Author Topic: Evolution  (Read 3901 times)

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« on: October 09, 2005, 09:58:15 PM »
Okay, there are two topics to be debated.

1. Should Creation be taught in schools?

2. Is Evolution true?

Here is what I have to say.

1. Evolution, in its grand form (which is not including variation within one own's kind), has not been proven true and it assumes there is no Creator. There is no scientific evidence supporting Evolution, supporting it is a matter of faith. As long as Evolution is taught in schools, Creation should be also. Teach both sides of the story is what public schools should do more of instead of bowing to the ACLU.

2. Evolution, the presumption that all things evolved from nothing and got to where they are now has no proof to back it. However, there is some evidence to back what the Bible has to say. The Bible knew things about science before we ever knew it. The Bible says that there was a worldwide flood, and according to geneologies, it was around 4400 years ago. The Grand Canyon was made from a flood in ten minutes. After the flood, from what evidence we can gather, there was an Ice Age, a very short one compared to what Evolutionists believe there was.

Originally, there was a canopy of water/ice as a layer of the atmosphere. This effect would cause a double in oxygen pressure, some people would live to over 950 years. Some speculate that a comet shower hit Earth and all the ice was magnetically drawn to the poles, creating the ice caps. In short time, the poles really froze over, freezing the mammoths. The canopy was broken by the shower, creating the rain mentioned in the Bible's flood story.

The comet fragments broke upon the "fountains of the deep," that water which was below Earth's crust and a lot of it came gushing forth. With the canopy, comet, and wells of the deep bursting, that all pretty much flooded the whole place. Eventually, the oceans began to form, the techtonic plates started moving. Now, 100-200 years later you have an Ice Age, since a lot of ice was introduced to the world. Without the canopy now, we are lucky to live to 100, and we don't grow as big, thus some of us need our wisdom teeth removed.

Some criticise the ark, saying there is no way two of each species could have got on. Well, first off, two of each kind got on. Since then, species have developed, but never has one kind of animal, for example, horses, ever produced a fish. Also, you don't take full grown adults on the ark, you take babies. Also, when measuring the ark, you may want to keep in mind that cubits was the measurement. Perhaps, with bigger people, there was a bigger cubit.

All the fish were not on the ark, they just swam around. Dinosaurs were in the ark. The word dinosaur was not invented until the mid 1800s. Before that, dinosaurs were referred to dragons. The dinosaurs pretty much went extinct as far as we know because they were hunted down. There are legends in many cultures about dragons being slain. Also, many cultures have a flood legend. Anyways, rumor has it that today there may still be some dinosaurs alive in the African Congo, a lot of that place has not been explored.

There, I covered as much as I liked, I could go more in detail, but that is the gist of it.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline Hooman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4078
Evolution
« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2005, 10:39:53 PM »
Well, I'd like to point out that you've made a number of claims without much proof, or really much in the way of backup.

Also, I don't so much believe that something like evolution denies the existence of a creator. I think it's more of a theory that can stand apart from having a creator. If people do evolve, that doesn't mean some creator didn't create them initially. Also, your part about 2 of every kind of animal being on the arc seems to imply some sort of evolution. There are clearly many diverse forms of life on the planet right now, and there is no way to deny that.

As for no scientific proof of evolution, ok, I can accept that. But I wouldn't go saying there is no scientific evidence of evolution. There is plenty to backup such a theory, it's just not entirely agreed upon that the evidence really does imply evolution. It's more of a weaker claim that evolution would appear to be true for certain reasons. Thus I also have to reject your claim that evolution must be taken as a matter of faith. It's certainly not popular because people want to believe it's true. Think of how much of the world is under a religious influence, and how often religion rejects claims such as these? I think people believe in evolution because there are certain real world situations that would be adequately explained by such a theory.


As for some of your other claims, I'm not entirely sure I completely understand them. From my point of view, many of them appear to be crazed nonsense.  :P

I'd also like to ask you, do you believe religion should be taught in schools? What about the idea of seperation of church and state? And isn't creationism, in a sense, taught to whoever wants to listen on Sundays? :P




 

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #2 on: October 09, 2005, 11:10:45 PM »
Well, pick some claims, and I will go more in depth. As a Christian, the Bible is solid fact to me. It is the truth of the Bible, that Jesus died for my sins and those who repent and believe shall be saved from the prospect of eternal damnation. A little over a year ago, I was converted, and I feel different as a person and many people tell me I am more different, more happy. You may think "How cute," but God's grace can change a person, and it is the Bible which has endured for many generations which tells us of that grace. I will believe the Bible until it is proven wrong.

Some believe that God started evolution, but the God of the Bible would not do that. The Bible clearly states that God created the world in six days and it was perfect. Then Satan tempted the first women, where she committed the first sin by eating the Foribidden Fruit thus eating the first man out of house and home. The God of the Bible would never start evolution. It is not in his character. Maybe some other god if there was another, but not the God of the Bible.

