God vs. Science

[CosmoLTW]

Don't take it out of context from some other person cynically trying to prove everything that someone else believes as wrong. Here I'll make it easy for you:

1 “Can you draw out Leviathan with a fishhook? Or press down his tongue with a cord?
2 “Can you put a rope in his nose Or pierce his jaw with a hook?
3 “Will he make many supplications to you, Or will he speak to you soft words?
4 “Will he make a covenant with you? Will you take him for a servant forever?
5 “Will you play with him as with a bird, Or will you bind him for your maidens?
6 “Will the traders bargain over him? Will they divide him among the merchants?
7 “Can you fill his skin with harpoons, Or his head with fishing spears?
8 “Lay your hand on him; Remember the battle; you will not do it again!
9 “Behold, your expectation is false; Will you be laid low even at the sight of him?
10 “No one is so fierce that he dares to arouse him; Who then is he that can stand before Me?
11 “Who has given to Me that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is Mine.
12 “I will not keep silence concerning his limbs, Or his mighty strength, or his orderly frame.
13 “Who can strip off his outer armor? Who can come within his double mail?
14 “Who can open the doors of his face? Around his teeth there is terror.
15 “His strong scales are his pride, Shut up as with a tight seal.
16 “One is so near to another That no air can come between them.
17 “They are joined one to another; They clasp each other and cannot be separated.
18 “His sneezes flash forth light, And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 “Out of his mouth go burning torches; Sparks of fire leap forth.
20 “Out of his nostrils smoke goes forth As from a boiling pot and burning rushes.
21 “His breath kindles coals, And a flame goes forth from his mouth.
22 “In his neck lodges strength, And dismay leaps before him.
23 “The folds of his flesh are joined together, Firm on him and immovable.
24 “His heart is as hard as a stone, Even as hard as a lower millstone.
25 “When he raises himself up, the mighty fear; Because of the crashing they are bewildered.
26 “The sword that reaches him cannot avail, Nor the spear, the dart or the javelin.
27 “He regards iron as straw, Bronze as rotten wood.
28 “The arrow cannot make him flee; Slingstones are turned into stubble for him.
29 “Clubs are regarded as stubble; He laughs at the rattling of the javelin.
30 “His underparts are like sharp potsherds; He spreads out like a threshing sledge on the mire.
31 “He makes the depths boil like a pot; He makes the sea like a jar of ointment.
32 “Behind him he makes a wake to shine; One would think the deep to be gray-haired.
33 “Nothing on earth is like him, One made without fear.
34 “He looks on everything that is high; He is king over all the sons of pride.”

[The12lber]

And how do any of those other theories have anything to do with what we are talking about? Look at the thread you are in dumbass.

Are you contesting any of those? Do you think any of those aren't true?

The point is you're only contesting evolution because you don't like it. Use your brain.

[CosmoLTW]

That is meant to be expressing the power of this creature in poetic form, not just to say that he breathes fire. But, if you read this, clearly it is talking about something much bigger than a crocodile. This wasn't written pre-society. You don't think they could easily capture a crocodile in these times? The point of this passage is to illustrate the strength of God in to say that man cannot control this beast, but God can.

[The12lber]

18 “His sneezes flash forth light, And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 “Out of his mouth go burning torches; Sparks of fire leap forth.
20 “Out of his nostrils smoke goes forth As from a boiling pot and burning rushes.
21 “His breath kindles coals, And a flame goes forth from his mouth.

Good job reinforcing what I said before. You really are dumb.

Aside from Leviathan breathing fire and being described in other books of Christianity as having multiple heads, therefore clearly not being a dinosaur, this is laughable.

LOOK, THIS MIGHT VAGUELY BE LIKE A DINOSAUR. IF IT IS, CLEARLY HUMANS AND DINOSAURS ONCE COEXISTED EVEN THOUGH SOME DINOSAURS ARE ****ING HUGE CARNIVORES SO YOU'D THINK THEY'D GET MENTIONED MORE THAN ONCE OR TWICE.

[CosmoLTW]

And, I am not contesting evolution. I think we are in an ever-changing world so God gave all of creation the ability to adapt, hence micro-evolution and maybe macro too to some degree. All I am trying to get across is that evolution doesn't necessarily rule God out, but people get all gung ho about it because the new fad religious belief during this time is anti-religion; the death/ nonexistence of God. The old church used to think that the universe was geocentric. Galileo proved them wrong. That has nothing to do with the core beliefs of my faith and is actually never backed up in scripture.

