Creation vs. Evolution

[Vieope]

hmm, well two weeks away from graduating college, I buy an engagement ring for my girlfriend who i had been dating for 4 1/2 years. i'm all excited, planning the best way i could pop the question. I go back to the campus that night & am walking to her apartment to hang out & see her walking arm-in-arm with a freshman. (that's a confidence booseter, eh?)

three weeks later, a high school friend dies & for the first time, i was in a depression. I never had it before, and I can't even begin to tell you how terrible i felt.

anyway, make a long story short, I searched for an answer & that was it. I quit smoking, drinking, lost 30lbs, work out now, & have a good job...

and i must say, I'm looking forward to seeing the bitch now (you have to rub this kind of thing in her face )

That's what I'm getting at. If I'm wrong, there is no God, & we just cease to exist.. what is the worst that happened? I found the comfort I was looking for & it has made me a much better person. I also have no fear of death, which I formerly did.

(of course, I think God is much more than an idea..I'm just saying that because having faith is not such a terrible thing, even if we're wrong)

I definitely believe He got me out of it.

how dramatic, huh?

No, not dramatic, nice story actually. You sould believe in revenge, not in God lol
Sorry for the delay to read your post, I was eating.

 

[OceanDude]

You make some very interesting observations - ones i wouldnt normally expect from a theist (especially you, considering some of your past comments). I especially like this: "This has always been man's weakness since being mortal and impatient he sees Creation in the context of his own limited lifespan and does not take the time to learn greater things that are just waiting in time as if fruit to be picked from a tree from a seeded concept. This is why most men will never be able to conceive of inventions and concepts that are universal in nature and exceed the limits of time and his own mortality." Replace 'Creation' with 'creation' and we're on exactly the same page.

Yet i find it strange that you can believe in such an abstract concept, and at the same time so staunchy support such concretes as "god" and whatever relatively recent prophecies have foretold. I mean, with statements like this: "Man has more power available to him than he can currently comprehend he just has not yet learned how to crawl beyond the nursery room," how can you honestly believe in god or organized religion in general? Isn't this organized worship the very "nursery room" youre speaking of? It's what appeals to nearly all of humanity, as is illustrated by the proliferation of religion. Wouldnt an example of man using that hidden power of understanding and comprehension require moving beyond 10,000 years of generic religious belief?

There is no conflict between what I believe is within man's potential and holding to a belief in God. There is much progress to be made in humankinds evolution and discovery (in all forms - physical, intellectual and spiritual). But the power I am talking about comes mostly from the spiritual dimension. If you can accept the possibility that the fundamental nature of humanity is much more than physical then it it becomes immediatley clear that it is foolish to shrug off things that you can not currently comprehend and relegate as mere conjecture.

"Creation", whether in upper or lower case I deliberately choose to leave ambigous in starting this sentence but hold it self evident that it "Is". All we are arguing about now is what the meaning of the word "is" is.

OD

 

[Monolith]

There is no conflict between what I believe is within man's potential and holding to a belief in God. There is much progress to be made in humankinds evolution and discovery (in all forms - physical, intellectual and spiritual). But the power I am talking about comes mostly from the spiritual dimension. If you can accept the possibility that the fundamental nature of humanity is much more than physical then it it becomes immediatley clear that it is foolish to shrug off things that you can not currently comprehend and relegate as mere conjecture.

"Creation", whether in upper or lower case I deliberately choose to leave ambigous in starting this sentence but hold it self evident that it "Is". All we are arguing about now is what the meaning of the word "is" is.

OD

So where does the limit of our potential lie? Can we conjecture ourselves all the way to equal footing with god?

Humanity is more than physical as 'physical' is currently defined, for sure - consciousness stands out as a clear example. But how much of humanity should be classified as physical? We dont understand the mind, perhaps because we are what we're studying. Perhaps we're no more than the single celled amoeba we deride, or perhaps we're unwitting gods ourselves - but with that mindset, how can you raise your standard with one factions interpretation and not another? What evidence has steered you towards christianity vs. some more liberal interpretation of spirituality/creation/existence?

 

[busyLivin]

No, not dramatic, nice story actually. You sould believe in revenge, not in God lol
Sorry for the delay to read your post, I was eating.

No revenge.. just icing on the cake.

 

[cman]

I have heard that some groups like the thought of a "pre-adamic" race to try merge evolution into the Bible. I would like to see what you have on it.

