Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

Discussion in 'Religion, Beliefs and Spirituality' started by Alter2Ego, May 27, 2018.

  1. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age we still have people believing some Sky fairy is responsible for our existence.

    People are so easily led.
     
  2. The word god is used by the many many phony religions too.
    Find new species? Because we missed to find them so far?
    Lack of species? Species die out with or even without human assistance.

    You are saying that evolution theory is not proven right and also that its not proven wrong.
    As is see if something has no prove that thing has no prove.
    It's also going against logic.An elephant related to an apple tree, i don't buy it.
    We can make the dogs big or small, ugly, fast, fat, even hairless but making another species?

    Sorry, a do most of my reading in my native language which is hungarian but i am sure if you really want something to find, you will.
    Mi a baj az evolúcióval? (javítva)

    Maybe our logic doesn't functioning the same way, i don't know. But i don't like believing things i like to know them.
     
  3. So if i understand correctly you saying that earth is an amusement park for humans created by accident?
     
  4. So, we can't say that couldn't be the case. I'm not saying this ironically either, it may literally be a Sky Fairy that is the creator of all of this.

    When we talk about existence, this, all of this, not just me and you, the people in our states, or in our hemisphere, this solar system, so on and so forth; all of it.

    Whether it be a universe or one of many, we can not pretend any of it makes sense.

    It could be chance and dice rolls, which I believe it to be, but it could also be "turtles all the way down". Now, we could say with some confidence, all of this isn't the creation of a spaghetti monster or sky fairy, and turtles holding up the world and themselves. But, again, none of it makes sense when you get to that origin and creation part of the question.

    Of course there are all sorts of things we don't know yet, and may never know of, but, for now, we can assume either something came from nothing, or something always was. This can be with or without a conscious force.

    Tell me how what I, and presumably you believe, makes more sense than a conscious creator? Now, I'm not talking religious teachings and doctrines being seen as absolute truth, that's a baffling idea to me.

    But, the idea of a creator in and of itself, whether they be active or passive in their creation, is no more absurd than chance and time.
     
  5. Big bang baby!

    Do you believe in fairies?
     
  6. I don't but obviously you do.
    So the whole universe was a point than became the universe? And before it was a point? Seems more like a fairy tale to me.
     
  7. The creator story is pedaled by the religious to reinforce their own beliefs imo. As has been pointed out earlier in the thread we don't know how it all began but to try to assert it must have been a creator is bizzaro.

    It's similar to the nonsense pedaled by evangelical Christian types who claim that the world is only a couple of thousand years old, this is spewed to try and give more credence to the "Bible" and other odd beliefs.

    That all said, as we both know I can't prove there wasn't a creator and you can't prove there was. It's a roundabout with no exit we're on. :)
     
  8. No to fairies. I'd put my faith in science, as we know scientists deal with facts rather than religious fairytales.

    Big Bang - Wikipedia
     
  9. Y
    You like to believe, i don't, i like to know things.
    BB is a theory. Like scientist were never wrong in history, right?

    I also see the phoniness in all the main stream religions too.
     
  10. If you were placing a bet on it would you back scientists or pseudo religious "scientists"?

    I'd put my money on science.
     
  11. Sure, i just hope your free will isn't influenced to hold you in check.
     
  12. Are you asking if we've found new species? Yes, we do all the time.

    Yes, most life that has ever been is dead, I'm going to use this fact to make a point shortly.

    I am saying theory and fact in science are not the same as when we speak about these things as laymen. A fact in science is simply the best supported and interpreted data we have available at any given time. That fact can and does lose that status when better data is provided. Sometimes, we learn more things about a subject and that fact, or theory, is modified, but not disproved.

    Of course we are very new to this, and scientist are just people, and people have ego's which can easily makes things get blurry, but, that's the core idea.

    So yes, when we talk about proof in this sense, as far as we know, or at least I know, this theory is the one with the most supportable observations. But, that doesn't mean it's some sort of dogmatic fact, only the best idea based on the observable evidence we have and know of so far.

    When people speak in absolutes of these concepts, it's hubris, that's it.

    We all do this, but, that's what it is.

    I've posted my reasons to OP as to why I belive this over anything else I've been exposed of, even though there are flaws, which, considering we're figuring all this out as we go, I'd be weary of anything that had none, this idea makes the most sense to me, at least at it's core.

    I'm under the assumption, because of some of what you've said and the blog, that you are Christian. This does not track with your statement that if something has no proof, then it's wrong (assuming that's what you meant). Religious origins are far less supported and more easily to counter than evolution, or at the last, rely's on some very convenient ideas that have no true support.

    However, a conscious creator, at it's core, is not something that can be logically concluded as false. That could very well be true, and, that could even work with the idea of evolution.

    But, if religious text is the basis of truth, that truth is far more fallible than evolution.

    Also, if that tree and that elephent didn't share the same building blocks, I'd dismiss the idea too.

    It is a logical conclusion though, when everything shares the same building blocks, there's some common source.

    Also, you can not use the idea of making a new species as proof, we could genetically alter a species and create a new one, but that would not be proof of evolution, simply technological advancements.

    Also, we can not say, with millions of years of breeding, we couldn't make that dog another species. We do not know enough to make that claim.

    I'm cool with you sourcing articles in Hungarian, that's cool you know two languages.