I do not doubt Microevolution, where different kinds of animals evolve within their own kind. I believe Macroevolution to be false. A dog will never give birth to a bird. It has NEVER been observed. However, microevolution does not proove macroevolution or anything higher.

When it boils down to things, either you believe in a Creator or you don't. If you don't believe in one, then Evolution is the thing to believe. You are right in a way, many people believe in Evolution because it is convenient to their political theories. Those political theories being Socialism, Nazi-ism, Communism, Humanism. You seem to be a Humanist.

Well, I was trying to remember all the stuff I've read and heard, I am not surprised that I don't seem to be the most organized or award-winning debater.

Seperation of church and state is NOT in the Constitution. The states not the federal government should decide whether or not there should be such a way. The first amendment in its referrence to religion was to prevent a state-sponsered religion, like many countries at the time had.

More people go to public schools than church, because of society, not wanting to homeschool or private-school because of lack of funds and lack of free time(for homeschooling). The fact is more people in American know the Evolution theory than that of Creationism. If we truely want to be balanced, then present both sides. Classes on religion, in my opinion, should only be taught as an elective. Even then, the ACLU has a fit. I believe there is nothing wrong with teaching the Christian ethics in school. I would personally like Christianity to be taught in public school, but that'd only happen when there are four full moons in a month.

Also, with schools, you have kids, especially elementary kids, that are told five days a week that Evolution is the foundational truth of everything, and how is one hour of Sunday school going to make much of a difference. Besides, in Sunday school classes, they are more focused on teaching Christian ethics and things about the Bible, and creation is not an often topic.

How many churches, were you to somehow visit a dozen in one day, would talk about Creation? Now picking a dozen, I'll be a bit surprised if more than one mentions it. Even then, some churches compromise and teach an evolution and creation duality theory which I totally disagree with.

Why is this topic important? Because about every non-traditional Christian-Judeo philosophy has Evolution somewhere justifying it. Now if you knew for certain that there was a Creator and he had rules he wanted you to obey, wouldn't you be more likely to obey them? It is the Christian-Judeo ethic which has kept the world from going into the type of darkness mentioned in Genesis 6 where virtually all of man had his every thought about some form of evil.

Also, how old is the Earth? If the earth is only 6,000 years old as the Bible says through its geneological records, then there is no way evolution could have happened on the scale many claimed for it to happen.  



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline Tellaris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 461
Evolution
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2005, 11:18:23 PM »
Ah, but they think the world is more then several billion years old, based on the decay rate of selected elements.   Old rocks.    Bible seys 6000 years old.   God fakes age?   So many people want to do that...
Spell Checker!   The PoWeR tOoL
Click Here For Coolness
Self Proclaimed OPU Help desk.

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2005, 11:43:56 PM »
The problem with that is that radioactive dating is unreliable. Carbon dating a tooth of a mammoth and another part of its body resulted in a 2000 year difference. Evolutionists date fossils by the layer they are found in and layers by the fossils that are in them. Circular.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline Hooman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4078
Evolution
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2005, 12:33:50 AM »
Well, I see no reason why God couldn't fake age. If you try to determine the age of something is based on physical properties of that thing, and if God created that thing, then He gave it those physical properties. I really don't see how the age of the world can really play into any sort of argument attempting to prove the existence of God wrong. It seems like people who would attempt such claims have no idea how those aging methods work. As for the other way around, if the world only did exist for say the last 6000 years, then certainly some things evolutionists believe will be wrong. It doesn't necessarily mean that things won't progress from whenever the world did start in a fashion consistent with some of the ideas of evolution. (and of course maybe it's all just BS). I think maybe the trouble with this debate is actually what you consider to be evolution. This seems to be one of those theories that everyone has heard a little bit about, and has a general and somewhat vague understanding of what it means. But I doubt many people could really explain the idea in depth. I certainly don't know of anyone that's gone back to Darwin's original works, or if they would even apply to this debate.

As for some of your claims, how about further explaining anything to do with water, and the life expectancy in relation to atmospheric pressure.


I'm not sure if there is really a difference between what you call microevolution and macroevolution. If microevolution is true, then over time changes will build up. How far from the original before you're willing to consider it a new species? In many ways it's really quite arbitrary. What if some of the original species is still around to compare with the new breed? Certainly two groups of the same animal can be seperated and subject to different conditions. And what about cross breeding animals?

And no, I don't expect a dog will ever give birth to a bird. Especially not in such a blunt way as you've put it. I think the idea was more that small changes over time give rise to the large differences we can see. And even then, I don't claim a breed of dogs will some day evolve into a breed of birds. I think the idea was more that simpler organisms can evolve into more complex ones (possibly different ones), and not so much that complex organisms will change from one type to another.

