Evolution True or False?

Post by **BuckGB** » Thu May 20, 2004 3:58 pm

Bloodthroe, implying that Fable has "serious mental problems" for simply offering his viewpoint and posing questions is totally unacceptable. Show some respect in your posts or you will find yourself banned from these forums.

InfiniteNature · Post by **InfiniteNature** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:12 pm

Oops sorry sometimes the temptation is so strong its hard not to write impulsively, try and control it in the future.

Now to actually add something constructive to the thread:

To Evolution, its the only thing that makes sense given the vast majority of data, until something else comes along that fits the facts better, I think Evolution is currently the better theory, if you can call other creation mandated ideas theories anyway.

Never really understood why some religiousosas can't have the flexibility to think that maybe evolution was God's way to create and improve life.

I mean it all goes back to the bible and more accurately literal interpretations of the stuff there, something that if you take as the exact word of God (not that I personally do of course), and assume everything in that text is completely accurate, your presuming a lot on human nature to assume that somehow it all was changed not one single little iota in the over 2000 years or so since it was last updated, or for those who believe completely in the old testament to the unchanged nature of that text, to suppose that somehow people kept it all completely right over ll that time since God filled everyone in is presuming that Humans are somehow perfect.

As far as I know viewed at from the religious perspective, God is the only thing that is perfect.

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:21 pm

Wow I am so having an epiphany. Fab, buck hugs? Lets stop this. Please acknowledge my truce, between our lost friendship. Surprisingly Fable was able to ignore this whole thing, he shows discipline in not being a part of it. And buck… you were such a good friend in coming to the aid of Fable, when I wrongfully attacked him.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:23 pm

As far as I know viewed at from the religious perspective, God is the only thing that is perfect.

Depends on your religion, though, doesn't it? I mean, there are numerous polytheistic religions that presuppose some grand working out of the universe through the antagonism of gods that are manifestly imperfect, or perfect only within a very limited sphere. Let's remember that Yahwah, or Jehovah, as he's called today, began as an West Asian Storm and Mountain deity. He speaks badly of other gods, and there are indications left in what remains in the Judeo-Christian holy books that he regarded them as very real antagonists rather than phantoms worshipped by other cultural groups. This might help explain the jihad he urged his followers to launch, slaughtering the inhabitants of city state after city state as they decided to take over the territory now known as Israel or Palestine (depending upon which side of that ideological fence you fall on). It was a campaign, not against people whom the invaders didn't know, but against their god's enemies.

I hardly see Yahweh as perfect, if that bible is an accurate reflection of his views. But then, I'm prejudiced. Is Yahwah, then, identical to this perfect god? Is this same god who made the universe, also the one that required human sacrifice (until he told Abraham to quit it), slew thousands of innocent Egyptians in his plagues, and made sure that *all* creatures were saved on an ark--including, presumably, microbes deadly to human life? No, I'm really not poking fun, here. I'm trying to put Yahwah in this perfect god's shoes, and they don't fit from my admitted limited perspective.

So who is this perfect god, and what are his/her/its attributes?

InfiniteNature · Post by **InfiniteNature** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:44 pm

I wasn't personally stating God was perfect, I personally don't believe that the deity even exists, but some people do, and the reason the cause behind their belief in literalism is linked to their innate belief in God's perfection. I was saying that if they believed in a perfect all knowing allpowerful deity; and if said word was taken from this being; that they are presuming a lot of human nature(something we know a lot better then that being) that nobody at all in the entire existence of the Bible did not change one single syllable.

If one believes in this being and that such a thing exists, then I think that there is no trying to define such a thing because it is undefinable, which doesn't stop people, religious finatics or nonbelievers from trying to anyway.

What's kind of funny is that regardless of what faith you are, you are trying to define the infinite, I wonder if it is at all definable, regardless whether you believe if the infinite is God, or just some random probablistic thing.

What's funny is that you even bother to try to define it at all.

Agreed Fable, allknowing one, it does depend on your religious perspective, but I was referring to one very limite religious perspective's views, that said perspective being responsible for literalism, which is linked to creationism which is linked to a lot of people's disbelief in evolution as a theory.

