Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Creation Vs. Evolution  (Read 26466 times)

Clinton

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2003, 11:11:20 pm »

I think a lot of people who back science in these science v religion debate/rant are just as religious as the people they are arguing against.

I am believer in the scientific method. This means.

(1) I understand that science itself is a collection of big fat lies which just happen to describe and predict what we observe better than anything else.
(2) I don't delude myself into thinking the world is actually made up of atoms and molecules, I understand however its the best model we've got, no matter how incorrect it may be.
(3) I'm quite happy to drop my model of the universe tommorrow for a totally new one if it matches what we observe more closely.

My beliefs are quite contrary to religion, as religious people accept their religion as true (which is contrary to my beliefs about science in [1] and [2]), and don't change their religious beliefs as easy.

Anyone who argues for science in a way such as "Evolution is right, creationism is wrong" is at least as religious the person they are arguing with.

I say, "Evolution seems to make sence, generally, but there are exceptions. The idea is nice, but there are some issues wit it. I don't know what actually happened, and never will.".  The last sentence is the important one.

If you say "There is a god" or "There isn't a god"", then you're religious.

If you say" "I don't know there is a god, because theres no way to experimentally test if there is a god at the moment", then your scientific.

I see too many people arguing "There isn't a god", and pretending they're not religous. Its a misrepresentation of scientific thought. Please do not take these people as scientific people.

End rant.


« Last Edit: October 22, 2003, 11:12:24 pm by Clinton »
Logged

kensai

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #31 on: November 19, 2003, 11:48:41 am »

I'm personally a 6 literal day the-earth-isnt-more-that-10000-years-old creationist. Don't feel like arguing about why, but I do find it ridiculous that my tax dollars go to support a conflicting theory of origins. I take comfort knowing that in the free state this will not happen.

And yes evolution is both a relgious theory and a scientific theory. In most cases it is, or leads to, a belief that there is no god. The belief of no god is a religoius stance.
Logged

ShrineGuard

  • Guest
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2003, 05:31:17 pm »

I would not say that evolution leads to a belief in no God.  Most people I know that believe in evolution also believe in God.

Having been born and spending a fair chunk of my life in New Orleans, the most overwhelmingly catholic major city in the US, as well as a center for catholic schools, almost all of those catholic schools teach that the old testament is not a real series of events, but is instead a series of fables that teach lessons about morality and whatnot.  They also teach evolution.

I also know that it is very common for Jews to believe in evolution as well as God.
Logged

DrMontrose

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2003, 02:34:57 am »

i do not believe in god
i dont even have to say why i dont because...

do you have to explain why you think the sky is blue? or do you just see blue and say "hey, thats blue"

I see this world and i say to you "hey, there is no god"
Logged

dlenmn

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
    • me blog
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2003, 04:18:55 pm »

I'm personally a 6 literal day the-earth-isnt-more-that-10000-years-old creationist. Don't feel like arguing about why, but I do find it ridiculous that my tax dollars go to support a conflicting theory of origins. I take comfort knowing that in the free state this will not happen.

If, someone who believes that abortion is morally wrong doesn't want their tax dollars paying for people's abortions, I can agree that their money shouldn't be. However, I don't believe that this also applies to tax dollars teaching evolution. Why? Because science is a package. The theory of evolution, the evidence that the earth is billions of years old, etc. are not independent of the other branches of science, on the contrary, they are supported by it; thus, to reject evolution is to reject science on the whole. Granted, some prevailing theories of science have been, and will probably continue to be, wrong, but such wrongs are corrected by other parts of science (and, to date, there appear to be NO valid scientific critiques of evolution (although some, such as Lord Kelvin's seemed good at the time)). Perhaps this need of science (as a whole) to correct science seems circular, but that's because it is; like I said, it's a package. Then the question is: why should we take science? Because it works. As Richard Dawkins said at a talk that I recently attended, "When you go to a conference on cultural relativism you do so by Boeing 747, not by flying carpet".
Logged
"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein

TANSTAAFL

Morpheus

  • Guest
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #35 on: December 07, 2003, 05:34:08 pm »

Government Schooling should not even exist, and it WOULD NOT exist within a Libertarian Society. The abolition- or, perhaps, more properly- the privatization of Government Schooling is one of the goals of the FSP to accomplish within New Hampshire.

