U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:21 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 8,534,108 times
Reputation: 2525

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I disagree. Science has lots of evidence proving the origin of man....Religion (creation) has only faith. I'll place my trust in science over myth always.
Science has evidence but not proof.
Religion has Evidence but not proof
Definition of faith: to believe is something you can not prove
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:21 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
13,938 posts, read 9,693,560 times
Reputation: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
You do not know it was a wolf do you, you can not prove it was wolf. Could have been a lion, could have died a natural causes and the buzzard ate it. So your belief it was a wolf is based on faith because you can not prove it was a wolf
Jeez man! Why don't you read what the man wrote?

"If we need to see something to "prove" it happens, we have both a very narrow minded person and some who doesn't understand anything about empirical evidence. We don't need to see something happen in order to know it happened. We see a wolf covered in blood, bits of deer hanging from its mouth, deer in its poop, and there are paw-prints walking away from the deer carcas, we know that this wolf ate the deer. We don't have "faith" that it happened because we have evidence that it did. DNA testing of the bits of flesh in its mouth show that it matches the deer. The stomach contents of the wolf show it has a significant amount of the deer in its stomach."

We KNOW it was the wolf!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:23 PM
 
2,893 posts, read 5,176,576 times
Reputation: 1973
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
the title of the thread is
Do atheists have faith? origins of the universe

So we agree we all have faith.

No. Because I do not think the origins of the universe is an answerable question. I am not confident humans will ever answer that question, not through science, not through religion. It is an unanswerable in the scope of human existence.

Unless, of course, you want to go into the ridiculous inner spiral destructive logic of "you have faith in your faithlessness!" or some other such balderdash.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 8,534,108 times
Reputation: 2525
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarmig View Post
The theory of evolution does not posit that humans come from apes.

You may be surprised to learn this, but humans are apes!

Yes, you are a great ape, one of the five species of great apes. I'm an ape. Your wife is an ape. My kids are apes.

Humans did not come from apes because humans are apes.


So that right there proves you don't know enough about the Origin of Man with regards to evolution to discuss its validity.

The origin of man *is* documented and proven by the theory of evolution. The origin of man is *not* from apes. The theory of evolution proves this.
People did not evolve from apes. This is not the belief of creationists or evolutionists. Claims that people evolved from apes comes from a common misconception and oversimplification of the theories of human origins developed from the fossil record. Men and apes are in different evolutionary paths that diverged from each other millions of years before either men or apes existed as we know them today so apes are a little more like cousins rather than parents.


Answer


According to the evolutionary theory man is descended from an ape-like creature. This creature supposedly would have appeared very much like an ape although it has now supposedly died out..

According to the Bible man was created by God in the beginning and apes etc were created separately.

The actual evidence for the evolution of man is scanty (usable bones could apparently fit into a coffin) and inconclusive. It is also contradictory and constantly changing due to supposed new evidence which overturns previous ideas. The supposed missing links which are desperately sought after and are needed to prove the theory, often turn out to be either true apes or real human forms similar to variants of homo sapiens. This is all in the public domain and admitted by evolutionists themselves. In relation to Genesis creation, scientists on the basis of their work on Mitochondria are talking about 'Mitochondrial Eve'. This does not mean that they believe in a literal Eve but that the evidence points towards the human race being descended from a single individual female. It also does not imply that they are referring to a literal Eve as in the Genesis account. They still hold to the descent from an ape-like ancestor before this. Creationists would interpret this research somewhat differently.

Calculations of the rate of Mitochondial mutations point to this being much more recent than previously thought. This, together with other scientific evidence supporting a young earth, undermines the whole evolutionary view, including the idea of descent from an ape-like ancestor.

In short, it has not been proven that man has descended from an ape-like creature. However, as many people's presuppositions require it to be so they will accept it regardless of the ongoing problems, gaps etc. Some Christians will seek to incorporate science into their faith and so accept it as well even though it flatly contradicts the Bible account. Evolutionists, would of course reverse this and say that some Christians accept the Bible creation account despite the evidence against it.

This is one area where it is important for each person to make up his own mind. It is also important to know what the evidence actually is so that an informed choice can be made. As both a thinking person and a Christian I do not accept it as true. No scientific evidence exists which contradicts this.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_it_true...tarted_as_apes

Once again stating simply both sides use faith
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:30 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,138,372 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
Science has evidence but not proof.
Religion has Evidence but not proof
Definition of faith: to believe is something you can not prove
Oh, let's play some more...

Science not only has evidence is has proofs and unanswered questions.

Religion, has neither evidence nor proofs. And what's a questions?

By the way, relying on one clause of a 8 section definition is a more than a bit disingenuous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:30 PM
 
2,893 posts, read 5,176,576 times
Reputation: 1973
Yes, cut and pasted without reference or acknowledgment from the Religion and Spirituality section of Answers.com, the go-to reference for hard-core scientific research into evolution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 8,534,108 times
Reputation: 2525
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Oh, let's play some more...

Science not only has evidence is has proofs and unanswered questions.

Religion, has neither evidence nor proofs. And what's a questions?

By the way, relying on one clause of a 8 section definition is a more than a bit disingenuous.
There is no proof that science offers that shows the origin of man. Whether by TOE or the big bang
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:33 PM
 
Location: An absurd world.
5,165 posts, read 8,093,501 times
Reputation: 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
Science has evidence but not proof.
Religion has Evidence but not proof
Definition of faith: to believe is something you can not prove
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 8,534,108 times
Reputation: 2525
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarmig View Post
Yes, cut and pasted without reference or acknowledgment from the Religion and Spirituality section of Answers.com, the go-to reference for hard-core scientific research into evolution.
Can not counter the discussion i see so attack the source
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2010, 01:34 PM
 
Location: An absurd world.
5,165 posts, read 8,093,501 times
Reputation: 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
There is no proof that science offers that shows the origin of man. Whether by TOE or the big bang
The Big Bang has nothing to do with humans (or life in general for that matter). What are you talking about?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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