[The12lber]

And, I am not contesting evolution. I think we are in an ever-changing world so God gave all of creation the ability to adapt, hence micro-evolution and maybe macro too to some degree. All I am trying to get across is that evolution doesn't necessarily rule God out, but people get all gung ho about it because the new fad religious belief during this time is anti-religion; the death/ nonexistence of God. The old church used to think that the universe was geocentric. Galileo proved them wrong. That has nothing to do with the core beliefs of my faith and is actually never backed up in scripture.

No, when you read back a few pages you were definitely contesting it, you are just backing off now as your argument has become so desperate you are citing bad poetry from the Bible.

There's nothing anti-religious in any of my statements. There's hostility towards idiots who want to contest science just because it intrudes on their metaphysical comfort zone.

[CosmoLTW]

Good job reinforcing what I said before. You really are dumb.

Aside from Leviathan breathing fire and being described in other books of Christianity as having multiple heads, therefore clearly not being a dinosaur, this is laughable.

LOOK, THIS MIGHT VAGUELY BE LIKE A DINOSAUR. IF IT IS, CLEARLY HUMANS AND DINOSAURS ONCE COEXISTED EVEN THOUGH SOME DINOSAURS ARE ****ING HUGE CARNIVORES SO YOU'D THINK THEY'D GET MENTIONED MORE THAN ONCE OR TWICE.

Again, you take it completely out of context. Look at it in the way it was written. I mean, in the beginning of the passage, do you think based on what it says, God wants us to go talk to the huge dinosaur? No the whole passage is written in a sarcastic tone at first but it written to stress the power and awe of this creature. If you are familiar with the way old hebrew texts were written this wouldn't seem like such a weird passage.

[CosmoLTW]

No, when you read back a few pages you were definitely contesting it, you are just backing off now as your argument has become so desperate you are citing bad poetry from the Bible.

There's nothing anti-religious in any of my statements. There's hostility towards idiots who want to contest science just because it intrudes on their metaphysical comfort zone.

Read through my posts. I said it is not a proven fact. I did not say it doesn't exist. And you have got to be kidding when you say you have not made any anti-religious statements. Look at what you have posted and come back to me.

[CosmoLTW]

you are just backing off now as your argument has become so desperate you are citing bad poetry from the Bible.

You don't like the dinosaur argument anymore? ...Which by the way you brought up. Here, how about the flood and Noah:

In a recent article from the Washington Post, explorer Robert Ballard (discoverer of the Titanic) led a team to the Black Sea in search of evidence for Noah’s Flood. About 550 feet below the surface, they found evidence of a ‘sudden, catastrophic flood around 7,500 years ago—the possible source of the Old Testament story of Noah.’

They captured sonar images of a ‘gentle berm and a sandbar submerged undisturbed for thousands of years on the sea floor.’ Then using radiocarbon dating, they determined that the remains of the freshwater mollusks found on this submerged beach were 7,500 years old and that the saltwater species were only 6,900 years old. (By the way, radiocarbon is not reliable in giving accurate dates going back thousands of years. AiG believes that Noah’s Flood should be dated to about 4,300 years ago.)

In an interview, Ballard said, ‘What we wanted to do is prove to ourselves that it was the biblical flood.’

According to Columbia University geologists William Ryan and Walter Pitman, who had predicted where this shoreline would be found in the Black Sea, describe the flood as such: ‘The Black Sea was created when melting glaciers raised the sea level until the sea breached a natural dam at what is now the Bosporus, the strait that separates the Mediterranean Sea from the Black Sea. An apocalyptic deluge followed, inundating the freshwater lake below the dam, submerging thousands of square miles of dry land, flipping the ecosystem from fresh water to salt practically overnight, and probably killing thousands of people and billions of land and sea creatures.’

Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, replied to Ballard, Ryan, and Pitman’s claim with, ‘All modern critical Bible scholars regard the tale of Noah as legendary. There are other flood stories, but if you want to see the Black Sea flood in Noah’s flood, who’s to say no?’

We agree that they indeed have found evidence for a huge flood in the Black Sea area. But we do not support their claim that this was Noah’s Flood. You see, in order to justify their assertion, they declare that the record of Noah’s Flood in the Bible is legendary and just a myth. They say the ‘myth’ originated from a real event (their Black Sea flood), but that it has been grossly distorted and exaggerated as it was relayed by word of mouth before eventually being written down. By using the term ‘myth’ they can disregard all the details of the biblical account that do not fit their Black Sea claim.