Would you consider "dog" to be a species? Or all the different types of dogs? Certainly a chiwawa isn't going to give birth to a pitbull. But many breeds of dogs can interbreed. What about horses and donkeys? They can mate, but the offspring is sterile. And why do all these similar species of animals exists if none of them are truely related? Couldn't we expect more radical differences in living things that wouldn't lend itself well to the idea of families/species of animals? Evolution might not be right, or maybe even only partially correct, but it certainly does provide an explaination of why these things exist.

What is Humanism?

I never claimed anything about the constitution, and keep in mind that I might not be American.  :ph34r: And even so, wouldn't religion being taught in schools make it a state sponsored religion? But all that aside....

People go to school and learn about evolution for how long? About a week maybe? A month a most? In one class, that gets maybe an hour a day? You spend how much of your life in a church? Doesn't matter if they don't talk about it often, I'm sure the time adds up. I can't imagine any church goer that doesn't know of Adam and Eve. Or Noahs ark either for that matter. As for more people knowing evolution that creationism, I think I'd disagree. The idea of creationism seems to be much better understood, although I doubt many people would think to call it "creationism".


Quote
I will believe the Bible until it is proven wrong.
Well, I'm sure that will be a long time then. I doubt there is any science that can prove the existence of God wrong. And I don't think there is really anything in the Bible that can be proven wrong. At the very least, it seems like a history book full of moral guidance. What can be proven wrong about that? Even if God doesn't exist, it doesn't mean all those events never happened, or that the moral guidance isn't a good thing. If the Bible was so easy to prove wrong, I'm sure the most we'd ever have heard of it would be some vague reference in an obscure history book by now. What, if anything, can possible stand to be proven wrong that's in the Bible?

I'm not entirely clear on why God wouldn't allow evolution. God supposedly allowed freedom of choice. If we didn't have that, would sin have ever existed? And it kinda sounds like you're looking to get clobered by any female readers.  :blink: ... eating the first man out of house and home?  :lol:

 

Offline Leviathan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4115
Evolution
« Reply #6 on: October 10, 2005, 05:49:10 AM »
Creation should not be taught in school.

Evolution is not agianst the bible. I think it should be taught in school.

Offline Sirbomber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3174
Evolution
« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2005, 06:11:17 AM »
If they teach Creationism or whatever in schools, I want them teaching Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Buddhism... The list goes on!
Point is: United States public schools are not supposed to teach religion, especially not favor a few religions above the other! If people want their kids to learn Creation, homeschool them! (Catholic Schools teach evolution you know)

And as for "no proof," I hope to God you're not talking about how it's the "Theory of Evolution". EVERYTHING in science is a theory becasue scientists are too lazy, which I'm sure we all know.  ;)

Quote
Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies -- which was neither planned nor sought -- constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory."
(Pope John Paul II)
"As usual, colonist opinion is split between those who think the plague is a good idea, and those who are dying from it." - Outpost Evening Star

Outpost 2 Coding 101 Tutorials

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2005, 06:23:28 AM »
Anyways, how do you think the Earth and life came about?

You are right, God could have put an age mark on things. Yet, I want to try to go into some evidences for a Young Earth http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=6:

"It has been estimated by evolutionary anthropologists that the earth could have easily supported 10 million hunter/gatherer type humans. To maintain an average of 10 million people, spread over the entire plane, with an average life span of 25 years, for the last 100,000 years . . . .would mean that 40 billion people had lived and died. Archeological evidence clearly shows that these "stone age" people buried their dead. Forty billion graves should be easy to find. Yet only a few thousand exist."

"Another indication of both a young earth and a confirmation of the worldwide flood is the scarcity of meteors in sedimentary rock layers. Although some meteors have been found in sedimentary layers, they are relatively rare. Meteors are easily identifiable, and many thousands have been identified and recovered from recent impacts on the planet’s surface. If most of the rock layers were laid down rapidly during the one year period of a worldwide flood, you would not expect to find many meteorites buried in only one year. However, if the sediment was laid down over billions of years, there should be multiple billions of meteorites buried within this sediment. The fact that we find so few is another possible evidence for the rapid accumulation of the sedimentary layers and a young earth."

From http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i1/howold.asp:

"If the continents were billions of years old, they would have eroded by wind and water many times over. Mountain uplift and other ‘recycling’ processes are nowhere near capable of compensating for this."

"Helium, a light gas, is formed during radioactive alpha decay in rock minerals. It rapidly escapes and enters the atmosphere much faster than it can escape Earth’s gravity.2 Even if God had created the world with no helium to begin with, the small amount in the atmosphere would have taken at most around two million years to accumulate. This is far less than the assumed 3,000-million-year age of the atmosphere."

