Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
View Poll Results: Is evolutionary theory accurate?
Yes. I believe the evolutionary theory is accurate. 210 58.82%
Yes. But I think aspects of the theory is flawed. 58 16.25%
No. I think it's completely flawed. 18 5.04%
No. I believe in creationism. 65 18.21%
I don't know. 6 1.68%
Voters: 357. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:08 PM
 
389 posts, read 1,986,659 times
Reputation: 185

Advertisements

i believe in creation, coz i believe in God. and i'm glad coz it is appalling to know that i evolved from a freaking ape as evolution teaches...

Last edited by june 7th; 05-04-2008 at 09:46 AM..

 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:17 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,543 posts, read 37,140,220 times
Reputation: 14001
This whole debate is so one sided. GSCTroop has provided reams of valid evidence and examples of evolution, and campbell all you do is mock it. How about you post some evidence from your side of the debate....and I do not mean links to creationist sites, but truly independent evidence from people with no horse in this race. I wait.
 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:21 PM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,734 posts, read 13,819,909 times
Reputation: 3808
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
"I believe many of them believe that their religious beliefs are supported by science."

I am still waiting for you to show me this science...I'd love to see some evidence of creationist theories.
How about how the layer of moon dust is too thin for and old moon?
 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:24 PM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,712 posts, read 13,460,010 times
Reputation: 4317
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
How about how the layer of moon dust is too thin for and old moon?
Yeah... that one is always good for a laugh. But, my personal favorite is the jar of peanut butter argument.
 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,543 posts, read 37,140,220 times
Reputation: 14001
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCSTroop View Post
Yeah... that one is always good for a laugh. But, my personal favorite is the jar of peanut butter argument.
I don't know that one, but then I have never been exposed to creationists before.
 
Old 05-03-2008, 05:40 PM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,712 posts, read 13,460,010 times
Reputation: 4317
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I don't know that one, but then I have never been exposed to creationists before.
This forum was my first real exposure to it. I'd heard OF them but I always thought it was one of those rumors that people spread to knock Evangelism. I never actually thought people REALLY believed it...

Anyway, here is the peanut butter argument. It's always good for a laugh in my opinion. I love how real science does research and Creation science resorts to "Jiffy".


YouTube - Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!
 
Old 05-03-2008, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,543 posts, read 37,140,220 times
Reputation: 14001
Thanks troop....Love it especially the comments..I sort of understand the creationists dilemma though... Their entire belief system in some cases their entire lives, is based on taking the bible literally, so if they admit they are mistaken it crumbles and everything is lost.
 
Old 05-03-2008, 06:12 PM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,712 posts, read 13,460,010 times
Reputation: 4317
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Thanks troop....Love it especially the comments..I sort of understand the creationists dilemma though... Their entire belief system in some cases their entire lives, is based on taking the bible literally, so if they admit they are mistaken it crumbles and everything is lost.
Well, I can understand that part of it. However, to me, there's a difference between those who try to pass off their faith as factual with unsubstantiated evidence at best. In all sincerity, if there were evidence that supported a Biblical Creation, than the very nature of science would also come to those conclusions as well. I don't honestly see how someone can sit here and say "science" tries to lie about findings to support Atheistic causes. It's really astounding when you think about it. And that's not to say that believers can't contribute wonderful scientific progression. Kelvin is one that comes to mind. Ken Miller who wrote Finding Darwin's God, and was the cornerstone of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover School Board case is a devout Catholic and an utterly brilliant biologist.

While I respect the stance that many find faith more important than science, I don't see why people are unable to reconcile the two in light of all the evidence that exists. I just don't know why some people believe that evolution equals "No God". It really doesn't. I mean, I rarely hear Jews proclaim that evolution defies their faith, and so it seems that this is strictly a Christian thing. Although, I am somewhat aware that the Muslim community frowns on evolution as well (I just haven't heard from them that much).
 
Old 05-03-2008, 06:16 PM
 
5,458 posts, read 6,716,040 times
Reputation: 1814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Real Scientist? Wikipedia states, Rhodesian Man is a hominin fossil. He is dated between 125,000 and 300,000 years old. Previously, some reports have given erroneous dates of up to 1.75 and 2.5 million years of age. Cranial capacity of the Broken Hill skull has been measured at 1,300 cm, which, when coupled with the more recent dating, makes any direct link to older skulls unlikely and negates the 1.75 to 2.5 million year earlier dating. Even if the skull looks like a text book transional, it's obviously not. And those real scientist of yours better do a little more research.
Wikipedia also says this

Quote:
However, when regarding the skulls extreme robustness, recent research has pointed to several features intermediate between modern Homo sapiens and Neanderthal.
Any particular reason you left that part out? Sounds like even the sources you find convincing say it's an example of a transitional fossil.
 
Old 05-03-2008, 06:23 PM
 
5,458 posts, read 6,716,040 times
Reputation: 1814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Why do you believe that had to evolve, and what evidence do you have to suggest anything ever evolved?
Current existing life forming a nested hierarchy is good evidence for common descent - Lines of Evidence: Nested Hierarchies.
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 > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top