Pitman recently spoke about this idea during an Australian lecture tour. Now in his mid 70s, Pitman has an interesting talk. He has conducted some excellent geological work in the Black Sea area. He presented good geological evidence that the Black Sea suddenly rose in level when a land barrier with the Mediterranean Sea failed, allowing water to flow in suddenly.

Unfortunately, he handles the biblical record carelessly. Noah’s Flood was not a local flood in the Black Sea area, but a world-wide flood that has left its mark on every continent on this planet.

Pitman knows that his link between the Black Sea flood and Noah’s Flood does not fit with the Bible. For example, his Black Sea flood does not have 40 days and nights of rain (He says the ‘whole event probably lasted about 40 years’), does not have a 140-meter ark as described in the Bible, does not cover the highest mountains, does not recede off the Earth etc, etc. Pitman knows it does not fit, shrugs his shoulders and when questioned about it he simply said he does not read the Bible literally. Therefore, his link with Noah’s Flood is totally arbitrary. He wants a flood, so plucks Noah’s Flood out of the air. It is a good flood to pick because it sells lots of books. Furthermore, the geologists love him. They think by saying that Noah’s Flood was a local flood then they can dismiss the implications of the real global Flood described in the Bible.

This is just another attempt to undermine the integrity of the biblical account of Noah’s Flood. However, the Bible claims to be the Word of God and ‘All scripture is given by inspiration of God,’ (2 Tim. 3:16). To say that Noah’s Flood was anything other than what Scripture says it was (i.e., a global flood) is tantamount to declaring that God is a liar. If God is lying, then we cannot trust any part of the Bible, including the Gospel message of the Cross, which means there is no hope for salvation and eternal life. The implications of Ballard’s claims are far more serious than many realize.

There is no reason to believe that Ballard’s Black Sea Flood was Noah’s Flood.

[CosmoLTW]

I saw you were talking about the Exodus earlier, so how about this:

Many people do not believe the Exodus took place. They often claim that there is no historical evidence, other than that found in the Bible. But there is evidence of the Exodus as stated by Grant Jeffrey in his book "Unveiling Mysteries of the Bible". An important Egyptian historical manuscript was discovered in Egypt more than a century ago.

Remarkably, this ancient papyrus parallels the history of the Exodus account as found in the Scriptures. This manuscript recorded the writings of an ancient Egyptian named Ipuwer. The papyrus manuscript, now called the Ipuwer Papyrus, was discovered by someone named Anastasi in the area of Memphis, near the pyramids of Saqqara in Egypt.

The museum of Leiden in the Netherlands acquired the papyrus in 1828. It was translated and published in English for the first time in 1909 by Professor Alan H. Gardiner. Gardiner wrote that the manuscript was one that recorded a genuine historical catastrophe when the whole country of Egypt was in distress and violence. "It is no merely local disturbance that is here described, but a great and overwhelming national disaster."

Gardiner suggests that Ipuwer was an Egyptian sage who directed his writing to the king as a complaint that the national catastrophe was in part caused by the king’s failure to act and deal with the crisis.

A comparison of several key passages from the Biblical Book of Exodus with the ancient Egyptian papyrus reveals remarkable correspondences and parallels that point to a real historical catastrophe.

1. The Plague of Blood
In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:5-6, it says: Plague is throughout the land. Blood is everywhere. Compare this with the Book of Exodus 7:21: There was blood throughout all the land of Egypt.

In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:10, it says: The River is Blood. Compare with Exodus 7:20: All the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.

In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:10, it says: Men shrank from tasting...and thirst for water. Compare with Exodus 7:24: And all the Egyptians digged round about the river for water to drink; for they could not drink of the water of the river.

2. The Plague of Hail
Ipuwer papyrus 9:23: The fire ran along the ground. There was hail, and fire mingled with the hail. Exodus 9:25: And the hail smote every herb on the field, and brake every tree in the field.

3. The Plague of Darkness
Ipuwer Papyrus 9:11: The land is not light. Exodus 10:22: And there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt.

4. The Plague of Egyptian Cattle
Ipuwer papyrus 5:5: All animals, their hearts weep. Cattle moan. Exodus 9:3: Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen, and upon the sheep: there shall be grievous murrain (disease).

