Darwinism explained, especially for the Christian GLP'er

Carl Sagan on Religion



Last Edited by HannibalTheCannibal on 05/20/2009 04:05 PM

pffft. if evolution is true why are there still monkeys!









/joking joking

Yeah, lol, if men evolved from monkeys why are monkeys still around?

And what about the EYE, its too complicated god must have done it.

Lets hijack this thread!



:skullbone: :skullbone: :skullbone: :skullbone: :skullbone:

Hijack it all you want, all i want you to do is watch that video, and understand at least 10% of it.

You are really a shill OP.

I battle with this each and every day. I like the thread OP. I am a christian but not a closed minded one. I think both theories are wrong (just my opinion though).

I truly have started to think that NOBODY gets out alive. The cycles of the earth are part of the cleansing of mankind. Somewhere out in the universe we have some type of creator.

The complex dna was created through some master or creator. Both of these theories are wrong to me but an amalgamation of both makes more sense to me. If I make any sense at all...lol.

What kind of accident might it be that from the dawn of being to the present has guided the infinite interactions of all things, in so wondrous, precise and orderly a fashion?

Chaos theory. With enough time anything within the laws of physics is possible.

There are 400 billion stars in just our galaxy.

The chemicals only have to be in the right physical conditions to allow hydrophobic chemicals to form in water.

There you have the first primitive cell membrane.

Evolution was a 4 billion year process so they say, there is even the possibility of panspermia, it may have taken 4 billion years on earth from simple single cells, it may have taken another 4 billion years somewhere else.

Last Edited by HannibalTheCannibal on 05/20/2009 04:42 PM

HTC....

Just a question out of curiosity...

how do you reckon things go from disorder to order with so much evidence that the opposite is the case? Everything under the sun is in a state of deterioration and eventual death.

I think i would ask myself what is disorder or order?

Humanity has a very time specific philosphical viewpoint sometimes, only the tangible is relevent for most people. If they dont understand they simply right it off as supernatural.

Even in disorder there is the order of the quantum world, the orbits of electrons the behaviour of the four forces.

An explosion to a person looks like chaos, but its really a very ordered reaction on an atomic and subatomic level.

According to astronomical observations, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 25 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.

Darwin's THEORY, k thx bye.

To believe in evolution is like finding domino pieces miles apart and assuming they must have all been connected at one time though there are litterally MILLIONS of pieces missing inbetween.

It's a leap at best.

Henduism at it's best.


Evolution explained to the masses of evolutards:

Im no astrophysicist, but thats something i will look into.

Im actually interested in building my own budget amateur radio telescope.

Last Edited by HannibalTheCannibal on 05/20/2009 05:11 PM

What is with all these guys attacking Christ or GOD lately, I don't believe in Islam but i never feel compelled to post hate threads or even think about it really. There OPs are deeply troubled about something related to their lack of relationship with Christ, I'm amazed at the effort they go through to rant about someone else being wrong, why do they even care :)

Did you guys watch the video? Yeah didnt think so.

Show me where in this thread i have attacked god?

I poked fun at the EYE arguement sarcastically, thats it.

Im just trying to help Christians understand evolution properly, there is too much misunderstanding and misinformation on GLP about it.

I felt it was about time christians here understood it better.

As soon as somebody says something bad about christianity or something false, 100s of posters come to its aid, why cant a scientist do the same for a theory he puts a lot of scope in?

Im just trying to show people they are misinformed and have misunderstood darwin, natural selection and evolution.

Last Edited by HannibalTheCannibal on 05/20/2009 05:11 PM

I have studied and pondered on the Second Law of Thermodynamics. My conclusion is that this process produces a breakdown of complexity in the open system. It would seem that the evolutionist would strongly disagree with that conclusion. Science supports both possibilities. This is one of the points by which many evolutionists and creationists part ways.

As far as time.....I do not believe that "time" exists as we know it outside of this finite state we currently find ourselves in. Whilst some may write off the incomprehensible and dismiss exploration of this mind-boggling concept, I (personally) am quite intrigued by this mystery.

I know we could splice hairs here re: Quantum Physics, Electrons, etc.

But sometimes what I can plainly see with my eyes is the most powerful evidence. And, I believe two people can look at the exact same thing and reach differing conclusions. It is this fact that motivated my question to you.

To the OP:

I appreciate your own appreciation for science and the scientific method. However, what you and most other evolutionists fail to see at the very ouset is that without order, structure and a system of physical laws already in place, there could be no entertaining a theory of any sort, no, not so much as a roundtable sharing of ideas.

The whole premis of the creationist's argument is that God did not require any pre-existing systems to be in place before He created life.

It is logically absurd to use created systems of inquiry to negotiate the acts of a creator. yet, the evolutionist continues with his well thought out peer reviewed and empirically testable (and only in some cases verifiable) rant.

