U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-15-2013, 08:32 AM
 
17,297 posts, read 25,691,472 times
Reputation: 8567

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
That's not any version of the Big Bang theory with which I am familiar.

The theory is that an infinitely small, infinitely dense singularity exploded. A singularity is certainly more than "nothing."

That's because the scientific version of the Big Bang Theory and the religious propaganda about the Big Bang theory aren't the same.



But it's always been puzzling to me how it's easier for people to believe an all knowing, all powerful being that has always existed and never will end appeared out of knowehere.... but still find it so hard or unbelievable that the universe could "create itself" randomly.

 
Old 03-15-2013, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,883 posts, read 16,258,735 times
Reputation: 12796
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
lols. Nice link. I've seen it before. Here's what the evolutionists claim from your fossil example. lols.

Eusthenopteron first appears 385 million years ago. It has six radial bones.

Panderichthys, first appearing 380 million years ago, is now believed to have four radial bones.

The Canadian fishopod, Tiktaalik, was found in 375 million year old rock. It's not known how many radial bones it has, because some of the fossil was missing, but it probably had eight. What's important here though is that Tiktaalik has a complex 'wrist joint," which was claimed to help it walk on land.

Ichthyostega has been found in rocks "dated" at 367 to 362.5 million years old. Because the front flipper/foot was not found, it is not known how many radial bones (if any) it may have had, nor if it had a wrist - however, Acanthostega, supposedly 365 million years old, did not have a wrist, and had eight radial bones.

So if we were to follow this fossil sequence, it would appear that the evolution of the finger has been something:

First we evolved six fingers, then in our evolutionary ascent we lost two, then gained four back at Acanthostega. Once on land, the number went back down to four (most amphibians have four toes). Apparently we evolved a complex wrist, only to lose it again at Acanthostega, and then apparently re-evolve it back once the critters got onto land.

And then there is the oldest fossil that "proves" man evolved from another species. The Coelacanth known is from Australia and dated at over 410 million years old. Although only a jawbone has been found, presumably it's at least similar to the other Coelacanths we do know of, which have lots of "radial bones" in its fin!

The Coelacanth has evolved over hundreds of millions of years into... Coelacanths.

There is no proof that one species has turned into another. None.
What species is it that you believe evolutionists say changed from one to the other?
 
Old 03-15-2013, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,883 posts, read 16,258,735 times
Reputation: 12796
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinArmageddons View Post
False.


[/list][/list]Source:
CC200: Transitional fossils

Thank you.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,883 posts, read 16,258,735 times
Reputation: 12796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
See, that one bothers me. It is an argument of convenience. Not saying it is yours, rather it is a common establishment for the position as it concerns lack of validity to the given assumption. It isn't testable.
Are you a clone of your parents?
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:01 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,883 posts, read 16,258,735 times
Reputation: 12796
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
It's funny how anti-evolutionists don't understand that the theory of evolution has been changed pretty much constantly since it was first proposed, as new evidence and knowledge has required that the theory be changed to reflect that new evidence and knowledge. Skeptics and atheists understand that that's how SCIENCE works.
Exactly. They also fail to understand how this theory has been tested like nothing before or since.

What is painfully clear is that they have made no attempts to advance their own knowledge to better argue their own case.

From Christ's College at Cambridge in the UK (How ironic is that?)

Charles Darwin & Evolution
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:13 AM
 
10,543 posts, read 12,008,091 times
Reputation: 2798
In my opinion, each of the many theories on the on the creation of the universe and of man has significant gaps. No matter which perspective you believe, there are places that are unknown leaving you with a belief, a guess, or an admission of ignorance. Until something is proven, you must fill those gaps with one of those choices no matter which theory you choose. Consequently, I see no need for condescension from anyone. I also see no need to limit what's taught in schools. My thought is to teach it all and let people decide for themselves or at least learn to understand what the billions of people across the world are discussing and why they think what they do. Knowledge of the various perspectives is a worthy goal in itself since they have significant influences on societies across the globe and on the history of man. The only reason to want to limit it would be a concern that someone may reach a conclusion different from your own, which seems to acknowledge a weakness of your own perspective.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:23 AM
 
9,665 posts, read 8,654,461 times
Reputation: 3225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
I also see no need to limit what's taught in schools.
Are you okay with the communist agenda being taught in schools?
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,883 posts, read 16,258,735 times
Reputation: 12796
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You are assuming that believers in those religions universally reject evolution. That is not true.

Catholic Church and evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"As in other countries, Catholic schools in the United States teach evolution as part of their science curriculum. They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains why evolution occurs. This is the same evolution curriculum that secular schools teach. Bishop DiLorenzo of Richmond, chair of the Committee on Science and Human Values in a December 2004 letter sent to all U.S. bishops: '... Catholic schools should continue teaching evolution as a scientific theory backed by convincing evidence. At the same time, Catholic parents whose children are in public schools should ensure that their children are also receiving appropriate catechesis at home and in the parish on God as Creator. Students should be able to leave their biology classes, and their courses in religious instruction, with an integrated understanding of the means God chose to make us who we are.'"

Jewish views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Rabbi David J. Fine, who has authorized official responsa for the Conservative movement's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, expresses a common Conservative Jewish view on the subject:
Conservative Judaism has always been premised on the total embrace of critical inquiry and science. More than being compatible with Conservative Judaism, I would say that it is a mitzvah to learn about the world and the way it works to the best of our abilities, since that is to marvel with awe at God's handiwork. To not do so is sinful.
But here's where the real question lies. Did God create the world, or not? Is it God's handiwork? Many of the people who accept evolution, even many scientists, believe in what is called 'theistic evolution,' that is, that behind the billions of years of cosmic and biological evolution, there is room for belief in a creator, God, who set everything into motion, and who stands outside the universe as the cause and reason for life. The difference between that and 'intelligent design' is subtle yet significant. Believing scientists claim that belief in God is not incompatible with studying evolution since science looks only for the natural explanations for phenomena. The proponents of intelligent design, on the other hand, deny the ability to explain life on earth through solely natural explanations. That difference, while subtle, is determinative.
David J. Fine, Intelligent Design"

How about Bhuddism?

Creation And Evolution in Buddhism « Daily Buddhism

" ... most Buddhists also accept the theory of Evolution. Simple life forms evolved and changed until the creatures we know today existed."

Islam?

Muslim thought on evolution takes a step forward | Salman Hameed | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

"The success of this event related to the fact that all panellists, with the exception of a creationist, more or less accepted the scientific consensus on evolution."

Hinduism?

Hindu views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In India, Most Hindus accept the theory of biological evolution. In a survey, 77% of respondents in India agreed that enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, and 88% of God-believing people said they believe in evolution as well.[5][6] According to the survey conducted by Pew Forum in the United States, 80% of Hindus agree that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of human life on earth."

So believers in the world's most common religions do not find it impossible to separate science and religion.



Evolution does not teach that man descended from chimpanzees. You expose a big gap in understanding when you claim that. Having a common ancestor is not the same. There is a very big difference.



Billions of people of different faiths reconcile their religious concepts with the concept of evolution, which is supported by multiple lines of evidence.

Brava!!!!!
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,831,432 times
Reputation: 3726
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHurricaneKid View Post
Are you okay with the communist agenda being taught in schools?
Maybe more time should be spent on teaching the strengths and weaknesses of Astrology and unicorns in our science classrooms, and let the children decide for themselves.
 
Old 03-15-2013, 09:24 AM
 
10,543 posts, read 12,008,091 times
Reputation: 2798
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHurricaneKid View Post
Are you okay with the communist agenda being taught in schools?
I learned about communism in school.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top