5. The Plague of the Firstborn of Egypt
Ipuwer Papyrus 2:13: He who places his brother in the ground is everywhere. Exodus 12:27: He (the angel of the Lord) smote the Egyptians. Ipuwer Papyrus 4:3: Forsooth, the children of princes are dashed against the walls. Exodus 12:29: At midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt. Ipuwer Papyrus 6:12: Forsooth, the children of the princes are cast out in the streets, Exodus 12:30: There was not a house where there was not one dead.

6. Response of the Egyptians to the Loss of their First born
Ipuwer Papyrus 3:14: It is groaning that is throughout the land, mingled with lamentations. Exodus 12:30: There was a great cry in Egypt.

In light of the ample evidence accumulated from ancient Jewish and Greek historians, together with the Ipuwer Papyrus that parallels several of the 10 Biblical plagues, it is clear that there is compelling non-Biblical evidence to confirm the scriptural account about the Exodus of the Jews from Egypt. Further proof of the Exodus is the fact; the Jews have annually celebrated three great festivals in commemoration of their Exodus (Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles) for 3500 years. Therefore, logically, the public observance of the Exodus Passover festival can only be explained if the Jewish people actually participated in these historical events as recorded in the Torah, the first five books of the Bible.

[Maniaç]

The point of this passage is to illustrate the strength of God in to say that man cannot control this beast, but God can.

When it comes to making someone believe in something they always resort to using the word, "God." Your statement made me giggle, because I used my brain cells and came up with this conclusion. "How can something have control on something else, if that person, uses the strenght of others, to assist it." Without faith God would be nothing.

You also keep babbling about how Evolution is nothing more than a theory. Yet there is proof of it's existence. How can you not take into consideration, all the past microorganisms, who started off life cause of adaptation. I hope you don't believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old.

Your first post in this thread was directed at me, seeing as I was the one who created this thread. You say that I made this thread to argue, that I didn't have knowledge when it came to both sides of the card. I mean, who are you, to say what I have knowledge on? You obviously have the reading skills of a brain damaged baboon. I could do whatever I want here, this is a public forum after all. And if you don't like it, all you have to do is hit that red X on the upper right hand side of your screen.

[CosmoLTW]

Or how about the prophecies of Isaiah?

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/isaiah.htm

[CosmoLTW]

"How can something have control on something else, if that person, uses the strength of others, to assist it."

Where anywhere in the Bible is this said?

"You also keep babbling about how Evolution is nothing more than a theory. Yet there is proof of it's existence. How can you not take into consideration, all the past microorganisms, who started off life cause of adaptation."

Be more specific. Which microorganisms? And there is NO proof that we can see that evolution exists to the level we think it does. It moves too slow. Show me the proof of its existence. Just one thing.

[CosmoLTW]

Yes, like the Chinese belief in dragons, flying snake like creatures which breathe fire. There's actually not a whole lot of mythical creatures which are similar to dinosaurs in anything but the vaguest way.

I'm sorry, but I think if Humans and dinosaurs lived side by side they would get more than one unverifiable mention in the book of job.


.

"Similar confusion is involved in objections that evolution is "unproven";[20] strict proof is possible only in logic and mathematics, not science, so this is trivially true, and no more an indictment of evolution than calling it a "theory" is. The confusion arises, however, in that the colloquial meaning of proof is simply "compelling evidence", in which case scientists would indeed consider evolution "proven". The distinction is an important one in philosophy of science, as it relates to the lack of absolute certainty in all empirical claims, not just evolution. "

Your precious wikipedia has betrayed you

[Maniaç]

Where anywhere in the Bible is this said?

Do something other than show me that your IQ is even lower than my dogs.

Where in my post, did I say that the statement came from the bible? Read it again, einstein. I clearly said, "I" came up with this conclusion. As in, after reading your post, my brain marinated the statement you had so much trouble understanding.

Be more specific. Which microorganisms? And there is NO proof that we can see that evolution exists to the level we think it does. It moves too slow. Show me the proof of its existence. Just one thing.

Haha, dude. There is no point in trying to explain ANYTHING to you. Ancient remains, fossiles, ect etc. I mean, do you want me to show you my cat slowly evolving into a smaller version of a saber tooth tiger? You also keep saying how you don't care about this and that, yet you continue posting in here?

[CosmoLTW]

And none of those fossils prove evolution. Just because something is similar to something else doesn't mean it came from that. In 100,000 are people going to dig up a tiger and say that your cat came from that too?

[CosmoLTW]

"I came up with this conclusion."
So... if you came up with this conclusion about something you don't believe in or know anything about, then its got to be true, right? And drop the insulting remarks, little boy, I promise you I have twice the IQ you have. Just learn to express yourself a little more clearly and we'll be alright. You have yet to come up with one specific, clear rebuttal. All you have done is come back with online insults. Man, aren't you cool.