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:50 pm

I always enjoy reading these threads. I find it amusing that this topic can so drastically polarize people when to me there is no real delima at all. I don't see why it is an all or nothing issue when (Though CE and Tom will no doubt disagree) everything encompassed within the theory of evolution has not been proven. And I am sure the very devout will never require that their faith prove beyond the shadow of a doubt where or why life originated in the cosmos. After all one of the corner tenets of most religeons is that you take it on faith without question.

We all pick and choose what we are most comfortable believing, or what makes the most sense to us, or what has the most credible evidence to support it. What if you are all right to one degree or another. What if there is a priaml and governing energy in the universe which science has not yet defined and has been worshiped and venerated since the beginning of man? What if the Theory of evolution is close but not perfect. What if "God" isn't a kindly old gentleman who looked in the mirror one day and decided he wanted toys in his own image. What if we are all just products of something that will someday be disected and labeled and catagorized by the physicists? If we discover what 'God' is, would there cease to exist that which permeates and animates the universe? Would we prove anything by doing it?

Originally posted by RandomThug
The book of the bible was a verbal tale for how long? Its fiction.

Actually, it is both an historical document in places, as well as one of the greatest collections of literature ever compiled in others. Rather you base your faith on it or not, it is very interesting reading.

Hi fable...good to see you

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Thu May 20, 2004 4:54 pm

Originally posted by InfiniteNature
Now to actually add something constructive to the thread:

To Evolution, its the only thing that makes sense given the vast majority of data, until something else comes along that fits the facts better, I think Evolution is currently the better theory, if you can call other creation mandated ideas theories anyway.

I have to agree with you here. It is the best and most scientifically supported explination, however there are a efw things that fall short for me and though I have read some very good scientific opinions, I have yet to be convinced that it is a complete explination.

Never really understood why some religiousosas can't have the flexibility to think that maybe evolution was God's way to create and improve life.

I have often wondered that myself.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:08 pm

Originally posted by Bloodthroe
Wow I am so having an epiphany. Fab, buck hugs? Lets stop this. Please acknowledge my truce, between our lost friendship. Surprisingly Fable was able to ignore this whole thing, he shows discipline in not being a part of it. And buck… you were such a good friend in coming to the aid of Fable, when I wrongfully attacked him.

Bloodthroe, I didn't respond because, as I mentioned earlier, you were in violation of Buck's rules, and I knew he'd enforce 'em. Buck didn't come to my aid as a "good friend," which he isn't, but because he's the site owner and sets the terms the rest of us follow. If you can do what he asks and drop the sarcasm, you'll fit right in with the board. It's up to you.

Hey, @Scayde.

Robnark · Post by **Robnark** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:15 pm

Originally posted by maverick8088
So, in other words, complexity is not evidence of a design. The world around us is full of complex things, all of them needed a designer. Noone would deny that man designs and builds wonderous things, all of them complex. Why is it so hard to see that infinitely more complex structures like the precision of the universe and the human brain couldn't simply happen?

of course they couldn't simply happen - how the structures come about is through, well, evolution. just because you don't believe something could happen doesn't mean it can't.

there are countless examples of how the complexity argument has been increasingly eroded over the years, but you always have to bear in mind that forms and use change. it is possible to trace in the fossil record how the jaw bones grew smaller and moved into the inner ear. either they moved, or god was experimenting and decided to make lots of intermediary forms for a laugh.

oh, and why couldn't the universe happen? you say precision, but you start messing about with matter, energy and physics and you'll probably get something pretty complex without anyone helping out. if you mean it's amazing the universe is how it is, maybe. but it's about as amazing that green looks green. if it was less amazing, we would probably not exist - although there might well be other types of life sitting in their pools of methane saying how amazing it is, and how good the universe is at creating conditions for them. it's only amazing if you believe that it was created for a reason - for us.

anyway, god may well be a busy, uh, sort of infinitely old wierd intelligence meddling thing living outside of space and time. if I was it, I'd be pretty chuffed if there was some sensible way of running the whole shebang without faking fossil records, messing about with geological dating, selectively killing off species and making sure that my creatures pack well into boats. god tends to be invoked because without him, we're just a scarily successful accident of mutation, death, predation and blind luck.

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:20 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
Evolution is the only explantion because god in all "his/her" greatness is as real as the easter bunny. And for the same reasons, to comfort. The book of the bible was a verbal tale for how long? Its fiction.

