Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Agent. Mulder

evolution vs. creationism

339 posts in this topic

this vids only like 9min but makes some nice points about evolution. its against creationism though, so some people may get a little upset. but still a good watch

see what you think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only question here is that if there was no form of Intelligent Design whatsoever then why wouldnt the course of evolution just make every living land creature a plant?

Wouldnt it be easier to grow with the gravitational pull of the earth than away from it? Take man for instance.

Man has no roots in the soil. It almost seems to me that every land walker has defied certain aspects of evolution.

I suppose this could be due to sea creatures and the buoyancy of the water; eventually throwing out specific creatures to the land.

But still...why wouldnt these creatures that came from the sea turn somewhat plantlike with some sort with a root system?

I know there is more to it than this but its just a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My only question here is that if there was no form of Intelligent Design whatsoever then why wouldnt the course of evolution just make every living land creature a plant?

Wouldnt it be easier to grow with the gravitational pull of the earth than away from it? Take man for instance.

Man has no roots in the soil. It almost seems to me that every land walker has defied certain aspects of evolution.

I suppose this could be due to sea creatures and the buoyancy of the water; eventually throwing out specific creatures to the land.

But still...why wouldnt these creatures that came from the sea turn somewhat plantlike with some sort with a root system?

I know there is more to it than this but its just a thought...

Evolution teaches us that life will expand to fill every available niche of possiblity. Gravity is a force evenly affecting all life, plants don't have it easier than any other form of life - in fact if you follow your logic to it's conclusion, the only form of life to evolve would be microbial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm...I thought this same video was in another thread about a week ago. They don't really say much worth considering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmmm...I thought this same video was in another thread about a week ago. They don't really say much worth considering.

yes....of coures they dont :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmmm...I thought this same video was in another thread about a week ago. They don't really say much worth considering.

There is much in this clip that is worth watching, not the least of which is the Executive Director of the National Physical Science consortium expressing the fear that views such as the one quoted here will eventually drive the U.S. into a new dark age of knowledge such as we see in Iran and other extreme fundementally religious societies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is much in this clip that is worth watching, not the least of which is the Executive Director of the National Physical Science consortium expressing the fear that views such as the one quoted here will eventually drive the U.S. into a new dark age of knowledge such as we see in Iran and other extreme fundementally religious societies.

IMO, this video is about as meaningful as reading the Sunday comics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, this video is about as meaningful as reading the Sunday comics.

You could have said the bible to get your point across, that being a work of fiction and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could have said the bible to get your point across, that being a work of fiction and all.

Apparently you don't understand the difference between fiction and non-fiction. The Bible is non-fiction.

You might want to check your local library. Sometimes they offer special classes to help people understand literacy skills like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently you don't understand the difference between fiction and non-fiction. The Bible is non-fiction.

You might want to check your local library. Sometimes they offer special classes to help people understand literacy skills like this.

Oh sorry I must have been confused, Cause when the bible talks about mythical creatures and whatnot I assumed it was fictional, you know like harry potter and lord of the rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh sorry I must have been confused, Cause when the bible talks about mythical creatures and whatnot I assumed it was fictional, you know like harry potter and lord of the rings.

Mythical creatures? What mythical creatures would those be? Also, please give me your evidence that they're mythical. Thanks. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it humorous that 'facts are not interesting, facts are a dime a dozen, facts are observation'. 'Theories are exciting, they give us the why'.

I find this especially interesting since Science by definition is not concerned with the 'why' and is defined by 'observation'. I would conclude therefore, that these so-called observers (scientists) have progressed to the point of prophets, and are merely giving their religious views...

JS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent video Mulder, think you.

Just a question WWF, do you favor the US becoming a theocracy like Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick note to all parties in this debate (ie, camlax and WwF) to refrain from personal attacks. thank you :tu:

Edited by Paranoid Android

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excellent video Mulder, think you.

Just a question WWF, do you favor the US becoming a theocracy like Iran?

It doesn't matter. The US government is what it is and it will probably get much worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I finished watching the video. Interesting, though nothing extremely new to me. The biggest criticism I have for this is that it is all coming from the one side. I am reminded of a Proverb - The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. (Proverbs 18:17). While the video did make a compelling case, without an opposing view, I got the impression that it was a bunch of people with the same view and outlook slapping each other on the back saying "right on, brother/sister".

I'm sure if you saw the arguments from the other side, they would also make compelling cases.

But that aside, i agree with the general consensus that Intelligent Design is for the chapel, not the classroom. However, just because one doesn't belong in the classroom doesn't mean that one is correct and the other is incorrect. There is nothing in any video so far that has led me to the conclusion that evolution and creation are mutually exclusive concepts.

Edited by Paranoid Android

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that aside, i agree with the general consensus that Intelligent Design is for the chapel, not the classroom. However, just because one doesn't belong in the classroom doesn't mean that one is correct and the other is incorrect. There is nothing in any video so far that has led me to the conclusion that evolution and creation are mutually exclusive concepts.

I see it differently. I have yet to see a creationist create a compelling argument for it's beliefs. I am interested to know what you and others think they are because maybe I have yet to hear them. Every single case a creationist makes has been refuted. I have met other biologists who said evolution and creationism aren't mutually exclusive, and in my opinion, they are taking the conservative approach. They don't want to make enemies in the classroom or lab. Intelligent Design didn't occur because if it did, everything would have been more intelligently conceived. We wouldn't have one hole for breathing and eating, we would have two to decrease death rates of choking for example. A human engineer is smarter than this supposed creator.