[The12lber]

"Similar confusion is involved in objections that evolution is "unproven";[20] strict proof is possible only in logic and mathematics, not science, so this is trivially true, and no more an indictment of evolution than calling it a "theory" is. The confusion arises, however, in that the colloquial meaning of proof is simply "compelling evidence", in which case scientists would indeed consider evolution "proven". The distinction is an important one in philosophy of science, as it relates to the lack of absolute certainty in all empirical claims, not just evolution. "

Your precious wikipedia has betrayed you

Actually, it basically said that all fields of science are without completely definite truth but scientists consider evolution as good as factual and are as certain as they can be. Just as certain as they can be about anything else. You know, like, the science behind the electrical engineering which created the computer you're using right now. They're not totally 100% all of that is factual. The bible says that god only created volatile storage mediums and not non volatile storage mediums like your hard drive... and that thing isn't working is it? OH WAIT, IT IS!?

You even bolded the part that illustrates this best.

IF ONLY YOU COULD UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU READ.

[The12lber]

Again, you take it completely out of context. Look at it in the way it was written. I mean, in the beginning of the passage, do you think based on what it says, God wants us to go talk to the huge dinosaur? No the whole passage is written in a sarcastic tone at first but it written to stress the power and awe of this creature. If you are familiar with the way old hebrew texts were written this wouldn't seem like such a weird passage.

I love it

THE PARTS THAT ARE CONVENIENT FOR MY ARGUMENT ARE FACT.

THE PARTS THAT ARE INCONVENIENT ARE LITERARY DEVICES.

Dude, you are painfully stupid. It is terrible. My kidney hurts reading this ****.

[Maniaç]

In 100,000 are people going to dig up a tiger and say that your cat came from that too?

Well if you reproduce then yes. Your lack of intellect will transfer to your children and their children and so on. How can you ask such ridiculous? In 100k years the tiger will most likely look very similer to how it does now, it may have some minor changes but nothing too extreme. That is, if they don't go extinct cause of some bad judgment we make.

So... if you came up with this conclusion about something you don't believe in or know anything about, then its got to be true, right?

It's nothing more than an opinion. So yea, to me it's true. LOL

And drop the insulting remarks, little boy, I promise you I have twice the IQ you have.

Im a day older than you man! If your birthday is on May 18th then yea, im older than you. And I wouldn't have to make remarks like those if you could prove to me that your shoe size isn't higher than your IQ. But take those remarks how ever you want, don't matter to me.

[hatch91]

Religion. 1 of the best topics of all time lol

[CosmoLTW]

Honestly guys, after last night I was thinking about it, and really this is just stupid. Neither one of us is going to get anywhere with the other on this topic. I dunno about y'all but I was getting too heated to where it was arguing just to be stubborn. Both of you have your opinions and beliefs and I have mine. Agree to disagree and no hard feelings and I'm sorry if I was a ****.

[man]

Honestly guys, after last night I was thinking about it, and really this is just stupid. Neither one of us is going to get anywhere with the other on this topic. I dunno about y'all but I was getting too heated to where it was arguing just to be stubborn. Both of you have your opinions and beliefs and I have mine. Agree to disagree and no hard feelings and I'm sorry if I was a ****.

The greatest minds in the universe don't have a concrete answer, why would you think a couple dumbass kids do (even though they think they do)? I think the smarter you are, the more you realize you don't know ****.

[CosmoLTW]

The greatest minds in the universe don't have a concrete answer, why would you think a couple dumbass kids do (even though they think they do)? I think the smarter you are, the more you realize you don't know ****.

You are absolutely right! Haha well said. Reps for being the smartest one in here.

[The12lber]

Honestly guys, after last night I was thinking about it, and really this is just stupid. Neither one of us is going to get anywhere with the other on this topic. I dunno about y'all but I was getting too heated to where it was arguing just to be stubborn. Both of you have your opinions and beliefs and I have mine. Agree to disagree and no hard feelings and I'm sorry if I was a ****.

You can just admit that your argument was mostly inflated by bull****.

And srsly, no hard feelings? This is the interwebs.

[CosmoLTW]

You can just admit that your argument was mostly inflated by bull****.

And srsly, no hard feelings? This is the interwebs.

No prob

[man]

And srsly, no hard feelings? This is the interwebs.

