View Poll Results: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    38 53.52%
  • No

    33 46.48%
Page 17 of 42 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 420

Thread: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

  1. #161
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
    You think the theological explanation is more strongly supported by scientific evidence than evolution?
    Yes I do, I also believe evolution is false and highly implausible if God did not have a hand in guiding it. I can understand theological evolution as a guided process by God (even though I disagree with it). However, a random process that resulted in biodiversity and life via the theory of evolution is impossible, unproven, and false.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  2. #162
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,633

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    There's nothing "above" reality, sorry. Just because he has a lofty delusion doesn't make it any less of a delusion.
    The system which his God is understood is above "reality" and logic. That is the whole point. You are conversing on one level and he on another.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 03-04-11 at 05:07 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #163
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,633

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Faith means nothing except to the emotionally and intellectually weak.
    I thought the weak were those who could not allow those to have faith without being snarky.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  4. #164
    Sleeper Agent
    iamitter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NY, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Yes I do, I also believe evolution is false and highly implausible if God did not have a hand in guiding it. I can understand theological evolution as a guided process by God (even though I disagree with it). However, a random process that resulted in biodiversity and life via the theory of evolution is impossible, unproven, and false.
    Life didn't occur via the "theory of evolution". And your last statement is just conjecture and opinion.

    I've really never that point argued - that the theological explanation is more strongly supported by scientific evidence than evolution, or even by any.
    Give a man a fish, or he will destroy the only existing vial of antidote.

  5. #165
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
    Life didn't occur via the "theory of evolution". And your last statement is just conjecture and opinion.

    I've really never that point argued - that the theological explanation is more strongly supported by scientific evidence than evolution, or even by any.
    By life I mean the creation of species. I understand secularists believe in abiogenesis (which is also false) as the mechanism for the first cell ever spawned.

    I do believe that the theological explanation is supported more so by science. It doesn't surprise me either. I believe God is real, that Christianity is truth, and it only confirms my beliefs with evidence when I see how science supports my theology.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  6. #166
    Sleeper Agent
    iamitter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NY, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    By life I mean the creation of species. I understand secularists believe in abiogenesis (which is also false) as the mechanism for the first cell ever spawned.

    I do believe that the theological explanation is supported more so by science. It doesn't surprise me either. I believe God is real, that Christianity is truth, and it only confirms my beliefs with evidence when I see how science supports my theology.
    I can just as easily say, I understand the religious believe in creation (which is false). Let's not turn this into a conversation where we trash the other side.

    I know what you believe, but I was trying to get you to explain more, by asking indirectly. I'll be more direct this time. What is your theological explanation and how is it supported more so by science than evolution is?
    Give a man a fish, or he will destroy the only existing vial of antidote.

  7. #167
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    The system which his God is understood is above "reality" and logic.
    This is a meaningless statement. It is meaningless in the same way that the term "square-circle" is meaningless and "north of the north pole" is meaningless. You are using language but attempting to use language in a way it that is nonsensical. Perhaps your statement triggers an intuitive or emotional response for you but it is nonetheless a meaningless statement.

    Think about it. What does it even mean to be "above reality" or "above logic"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    That is the whole point. You are conversing on one level and he on another.
    Precisely what is that level? Can you describe it? State its properties, rules, principles, or guidelines? It is as illusory as a square-circle.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  8. #168
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
    I can just as easily say, I understand the religious believe in creation (which is false). Let's not turn this into a conversation where we trash the other side.

    I know what you believe, but I was trying to get you to explain more, by asking indirectly. I'll be more direct this time. What is your theological explanation and how is it supported more so by science than evolution is?
    I have said nothing negative about evolutionists. All I've stated is that I believe they are wrong and that I am right based on scientific evidence. If you look at the thread I would say it is the creationists who receive most of the irrational trashing.

    I believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. I believe God created life. I'm a molecular biologist, I've read enough publications and have studied enough genomic sequences and protein products to see that these things didn't happen by random chance or chaotic mutations. Things have been designed in an intelligent and organized way. I don't believe the randomness of unguided evolution could have done this. Evolution cannot prove that a direct creature was the missing link between two proposed evolutionary species. They haven't looked at DNA or genomic sequences and found where the mutations have occurred that led to beneficial protein products that produced a new trait. It's all speculation and unproved assertions. I believe life was intelligently designed by God the Creator.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  9. #169
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    02-24-14 @ 01:55 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    421

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    No, faith cannot be verified by anyone. It can be justified, it simply cannot be demonstrated to be objectively true to anyone, including the believer. Faith is an emotional crutch, it's a means of feeling better about the world when you cannot accept it for what it actually is. It's a security blanket for those who are too weak to cast it off and deal with reality as it is. You can laugh at it all you want, that doesn't change a thing.
    Faith is an "emotional crutch"? Really? So the FAITH that our system of jurisprudence places on the verdict of 12 men/women on a jury is nothing but an emotional crutch? What objective proof do these men/women have to declare the guilt or innocence of anyone...if in fact they were not direct eyewitnesses of the act in question? Faith must be applied by both the jury in accepting the sworn testimony of any key witness brought forward by either the prosecution or defense, and by the STATE or authority conducting the trail, must have faith in the verdict. How many people are convicted of a crime on a daily basis here in these United States based purely upon "prima facie" evidences, i.e., evidences that are not witnessed but believed to be true beyond the reason of any sane person to doubt otherwise?

