Creationism vs. Darwinism

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

The Amazing Ryuu

Also... since I think the current discussion was on the literal six-day theory... wasn't the sun and moon not made until the third or fourth day? So, it could NOT have been a literal 24-hour day that was mentioned in the Bible.

When this was written, a day was sunup to sunset, and night was sunset to sunup. If you experienced a length of time, completely undeterminable, that was light, and then an equally undeterminable length of dark, wouldn't you call that a whole day? So it was dark for an undertermined length of time before the light and dark got seperated... night into day. Then after another undetermined length of time, the dark and light got set into their appropriate rotations. Day into night. Two days. However long that might have actually have been.

That is a really good point. eek I never thought of that before.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

Fushigi na Butterfly

That is a really good point. eek I never thought of that before.

Well that's why you keep me around, isn't it? To keep you sharp. smile  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

And to suggest Bible verses and write comments on them. 4laugh  

[MatthewLovesChocolate123]

God truly amazes me when it comes to creating people in his own image. I only believe in creationism because I know that God created us and all of the living things including, planets, solar systems, stars, and everything that has breathe. God is a truly amazing when it all comes down to what he has done for us. He deserves all the credit and love from us too! I will never stop believing in God. biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin GOD IS LOVE!!! heart heart heart heart heart biggrin  

[freelance lover]

Matthew82-62

God truly amazes me when it comes to creating people in his own image. I only believe in creationism because I know that God created us and all of the living things including, planets, solar systems, stars, and everything that has breathe. God is a truly amazing when it all comes down to what he has done for us. He deserves all the credit and love from us too! I will never stop believing in God. biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin GOD IS LOVE!!! heart heart heart heart heart biggrin

But how does science take away God's credit for creating everything? That was the thing I never understood. I'm sure all the things science has theorized about the creation of the universe could very easily be true, however I don't think that means God didn't do it. Understanding the physics of things is like understand how God works, in a way. Just because we can explain it, doesn't mean it's not of God.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

And really, the more science finds out, the more they CAN'T explain. When you get below the size of an atom, the rules of the universe go all haywire. Particles are suddenly there one moment and not the next... or in two different places at the same time. At the sub-molecular level, we're not really here... or are we here AND there at the same time? It's absolutely astounding to think about, and then think that all this is random happenstance. Every time science makes this big leap, there's something else they find right behind it that reaches down, pats them on the head and goes 'not yet little man.'  

[ferret658]

The Amazing Ryuu

And really, the more science finds out, the more they CAN'T explain. When you get below the size of an atom, the rules of the universe go all haywire. Particles are suddenly there one moment and not the next... or in two different places at the same time. At the sub-molecular level, we're not really here... or are we here AND there at the same time? It's absolutely astounding to think about, and then think that all this is random happenstance. Every time science makes this big leap, there's something else they find right behind it that reaches down, pats them on the head and goes 'not yet little man.'

WE HAD A SUNDAY SCHOOL LESSON ON THAT THEORY!!!! Unfortunately, though, I missed it. I had to work....The whole theory was illustrated by an experiment of a cat in a box with this one particle. The particle is here and not here at the same time. On one side of the box is a cat, and on the other side is a bomb. The particle is moving faster than speed can be recorded. Since the particle can be in two places at once, the cat dies and lives at the same time.

Trippy, ain't it? The lesson of that lesson was that we pretty much are that particle, meaning that we are in the World, but not of it.

Okay, so I skimmed over the part about the vestigial organs, and I know I'm going to Hell for not reading and comprehending the arguement behind it, but I must pose a question.
God created all things. All things have a similar skeletal structure, and that's where Joe Schmo thought up the idea that we have a common ancestor. If God thought of a structure that works in supporting everything in and on our bodies, then why change it? If it works for one thing, He'll make it work for everything else.  

[ferret658]

Also, here's an interesting point that I have never heard of anyone come up with: The DNA for a specific body part or organ has to be in the organism or it won't be able to grow or develop properly.