Edited by Cimber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I finished watching the video. Interesting, though nothing extremely new to me. The biggest criticism I have for this is that it is all coming from the one side. I am reminded of a Proverb - The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. (Proverbs 18:17). While the video did make a compelling case, without an opposing view, I got the impression that it was a bunch of people with the same view and outlook slapping each other on the back saying "right on, brother/sister".

I'm sure if you saw the arguments from the other side, they would also make compelling cases.

But that aside, i agree with the general consensus that Intelligent Design is for the chapel, not the classroom. However, just because one doesn't belong in the classroom doesn't mean that one is correct and the other is incorrect. There is nothing in any video so far that has led me to the conclusion that evolution and creation are mutually exclusive concepts.

I saw no backslapping ,verbally or otherwise ,are you reading into it the things you want to see?

fullywired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see it differently. I have yet to see a creationist create a compelling argument for it's beliefs. I am interested to know what you and others think they are because maybe I have yet to hear them. Every single case a creationist makes has been refuted. I have met other biologists who said evolution and creationism aren't mutually exclusive, and in my opinion, they are taking the conservative approach. They don't want to make enemies in the classroom or lab. Intelligent Design didn't occur because if it did, everything would have been more intelligently conceived. We wouldn't have one hole for breathing and eating, we would have two to decrease death rates of choking for example. A human engineer is smarter than this supposed creator.

I have yet to see an evolutionist make a compelling argument for his/her beliefs. Every case an evolutionist has made has been refuted. Your argument about intelligent design not occurring because we could be more "intelligently conceived" is lacking, because it doesn't matter what we see as more intelligent. God obviously created us the way He wanted us to be created, which includes certain limitations. If you want to decrease the potential of choking to death, use some common sense and chew your food better. Also, don't shove your fingers up your nose while keeping your mouth closed. I know we were created because I know the Creator personally. He has spoken to me verbally and He communicates with me quite often. From what I've gotten to know of the Creator is that He is different in some ways than I expected Him to be. He is loving, yet He is also wrathful if you are doing the wrong thing. Everything He does is perfect, whether we see it as perfect or not. It is not our choice and He has made that clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw no backslapping ,verbally or otherwise ,are you reading into it the things you want to see?

fullywired

Not that I give a **** either way.

But you can tell that some of these guys think their "male parts" are bigger than most others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have yet to see an evolutionist make a compelling argument for his/her beliefs. Every case an evolutionist has made has been refuted. Your argument about intelligent design not occurring because we could be more "intelligently conceived" is lacking, because it doesn't matter what we see as more intelligent. God obviously created us the way He wanted us to be created, which includes certain limitations. If you want to decrease the potential of choking to death, use some common sense and chew your food better. Also, don't shove your fingers up your nose while keeping your mouth closed. I know we were created because I know the Creator personally. He has spoken to me verbally and He communicates with me quite often. From what I've gotten to know of the Creator is that He is different in some ways than I expected Him to be. He is loving, yet He is also wrathful if you are doing the wrong thing. Everything He does is perfect, whether we see it as perfect or not. It is not our choice and He has made that clear to me.

w...t...f...... :blink:

they dont have to make a compelling argument (well, they already have plenty of times. but w/e). do you know why they dont? because they have proof that it happened. that theyre theory is (or 'belief' as you put it for w/e reason) correct, proven by science. unlike the belief of creationism. my oh my

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have yet to see an evolutionist make a compelling argument for his/her beliefs. Every case an evolutionist has made has been refuted.

Refuted by Ken Hovind? A Fundamentalist and Fraud who stretches the facts to convince christians that they're right.

I know we were created because I know the Creator personally.

I had an imaginary friend when I was 5 who I 'knew' personally until I grew out of needing him. See, you really dont know anything and the fact that you're so sure of yourself and the voices in your head tells me that you need to see a doctor. Which is what any rational person would do.

And even if you're right, voices in your head does not convince anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
w...t...f...... :blink:

they dont have to make a compelling argument (well, they already have plenty of times. but w/e). do you know why they dont? because they have proof that it happened. that theyre theory is (or 'belief' as you put it for w/e reason) correct, proven by science. unlike the belief of creationism. my oh my

What science claims is too changes quite often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Refuted by Ken Hovind? A Fundamentalist and Fraud who stretches the facts to convince christians that they're right.

I had an imaginary friend when I was 5 who I 'knew' personally until I grew out of needing him. See, you really dont know anything and the fact that you're so sure of yourself and the voices in your head tells me that you need to see a doctor. Which is what any rational person would do.

And even if you're right, voices in your head does not convince anyone else.

Nobody mentioned Ken Hovind in this thread. At least not that I'm aware of. I don't have "voices in my head". I have had God speak to me verbally in the presence of others. Unfortunately you can not understand because you choose not to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could take a creationist back in time and let a T-rex eat him he would be deigning it all the way down. I like the guy who said we were poorly engineered and he couldn't believe a God couldn't do as well as a human engineer. I know I would do with an engineering up date.

Edited by Darkwind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.