By the way, I'm no scientist but I am an engineer and if it takes someone of my rank or higher to believe in a simple gospel message that even a fool can not ere with, then, please, amass your wealth of oxymoronic musings in an impeccable catalogue of pristine logic.

Just remember where your wealth comes from.

A Theory, when advanced by a competent scientist, is an elaborate and detailed attempt to account for a series of otherwise disconnected and appearently unrelated observations. It is based on numerous observations, close reasoning, and, where appropriate, careful mathematical deduction. To be successful, a theory must be confirmed by other scientists through numerous additional observations and tests and, where this is possible, must offer predictions that can be tested and confirmed. The Theory can be, and is, refined and improved as more and better observations are made.

What is a Theory not? It is not "a guess". - Isaac Asimov

Nice vids, OP, but many GLP members have questioned the theory of evolution, in their own inimitable manner:


WTF, Dude?!?! Like, we all lived in the sea?!?!? And then we became, like, these stoopid, smelly MONKEYS?!?!?
GTF outta here!1!!

Actually, I believe new science is actually morphing the two [creationism and evolution] regarding the universe, or "multiverse" as it's now called.

When LISA goes up, we will know. 2011 :)

The Crab Nebulae is 6,500 LY away and blew up (the nova was observed by Chinese astronomers) 900 years before that. So that event was seven and a half thousand years ago. Kind of hard to reconcile with a 6,000 year old Universe, isn't it?

Kepler's Supernovae, SN-1604, was observed by Johannes Kepler (yes, that Kepler) in 1604. It is 20,000 LY distant.

Keep bringing those supernovae remnants up, chuckles; they all point to an older Earth than your Biblical pseudo-history.

The speed of light is not constant. Obviously the speed of light can't be used to date the universe or there would be more supernova remnants.

Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.

It's worth it for the amusement value. The supernova claim shows up in a couple of lists issuing from the usual Creationist think tanks. The most familiar one is from Humphries (it appears in a couple of different forms).

Humphries' little list also has galaxies that wind up, the Earth's magnetic field as steadily decaying from some original value (he doesn't believe in magnetic pole reversals), and various other absurdities.

It is also amusing to note that Humphries list does NOT point towards a single act of creation 6,000 years ago. They fail, in fact, to converge on any particular date (although they all end up younger than around one billion years), and his description of the original state of the universe is, well, peculiar indeed. Almost Velikovskian, in fact.

I'm pretty sure the Disco Toot puts up with him because even a wacko scientist that disagrees with them is better than having no scientists at all to help them with their attacks on mainstream science.

And when did the speed of light drop to it's current value, then? And how old are the remnants we do see? Are you going to assume that since the speed of light can vary, gas shooting across interstellar space can chose to exceed it?

Think about this; we can see a nebula that's been shooting out from the original supernovae for 20,000 years. We can measure the current velocity of that gas via Doppler shift. So, what, was the gas traveling faster than light for the first thousand years, just so it could get to where we see it now?

Speed of light also does damned all for intrinsic brightness, or the cycle of wolf-rayet stars, or the mass/spectrum/luminosity relationship of main sequence stars.

And speed of light also can't save you from parallax. Admittedly, that only gets us 100 LY or so these days, but that's good enough to show the other parts of the stellar distance scale are working right.



But let's look at that speed of light change again. If the speed of light were changing at a steady rate, we'd observe it now. We measure it FAR too finely to miss a gross change. And with anything less than a gross change, it ain't gonna compact 20,000 years of light into 6,000 years.

Oh, and there's another little problem. Put a star 6,000 LY away. The light it emitted 6,000 years is shining on us now. Now speed up light in the past, so the light it emitted 9,000 years ago is ALSO shining on us? You see the problem, perhaps? The star is now TWICE AS BRIGHT!



Humphries, for all his faults, is a lot smarter than that. (He did make a bunch of unfounded assumptions, then looked at the wrong part of an old catalog, but one can't blame him for stopping at what supported what he wanted to believe and not looking more closely at his math or his sources. Oh, wait. He has a degree and purports to be a scientist. One CAN.)

I have no explanation as to how the first lifeforms came about, chemically i can see how hydrophobic chemicals may have formed the first primitive cell membranes and protected other chemicals inside, which then gave rise to complicated molecules forming inside a slightly protective shell.

However evolution is something i can see, genetics is proven, evolution by natural selection just a theory but its the best and most logical theory, looking around at the selective breeding of animals and plants by humans proves it is possible, its not so hard to belive that the harsh nature of mother earth forced survival of the fittest on lifeforms which over time = evolution.

Darwinism speaks for itself, the hard part to grasp is how the first simple lifeforms came to be.

Thank you for the information.

Like i said earliar in the thread, building my own radio telescope is something i wish to do at a later date.

I did throw a 1meter dish out a while back, should have kept it.

Would have been nice to listen to the sounds of the stars.