So when some amino acid formed in the primordial ooze because of a bolt of lightning, in that instant, all life and all coding for the life on this planet was created? Scientists are claiming that a random force of nature just exploded and accidentally created a chain of amino acids. Give me a break! rofl The crap scientists come up with is more ludicrous than their claims that the Bible is wrong and that we're all being brain washed!

Think about it this way....You hear a bang and you turn to the person next to you and you ask them, "Hey, what caused that bang?" and they said, "There's no explanatin for it. It just happened." Would you believe him? Of course not! You know why? Because there is an explanation for everything; that is what sciencee has always told us.
So why do people accept the theory that a Big Bang was caused by nothing? What caused the Big Bang to bang? Do scientists have an answer for that? (I really don't know the answer to that sweatdrop )  

[Tirissana]

Actually the more science finds out the more it can explain and prove that God does undoubtedly exist. Science answers the How question, whereas God answers the Who What When Where and Why.

The Bible doesn't support the 7 day theory. Actually 7 days could turn out to be 2 billion or 6 billion years old. If God was never changing then in his eyes, the years would pass by slowly not quickly. If God was ever changing then the years would pass by quickly. :3

And, the Big Bang Theory wasn't created by a scientist. It was created by a Catholic. A Christian. :3  

[zz1000zz]

The Amazing Ryuu

And really, the more science finds out, the more they CAN'T explain. When you get below the size of an atom, the rules of the universe go all haywire. Particles are suddenly there one moment and not the next... or in two different places at the same time. At the sub-molecular level, we're not really here... or are we here AND there at the same time? It's absolutely astounding to think about, and then think that all this is random happenstance. Every time science makes this big leap, there's something else they find right behind it that reaches down, pats them on the head and goes 'not yet little man.'

This sounds a lot like the "God of the Gaps" argument. A common tactic of anti-evolutionists was to say scientists did not have fossil records of transition organisms (creatures between two species). They would argue about the "gaps" in the fossil record. The problem was that each time a new transition fossil was found, it created a gap as it divided one big gap into two smaller ones.

Science expects there will always be more things to study. Given the size and complexity of this universe, nobody should seriously expect humans to ever understand all the physical processes of it. And yes, there are some crazy things at the sub-atomic level. Why shouldn't there be? Why would anyone expect the universe to work only in ways that are easily translatable into current human understanding?

ferret658

WE HAD A SUNDAY SCHOOL LESSON ON THAT THEORY!!!! Unfortunately, though, I missed it. I had to work....The whole theory was illustrated by an experiment of a cat in a box with this one particle. The particle is here and not here at the same time. On one side of the box is a cat, and on the other side is a bomb. The particle is moving faster than speed can be recorded. Since the particle can be in two places at once, the cat dies and lives at the same time.

Trippy, ain't it? The lesson of that lesson was that we pretty much are that particle, meaning that we are in the World, but not of it.

You would be talking about the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. While it is an interesting thought experiment, it is not really applicable to real life. The process described in it is meant metaphorically, not literally. The effect of the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment can only happen at the microscopic level, not the macroscopic level.

Incidentally, the particle is not "moving faster than speed can be recorded." The particle simply is not in a single spot, regardless of the speed at which it moves.

ferret658

Also, here's an interesting point that I have never heard of anyone come up with: The DNA for a specific body part or organ has to be in the organism or it won't be able to grow or develop properly.

So when some amino acid formed in the primordial ooze because of a bolt of lightning, in that instant, all life and all coding for the life on this planet was created? Scientists are claiming that a random force of nature just exploded and accidentally created a chain of amino acids. Give me a break! rofl The crap scientists come up with is more ludicrous than their claims that the Bible is wrong and that we're all being brain washed!

I really do not appreciate you insulting science. Science does not insult religion (though some scientists may), and there is no reason for religion to insult science. It is petty, pointless and unnecessarily hostile. While you are free to disagree with any parts of science you do not like, do not insult it.

As for your statements about DNA and the origin of life, you simply do not understand the scientific view on the issues. A brief explanation of abiogenesis would be this. The basic "building blocks of life" are called amino acids. These amino acids are organized into what we know as proteins, which are constructed by nucleic acids. Now then, we know amino acids can be formed in nature independent of life (as shown by the Miller-Urey experiment), so the question of how life began is the question of how nucleic acids formed.