The various PRIVATE schools would possess the power to decide if they would teach evolution. Many would, and many wouldn't. Such is freedom.
I, of course, would send my offspring {were I to ever have any} to a school of the former persuasion.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2003, 05:37:30 pm by Morpheus »
Logged

seekingtruth

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #36 on: December 13, 2003, 06:55:32 pm »

 ::)

First, I honestly believe that Creation and Evolution are compatible.  I am a Christian, and while as of right now, I can't wholly identify with any particular denomination, I can say that both are possible.  Even the names suggest harmony.  Something can be created and then evolve.  Thus, why would it be ludicrous to believe that God created the world and planned evolution in order for things to make sense for the rest of us?

As for Evolutionary Science being taught in school, I think it is highly advisable, even at Christian schools.  While as a libertarian, I don't believe that schools should necessarily have to hold to any particular curriculum, it is intelligent to teach the theories that exist.  Even if evolution is controversial, it is currently the best scientific theory that we have in regards to the nature of our being.  Other parts of science which are much more disputed among professionals than evolution (atomic theory, the theory of the wave/particle nature of light) are taught and tested in virtually every high school.  It is ultimately the student's choice to agree or disagree with whatever knowledge is impressed upon him or her, but it should be the school's responsiblity to impress as much knowledge as is in their power
Logged

psyka

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #37 on: February 09, 2004, 09:58:16 pm »

I believe in creation. I am not a deist and I am not a scientist. I believe in evolution and I believe in creation. I am able recognize that my consciousness is not merely a series of chemical reactions taking place in my brain (nor do I believe that the brain is the source of thought; merely the amplifier of the source of thought).

It is also my personal belief that all matter is expanding consciousness that elevates as its vibrational rates (atoms all vibrate) increase. According to the "Origins of Life" a lightning spark that excites certain chemical compositions dramatically, spawning single celled organisms; light and energy here is the cataclysm of such an event.

About death? Well, as you all have put there are 3 possibilities:
   1) A new expirence completely ("heaven")
   2) Reincarnation
   3) Nothingness

I believe that #3 is possible but only can be expirenced for brief, perhaps, unnoticable periods of consciousness. I believe 1-2 are also correct; that the mind reincarnates to evolve itself until it is ready for #1. All matter and energy is recycled as everything is contained within a closed system, therefore nothing can escape something-ness. My opinion is that God (the one that Buddha, Jesus, and Ghandi knew; I believe, bible stories are a series of mental excercises as is zen) is absolutely everything...attempts at revealing this to others prooved unsuccessful as a whole. Its not like it can be TAUGHT, anyway; the path can be revealed but you must take it upon yourself to learn (if I pointed to a specific tree in a forest, you would miss the sky).

Peace :)
Logged

SteveA

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2905
  • Freedom - Are you man enough to handle it?
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2004, 05:34:49 am »

Quote
And, if the Creator is all-powerful, why couldn't It speed up time and evolution?  Why would It need billions of years, if It had the power to control time?  The Biblical 7-day genesis could happen, with this theory.  And it would still "jive" with evolutionary evidence.

Something to consider is that we don't have any objective view of "how fast" time is occuring.  We likely view the passage of time as fast as everything around us does, like a character in the VCR movie people were referring too.

If God were a higher dimensional being, like a 4th dimensional being who had not only height, width and depth but spanned time as well, he would view our lives as an object fixed in time, that covers a certain distance/length of time.  He could see our creation, as one end of our dimension in time and our death as the other end.  He could even literally view inside us, though I can't describe this easily here but as a quick analogy:

I will extrapolate on some examples in a book called Flatland.  Imagine a flat world, we call this 2 dimensional, it has height and width.  If people were objects on this sheet, like triangles or squares, and lived in this flat world, they would view everything inside this sheet as all they are able to sense.  Their eyes see in a flat manner, inside this ultra-thin slice of reality, but that is the whole of their existance and they do not notice how truly flat they are.  They can bump into each other and move around inside their flat world.

