|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:57 pm
Looking around the guild, I find that it takes a while for posting to happen. I can only imagine that the reason would be because we have run out of things to talk about. There's the usual, like "Why the Bible is wrong.", "Things on Darwin.", etc... But everyone just says the same things. Why not have a debate and try to put yourselves into the opposing opinion's shoes? That's what a debate is about, having opinions/facts on both sides. So, let's try it?
Let's say that creationism and evolution can co-exist. Yes, the big bang happened, but what made it happen? Your thoughts on this idea?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:32 am
R.o.s.e.Thorn Looking around the guild, I find that it takes a while for posting to happen. I can only imagine that the reason would be because we have run out of things to talk about. There's the usual, like "Why the Bible is wrong.", "Things on Darwin.", etc... But everyone just says the same things. Why not have a debate and try to put yourselves into the opposing opinion's shoes? That's what a debate is about, having opinions/facts on both sides. So, let's try it? The problem is that we are too used to tearing down the ideas and facts from the opposing side that there is little chance of debating with them. Especially when most of their strongest arguments are simple logical fallacies. I don't see a debate on this issue, I see people trying to convert through lies and superstition, through ignorance and laziness. I see attempts to infiltrate education and government. I see an assault on the scientific methodoligical naturalism. On reason itself. R.o.s.e.Thorn Let's say that creationism and evolution can co-exist. Yes, the big bang happened, but what made it happen? Your thoughts on this idea? I have no problems with people believeing in guided evolution. I don't believe it myself, and I don't want it taught to students in schools. But... it's not something I have a problem with apart from that. Technicially it is entirely unprovable either way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:15 am
I can't really speak for other people, but I personally do not see the point in believing in guided evolution. I mean, fine, it might be true, but so could that 'theory' that the entire universe, including us and all of our memories, was created last Tuesday. I mean, you can't disprove that. But you can't disprove it, either. So, really, there's no point.
I dunno if that made any sense...? It's early. >.>
On the subject of debates, I agree with redem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 10, 2006 9:34 am
I believe in the Big Bang/Crunch theory.
This theory states that the result of the Big Bang is the compression of all things in the universe into one extremely dense speck (the Big Crunch), which then repels itself outward and releases all of it's matter creating the universe. This cycle then repeats itself when the gravity from this point of origin pulls everything back inward.
There is proof of this as well.
When studying the light from a far off star, a man by the name of Hubble realized that the light rays radiating from it were shifted slightly to the red side of the scale. This is inevitable truth that that star must be moving away from us.
After studying more stars, they all seemed to be moving away at a great speed, which, he guessed was the result of a Big Bang.
It is true that he also discovered that the star was actually ACCELERATING away from earth, but this could be explained through any number of possibilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:25 am
Quote: Let's say that creationism and evolution can co-exist. Yes, the big bang happened, but what made it happen? Your thoughts on this idea? In that case, for every missing link yet not discovered, one can say oh "God dit it". Then if such fossil linking two eras is found one can say "God meant for it to happen". On the other hand, you can argue that since the "bible" was written at a such latter period, there are "missing links" in the bible which science fills in. Then again looking from either perspective it's hard for both to co-exist. In the case of the big bang, one can say it was an anomalie that's ocurrence is less that 1 in a million still happened, and brough about in the long run a "life creative force". Furthermore, one can also say "God made the big bang, so that we could gain life, therefore he created monkeys first, but since none were of higher intelligent level, he molded the human after the monkey yet added some of his image" concluding the quote "humans were made at his image"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