"There are billions of fossil fish in rock layers around the world which are incredibly well-preserved. They frequently show intact fins and often scales, indicating that they were buried rapidly and the rock hardened quickly. In the real world, dead fish are scavenged within 24 hours. Even in some idealized cold, sterile, predator-free and oxygen-free water, they will become soggy and fall apart within weeks.3 A fish buried quickly in sediment that does not harden within a few weeks at the most will still be subject to decay by oxygen and bacteria, such that the delicate features like fins, scales, etc. would not preserve their form. Rapid burial in the many underwater landslides (turbidity currents) and other sedimentary processes accompanying Noah’s Flood would explain not only their excellent preservation, but their existence in huge deposits, often covering thousands of square kilometres."

"Argonne National Laboratories have shown that heating wood (lignin, its major component), water and acidic clay at 150C (rather cool geologically) for 4 to 36 weeks, in a sealed quartz tube with no added pressure, forms high-grade black coal."

"Each year, the world’s rivers and underground streams add millions of tonnes of salt to the sea, and only a fraction of this goes back onto the land. Using the most favourable possible assumptions for long-agers, the absolute maximum age of the oceans is only a tiny fraction of their assumed billions-of-years age."

Okay, more information on the canopy of water.

From Dr. Hovind's second Creation Science Seminar http://www.algonet.se/~tourtel/hovind_semi...nar_part2.html:

"     Well, today an eighty footer could not breathe, but before the Flood, I think they had double the air pressure from that canopy of water or ice over head-increase the air pressure. Plus, when they drilled into the amber (how many saw Jurassic Park when they went after the mosquito blood?), sometimes in amber they find air bubbles trapped. The air bubbles trapped in amber have 50% more oxygen than we do today. Interesting! Did you know if you lived in a world with double the air pressure and 50% more oxygen, just breathing would be exciting! Adam would go,
      "(breathe) Wow! Eve, that was fun, let’s do that again, ready?" Because under those conditions, not only does your hemoglobin take on oxygen, your plasma gets oxygen saturated in your blood stream which means you could run for hundreds of miles without getting tired. Adam and Eve did not need a car; they could run to Grandma’s! Only they did not have a grandma, or a mother-in-law by the way, which was why it was paradise! No, actually my wife has a great mother-in-law, but!
      I think before the Flood came the earth had double the air pressure and increased oxygen. That explains how the dinosaurs could get so big on small lungs. It explains a lot of things by the way. It would sure heal up faster under those conditions; extra oxygen makes you heal much faster. How many of your remember Baby Jessica, she fell down in the well in Texas about 10 or 12 years ago? When Jessica fell down in the well, she was 18 months old, her left leg slipped down in the pipe, her right leg came up behind her and she did the splits as she slid down 20 feet inside an 8 inch steel pipe. She was down there 2 and 1/2 days; it was an amazing rescue, when they finally got her out a lot of her body had turned black from lack of circulation. Her right leg was totally black;
one of the doctors said we have to cut the leg off immediately. Another doctor said, before we cut her leg off, let’s just try putting Jessica in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber. In a what? Hyperbaric oxygen chamber? What is that? Well, it is a chamber like this; they put Jessica in one of these. Now, back in
1987 this was very new therapy. This was a revolutionary idea; today it is being used more and more. They stuck Jessica in one of these chambers, filled it up full of pure oxygen, and pumped it up to double normal pressure forcing oxygen into her system. Within a few hours, her leg turned pink; one by one her toes turned pink. They finally had to amputate half of her little toe. She would have lost her whole leg had it not been for hyperbaric therapy.
      You know, one of the biggest ones in America is right here in Pensacola, Florida. Holds thirty people in emergencies. Hyperbaric Chamber, strange, huh? You know in West Germany all stroke patients are required to go for hyperbaric oxygen treatments after they have a stroke? They are finding incredible healing. Different countries around the world—in England, Multiple Sclerosis patients are being treated with hyperbaric oxygen; in India, they treat leprosy with it.
      Adding oxygen to the system, everything seems to heal faster. A small chamber like this, it only holds one person, is cheaper to operate and to build; quite a few pro teams have one. Dallas Cowboys have one, the San Francisco 49er’s have one, the New York Jets have one, all these pro teams are finding their injured players are healing twice as fast under hyperbarics. Well, if you are paying the guy $1000 a minute to go play with a ball, you want him out there playing with the ball, right? Can you imagine, though, if the entire earth was hyperbaric before the Flood? That would be a different world, wouldn’t it? You would not need a hospital, you would be healed up before you could get there; plus it would make plants grow like crazy. See, increased air pressure would also increase pressure to the plants. Now, plants do not have lungs to breathe, they have to rely on what comes by right? It would also increase pressure to the gases—that puts more gas into the water and fish have to breathe under water; if you have increased air pressure you get a lot more fish able to survive per cubic mile, I mean lots more fish, lots more plant growth. ...
    You know before the Flood came, the Bible says the people lived to be over 900 years old. Right after the Flood came, that canopy of water fell down, life spans dropped off to 400, and then 200, and then 100, and today 100 is old. Before the Flood, you were just a kid at 100; it was about time to start looking for a wife and a house near a grade school. Well, today if you wait till you are 100, you can still get the wife, but you can forget the grade school! You will not need it, okay? It was just different back then folks, a lot different; they lived a long time.
      One guy is going around the country and claims to be a Creationist, he says, "You know folks they were not really living to be 900, they counted every month as a year, you have to divide their age by 12." Wow, that is an even bigger miracle! Let’s see, Enoch was 65 when he begat Methuselah. Two of these guys were 65 when their son was born. Let’s see, 65 divided by 12, he was 5 and 1/2 when he became a daddy! I do not think so! No, they really lived to be 900, folks, something was different back then."