[David88vert]

You all are still going? :-)

Ok, I will not bother with the Biblical arguement, only the evolutionary discussion, if you agree.

Evolution is not a scientific fact - it is a theory. Any accredited university that teaches evolution will explain that to you. Try Berkeley, they are the most liberal of universities, and promote the teaching of evolution more than any other. They teach that it is only theory, not scientific fact.

Genetic study of DNA shows that evolution is not mathematically probable. The mathematical probability of a single cell coming about by random chance is 1/10340,000,000, the fraction 1 divided by 1 followed by 340 million zeros. That's pretty close to zero percent, wouldn't you agree?

Evolution tells us that through chance mutations and natural selection, living things evolve. Yet to evolve means to gradually change certain aspects of some living thing until it becomes another species, and this can only be done by changing the DNA.
The same basic quality of information exists in bacteria and plants as in people. The code is shorter in bacteria, but qualitatively, it gives instructions as precisely as that in a person. We find a complete, intelligently designed language (alphabet, grammar, semantics) in bacteria as in people. Show me a language that was not created by random accident. It has never happened. ALL languages were created by intelligence.
Back when Darwin published his book, life seemed simple. Viewed through the primitive microscopes of the day, the cell appeared to be but a simple blob of jelly or uncomplicated protoplasm. Now, 150 years later, that view has changed dramatically as science has discovered inside the cell a major complex DNA system.

One of the world's most famous atheists, Professor Antony Flew, admitted he couldn't explain how DNA was created and developed through evolution. Even he accepts the need for an intelligent source to have been involved in the making of the DNA code. "What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinary diverse elements together."

[Sledlude]

of course it is not 'probable'. just the right amount of events had to occur at precisely the right time. but given that the eart holds the aqueous soup that is our oceans, the chances of the alignment of the proper molecules to the right degree is made possible... think of how small one nucleic acid residue is.... compare that with the size of the oceans and the elemental particles within, and your chances of proper alignment increase significantly.

i agree that it was an amazing event that occured and odds were stacked against it, but it happened. This is why you do not have life popping up on every single planet or asteroid in the universe.... the odds are small, but there are still odds.

just a fraction of a chance is still a more scientifically sound explanation than God creating the universe in 7 days, moses parting the red sea, jesus rising from the dead, etc etc.

[soul]

of course it is not 'probable'. just the right amount of events had to occur at precisely the right time. but given that the eart holds the aqueous soup that is our oceans, the chances of the alignment of the proper molecules to the right degree is made possible... think of how small one nucleic acid residue is.... compare that with the size of the oceans and the elemental particles within, and your chances of proper alignment increase significantly.

i agree that it was an amazing event that occured and odds were stacked against it, but it happened. This is why you do not have life popping up on every single planet or asteroid in the universe.... the odds are small, but there are still odds.

just a fraction of a chance is still a more scientifically sound explanation than God creating the universe in 7 days, moses parting the red sea, jesus rising from the dead, etc etc.

yea this relates to the qoute i posted few pages back about probality of life on other plantes. and with the ocean theres possiblitly of even greater probalitly

"Assume thats theres the possiblity for life to grow and thrive on a planet is 1 in a billion, well you take that ratio apply it the universe and you still get roughly about 1billion!!!!!!!!! planets that can bear life."

apply thy to the ocean and the oprganisms, say there 8 billion dif type of cells n what not over time, possibilty for the right occurance and right matches, are exponetntial

[David88vert]

Do you 2 understand mathematics?

Probability is the chance or likelihood that a certain event will happen. Mathematical probability is usually expressed as a ratio. If it is equally likely that an event may happen in h ways and fail to happen in f ways, where h + f = n, then the probability that the event will occur may be expressed as the ratio h/n, and the probability that it will fail to occur may be expressed as the ratio f/n. The fraction that denotes the number of favorable outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will happen. The fraction that denotes the number of ways an event will fail to happen divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will fail to happen.

Let me explain it this way, scientists at Cornell estimate that there are 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the universe. That number is a 4 followed by 79 zeros.

Do you realize now that the odds are incredibly large - and that for just a single cell - not all of the cells that exist in the universe? On top of that the cell would have to live long enough to reproduce, and that would be another set of odds? It won't happen. It is as close to impossible as anything can get.

If you want to believe in evolution, realize that you are taking it completely on faith, not based on science. Physics, genetics and mathematics do more to disprove evolution than support it - at this point in time, with our current knowledge. I am not saying that you cannot believe in evolution, just understand that it is no different than religion right now. You are believing through faith in something based upon what has been told to you by other people.