Questions in bold.

I believe God created the heaven and earth in tact 15billion years ago. And thru his power created life on Earth, Mars, and possibly a third planet no longer existing in whole but as a meteor beltnow.

The Devil, or Lucifer, Corupted the inhabs of all 3 planets and god destroid the 3rd one wiped life of earth and mars.

After all he was already fallen when he tempted Eve, he fell by deceiving the nations. What nations were here before them?

This explains the crator that was formed when the dinasours were wiped out.

I believe the UFO sightings today are possibly fallen angels. other wise they would show them selves.

When the church is gone I believe they will suface and that is the end time dception.

Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

It is not possible because we are not here.

But those left here will surly worship the inhabitants.

Look a the Dogon people. claim 4k years ago half fish half man in saucer visited them and they worship them to this day.
they also described part of the solar system that we could not verify till 1997.
It was as the Dogon said.
They claim the ship inhabitants explained it to them.

Also Noah was spared cause he worshipped God but also cause he was Perfect in his Geniology.
Gen 6
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

Gen 6:2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Gen 6:3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Gen 6:4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.

Gen 6:5And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.

Gen 6:6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Gen 6:7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Gen 6:8But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Gen 6:9These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God.

read the book Alien Encounters: The Secret Behind The Ufo Phenomenon
By Chuck Missler

Also go to http://www.khouse.org/conferences/alien/


you can E mail me for more info.
Chuck

 

[Monolith]

I believe God created the heaven and earth in tact 15billion years ago. And thru his power created life on Earth, Mars, and possibly a third planet no longer existing in whole but as a meteor beltnow.

The Devil, or Lucifer, Corupted the inhabs of all 3 planets and god destroid the 3rd one wiped life of earth and mars.

After all he was already fallen when he tempted Eve, he fell by deceiving the nations. What nations were here before them?

This explains the crator that was formed when the dinasours were wiped out.

I believe the UFO sightings today are possibly fallen angels. other wise they would show them selves.

When the church is gone I believe they will suface and that is the end time dception.

Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

It is not possible because we are not here.

But those left here will surly worship the inhabitants.

Look a the Dogon people. claim 4k years ago half fish half man in saucer visited them and they worship them to this day.
they also described part of the solar system that we could not verify till 1997.
It was as the Dogon said.
They claim the ship inhabitants explained it to them.

Also Noah was spared cause he worshipped God but also cause he was Perfect in his Geniology.
Gen 6
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

Gen 6:2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Gen 6:3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Gen 6:4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.

Gen 6:5And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.

Gen 6:6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Gen 6:7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Gen 6:8But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Gen 6:9These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God.

read the book Alien Encounters: The Secret Behind The Ufo Phenomenon
By Chuck Missler

Also go to http://www.khouse.org/conferences/alien/


you can E mail me for more info.
Chuck

Well see now, youre not just a christian, youre fucking nuts.

Stick to www.coolaidcults.com, please.

 

[Rich46yo]

Why do these threads always end up becoming sermons? With all that science has uncovered, and the strides weve made, do you really,really think there actually was an Adam,Eve, all naked around the snake? So we just popped out of the ground one day eh?

Or do you think that just as a long term strategic plan in case, after you croak, there really is a Hell? Is it actually fear thats the driving force behind Creationism and not logical thought? "Fear" is a very important motivator in religions, most of all if your Christian or Muslim. They beat you over the head with it until your to afraid to pull your pud, half expecting Satan to come crashing thru the floor to drag you to some awful place to burn for about 97 eternities.

I guess this is why Im not exactly a right winger. I have nothing against religion but in many ways it hasnt evolved since the middle ages, if it ever did. If Im ever in front of those pearly gates I'll not only tell the man I never commited any hanging offenses but I STILL! want to see proof!...................................Rich

 

[milliman]

If Im ever in front of those pearly gates I'll not only tell the man I never commited any hanging offenses but I STILL! want to see proof!...................................Rich

Lets see, Thomas said the same thing.

This is where we get the term a "doubting Tom".

 

[milliman]

I love it when someone makes my point for me !!!