If someone, let's say they are shaped like a sphere/ball,  from the third dimension, with not only height and width but depth, passed through their world, they would see, as the ball passed through their flat world, a circle, slowly increasing in size, appearing out of nowhere.  This circle would grow until the sphere person was halfway through the plane/flatworld then the circle would gradually shrink and disappear.  The sphere person could look at the flatworld inhabitants and see inside them.  Knowing everything about them.  If you took the entire life of a flatworld person and stacked individuals frames of their life, one on top of the other, you would have a column, a three dimensional object that represented the whole of their existant, visible in one glance.  You could reach into anywhere in the flat world and modify most whatever you wanted without worrying about being limited to moving through their world and avoiding the obstacles they might encounter.

I posted these this here just as an interesting thing to think about.  I doubt such a simple example would apply to any Creator, if such existed, but there are some very interesting correlaries.

The big question for me is:  Why am I inside my body viewing the world from this specific body?  What is it that holds my "spirit" to this body?  I am rather certain there is no specific spot of my body that holds my soul - I could lose an arm and still be here, or as cells die and are replaced continually in all of us, there wouldn't seem to be any specific atoms or other physical objects that our lives are attached to.  If we die, do effectively sleep, still attached to whatever remains of our bodies until in some future interation of the universe life occurs again and we are reborn, or do we drift away after death and go somewhere else.  There are enough scientific possibilities, in my opinion, to justify some sort of existance after death but other than a few guesses, it seems like a mystery as to why any of us are here right now and what is there specifically that holds our "soul" to our body?

If you replaced a few carbon atoms in your body with a few other identical carbon atoms, I assume life would continue as normal, but consider slowly replacing every atom of your body with identical atoms.  Is it still you there?  I would assume so again, but now consider what would happen if instead of slowly replacing those atoms, those atoms were put together to create an exact replica of someone.  I would assume the original persons soul would not move to the newly created replica but then again, how would anyone know?  What if the both the replica and the original person said they were both alive and living normally?  Was life created or is it a lifeless talking collection of chemicals?  Spooky :o Let's not do it ;D  I don't see any obvious ways of knowing how we live and what a soul is and it's amazing that with all the advances in science we don't appear to be any closer to answering any of those questions.
Logged
"Fruitless, born a thousand times, lies barren.  Unguided inspiration, yields random motion, circumscribed in destination, going nowhere.  Guidance uninspired, always true in facing, stands immobile.  But fixed upon that destination firmly and with inspiration lofted; beget your dreams."

GOD

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • I'm a myth!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #39 on: February 17, 2004, 10:57:01 am »

I think a lot of people who back science in these science v religion debate/rant are just as religious as the people they are arguing against.

To refuse to "have faith" or "believe" in something that is not only unproven but contrary to the existing evidence is not an act of religion.

--------

re·li·gion    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (r-ljn)
n.

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
Logged

GOD

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • I'm a myth!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2004, 10:59:44 am »

What is it that holds my "spirit" to this body?  

First prove the existance of this "spirit".  I suspect it'll be as easy as proving the existance of ghosts and goblins.
Logged

Morpheus

  • Guest
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2004, 12:19:34 pm »

If you don't believe in yourself.. then no one else will.
Logged

MattyDubbya

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2004, 08:22:19 pm »

Hello people, found this forum on creationism and evolutionism, and decided I may as well way my piece...

First of all, there was an earlier post saying something along the lines of "If you say you believe in God or you say you Don't believe in God, you're religious." I like that, and hes absoutely right.  You must have faith to make either one of those statements.  However, SCIENTIFICALLY, it makes much more sense to say the FORMER!

Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor? It says that when attpemting to deduce the cause of something, use the simpilist explanation. So...

Using this scientific method, would it make more sense that:
a. God created the Universe
b. The big bang happened by chance (a chance that is 1 in 10^120)

lets think about that number for a minute...
if you covered the continent of north america in dimes from the earths surface to the moon, and then took 1 BILLION MORE covered the same way, painted ONE of those dimes red and asked someone to close their eyes and pick it out, their chance would be 1 in 10^120

So scientifically, could anything happen by that small of chance? I think not.  In fact, the scientific standard for being correct is 95%.  Not so close, is it?

for more information on this topic, as well as answers if you're atheist or agnostic, please go to www.godandscience.org

it opens you eyes

P.S.  I've also noticed that people refer to got as "mean", "angry", "nice", or whatever.  Please remember that God is not human, and if he does exist, he does so on more than the 3 dimentions of space and 1 dimention of time that we operate on! (check out the most recent Popular Science magazine for info on dimentions).