There is a lot more in that link talking about the canopy.

Okay, I need to clearify what I consider kinds of animals and the difference between macroevolution and microevolution. A wolf and a dog can have kids, they are the same kind (not species). A horse and a zebra can have kids, they are the same kind. With microevolution breeds within a kind and species within a kind develope. Now, a zebra can never produce a giraffe or new kind of animal. Now, with macroevolution, you have to assume that all animals came from one animal. Now if the Earth was young, macroevolution could not have happened, now could it?

I would consider dog to be a kind of animal, that also included wolf and coyote. Horses and donkeys, if they can mate, then they are the same kind. A lot of people would consider dogs to be a species. Now, like dogs, other kinds have inbred and bred amongst themselves, thus how horses, donkeys, and zebras are the same kind.

Quote
And why do all these similar species of animals exists if none of them are truely related?
... God created the heavens and the earth and the birds and the fish and the animals. Creation has an explanation for it as well.

And humanism, according to the American Humanist Association: "Humanism is a progressive lifestance that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead meaningful, ethical lives capable of adding to the greater good of humanity." I do use the term a bit loosely, but you seem to have some leanings towards it.

Quote
And even so, wouldn't religion being taught in schools make it a state sponsored religion?
Evolution is state sponsered and takes faith, if it is okay to teach that in school, why is it wrong to teach Christianity? Anyways, if I had things my way, there would be no public school system. If you can get control of the schools you can get quite an unfair impact on the population. Also, here in America, more is spent per kid in a public school than in a private school. (Due to tax dollars) We could really go into this more ... in another debate.

Quote
As for more people knowing evolution that creationism, I think I'd disagree.
Worldwide, maybe, but in America, where the public education is terrible, more people know about evolution theory than creationism. The stories of Adam and Eve and the Flood are well known, but they are not often taught in the light of Creation Science. If Adam and Eve is talked about in a sermon, then most likely they are talking about the first sin and there is a chance that the sermon will go on to why we need a Savior. Now, with Noah and the Flood, many people teach that as a story about faith. You had a guy that spent 120 years building the ark while being ridiculed by the rest of the world. He HAD to have faith.

The Bible is more than just a book. It is the divinely inspired word of God. Many different authors, but each one was just as divinely inspired, and by God's guidance do we have the assembly of the books of the Bible today. It has survived many ages and has been translated carefully. (Except for the past 100-200 years where you started getting a lot of translations. Bible translations is a whole other ball of wax) Many of the events that happened in the Bible could not have happened without a God.

I believe that God planned on sin, in eternity past set up his salvation plan, and that He still has an active presense in this world. I believe that the whole of history, when it all is over, will be the greatest testiment to God and all of his infinite attributes. (Such as infinite love, infinite justice, infinite grace, so on and so forth)

Well, I'll take a chance with the female readers.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline zigzagjoe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Evolution
« Reply #9 on: October 10, 2005, 06:36:28 AM »
Well, to put it plainly, I think religion and such is a bunch of bs, no offence. Along with that goes this creationism bs. Explain a giant hand or w/e scientifically.

For all we know the bible was written by a few drunk monks in a bar........


I think that Evolution is right.
IMO, I think anyhting related to religion should be kept far away form school, law, which includes this creationism s***. Religion should not be a part of education or law in ANY way.
 

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #10 on: October 10, 2005, 06:44:13 AM »
So, ZigZagJoe, how do you think evolution happened?



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline zigzagjoe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Evolution
« Reply #11 on: October 10, 2005, 07:02:26 AM »
And a donkey and a horse are not the same, as the offspring is sterile. Most crossbreds like that are sterile.

@Phil : Im not going to type it all here, just google it.





Feel free to belive what you want, be is Chistanity, Islam and such, just dont force it on others.