As for the whole definition of evolution thing... here you go (right out of the american heritage dictionary, not made up to fit my ideals):

# A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form (did you notice it says different or more complex. Not the same with different colors, see below). See Synonyms at development.
#

1. The process of developing.
2. Gradual development.

# Biology.

1. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations did you notice it says change in the genetic composition) as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. (did you notice it says the development of new species. Or did you conveniently overlook that part ?)
2. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.

By definition, evolution includes what you just described.

To take the idea further, do you consider a zebra to be "just another horse"?
What else is it ?

Here is an example evolutionists like to use.

In England, they used to have a lot of black & white moths (same species). The moths lived on the side of trees with white bark. White moths were predominate since the black moths would stand out on the trees and get eaten by birds.

When the industrial revolution occured, there was a lot of polution in the air that settled on the trees. Rain then washed it down on the branches and made them dark colored. When this happened, the black moths became predominate since they blended into the tree color better.

Evolutionists use this to support evolution thru survival of the fittest.
Creationists use this to support genetic adaption, or survival of the fittest.

The problem for evolution is that you had a moth before and you have a moth afterwards. The same genes are still there, there has been no increase in genes in the gene pool. You just have a predominance of black genes in the population.

For evolution, you must have new genes coming into the gene pool or it can not happen. If no new genes were introduced, then we should have the same genes as the first forms of life (under evolution) and that would be amoebas.

Heck, we don't even have the same genes as the chimpanzee that is supposed to be so closely related to us.

Under Creation, God created animals with genes. Then depending on which part of the world they lived in, the animals with the genes/traits for that climate would do better and the others would die off or move to a diiferent climate. But dogs were still dogs, and horses were still horses. Mybe that had long hair or short hair, stripes or not stripes, but they were still the same animal.

w t f

This "genetic blueprint" is only important because it led to the creation of "us." If this blueprint gave us 3 heads, half an arm, and a couple tails, you'd still be calling it a work of genius "too perfect to be random." Why? Because you wouldnt know any better. As it stands, you dont know if there was an accident half way down the genetic blueprint somewhere that gave all of us half the intelligence we could have had. To us, the blueprint is perfect, because we are as we have always been and as we have always known ourselves to be.

This concept really isn't so terribly abstract. Just think about it. Harder.

I thought about it plenty. I was a pre med student.

Err, no. When talking chemistry, the second law of thermodynamics involves atoms and molecules. Do you know whats spreading all that smoke across the room? The speed at which all those molecules are smashing into each other and forcing themselves away from each other.

Building blocks do not spontaneously arrange themselves into a castle. But building blocks also do not speed around the work site at thousands of miles an hour, smashing together and releasing massive amounts of energy.

Think of it this way: There are millions of compounds that contain less inherent energy than the elements from which they were formed. In other words, the second law predicts the construction of molecules. The second law doesnt say there must be a decrease in order, only that energy must "spread out." .

Nice speech and a bass ackwards reading of the 2nd law. Now lets get to real life and out of fantasy land.

Based on what you are saying, you should find life appearing all over the place since you think the 2nd law predicts it. So how come we don't find amino acids, proteins and life apprearing in laboratories under controlled circumstances ?
Modern day scientists should be able to "make life" since it is so easy. But with all of our modern technology and all, we can't make anything.

Thats is zilch, nada, nothing.

Anyway, while i feel the following will be wasted on you, since you failed to grasp earlier concepts, ill give it a shot:

What humanity defines as "life" is based on what we are and what we percieve as such. It is a human definition for human perception. Our definition of life - even our consideration of ourselves as life - could be no more than simple chemistry to some third party observer. We have built up a reality for ourselves that we are some magnificent invention, yet we have no grounds to base that assertion on beyond our own world. Beyond our own meager understanding of our environment. From a purely biological aspect, we are chemistry in action. Everything from our kidneys to our brain can be discussed using terms like "action potential" and "ion gradient." This "jump" from nucleic acid to life may not be as pronounced as we make it out to be - we are simply a much larger amalgamation of proteins and aminos than we were a few billion years ago.

Mono,

Explain how RNA can replicate a strand of DNA due to chemical processes.

Explain how centrioles and cell replication due to chemical processes.

Explain cognitive thought due to chemical processes.

There is more going on than protons and electrons, there is a life force driving it all.

 

[cman]

Well see now, youre not just a christian, youre fucking nuts.

Stick to www.coolaidcults.com, please.

More or less.