Thanks for reading
Logged

GOD

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • I'm a myth!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2004, 08:45:18 pm »

Ssssshhhhhh...(I'm not under 21).
For life to form itself from nonliving matter is illogical.  The natural tendency of things is to degenerate from order into disorder...so saith Isaac Newton.  

Nonsense.  Already refuted.  

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#thermo

Biology is a construct upon, not a derivative of, chemistry and physics.
Which would form first:  the ability to eat, the desire to eat, the food to eat, or the means to digest?  The answer is all would have to form simultaneously.  Unlike growing or developing, systemic functions must exist in all their components before they can work.

More illogic:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI101.html

The sun should be smaller.  Extrapolating backwards from its current size and rate of shrinkage, it would have to have been so big as to have consumed Mercury for it to have existed billions of years ago.  

This is simply untrue.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-solar.html#_Toc430357875

Working from that same logic, the moon is too close, the earth spins too fast and orbits too fast.

This is disproven, even the creationist "discoverer" of this has renounced it.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea2.html#proof20

There is not enough sediment in the oceans.

Yet more incorrect information.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html#ocean

It is possible that we have not been deceived by a malevolent Creator into thinking the earth is billions of years old.  It is possible also that the dinosaur and geological records are not "plants" meant to deceive us into overestimating the age of all things.  Possibly time does not pass at a constant rate.  There is already rudimentary evidence to suggest that the speed of light has been decreasing for some time.  In Glen Rose, TX, fossilized dinosaur footprints are found in the same rock strata with homo sapiens footprints.
I cannot participate in this forum; I'm eight years too late to the table.  But I encourage you to base your beliefs upon facts, and to get all the facts before forming beliefs.  Be open minded but not gullible.  Be steadfast but not dogmatic.  Test every idea, every belief on its own merit.  Truth does exist.  It's there for you to find it.  Don't settle for less, don't settle for a watered down compromise.
I have struggled with creation v. evolution in my own mind for many years.  I have read a lot of pages on both sides of the issue.  I have since made up my mind based on the facts.  I cannot make up anyone else's mind but my own, so I won't try to.  I'll tell you one very important thing that I learned along the way, though.  The facts will lead you to the truth, and the truth will set you free.

Andrew

Anytime some creationist comes at you with nonsense about "young earth science" or other "proofs" of creationism, I STRONGLY urge you to go here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-index.html

Look up what they are claiming is "proof" and see if it has already been disproven (99.99% of the time you'll find it here) or if the studies supporting it were tampered with.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2004, 08:46:10 pm by GOD »
Logged

GOD

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • I'm a myth!
Re:Creation Vs. Evolution
« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2004, 08:51:29 pm »

Hello people, found this forum on creationism and evolutionism, and decided I may as well way my piece...

First of all, there was an earlier post saying something along the lines of "If you say you believe in God or you say you Don't believe in God, you're religious." I like that, and hes absoutely right.  You must have faith to make either one of those statements.  However, SCIENTIFICALLY, it makes much more sense to say the FORMER!

Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor? It says that when attpemting to deduce the cause of something, use the simpilist explanation. So...

Using this scientific method, would it make more sense that:
a. God created the Universe
b. The big bang happened by chance (a chance that is 1 in 10^120)

lets think about that number for a minute...
if you covered the continent of north america in dimes from the earths surface to the moon, and then took 1 BILLION MORE covered the same way, painted ONE of those dimes red and asked someone to close their eyes and pick it out, their chance would be 1 in 10^120

So scientifically, could anything happen by that small of chance? I think not.  In fact, the scientific standard for being correct is 95%.  Not so close, is it?

for more information on this topic, as well as answers if you're atheist or agnostic, please go to www.godandscience.org

it opens you eyes

P.S.  I've also noticed that people refer to got as "mean", "angry", "nice", or whatever.  Please remember that God is not human, and if he does exist, he does so on more than the 3 dimentions of space and 1 dimention of time that we operate on! (check out the most recent Popular Science magazine for info on dimentions).

Thanks for reading

And when you done go to:  

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-index.html

For the debunking of www.godandscience.org

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up