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #12 on: October 10, 2005, 07:15:21 AM »
To get those I missed because I was typing a long lengthy post:

Quote
Creation should not be taught in school.

Evolution is not agianst the bible. I think it should be taught in school.

I think both should be taught, and Evolution is against the Bible, which teaches a six day creation.

Quote
If they teach Creationism or whatever in schools, I want them teaching Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Buddhism... The list goes on!
What makes Christianity special for America is that it was the Bible that was the most referrenced work when the Constitution was being made. Wouldn't a better understanding of Christianity help us better understand our roots?

Quote
Point is: United States public schools are not supposed to teach religion, especially not favor a few religions above the other! If people want their kids to learn Creation, homeschool them! (Catholic Schools teach evolution you know)
Well, they already teach elective classes. If Creation and Christianity was taught as an elective, would you protest? Not everyone can homeschool. The ideologies of Christianity-Judaism and Evolution cannot coexist, thus there is this divide in ideology.

I'm not Catholic.

Quote
And as for "no proof," I hope to God you're not talking about how it's the "Theory of Evolution". EVERYTHING in science is a theory becasue scientists are too lazy, which I'm sure we all know.
Well, show that we all came from a Big Bang billions of years ago, and I will believe you. Evolution is something that is accepted by faith.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline spirit1flyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
Evolution
« Reply #13 on: October 10, 2005, 07:28:23 AM »
Quote
This was a revolutionary idea; today it is being used more and more. They stuck Jessica in one of these chambers, filled it up full of pure oxygen,

this can't be true because pure oxygen is deadly

I don't have the time right now to add a long post but I will state my view:

Creation should be taught. in some schools they are teaching budda. but if you as much as pray before a test you get sent to the principle

 
"Until you stalk and overrun You can't devour anyone"


Loyal Xfir supporter

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #14 on: October 10, 2005, 07:35:20 AM »
The first astronauts had pure oxygen ih their capsules. They were okay, up to the point of Apollo one.

Quote
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBO) is a medical treatment by which oxygen is administered at greater than normal pressure to a patient in order to treat specific medical indications. Long established as the primary therapy in the treatment of medical disorders such as carbon monoxide poisoning and gas gangrene, hyperbaric oxygen therapy is now increasingly being used on an adjunctive basis in the management of a variety of disorders refractory to standard medical and surgical care. HBO has been shown to be particularly effective in treating problem wounds, chronic bone infections and radiation injury.

In HBO therapy, the patient is placed in a specially designed chamber, the pressure in the chamber is increased, and 100% oxygen is breathed. Alveolar oxygen pressure is increased, causing a rise in plasma oxygen content which results in enhanced tissue oxygen delivery. The amount of pressure increase and the length of time under pressure are determined by the condition being treated. Treatment pressures are usually between 2 and 3 times atmospheric. Treatments usually last from 1 to 2 hours at full pressure.

100% Oxygen. Now if people were dying from all of that, why do they still do it. 100% oxygen is not as deadly as you make it out to be.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline spirit1flyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
Evolution
« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2005, 08:51:34 AM »
maybe when I had read that, They may have meant that over some time it would be deadly?

 
"Until you stalk and overrun You can't devour anyone"


Loyal Xfir supporter

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2005, 09:01:28 AM »
Early on in scuba diving the divers would eventually start to get a bit sick because their tanks had 100% oxygen. Later on some guy added nitrogen to the mix.



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline spirit1flyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
Evolution
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2005, 09:36:32 AM »
maybe that was what I read and I just got it mixed up
"Until you stalk and overrun You can't devour anyone"


Loyal Xfir supporter

Offline BlackBox

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3103
Evolution
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2005, 12:38:35 PM »
First of all, when you say 100% oxygen... what exactly does that mean? At what pressure? 1 atmosphere? or a much lower pressure.

100% Oxygen at 1 atm will kill a person. At a much lower pressure, say 0.2 atm, the amount of oxygen that you'll inhale is about the normal amount you would at sea level. (1 atm)

100% oxygen is fine in space because of the near-vacuum conditions. In diving, submarines, and other very-high-pressure environments, it would kill a person.

In high pressure environments it's mixed with other inert gases such as nitrogen and helium to prevent poisoning.

However, you may not realize it, but oxygen is a very corrosive gas at high pressure or temperature. It's pretty reactive, as are the other halogens (F, Cl, Br, and I. FYI, Fluorine is the most reactive nonmetal).

In a hyperbaric chamber it's not as critical since the treatment lasts a relatively short time. (not to mention it's necessary in cases like CO poisoning)

-----

Now, about the evolution debate.

First of all, C14 dating non organic substances such as rock is guaranteed to produce erratic results. It works on the fact that C14 slowly decays in non living organisms over time, to give a rough estimate of time.