    I have stated my reasons why I side with the idea of evolution (maybe not the scientifically specific definition, but the core idea) over other's I've heard of.

    Could you state what you believe and what supports your beliefe.

    It's easy to attack an idea, but that's nothing if you do not present a counter that is better supported.

    I used the browsers translator for the article you posted, it wasn't perfect, but I think I got the main points.

    Links were 404'd, also it seems a lot of things rely on the idea that we are competent enough to fully understand these things and I did not find a better supported alternative idea of origin presented.

    To bring back what I mentioned early. I am very surprised our species has lasted as long as it has. I find it hard to believe that if we started when all of this started, we would have some how survived this long. If this were the case, why is there such a massive time gap between our beginning and written language, culture's, etc.,etc.?

    A few hundred thousand year gap isn't that absurd to me, a 3.6 billion year gap, even if the numbers were crazy off, we're talking many, many dozens of millions of years, is insane to believe. Humans like to leave evidence, I feel like there would be much more evidence of our existence if this where the case. But we're lucky to find a fossil 200,000+ years of a human let alone advanced cultures older than something like 11,000 years.
     
  13. I am not a Christian.
    I found phoniness, lies or misguidances in all major religions so far.
    They mostly based on the fear of death, so they promise humans a prize after death if they follow them and their rules and give them money. It's a well working business. They also give an explanation on how our world was created.
    I can not imagine different truths, there can only be one.
     
  14. I assumed based on the religious themes I got from the blog, at least, from the translation of the blog. Are you saying there is only one truth as a truth you know? This is what was also leading me to believe you were Christian.

    Many people use the term one truth and variations in allusions to religion. I am not sure how you are using this idea.

    Are you claiming any idea of human origin and existence itself, I suppose is what I am asking.
     
  15. I don't know, i can't know for a fact i was not there, but yes for me life on earth, earth itself looks like created by something other than coincidence.
     
  16. I got you, and I can concede the point that I can't know either, but, though it may feel like there would surely be a creator to me, there is nothing that makes that make sense to me. Chance makes more sense to me than a creator.
     
  17. I know that feeling i had it for 3 decades than i had a near death experience( i learned way later that that was the start), questions came up and i found answers too so at 30 years old i had to admit that my life was mostly based on lies, what i've believed to be facts turn out not to be facts but thing to misguide.
    That was not a nice experience to say at least.

    As i see Earth is our home, we should act like we know it.
    Until mankind doesn't unite as one to get rid of the bloodsuckers (also existing in human form) and regain its freedom we can't advance.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Azzanadra:

    Nothing considered FACT is identified with the word "THEORY." Clearly, you don't know the difference between FACT and THEORY.

    Definition of "FACT" according to Webster's Dictionary
    1 a : something that has actual existence
    • space exploration is now a fact
    b : an actual occurrence
    • prove the fact of damage
    Definition of FACT


    Definition of "THEORY" according to Oxford Dictionary
    NOUN
    • 1A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

      ‘Darwin's theory of evolution’
    theory | Definition of theory in English by Oxford Dictionaries


    Notice the definitions above from two different dictionaries. A "fact" is something that actually exists. A theory is a "system of ideas."


    Alter2Ego
    ________________

    "That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." ~ Psalms 83:18
     
  19. #99 Alter2Ego, Aug 12, 2018
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2018
    IDTENT:
    You are repeating yourself aka stalling, while failing to present a single example of what you claim is "enormous amount of evidence in support of evolution."

    Alter2Ego
     
  20. Life on this planet millions of years ago.
    The earth rotating at the same speed for millions of years seems impossible to me ..
    The moon getting farther away from earth every year … at the rate of 1.5 inches every year on average .

    Do the math ,, 1.5 inches times 250 millions of years ago when dino roamed the face of the earth .
    The world would been getting flooded 4 times a day from the moons gravity .

    If you want to know how life was possible on earth, really is you have to ask yourself certain questions like .

    Is what the chances of earth rotation slowing down over the last 2.5 millions of years ago when scientist say life began more then 2.5 millions of years ago .
    The moon gravity is creating hi tides and slowing the earths rotation down right now .
    The moon is slowing the earths rotation down now , how could it not be slowing down the earth rotation down 250 million years ago when the moons orbit was way closer ?

    How close was the moon 2.5 millions of years ago ?
    Scientist say earth was formed billions of years ago , but on average the sun is getting smaller by 5 ft per day
    So how close and hot was the sun to earth 14.7 billion years ago ?

    If life existed 250 millions years ago , then we would have a few things that would be millions of years old .
    The oldest single living tree is 4500 to 5000 thousand years old .
    Oldest desert ( Sahara ) is growing every year. but its growth doesn't support earth being millions of years old .
    Actually it support the deserts age as being less the ten thousand years old .

    250 millions years ago Dinosaur died off .
    What is weird is all the Dinosaurs bones being dug up all have soft tissue ?
    If I died in the desert 5000 years ago , just laying there year after year my body wouldn't have soft .
    Certain micro bugs would have chowed down on all my soft tissue after a certain amount of time .
    But do have 250 million years old bones with soft tissue defies common sense .
    Its not just a few dinosaurs bone , its all of them have soft tissue in them or attached .

    Waco Texas , mans foo print inside Dinosaurs foot prints , man was chasing or hunting the dinosaur dated at 5000 thousand years ago .
     

Share This Page