Wrong. You can’t prove god doesn’t exist, just as creationists can’t prove he does. The mere fact that any of you think you can explain or define which is true is a big waste of energy. Talk is cheap as one would say. If you think about it hard enough, you’ll realize that there is nothing you can say to change the other person’s mind in here. Whether or not you somehow know god is fake, you would do best to respect the other person’s beliefs. For you have no control over them, even so, you have no say in them either. Your own beliefs can be more important to you then others are to you, or they can be equal. It’s your belief to make yours more important, just as it is mine to make them equal. You can accept this as fact or you can continue to hang on to your desires for limitation.

But know this, you will never be able to prove that your beliefs are the correct ones.

Never.
@All, not just RT

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:22 pm

Originally posted by fable
Bloodthroe, I didn't respond because, as I mentioned earlier, you were in violation of Buck's rules, and I knew he'd enforce 'em. Buck didn't come to my aid as a "good friend," which he isn't, but because he's the site owner and sets the terms the rest of us follow. If you can do what he asks and drop the sarcasm, you'll fit right in with the board. It's up to you.

Hey, @Scayde.

Yeah well I decided there was no need for the entire conversation and so I gave in. The least you could do is drop it.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:22 pm

What's kind of funny is that regardless of what faith you are, you are trying to define the infinite, I wonder if it is at all definable, regardless whether you believe if the infinite is God, or just some random probablistic thing.

@InfiniteNature, I'm sure perfection isn't comprehensible, much less definable. My problem arises when people (*not* you) state that god made the universe, and the universe is beyond our understanding, because god is perfect. Thus, I refered to the Judeo-Christian holy books to show that this god being worshipped does not appear, at least to me, to be perfect in any sense I can accept. That being the case, 1) either the god of this universe (if we accept such a god as existing) is quite different from that of the Judeo-Christian one reported in their scriptures, and the universe is infinitely complex, or 2) the god of the universe and that of the Judeo-Christian holy books are one and the same, a very imperfect being, and therefore the universe is imperfect and presumably understable by imperfect creation.

What's funny is that you even bother to try to define it at all.

Hey, not me! I'm of the camp that nearly all of this is inexplicable. I'm a witch and a Wiccan. I just worship. The dogma of all this is way beyond my ken. Others can define, and are doing so. I'm just trying to get a handle on this god they keep talking about, as if everybody agrees it's the same thing.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:26 pm

Originally posted by Bloodthroe
Yeah well I decided there was no need for the entire conversation and so I gave in. The least you could do is drop it.

Bloodthroe, you brought my name up in addressing Buck. I felt like it was being used against Buck, in a sense, as though I was hanging back from adding my comments, but Buck wasn't, and somehow, I was right to do so, but Buck was wrong. I felt obliged to respond, and I don't feel I'm starting anything up against you. Can't you just please, let this go, and do like the rest of us?

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Thu May 20, 2004 5:31 pm

Originally posted by fable
Bloodthroe, you brought my name up in addressing Buck. I felt like it was being used against Buck, in a sense, as though I was hanging back from adding my comments, but Buck wasn't, and somehow, I was right to do so, but Buck was wrong. I felt obliged to respond, and I don't feel I'm starting anything up against you. Can't you just please, let this go, and do like the rest of us?

I can understand this, but I still see no point in it being explained. I gave in and stated my wrong, even more I apologized. You can take it or leave it... or just ignore it. It will affect me none. The only thing that bothers me is that everytime I have to type one of these posts to you, that I'm spamming this thread. As I believe you are doing when you write back. This is all I have to say. I hope it's finally the end of this nightmare.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Thu May 20, 2004 6:00 pm

I hate to post somethign like this, but Bloodthroe, Fable. Please, PM's. I'm reading this thread for evolution purposes, biding my time until I have some otherwise useful to say.

Not an attack on anyone, but both of you seem to be taking the other's baite right now

Robnark · Post by **Robnark** » Thu May 20, 2004 6:05 pm

okay...

Originally posted by Bloodthroe
This is all I have to say.

good. I'm not under the illusion that I have any say, and I really can't be bothered to work out what the problem is, but I've had enough of this argument from all sides.