Dating substances such as rock would only contain trace amounts (relatively speaking) of C14 and thus would throw the results off.

As for the theory of evolution itself, I tend to discredit it because it conflicts with the concept of entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Without going into great detail, (I don't even understand it totally myself -- I'm a chemistry guy, not a physics guy), the 2nd law essentially states that entropy (measure of chaos/randomness in the universe) increases as time passes.

This conflicts with the concept of evolution which tries to say that as time passes organisms increase in complexity due to beneficial genetic mutations. This doesn't support the idea of entropy at all.

Also I refuse to accept the theory of evolution because it is simply that, a theory. Nothing has proven it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I personally believe in creation because I'm christian myself. In my opinion it may be best to not teach either set of ideology (creation or evolution) in schools... Let people decide for themselves what they want to hear. It just creates a big uproar.

Offline Eddy-B

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
    • http://www.eddy-b.com
Evolution
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2005, 12:55:20 PM »
I must confess, i did not read the *entire* post (i read only a tiny bit of it  :blush: upto now), but it seems to me this is one of the oldest "wars" of belief in a creator against the belief in pure science.

At this point, i have only 1 thing to say: isn't it kinda naive to think we are the center of the universe ? "God created man as an image of himself" ? There are billions upon billions of stars, most of them having at least a couple of planets (that HAS been proven by NASA and others) and some of them that are in the star's life-zone. It would be selfish to think we are the only one that has life.

Doesn't this contradict the Genesis story ?

---------------
(dont shoot me, if i am off with some of the numbers, im writing this from memory alone, not copying from other sites, or papers i've read/documentaries i've seen)

You may have noticed scientists & archeologists have found proof for some of the bible's "stories" (coz thats what they are : STORIES).
A great flood happened just before the last iceage started some 12500 years ago. The people that lived on the planet at that time KNEW what was going to happen, coz it had  happened before, and they could read the stars, and knew about some laws of physics, as well as advanced mathematics. They could really predict when it would happen.
The story goes something like this:
The ancients calculated a precise date of the start of this disaster, resulting in the great flood, and they built thousands of manjits (small boats) to escape from Atlantis. Some of them went towards the shores of what is now called central america, while others went to the east, and landed in what is now Egypt & the middle east (mesopotamia). To keep the history of what happened alive they told the story from generation to generation, until it finally was written down by Plato.

Then there's this character named Noa. Well, ANY biologist will tell you, that having 1 male and 1 female of a certain species, means a 100% chance of extinction. You need at leat a couple thousand for a species to have it survive. So that is again, just a *story*..  doesn't mean it never happened: maybe there was a lunitic who thought he could 'save the world' by doing this, but if there was, he wasn't the one that saved the world around us.

There are other examples of bible stories that archeologists have found real, scientific proof for. These things can all be carbon-dated. The dating isn't exact but it does give an aproximate dating, precise enough to know when it all happened.



>btw: you may have noticed i'm practically an atheist.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2005, 02:08:00 PM by Eddy-B »
[size=8]Rule #1:  Eddy is always right
Rule #2: If you think he's wrong, see rule #1[/size]
--------------------

Outpost : Renegades - Eddy-B.com - Electronics Pit

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2323
Evolution
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2005, 04:05:08 PM »
I dont beleive in Evolution but i do beleive in mutation.  Not like that s***ty super powers fire lighting from my ass mutations.  More like extra legs and such.  perhaps that is all evolution is.  Nothing more then a mutation that was influanced by a environmental change or lifestyle or even nessesity.

Oh yes i dont think relion should be brought into this.  If it goes againist your religon then dont say any thing because you know its going to start a fight lol.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2005, 04:06:27 PM by Freeza-CII »

Offline Hooman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4078
Evolution
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2005, 04:59:40 PM »
Well, first of all I don't consider Evolution and the Big Bang to be the same thing. I'd only consider evolution valid once life has started, and whether you go by the bible, or the big bang, the world was created before the people on it. I think belief in evolution doesn't exclude a belief in the big bang, or vice versa, but what you seem to be claiming is that if one is false, the other must also be false. I don't buy that at all.

Secondly, I'm really sick of this carbon dating double standard. If you're going to argue about it, then pick a side and stick with it already. If carbon dating isn't acurate, then people who tried to age things based on it could potentially be quite wrong and the earth might not have the length of history they've expected. Fine, I can accept that. But then to go saying that evolution is wrong because the aging people have determined based on carbon dating doesn't match your other methods of aging.... Well you just said carbon dating isn't accurate! Of course you can expect some discrepancy!

I think that all goes back to what you consider evolution. It seems like you're taking the stance that the whole story of the creation and history of the earth is all lumped together with this idea that living things can evolve. I'd say the possible history and creation of the earth, and the possibility of living things evolving are two seperate things. Even if you were to convice me that God created everything, that doesn't necessarily convince me that the idea I have of evolution is wrong. I think we need to be clear on this if we're to have a meaningful debate.


As for the Bible being the most referenced book for the constitution. I don't see why it shouldn't be. What are laws anyways? It's essentially just an enforced moral code. The Bible is full of morals, and it was a common set of morals that many people lived by. Why not draw from there?

And as you keep mentioning that evolution is taken on faith.... Well, what about what you believe in? I'd certainly consider that as faith. If taking something on faith is so wrong, then you shouldn't believe what you do and we shouldn't be having this debate. And if you can accept believing things on faith, then stop pointing it out like it's so bad. Besides, I will say again, I don't believe evolution is taken purely on faith. I think to many people it provides a fairly reasoned argument as to why things are a certain way. I'm not saying none of the reasoning people put forth for evolution is flawed, but by and large it seems to make some sort of coherent sense. Also, if you'd like, I'll allow that you accept creationism on more than just faith. But that doesn't mean I agree with your reasoning.


Hmm, maybe we should start a new debate on whether the Big Bang started it all, or if God started it all.  :blink:


Edit: Btw, I like Hacker's reason for rejecting evolution. That's certainly an interesting point. I'm tempted to go further into that at a later time.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2005, 05:03:36 PM by Hooman »

Offline spirit1flyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
Evolution
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2005, 05:02:56 PM »
Quote
I dont beleive in Evolution but i do beleive in mutation. Not like that s***ty super powers fire lighting from my ass mutations. More like extra legs and such. perhaps that is all evolution is. Nothing more then a mutation that was influanced by a environmental change or lifestyle or even nessesity.

thats been tested with flys, They can get the flys to be born with extra legs. but they can never seem to be able to use the legs

and what about the human body? if Evolution is true how did it make our toes the way they are? if they were half an inch shorter it would destory man's ablity to balance. or how did a horse get 4 frogs? without them the horse would die "frogs are on a horse's feet they are small pumps"
 
« Last Edit: October 10, 2005, 05:09:18 PM by spirit1flyer »
"Until you stalk and overrun You can't devour anyone"


Loyal Xfir supporter

Offline OP2Patriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2228
Evolution
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2005, 05:29:52 PM »
Quote
At this point, i have only 1 thing to say: isn't it kinda naive to think we are the center of the universe ? "God created man as an image of himself" ? There are billions upon billions of stars, most of them having at least a couple of planets (that HAS been proven by NASA and others) and some of them that are in the star's life-zone. It would be selfish to think we are the only one that has life.
The heavens were made to show the majesty of God's power and might. You cannot proove that there is life on other planets. Life on other planets could very well put a dent in the evidences for Creation.

Quote
You may have noticed scientists & archeologists have found proof for some of the bible's "stories" (coz thats what they are : STORIES).
A great flood happened just before the last iceage started some 12500 years ago. The people that lived on the planet at that time KNEW what was going to happen, coz it had happened before, and they could read the stars, and knew about some laws of physics, as well as advanced mathematics. They could really predict when it would happen.
How do you know it was that long ago?

Quote
There are other examples of bible stories that archeologists have found real, scientific proof for. These things can all be carbon-dated. The dating isn't exact but it does give an aproximate dating, precise enough to know when it all happened.
Even if dating was as approximate as you say, you cannot date anything by carbon dating because you must assume that the amount of C14 in the atmosphere today is what it has always been. That is quite an assumption.

Quote
And as you keep mentioning that evolution is taken on faith.... Well, what about what you believe in? I'd certainly consider that as faith. If taking something on faith is so wrong, then you shouldn't believe what you do and we shouldn't be having this debate.

The reason I stress that evolution is a faith is because too many people take it to be pure science fact, and that the Evolution vs Creation is science vs religion. It is in fact one belief vs another. When everyone in this thread will accept that I will not stress it as much.

 



The Forbidden Outpost 2 Forum ... they don't want you to know about it.
Yell if the above link disappears.

Offline spirit1flyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
Evolution
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2005, 05:47:57 PM »
Quote
The heavens were made to show the majesty of God's power and might. You cannot proove that there is life on other planets. Life on other planets could very well put a dent in the evidences for Creation.

why? GOD has not told us everything He knows. There could be life on another planet and we just don't need to know.

Quote
how do you know it was that long ago?

he does not know but that is his theory

Quote
The reason I stress that evolution is a faith is because too many people take it to be pure science fact, and that the Evolution vs Creation is science vs religion. It is in fact one belief vs another. When everyone in this thread will accept that I will not stress it as much.

I agree with you on that point completely

spirit
« Last Edit: October 10, 2005, 05:49:18 PM by spirit1flyer »
"Until you stalk and overrun You can't devour anyone"


Loyal Xfir supporter