Actually I used to think those guys were fruit cakes and then did some research my self. look into it you will be surprised. I believe a weather ballon crashed at roswell, but there are 5000 year old tombs with perfect pictures of hellecopters. That is something to look into. plus all of the ancient looking landing type sites around the world make a pentagram.

Too much for coinkydink.

 

[OceanDude]

So where does the limit of our potential lie? Can we conjecture ourselves all the way to equal footing with god?

Humanity is more than physical as 'physical' is currently defined, for sure - consciousness stands out as a clear example. But how much of humanity should be classified as physical? We dont understand the mind, perhaps because we are what we're studying. Perhaps we're no more than the single celled amoeba we deride, or perhaps we're unwitting gods ourselves - but with that mindset, how can you raise your standard with one factions interpretation and not another? What evidence has steered you towards christianity vs. some more liberal interpretation of spirituality/creation/existence?

Why ponder about limits when we can not yet grasp half the extent of the possibilities? Equality with God is nothing to be grasped at and it may be the case that there is the notion of a family or team each with talents and abilities that are orchestrated to divine will.
I would be less focused on being concerned with how much should be classified as physical since the more important concept is to fathom and accept that the real possibility that there are multiple interacting domains of relational existences. This means we are not limited to relate to only things that are but we have the ability of at least some form of relationship with the past and the future through a linkage of relationships and influences therein. As for which standard to raise one self to I would propose that you go with your "instincts" since I suspect that Nature has already programmed into us a pathway toward purpose and success. This is not the same things as destiny but rather being responsive to the call of opportunity and purpose arising from Nature's need and one's own unique talents. The pragmatic problem is being free to hear and respond to the call and not be distracted by the small mundane things in life that come as noise from the chaos around us.

The important question you ask is what evidence brings me to Christianity? The answer is: This is personal, more an inner "feeling" and I can not answer satisfactorily in the terms that you specify. It is less a matter of evidence than it is a matter of invitation. I accept it as a gift and consider myself to be fortunate beyond all personal ability to repay. I will however attempt to reveal certain things that ratify how I came to believe in my original teaching. This is more in line with what you call "evidence" (if such a thing is static). There is remarkable consistency in recorded prophecy arrising from different peoples and places for thousands of years. No other religion has this distributed arthurship penned and conveyed over centuries. This requires much research to resolve for one's self and the amount required depends on how deeply one wants to play the devil's advocate and doubt. I doubted greatly and researched greatly. I spent over 1 year in studious solitude and did not date or see a woman or interact with too many people or concern myself with much more than sitting and reading at home. I was as a hermit and judged the stakes so high (immortality vs spiritual death) I was compelled to this task. I finally resolved a fundamental observation. Namely, that much of humanity that was well versed in those prophecies (the ancient Jews) failed to accept the thing they waited centuries for when it came. This could be no man made conspiracy when the designated advocates rejected that which they spawn since it was not in the precise image they envisioned. These were no advocates. In fact they attempted to destroy The Christ physically it in a way that in and of itself was consistent with prophecy and they became unwitting players in the scriptures. Only a few of them recognized that they were "being used" in this hostile role and recognized it (the high priests) as consistent with scriptures and still could not prevent their human vices from continuing the cascade of foretold events. Those responsible, in their disbelief proved themselves to be completely the worst possible advocates of this teaching and in so doing became an instrument for ratifying all the scriptures as "not man made". The linkage between the Old and New Testaments are so profound and consistent that anyone who studies it can have no possible doubt that there is divine will manifest in those accounts. There are many more things I could say but I would be writing for hours and I already run long.

OD

 

[cman]

the whole idea of aliens seeding our planet only pushes the mystery of life somewhere else. where did the aliens come from?

Agree,

 

[Monolith]

GOAIUGDSAIOGHASOG

Right, well, there's really nothing more i can say.

Get back to me when you look up the words in that definition you dont understand.

 

[Rich46yo]

Look I'm very tolerant of religion. I even bring my cold,dark,insulting,evil heart to church on occasion. I was raised religious and in my opinion the plus's of following the ways of the Bible far,far,far outweigh the minuses. I believe in God, believe Jesus lived, and believe society would be much better off if we followed Gods law.