    What about the FAITH that you might have in a physician? You might place your life into the hands of a total stranger because you have FAITH that you will not be the 1 in 10 that might die on the operating table undergoing the same procedure.....is that FAITH an emotional crutch?



    I for one can prove to you that Christian Faith...true Christian Faith is anything but BLIND FAITH based upon nothing but emotion and hope. Christian Faith is based upon Objective Testable Evidences. 1.) Christian Faith comes from only one source...the word of God, "...faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the WORD OF GOD." -- Romans 10:16,17. 2.) The Christian is admonished to TEST EVERYTHING, and to hold onto that which is proven to be good -- 1 Thess. 5:21 3.) No one is born with an innate sense of Christianity, it must come from Hearing, and how does one hear and how has the Faith been passed from Generation to Generation over the last 2000 years if such is not grounded in the Word of God...i.e., the Holy Scriptures? Is faith a miracle? Hardly, Christian Faith comes by placing those Scriptures to the TEST. Simply prove One truth that is presented in the Holy Scriptures to be a documented, observed, untruth by using Physical Science or History Actual. The Scriptures are Objectively recorded, they read exactly the same regardless of what faith or lack of faith that you might have in the words that are being communicated.

    Please...no Prima Facie Philosophy expected to be accepted as SCIENCE, no theories, speculations, assumptions..etc. Physical Laws of Science and History Actual applied where they might be tested.

    Christians do not reject genuine proven facts of science. What many do dispute are unsupported theories that have been designed in an attempt to explain those facts (philosophy). For example, it is a fact that there are certain similarities between the bone structure of men and animals. However, it is an unsubstantiated speculation to suggest that this indicates that humans evolved from animals. No one is opposed to true Science which derives facts from Observed, Reproduced Experimentation.

    And even attempting to measure the Supernatural by applying Natural Law is an absurd act of illogical lunacy. Example someone attempting to claim that God lied when He gave the appearance of an Old Earth when Science PROVES the earth to be billions of years old? Really? Just what Observed, Reproduced Experiment was used in calculating that age? The assumption of Carbon Dating which states that the rate of decay in certain elements has remained constant throughout antiquity? Really..again? Simple water leeching does not effect that rate of decay whatsoever? The real fact is the truth.....there is no source of calibrating any age past that of RECORDED HISTORY without introducing speculation....any age past that which can be verified by history actual is based upon...that TRUTH AGAIN.....PRIMA FACIE..which in reality is nothing but a truth based upon FAITH.

    I for one again, would like to know just where the secular types keep their SUPERNATURAL-O-METER that allows them to test things which are by definition BEYOND NATURE or SUPERIOR to....
    Last edited by Walter; 03-04-11 at 05:59 PM.

  10. #170
    Sleeper Agent
    iamitter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NY, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I have said nothing negative about evolutionists. All I've stated is that I believe they are wrong and that I am right based on scientific evidence. If you look at the thread I would say it is the creationists who receive most of the irrational trashing.

    I believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. I believe God created life. I'm a molecular biologist, I've read enough publications and have studied enough genomic sequences and protein products to see that these things didn't happen by random chance or chaotic mutations. Things have been designed in an intelligent and organized way. I don't believe the randomness of unguided evolution could have done this. Evolution cannot prove that a direct creature was the missing link between two proposed evolutionary species. They haven't looked at DNA or genomic sequences and found where the mutations have occurred that led to beneficial protein products that produced a new trait. It's all speculation and unproved assertions. I believe life was intelligently designed by God the Creator.
    Well, trash is a poor choice of words on my part. I should have said something more like let's not make assumptions or guesses.

    That's cool that you're a molecular biologist, what research do you focus on?

    Everything you basically said was discussed in court cases on intelligent design, when they tried to pass it off as science - almost the exact same arguments if you can imagine. That things are too perfect to happen by chance, etc. Every single example of that was disproved by modern evolutionary theory - they can be explained.
    When I split your argument down, it is basically this: "It's all speculation and unproved assertions. Evolution cannot prove that a direct creature was the missing link between two proposed evolutionary species." This as an unproven assertation on your part, because it's not speculation, there's quite a bit of evidence behind it.
    On the other hand, for your argument, you say: "I believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. I believe God created life. I believe life was intelligently designed by God the Creator. I don't believe the randomness of unguided evolution could have done this."
    I'm seeing your beliefs - I'm not seeing how scientific evidence verifies them.
    Give a man a fish, or he will destroy the only existing vial of antidote.

Page 17 of 42 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •