Escape Artists
The Lounge at the End of the Universe => Gallimaufry => Topic started by: Russell Nash on September 18, 2007, 05:07:27 PM
-
Evolution says Traits evolve over time with usefel traits continuing and nonuseful traits dissappearing. Intelligent Design says all traits were created by some greater intelligent force.
-
Oy?
-
err no none of the above hu?
-
I was going to say, "Yes."
Hey, when are we getting our pick a fight with Russell Nash thread? ;D
-
I was going to say, "Yes."
Hey, when are we getting our pick a fight with Russell Nash thread? ;D
The two are mutually exclusive. There is no yes or both. One says it's natural and the other says it's controled by an outside force.
You start the thread and I'll show up.
-
I this a scientific poll?
;)
-
are you shure?
-
err no none of the above hu?
Since the poll was new, I added it just for you. Changing the poll wipes the results, so I won't be doing it again.
-
I this a scientific poll?
;)
This poll will tell us exactly what the people who vote want to tell us. Precisely.
-
I was going to say, "Yes."
Hey, when are we getting our pick a fight with Russell Nash thread? ;D
The two are mutually exclusive. There is no yes or both. One says it's natural and the other says it's controled by an outside force.
You start the thread and I'll show up.
But if I believe God used evolution to create stuff, why wouldn't it be natural?
-
thanks
your a hoopy frood
-
Hey, when are we getting our pick a fight with Russell Nash thread? ;D
Why do we need a new thread? We already have so many threads that constantly bring up topics that have been done to the point of nausea and slow death just for the sake of arguing with those naive, silly, religious simpletons.
Russell, we got the point months ago that evolution is your hot topic--that the thought of anyone beliving in God makes you shudder. Can't we evolve away from this discussion?
I'm sorry for the agression and for making it personal. You can pull this post if you want. I am am just so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so tired of this whole debate. I know I should just avoid threads such as this one, but it creeps into nearly every thread that I read. I want to be part of this community, but honestly, keeping up with the forums has led to a decline of my enjoyment of Escpae Pod stories. It's most likely just my problem; and I need a break.
-
Well, my idea was more of a ridiculous fun thread, like zombies and time-travel, not a serious one. It's posted here: http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1069.msg15646;boardseen#new (http://forum.escapeartists.info/index.php?topic=1069.msg15646;boardseen#new)
-
Hey, when are we getting our pick a fight with Russell Nash thread? ;D
Russell, we got the point months ago that evolution is your hot topic--that the thought of anyone beliving in God makes you shudder. Can't we evolve away from this discussion?
Look back. I said I wouldn't argue the Evolution/ID thing again and I haven't. Since it does come up often, I thought we'd find out what the Forums thought and maybe it could rest. Also I have no problem with religion. My problem is with religious people telling me I have to believe in their personal version of a god. Their attacks on hard science are enough to make me puke. There is no great scientist conspiracy against religion.
-
None of the above?!?
Is there a third way?
-
None of the above?!?
Is there a third way?
I thought after the poll was over we'd ask for clarification on that exact point.
-
...those naive, silly, religious simpletons.
He he! That makes me giggle. :D
-
None of the above?!?
Is there a third way?
I thought after the poll was over we'd ask for clarification on that exact point.
Ah, so I should vote for #3...
-
I wasn't at first sure which to vote for, because I do believe that adaptation occurs, resulting in greater biodiversity over time. I don't think that every aspect of our current biodiversity is due to direct Divine intervention.
But I think the ability to adapt is a designed feature, so that got rid of my conflict.
-
There is no great scientist conspiracy against religion.
LOL :D Okay, you made me laugh. Scientist conspiracy--that's pretty good.
I knew I'd regret posting before waiting a bit, and I do. I am sorry for making it personal. Seeing "Evolution or ID" as a new thread title just got me riled. Now I've stepped away from the computer for a bit, had some lunch...I'm better now. And I'm not adverse to discussing religion or science; I love both. But the combative, dissmissive debates just grate on me.
It seems to me you have had bad experiences with religous people. And thinking about it, I guess I too have had people "telling me I have to believe in their personal version of a god" because my beliefs varied from theirs. To me, my faith in God is very personal, and I tire of people dismissing it.
Back on topic, as far as evolution, I believe that many things have been observed and proven scientifically. However, when that information is extrapolated beyong the scope of observable science, and a limited viewpoint is used to explain the beginning of existence, it becomes little more than a guess based upon what scientists are able to observe right now. I have a hard time swallowing that all life began as an accidental combination of molecules.
I was very impressed by the Bohr quote Steve used in the outro: "...the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." Science is always learning, always changing, evolving if you will; new theories arise as different things are discovered and observed. It is not perfect truth. Scientists do the best they can with what they've got and they speculate based upon that knowledge. But it is arrogance to assume that we have it all figured out and that we even possess the knowlegde and ability to figure it out for ourselves. I think humility is required for the true pursuit of knowledge.
To be fair, I also feel that it is arrogant to assumre that one can gain a perfect truth by study of the Bible alone. If we can combine and balance the spiritual power that comes from prayer and scripture study with the intellectual power that comes from the pursuit of science, all the while remaining humble, we could come much closer to determining the ultimate truth.
-
My opinion is Fundamentalists suck, whether they are religious fundies, or Atheist fundies. Fundies refuse to budge, or accept their opinion is not the only OPINION. Personally I think there can be an acceptance of both beliefs to some extent. Being a born again pagan, I have to go with Midgard was created. However nowhere in that mythology does it go into to detail on where all the animals came from that I can recall. Midgard sprang from Ymir's eyelashes.
-
Look back. I said I wouldn't argue the Evolution/ID thing again and I haven't. Since it does come up often, I thought we'd find out what the Forums thought and maybe it could rest.
As a general rule, the idea of One Final Thread to conclusively finish a discussion doesn't work. Some discussions never conclude. This is one of them.
And, I love you all, but this is also one of those examples where knowing what some participants on a forum think isn't going to make any difference on what anyone else thinks. You're not going to change Mr. Tweedy's or FNH's mind. They're not going to change yours. If the discussion's getting old for anyone, just stop participating. The world and the people in it aren't going to be any different no matter what happens here.
-
DING!!!!
WE HAVE A WINNER!
give that man a prise
-
Did the zombies evolve or were they created by some sort of intelligence?
If they are the result of a virus, did that evolve or was it created? If it was created by humans does that imply ID for zombies?
What about the zombies?
For the love of God, will someone please think of the zombies?!
-
Did the zombies evolve or were they created by some sort of intelligence?
If they are the result of a virus, did that evolve or was it created? If it was created by humans does that imply ID for zombies?
What about the zombies?
For the love of God, will someone please think of the zombies?!
I'm pretty sure Zombies are the result of either ID (Intelligent Design) or UD (intentional Disaster).
-
Did the zombies evolve or were they created by some sort of intelligence?
If they are the result of a virus, did that evolve or was it created? If it was created by humans does that imply ID for zombies?
What about the zombies?
For the love of God, will someone please think of the zombies?!
I'm pretty sure Zombies are the result of either ID (Intelligent Design) or UD (intentional Disaster).
On this one my vote would be UD. I'm sure the hunger for brains was caused by researchers trying to instill a hunger for knowledge. The zombies are just trying to be a little too direct.
-
hoopy frood
Nice. ;)
-
Did the zombies evolve or were they created by some sort of intelligence?
If they are the result of a virus, did that evolve or was it created? If it was created by humans does that imply ID for zombies?
What about the zombies?
For the love of God, will someone please think of the zombies?!
I'm pretty sure Zombies are the result of either ID (Intelligent Design) or UD (intentional Disaster).
On this one my vote would be UD. I'm sure the hunger for brains was caused by researchers trying to instill a hunger for knowledge. The zombies are just trying to be a little too direct.
i think this might make a great short story. AFTER the zombie apocalypse, when everyone is a zombie, they try to reason who made them, and end up with some crazy religion. it would be funny no?
all hail the great t-virus!
"And Steve did slay the great Alice with his mighty jaw, and it was tasty. And her brains did staineth the floor, and she did cometh back to 'life' by the grace that is the Lord our Virus."
-
Now that the poll is over I have a question. For the five of you who voted "none of the above" what do you believe?
-
Since I would have voted "none of the above", I'll take that one.
Basically, I don't understand the point of all of the debate over it. By definition, Evolutionary THEORY is not proven. I would suggest that if we wanted to be completely rigorous about definitions, you might only really be able to call it the Hypothesis of Evolution. There are two reasons I say that: 1) too many personal reputations and preconceived notions have driven the research, and 2) there is no way to gather conclusive proof in sight.
That said, there is plenty of room for speculation. If you want to believe that God created the world, and used Evolution as a tool to do so, I don't see how anyone could rule that out... but it's not science. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, well... watch out for the pirates. I think there is room for intelligent design within the realm of science if evidence comes up that can support it. But that hasn't happened, yet.
And since most people using the term seem to think that popular support for the idea that "someone" might have caused the universe gives them the right to use Intelligent Designtm as a tool for some kind of political gain... I won't sign on with that team, either. It might be fun to speculate about it, but it shouldn't drive public education policy, especially at a time when we are so lacking in critical thinking skills as it is.
But what bothers me about all of the yelling is this: does it really matter how we got here, or what each of us believes about it? This issue is such a small part of what science is about, and yet, we've wasted how many decades arguing about it? I think everyone needs to unbend about the whole thing and work on problems that can reasonably be solved in our lifetimes.
Like how to grow a prehensile tail... I could USE one of them!
-
There is no great scientist conspiracy against religion.
LOL :D Okay, you made me laugh. Scientist conspiracy--that's pretty good.
I knew I'd regret posting before waiting a bit, and I do. ...
Sorry if I echoed parts of this post; I must have missed it when I first scanned through the thread, looking for un-covered territory!
-
actually, im a scientist, and there is a conspiracy.
you can probably also ask Brandt, hes a scientist of Awesomeology.
he'll back me up. ask any scientist, and if they dont tell you outright, a little "persuasion" will make em say what ya want.
there's a conspiracy.
dates back to Leonardo DaVinci, in his Last Supper painting, and i'll leave it at that.
-
actually, im a scientist, and there is a conspiracy.
you can probably also ask Brandt, hes a scientist of Awesomeology.
he'll back me up. ask any scientist, and if they dont tell you outright, a little "persuasion" will make em say what ya want.
there's a conspiracy.
dates back to Leonardo DaVinci, in his Last Supper painting, and i'll leave it at that.
a little "persuasion" usually known as lots of beer or a bottle of expensive liquor. I swear almost all of my scientist professors and TA's were bribeable with alcohol. Especially in the Chemistry department. My one organic chem TA used to talk about how one of the bars in the area had to call him a cab almost every Friday night. It's another reason why engineers have that "engineer shape"