There is no known answer to that question, though there are a number of theories about it. Once nucleic acids formed, amino acids could be organized into proteins, which would have been the basis for life on Earth. Over time, the single cell organisms (prokaryotes) could have evolved into more complicated single cell organisms, which could have evolved into multi-cellular organisms, so forth and so on.

A great deal of work has been put into understanding how organisms can evolve into other organisms, and just because you do not understand (or just do not like) it, does not give you an excuse to insult it. If you have questions, feel free to ask them. I would be glad to do my best to answer any you may have, so long as they are asked in a legitimate manner.

ferret658

Think about it this way....You hear a bang and you turn to the person next to you and you ask them, "Hey, what caused that bang?" and they said, "There's no explanatin for it. It just happened." Would you believe him? Of course not! You know why? Because there is an explanation for everything; that is what sciencee has always told us.
So why do people accept the theory that a Big Bang was caused by nothing? What caused the Big Bang to bang? Do scientists have an answer for that? (I really don't know the answer to that sweatdrop )

No scientist says the Big Bang was caused by nothing. Scientists know what caused the Big Bang. The Big Bang happened because all matter in the universe was condensed into a single point, causing immense pressure. This pressure caused the Big Bang.

Scientists do not know where the all the matter of the Big Bang came from, as they have no way to study anything "before the Big Bang." They freely admit this, and currently they do not worry about it. If at some point in the future they find information which allows them to study the subject, they will.

-Tsukiyo-Moon Maiden

Actually the more science finds out the more it can explain and prove that God does undoubtedly exist. Science answers the How question, whereas God answers the Who What When Where and Why.

Science does not speak towards the existence of a god, either supporting or opposing the belief. It has nothing to say on the subject.

-Tsukiyo-Moon Maiden

And, the Big Bang Theory wasn't created by a scientist. It was created by a Catholic. A Christian. :3

The person who created the Big Bang theory, whose full name I won't try to remember, was Georges Lemaître. He was a Belgian Catholic priest, and he was a scientist. He saw no reason science and religion could not coincide.  

[ferret658]

.....you don't has to be mean.... crying  

[zz1000zz]

ferret658

.....you don't has to be mean.... crying

I do not see anything in my post which was mean. Certainly I was blunt, but that is not the same as mean. I believe I was quite generous in my tone, considering your post contained things like:

ferret658

The crap scientists come up with is more ludicrous than their claims that the Bible is wrong and that we're all being brain washed!

I put some effort into not saying anything insulting in my post, so I honestly have no idea what you think was mean about my post.  

[freelance lover]

Wow zz, you're wall of text is awesome eek

I wish I had something equally intelligent sounds to say, but I would like to add that science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Science and religion don't even really over lap. Science is the study of the natural laws of the universe. God is not part of the natural laws of the universe- he's supernatural. Anything that science says about the natural order of things doesn't apply to God because he doesn't fall in the same category. It's apples and oranges.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

zz1000zz

Science expects there will always be more things to study. Given the size and complexity of this universe, nobody should seriously expect humans to ever understand all the physical processes of it. And yes, there are some crazy things at the sub-atomic level. Why shouldn't there be? Why would anyone expect the universe to work only in ways that are easily translatable into current human understanding?

That's the reason I love physics. I love seeing them have all these rules and regulations about how the world works and then have to pull their hair out once they get smaller than an atom. Of course, I feel bad for Steven Hawking and his friends, trying to make that universal theory. I don't think that goal is EVER going to be accomplished.  

[ferret658]

zz1000zz

ferret658

.....you don't has to be mean.... crying

I do not see anything in my post which was mean. Certainly I was blunt, but that is not the same as mean. I believe I was quite generous in my tone, considering your post contained things like:

ferret658

The crap scientists come up with is more ludicrous than their claims that the Bible is wrong and that we're all being brain washed!

I put some effort into not saying anything insulting in my post, so I honestly have no idea what you think was mean about my post.

I guess I shouldn't pull that on strangers. sweatdrop That's just me. I intentionally over exaggerate things and then run away in real life to cause random confusion.