Re: Do We Have any Evolutionists

[Gate Troll]

In fact Big bang it´s not infinite energy..the astrophysic field have calcaleted it (about 10 elevated at 31 J i think, but the number could be wrong).

Only one question here, where did the big bang come from?

Yes evolution normaly deal with "common ancestor" not "direct relatives".

Actually that contradicts main-stream evolutionists. They believe humans descended from Neanderthals.
I believe humans were created by God.

Creacionism could be a theory but it´s not called scince since most of it´s principles can´t be tested.

Wow. That's pretty arrogant. The same could be said for evolution.
You can't test many of evolution's ideas either. You can't hold a group of animals in a zoo for a million years and wait for something to happen, and even if you could they still have a couple hundred thousand years to go.

Life originated by chance. My goal is not to describe all theories of origin of life on earth but if you research and understand some principles of chemistry and physcis makes a lot of sense.

I don't understand your view of science. In science we constantly test our hypothesis's and theories for flaws.
Here you state as 'set-in-stone-fact' that "Life originated by chance". You automatically assume evolution is fact and dismiss all other theories. And I'd prefer actual proof of it rather than you just saying "there is conclusive proof" as your last sentence basically does.

Yes, you can belive in evolution and in the existence of some superior entity, it´s up to you at which level (escale) you switch one explanation for the other.

That is utter stupidity. You act as if evolution = science and that evolution is established fact and its up to people how much they want to believe the 'truth' or not. I believe that which has been conclusively tested and proven true
not some 'create your own reality' in which you believe whatever you want to.

[Gate Troll]

Behold the Gestapo. MR. Lurtzy shouldn't have to write half a paragraph to say he agrees with SoP.  And since when did mods become absolutes on peoples opinions? I think all this NBardania... ...crap has gone to Führer NBarden's head.   

[Gil-Estel]

Well, GT, why use terms as arrogant and utter stupidity? There is no need for that. I like sharp debates and I know that espeacially with these topics things can get emotional, but sharp words don't need to be used.

[Gate Troll]

I have to say that evolution = scince. Like every theory it may have lot of errors and misunderstandings interpretations, but in fact evolution is consider a well stabilished stream of the the scince Biology. Again you can choose not to belive on this theory, but please keep in mind that when you said "Evolution is not scince" you are against hundreds and hundreds of scientist that use empirical methods to do research, so please don´t say that this is "utter stupidity"

That really steams me. Science isn't one idea, it is a technique used to evaluate ideas. The majority of scientists may agree with evolution but that doesn't make it factual or official. During the period of 1939-1945 in the Greater German Reich the 'majority' supported an evil, evil man called Hitler. Never believe something just because the 'majority' does.  And what I was calling 'utter stupidity' was the idea that evolution is science.

I have one curiosity i like to ask to you: How older you think Earth is? and how older the first animals we can call humans are? You belive that creationism is more related to other fields of scince (Biology, Chemestry, Physics, Geology, etc...) than evolutionism?

To your first question- About 6000 years old. To your second question Humans are older by six days.
To your third question- I believe that life is much too complex to form by chance. Stack the parts of a bicycle together and wait a couple million years all while zapping it with lighting with not produce a complete bicycle. My problem with evolution is similar. It relies on a million ifs that make no sense. In biology, when asexual creatures reproduce, they repeat each other exactly, unless there is a mutation. There is no way one species could slowly develop into another species Again, we are perfectly situated with the sun. if we were only a little bit further away we would freeze to death, and if we were only a little bit closer the world would be an inferno. Want any more answers? Look here.

Well, GT, why use terms as arrogant and utter stupidity? There is no need for that. I like sharp debates and I know that espeacially with these topics things can get emotional, but sharp words don't need to be used.

Because , it is arrogant say: 'Creationism' could be a theory but it´s not called scince since most of it´s principles can´t be tested.' He acts as if he is the ultimate authority who decides what is 'science' and what is not. If I said the same thing and replaced 'Creationism' with 'Evolution'. I would be guilty of arrogance for presuming to judge what is and what is not 'science'. It is also utters stupidity to sat that evolution is science. It assumes that truth can be dictated my a majority.

[Gil-Estel]

I have read the same posts, and nowhere I have seen him stating that he is a authority on this stuff, except that he says he has studied for some years. Well, I guess that has to count for something.
That human life is impressive is true, that our possition towards the sun is unique, also true. But both do not prove the existense of God, nor a creator. It raises questions, absolutely and for those who want to -like me- it is 'prove' that God is there. But I can't use it as an argument. Because it is no prove.
Truth is always determined by the majority. Generaly accepted that is. It's like what I said about statistics. I can say that the chances that if I throw a dice 100 times, I will throw 3 the most. Scientists will correct me....It can happen, but the chances are slim. What is science? Science works with models and generaly accepted assumptions based on experiments....

But even when Pepin intentionally offended you, you do not need to react with harsh comments as utter stupidity and stating he is arrogant. And giving as an argument that if it was the other way around it would be like that.....well, I think you could just go with the respectfully disagreement. Challenge eachother in a mature way, and do not feel offended too quick.

Oh and please, for debate sake, do not post all these links..Why don't ask questions, trying to find out what the other's possition is? That way a debate could lead somewhere instead of ending in 2 people being stubborn and just say: read this, I'm right...no read this, I'm right......

[turin08]

As soon as I saw the title of this thread I knew it would be trouble, it was purposefully geared for conflict and GT as always was all too happy to oblige as usual. No one likes to debate with you because your stupidly aggressive and I don't think you properley ever read what people say. No matter how politely someone else writes something you always manage to turn it into some personal affront.

Anyway now that I've had my rant I'll get to my oppinion on the subject. I believe in Intelligent design, by that I mean when I look at the world I see a world that could not possibly have happened by chance. To me it seems clearly designed, and designed well. I would reccomend the book 'Case for a Creator' by Lee Strobel to everyone here.

[Gate Troll]

As soon as I saw the title of this thread I knew it would be trouble, it was purposefully geared for conflict and GT as always was all too happy to oblige as usual. No one likes to debate with you because your stupidly aggressive and I don't think you properley ever read what people say. No matter how politely someone else writes something you always manage to turn it into some personal affront.

How was I stupidly aggressive? I was debating with Pepin the Brave and then you came and chucked some verbal gasoline on the debate.
What did you intend to accomplish beyond a flame-war?

[sickofpalantirs]

Wow. That's pretty arrogant. The same could be said for evolution.
That is utter stupidity.

I believe Turin is talking about this.
It is possible to believe totally different things from someone else and still be able to talk civilly about it.

[Gate Troll]

Wow. That's pretty arrogant. The same could be said for evolution.
That is utter stupidity.

I believe Turin is talking about this.
It is possible to believe totally different things from someone else and still be able to talk civilly about it.

I was being civil. What he said was arrogant. Whether that is politically correct or not does not matter.
And yes, it is utterly stupid to say that evolution = science. I rest my case.