Evolution or Creationism

[Ceannairceach]

Can't what be both what?

If he's actual looked at the evidence, he would know that it's definitive. So he's ignorant, willfully or otherwise.

Can't he be faithful and foolish was what I was getting at. And it's not definitive. So good-bye to that argument.

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

[Beldonia]

Can't he be faithful and foolish was what I was getting at. And it's not definitive. So good-bye to that argument.

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

[Mosasauria]

Can't he be faithful and foolish was what I was getting at. And it's not definitive. So good-bye to that argument.

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

Not all scientific theories are 100% factual, however, I would say that ones that have lasted as long as evolution and been tested repeatably are generally true.

[The Black Forrest]

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

Evolution doesn't care about abiogenesis. That is a different discussion.

You can't prove or disprove God so it's a non-question and left out........

[Ceannairceach]

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

For all you know, god was fabricated. In fact, I am almost sure he was. :/ UNLESS you were there...

[Mosasauria]

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

Evolution doesn't care about abiogenesis. That is a different discussion.

You can't prove or disprove God so it's a non-question and left out........

Exactly. He could either exist or not exist. We won't know until we are dead, even if there is no afterlife.

[Ceannairceach]

Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it has enough proof to be considered factual.

Not all scientific theories are 100% factual, however, I would say that ones that have lasted as long as evolution and been tested repeatably are generally true.

Oh, no doubt. But I was simply pointing out that the theory of evolution has enough evidence that has lasted long enough to be considered truthful and factual.

[Beldonia]

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

Evolution doesn't care about abiogenesis. That is a different discussion.

You can't prove or disprove God so it's a non-question and left out........

Sorry, what's that mean?
AAs for your second point: I know, I know. It's a matter of faith. NOT IGNORANCE

[Mosasauria]

Were you there? Have you been alive for millions of years? You have? Oh, that's just fantastic! You can tell us all sorts of great stuff about history! Oh, this is great!
No. You weren't there. For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

For all you know, god was fabricated. In fact, I am almost sure he was. :/ UNLESS you were there...

But as Black Forest said, we have no proof that he does not exist. Therefore, neither side is correct. All that can be said is that evolution is true. However, evolution does not disprove God.
Only the Babel Fish can do that.

[Mosasauria]

Evolution doesn't care about abiogenesis. That is a different discussion.

You can't prove or disprove God so it's a non-question and left out........

Sorry, what's that mean?
AAs for your second point: I know, I know. It's a matter of faith. NOT IGNORANCE

Abiogenesis-How life arises from inorganic materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

[Komoras]

Sorry, what's that mean?
AAs for your second point: I know, I know. It's a matter of faith. NOT IGNORANCE

Abiogenesis-How life arises from inorganic materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Gah. I hate these arguments but here it goes.
Creationists say this is what i believe. Lets find something to support it.
Evolutionists say This is the evidence. The Evidence says i must believe this.
Bravo on the Abiogenesis.

[Beldonia]

Sorry, what's that mean?
AAs for your second point: I know, I know. It's a matter of faith. NOT IGNORANCE

Abiogenesis-How life arises from inorganic materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

I assumed that, I just didn't want to start talking about it and then not know exactly what it was.

[Kobeanare]

Abiogenesis-How life arises from inorganic materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

I assumed that, I just didn't want to start talking about it and then not know exactly what it was.

Here.

[The Black Forrest]

Evolution doesn't care about abiogenesis. That is a different discussion.

You can't prove or disprove God so it's a non-question and left out........

Sorry, what's that mean?
AAs for your second point: I know, I know. It's a matter of faith. NOT IGNORANCE

It's the study of how biological life arises from inorganic matter. Big bang/God waving his hand/etc......

Denying the obvious is willful ignorance. Ever notice those who tend to be the most ignorant tend to have great faith?

[Mosasauria]

Abiogenesis-How life arises from inorganic materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Gah. I hate these arguments but here it goes.
Creationists say this is what i believe. Lets find something to support it.
Evolutionists say This is the evidence. The Evidence says i must believe this.
Bravo on the Abiogenesis.

Frankly, I think of abiogenesis as about as real as God. We have no proof, we have not created life from inorganic materials, yet, we cannot disprove it.
It could be real or false.

[Komoras]

Personally I believe that the Universe/ Universes *whole other argument there* are just a never ending series of big bangs resulting in what we see around us.

Frankly, I think of abiogenesis as about as real as God. We have no proof, we have not created life from inorganic materials, yet, we cannot disprove it.
It could be real or false.