I am actually interested in the discussion in this thread. I do not want to wade through these posts and this atmosphere to follow it. if you want to have a fight, take it to PMs or another message board, but I've seen too many tempers run high in religious threads. it isn't amusing, it's rarely dignified, and people get in trouble so - anybody who wants to start - stop it now.

this is not an attack on anyone. if you feel it is, PM me. this is just a personal plea for calm. if any post is meant to convey emotion, it shouldn't be in this discussion.

edit: meh, aegis beat me, but then he has more power.

Bloodthroe · Post by **Bloodthroe** » Thu May 20, 2004 6:10 pm

Well since people are starting to get into me and fables personal convo. I'd just like to say that I did try to post something in here that had to do with the thread. Please don't dismiss it as a post that had to do with the quarrel me and fable had and end up not reading it because of that.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 20, 2004 6:20 pm

Well since people are starting to get into me and fables personal convo.

@Bloodthroe, once again: it's *not* a personal anything, between you and me. It's a matter of following the rules set down by Buck, as he said, and as T'lainya said, the site owner, and the moderator for this forum. Please, stop casting this in any other light as my being involved in something personal: people can check back for themselves, and see it doesn't involve that. I come to this board, and have, for several years, because it doesn't allow flaming or personal attacks, among other things. We all have. That's why I brought up the rules, and why I asked that several people stop spamming.

It's important to make the point that this is about the rules, because Buck doesn't play favorites, and the board really does enforce those same rules I mentioned to you.

Please, just let it go. Don't try to make it something it isn't. It's about following Buck's rules, not any personal antagonism, which I haven't got for you or anybody else, here.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Fri May 21, 2004 9:40 am

Wrong. You can’t prove god doesn’t exist, just as creationists can’t prove he does. The mere fact that any of you think you can explain or define which is true is a big waste of energy. Talk is cheap as one would say. If you think about it hard enough, you’ll realize that there is nothing you can say to change the other person’s mind in here. Whether or not you somehow know god is fake, you would do best to respect the other person’s beliefs. For you have no control over them, even so, you have no say in them either. Your own beliefs can be more important to you then others are to you, or they can be equal. It’s your belief to make yours more important, just as it is mine to make them equal. You can accept this as fact or you can continue to hang on to your desires for limitation.

But know this, you will never be able to prove that your beliefs are the correct ones. Never.
@All, not just RT

First off this is a thread called "Evolution True of False?" The point is to post your opinion on the matter. Your right, no one can prove or disprove. Just like you cant prove alien dogmen travel the galaxies, they havent visited us yet. Hey you dont know!

And your wrong on peoples opinions never changing. Many people here have changed my opinions here.... even the canuck Aegis has altered my perception a bit. Scaydes given me a slight bit of faith in life... damn texan. And Fable's shown me life after 100 will be fine, before I was like "Wow Im going to die". Also your a little too much. "Uts your belief to make yours more important". I was just posting my opinion... If you want me to debate why I believe the bibles a bunch of boo hickey... well I'll do that. My point is there are no reasons for beliefs since no one can prove it and in my opinion is non existant. Religion is opium for the masses.

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Fri May 21, 2004 10:10 am

Originally posted by Bloodthroe
Wrong. You can’t prove god doesn’t exist, just as creationists can’t prove he does. The mere fact that any of you think you can explain or define which is true is a big waste of energy. Talk is cheap as one would say. If you think about it hard enough, you’ll realize that there is nothing you can say to change the other person’s mind in here. Whether or not you somehow know god is fake, you would do best to respect the other person’s beliefs. For you have no control over them, even so, you have no say in them either. Your own beliefs can be more important to you then others are to you, or they can be equal. It’s your belief to make yours more important, just as it is mine to make them equal. You can accept this as fact or you can continue to hang on to your desires for limitation.

But know this, you will never be able to prove that your beliefs are the correct ones. Never.
@All, not just RT

This is not true in all cases. If you like me thinks that only things that can be objectively demonstrated can be said to exist then god can not be said to exist. Its only if you have additional criteria that allows existence that god can exist. For example you might belive that a firm inner conviction is enough to prove existence of a phenomena. In that case, you would be right - No one could prove anything to anyone. It is important to realize that this have far reaching consequences though.