[Deke]

Fuk me, I didn't read your first post correctly, and honestly I don't want to get into this on import atlanta.

Hopefully you didn't alreay quote the original

[ahabion]

jeez this thing is still going? I think I'm back at page 8 or something... oh well...

Instead of the topic being God vs Science, should be God vs Darwinism or something like that...

[The12lber]

Do you 2 understand mathematics?

Probability is the chance or likelihood that a certain event will happen. Mathematical probability is usually expressed as a ratio. If it is equally likely that an event may happen in h ways and fail to happen in f ways, where h + f = n, then the probability that the event will occur may be expressed as the ratio h/n, and the probability that it will fail to occur may be expressed as the ratio f/n. The fraction that denotes the number of favorable outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will happen. The fraction that denotes the number of ways an event will fail to happen divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will fail to happen.

Let me explain it this way, scientists at Cornell estimate that there are 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the universe. That number is a 4 followed by 79 zeros.

Do you realize now that the odds are incredibly large - and that for just a single cell - not all of the cells that exist in the universe? On top of that the cell would have to live long enough to reproduce, and that would be another set of odds? It won't happen. It is as close to impossible as anything can get.

If you want to believe in evolution, realize that you are taking it completely on faith, not based on science. Physics, genetics and mathematics do more to disprove evolution than support it - at this point in time, with our current knowledge. I am not saying that you cannot believe in evolution, just understand that it is no different than religion right now. You are believing through faith in something based upon what has been told to you by other people.

You're actually refuting natural origin and not evolution there, smart guy.

As a side note, considering the scope of the universe, your "as next to impossible as possible" odds mean nothing. The incomplete nature of science isn't proof of god, its proof of human imperfection. So take your statistics and shove them up your ass.

[David88vert]

You're actually refuting natural origin and not evolution there, smart guy.

As a side note, considering the scope of the universe, your "as next to impossible as possible" odds mean nothing. The incomplete nature of science isn't proof of god, its proof of human imperfection. So take your statistics and shove them up your ass.

Evolution is based on natural selection, smart guy.

As a side note, considering the scope of the universe, you seem incapable of putting together a single coherent scientific observation that can prove evolution through physics, genetics, or mathematics. Your "incomplete" statement is a cop-out. So take you unfounded, non-scientific opinions and keep them in your ass.

The bottom line is this - if you chose to believe in evolution, it is completely on faith, just as religion. Scientifically, the theory of evolution does not stand up to solid scientific evidence. It's just like believing that a god created this entire universe. Neither is proveable at this time. Seems to me that you are getting riled up that your "religion" is not as solid as you thought. That's ok though, you can still believe it based solely on blind faith, and no one can put up a scientific argument against that.

What I find funny about current science is its similarities to the ancient Greeks. They knew that the world was flat and the earth had to be the center of the universe. Anyone who didn't agree with their highly educated opinions was branded a backwards religious nutcase. Of course, we know a lot more know about the universe than they did then, and I suspect that in 1500 years, our decendants will know a lot more, and make us look like the Greeks.

[BABY J]

I'd take Greek Science over Greek Mytholgy (religion) any day of the week. But to your defense... that post sounded a whole lot like:


http://www.importatlanta.com/forums/...&postcount=117

[Sledlude]

wow. yessir, I do understand mathematics. I know what a probability is. The point is, there is a probability, no matter how small, that is mathmatically calculatable... right? what is the probability that divine Creation occured? Is it measurable? Is there a mathematical possibility? I don't think there is. It is not mathematically measurable because there is no science behind it; ie there is no evidence to back it up.

'belief' in evolution is not like 'belief' in a god who created us- there is scientific proof vs ancient text.

The fact that the chances are small that an event will occur does not hold as evidence against its occurrence.

Do you 2 understand mathematics?

Probability is the chance or likelihood that a certain event will happen. Mathematical probability is usually expressed as a ratio. If it is equally likely that an event may happen in h ways and fail to happen in f ways, where h + f = n, then the probability that the event will occur may be expressed as the ratio h/n, and the probability that it will fail to occur may be expressed as the ratio f/n. The fraction that denotes the number of favorable outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will happen. The fraction that denotes the number of ways an event will fail to happen divided by the total number of possible outcomes represents the probability that an event will fail to happen.

Let me explain it this way, scientists at Cornell estimate that there are 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the universe. That number is a 4 followed by 79 zeros.