Well Scientists did run an electric current through the "starting ingredients" of life and created several amino acids. For all we know it could have been some lucky lightning strike that started life. But yes we havent "created life" we made blueprints though...pretty good right?

Ever notice those who tend to be the most ignorant tend to have great faith?

Well i think that is just something that correlates but is unrelated. Murder rates and Cancer Rates go up at the same time. There is no clear link between the two but their is some suspicion

[Dypsomaniacs]

Evolution happened, but only as God willed it.
This is the stance I take as a religious believer.

Questions?

Not that I am religious...

But, it strikes me as odd when people argue as if the two have to be exclusive...

It makes sense to me that a creator would follow a logical series of steps rather than just being - done...

[Mosasauria]

Evolution happened, but only as God willed it.
This is the stance I take as a religious believer.

Questions?

Not that I am religious...

But, it strikes me as odd when people argue as if the two have to be exclusive...

It makes sense to me that a creator would follow a logical series of steps rather than just being - done...

Yep. People argue as if evolution disproves God, when it really doesn't affect anything religious other than creationism.

[Abdju]

Evolution happened, but only as God willed it.
This is the stance I take as a religious believer.

Questions?

Not that I am religious...

But, it strikes me as odd when people argue as if the two have to be exclusive...

It makes sense to me that a creator would follow a logical series of steps rather than just being - done...

*shrugs* Seems to be a common view on here that you either believe in the literal account of Genesis, or you are at least agnostic, if not atheist, and go with evolution - end of story. I don't buy into that, but whatever... if they want to have their fun, let them.

[Sociobiology]

Personally I believe that the Universe/ Universes *whole other argument there* are just a never ending series of big bangs resulting in what we see around us.

Frankly, I think of abiogenesis as about as real as God. We have no proof, we have not created life from inorganic materials, yet, we cannot disprove it.
It could be real or false.

Well Scientists did run an electric current through the "starting ingredients" of life and created several amino acids. For all we know it could have been some lucky lightning strike that started life. But yes we havent "created life" we made blueprints though...pretty good right?

Ever notice those who tend to be the most ignorant tend to have great faith?

Well i think that is just something that correlates but is unrelated. Murder rates and Cancer Rates go up at the same time. There is no clear link between the two but their is some suspicion

to counter the "millers experiment used the wrong atmo" argument thats coming more recent (2009) experiments produce even more complex things like RNA itself (which is self-replicating).
cited;
Synthesis of activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides in prebiotically plausible conditions Matthew W. Powner, Beatrice Gerland & John D. Sutherland. Nature, Vol. 460, May 13, 2009.

they key it turned out was that they had to start with even simplier molecules than other experiments used, in effect starting from scratch worked better than trying to skip steps.

to clarify scientists have created in a lab from scratch using only conditions present on the early earth, RNA and many known longer strands of RNA are self replicating.

[Unhealthy2]

But as Black Forest said, we have no proof that he does not exist. Therefore, neither side is correct.

Even if we were to accept the premise that there's absolutely no evidence either way as far as god's existence, it is a category error to presume that this means that neither atheists nor theists are correct. Epistemology is not metaphysics.

God, people confusing the capacity to know with whether there is something to know pisses me off so much.

God either exists or he doesn't. His existence or nonexistence is unrelated to our ability to know whether he exists or not.

[Unhealthy2]

For all you know, the evidence for "evolution" was just fabricated by God.

If you want to play that game, prove that the universe wasn't created last Thursday, with all the evidence of an older earth just made up. Also, all your memories of things happening before last Thursday are implanted. They are false, to make you think the world is older than last Thursday. Prove me wrong.

[The Black Forrest]

But as Black Forest said, we have no proof that he does not exist. Therefore, neither side is correct.

Even if we were to accept the premise that there's absolutely no evidence either way as far as god's existence, it is a category error to presume that this means that neither atheists nor theists are correct. Epistemology is not metaphysics.

God, people confusing the capacity to know with whether there is something to know pisses me off so much.

God either exists or he doesn't. His existence or nonexistence is unrelated to our ability to know whether he exists or not.

I'm sorr I thought we were talking about science?

[Unhealthy2]

I'm sorr I thought we were talking about science?

Someone said we have no evidence either way, therefore neither side is correct. I explained why this is fundamentally in error.

[Deus Malum]

I'm sorr I thought we were talking about science?

Someone said we have no evidence either way, therefore neither side is correct. I explained why this is fundamentally in error.

Well that or god exists as a superposition of God and No-god eigenkets. All we need to do is apply an observable compatible with the God Operator and we'll be able to determine which of the two states the system jumps into.

Get to work, you theoretical physicists!