amino acids in a controlled, oxygen free environment, but it is NOT possible for the same thing to happen with exclusively left-handed proteins in conditions that never existed on this planet. Further, it has never been demonstrated that benevolent mutations could facilitate increasing complexity.

Have you been listening to Kent Hovind? That would explain your spectacular misunderstanding of this subject. Please understand that your objections are actually an argument against abiogenesis, not evolution. They are two separate things. I certainly do not mean to imply that your objection/argument is a potent one; it still betrays a misunderstanding of the application of facts, but you're not talking about evolution here at all. Evolution and abiogenesis are two completely separate fields of study. (("left handed proteins"...lol! You're talking about homochirality, right? have you ever spoken to an organic chemist about this "problem"?))

Evolution exists because there is nothing else in science to explain how we came to exist. The Scriptures not only explain how, but also why.

The scriptures may attempt to explain how, but they get it wrong. That makes the "why" wrong as well.
I do not think you understand what science is.

From a strictly logical point of view, believing in something you know cannot happen (evolution) over something that millions of people have experience with (God) is the greatest foolishness of all.

Millions of people also have an education that has helped them see how evolution actually does make perfect sense. The fact that you believe in god to the exclusion of the evidence for evolution does not make them foolish.

 

[Supreme]

MOD HAT ON

Thread is being closed as it is turning into a General Apologetics thread. This is off topic to the Conspiracy Theory forum.

MOD HAT OFF