Do you realize now that the odds are incredibly large - and that for just a single cell - not all of the cells that exist in the universe? On top of that the cell would have to live long enough to reproduce, and that would be another set of odds? It won't happen. It is as close to impossible as anything can get.

If you want to believe in evolution, realize that you are taking it completely on faith, not based on science. Physics, genetics and mathematics do more to disprove evolution than support it - at this point in time, with our current knowledge. I am not saying that you cannot believe in evolution, just understand that it is no different than religion right now. You are believing through faith in something based upon what has been told to you by other people.

[David88vert]

wow. yessir, I do understand mathematics. I know what a probability is. The point is, there is a probability, no matter how small, that is mathmatically calculatable... right? what is the probability that divine Creation occured? Is it measurable? Is there a mathematical possibility? I don't think there is. It is not mathematically measurable because there is no science behind it; ie there is no evidence to back it up.

'belief' in evolution is not like 'belief' in a god who created us- there is scientific proof vs ancient text.

The fact that the chances are small that an event will occur does not hold as evidence against its occurrence.

Evolution claims to be based upon scienctific measurements and observations, therefore you can calculate its mathematical probabilty as we are dealing with a finite universe. Religion does not claim to be based upon scientific measurements, therefore you cannot calculate its mathematical probability as we are dealing with an inifinite entity. However, there was a book that attempted to deal with the mathematical probability of God's existance, and it was written by an atheist attempting to disprove God. By his own calculations, however flawed, he determined that there was a 97% chance that God did not exist. If you take his answer, it is much more likely that we were created by the Christian God, than we came into existance by random chance.

There is ample scientific evidence against evolution, as I have pointed out, and no one has been able to produce any conclusive evidence for it - and I don't mean just on this forum, I mean anywhere. No one has been able to show a species evolve to another species, and current genetic understanding expressly negates the possibility.

Since you need to learn for yourself, I would suggest you see how random mutation works through a simplified simulator. It is not perfect IMO, but it will get the point across that random mutation doesn't work. Yes, it is from a pro-ID site, but the math is correct regardless.
http://progettocosmo.altervista.org/...sk=view&id=102

[BABY J]

Why do people laugh at creationists??? Because they make it easy...duh. This is a 22 part series, here's the first 11. Good for a sh*t-ton of laughs at these brainwashed illiterates.




www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY



--> second video about 2:40 in listen to that then at 3:00 the guy says What a crock of ****. lmao. I lost it laughed pretty good.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=istxUVBZD2s

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEZTdOlGss

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFeVwuJB7I

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvprBLhJx_o

www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKdfeP1sGIg

www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6_o1GxgNMQ

www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3nvH6gfrTc

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzDYVFa1TR0

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aGEXMyFWyg

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttnU8Tbwtd0

[Sledlude]

There is ample scientific evidence against evolution, as I have pointed out, and no one has been able to produce any conclusive evidence for it - and I don't mean just on this forum, I mean anywhere. No one has been able to show a species evolve to another species, and current genetic understanding expressly negates the possibility.

What is a species? it is described as a group of organisms that can only reproduce with itself. correct? Evolution is a process that has been described as taking millions of years- the evolution of a macroorganism takes too long to be noticeably to human observers. HOWEVER... we can look at microorganisms, such as bacteria. They are evolving before our eyes. Natural selection occurs everyday in these organisms. Look at antibiotic resistant strains! Genes for antibiotic resistance can be transferred from one bacterium to another (a process called transduction). Once a bacterium has acquired the genes for antibiotic resistance, it is no longer susceptible to being killed off by said antibiotic, nor are its daughter cells. Ever heard of MRSA or VRSA staphylococcus? These strains have acquired serious resistance and are virtually untreatable by conventional antibiotics. This phenomenon is pretty much explained by OUR overuse of antibiotics (remember, back in the day, they prescribed penicillin for everything). After some horizontal gene transfer, and killing off of susceptible organisms, resistant strains have emerged ('evolved', if you will ) Natural selection/evolution before your eyes, homeboy.

It is observable to us in these organisms because of their extremely small generation times. You also see this in mice that are resistant to pesticides, in weeds that are resistant to herbicides, etc. etc.... For larger, k-selected species (that take forever to establish a new generation), evolutionary change takes way too long for us to notice. Now that we have written history, lets see in a few thousand years (if we are still around) what kind of changes our species has made, and what characteristics we will have acquired. It should be interesting!!!

edit: You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to David88vert again.

Thank you for intelligent debate.