I just don't believe that Adam and Eve shit! I'm a person who thru both training and inclination looks at evidence and makes objective judgments. And evolution is a no-brainer! Ive seen enough of the cruelty and impartiality of nature to accept without question the theory of natural selection and I believe "most" of the questions regarding the creation of the earth and the evolution of life on it has been explained logically using sound science. NOW we are slowly un-raveling the deepest secrets of the universe. BTW I already said Chimps have a 97% DNA match with us, are able to talk to us with sign language, and have retained other shared characteristics. It was 6 million years ago that, what would end up as the Human animal, and what would end up as the chimpanzee, diverged from a common ancestor.

Now at the same time it would be very dangerous for humanity to become so entranced with science that our spirituality is destroyed. I'm afraid however that Homo Sapien is an animal. A vicious,tribal,selfish,brilliant, and extremely dangerous animal. But in this darkness is also a spark. And religion, when actually followed, is one of them. As is art, compassion,love,education, and even science. We just have a very difficult time extending such positives past our immediate tribes. Much like a troupe of chimps, Go-rillas, or orangutan's.

I accept it all as Gods plan to begin with. And Milliman, again, the Industrial revolution cannot be used as an example of natural selection. Why is that? Because it aint "natural", has happened in 100 years or less, "against what? Billions of years of the earth"? Even tho there might be some of the same results...............................................Rich

 

[allpro]

I have absolutely no problem with the notion of God through force of divine will and command ordering Creation into existence and setting it in motion with a set of consistent rules, Natural Laws and phenomenon. Therefore I am perfectly comfortable with the notion that the mechanism of Evolution can be in perfect agreement with the fundamental view of Creation since God can chose whatever tools, processes and mechanisms he desires. He can just as easily create man from clay as he can create a genius from a donkey (hey don't look at me that way ), or an ape from an amoeba or a woman from a man's rib.

It is interesting to note that God did not chose to just "will" that his "word [become spontaneous and instant] flesh" when Jesus came into physical existence on Earth. Rather, for reasons known only to God he had Jesus suffer the humility of being born and grow as a normal human when it was clearly within God's power to directly and immediately manifest him through a simple action of will.

OD

well said..i agree 100%

 

[bandaidwoman]

Will creationists please stop invoking the second law of thermodynamics? As an ex chemist this is offensive because it shows a basic lack of understanding of the second law of thermodynamics.

If it were valid, mineral crystals and snowflakes would also be impossible, because they, too, are complex structures that form spontaneously from disordered parts.

The Second Law actually states that the total entropy of a closed system (one that no energy or matter leaves or enters) cannot decrease. Entropy is a physical concept often casually described as disorder, but it differs significantly from the conversational use of the word.

More important, however, the Second Law permits parts of a system to decrease in entropy as long as other parts experience an offsetting increase. Thus, our planet as a whole can grow more complex because the sun pours heat and light onto it, and the greater entropy associated with the sun's nuclear fusion more than rebalances the scales. Simple organisms can fuel their rise toward complexity by consuming other forms of life and nonliving materials.

Thus the error is assuming the earth is a closed system. It isn't, the sun is our external energy source.

In addition, chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. That is the second misinterpretation of Darwinism. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.



As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence "TOBEORNOTTOBE." Those hypothetical million monkeys, each pecking out one phrase a second, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison of Glendale College wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

 

[OceanDude]

Look I'm very tolerant of religion. I even bring my cold,dark,insulting,evil heart to church on occasion. I was raised religious and in my opinion the plus's of following the ways of the Bible far,far,far outweigh the minuses. I believe in God, believe Jesus lived, and believe society would be much better off if we followed Gods law.

I just don't believe that Adam and Eve shit! I'm a person who thru both training and inclination looks at evidence and makes objective judgments. And evolution is a no-brainer! Ive seen enough of the cruelty and impartiality of nature to accept without question the theory of natural selection and I believe "most" of the questions regarding the creation of the earth and the evolution of life on it has been explained logically using sound science. NOW we are slowly un-raveling the deepest secrets of the universe. BTW I already said Chimps have a 97% DNA match with us, are able to talk to us with sign language, and have retained other shared characteristics. It was 6 million years ago that, what would end up as the Human animal, and what would end up as the chimpanzee, diverged from a common ancestor.

Now at the same time it would be very dangerous for humanity to become so entranced with science that our spirituality is destroyed. I'm afraid however that Homo Sapien is an animal. A vicious,tribal,selfish,brilliant, and extremely dangerous animal. But in this darkness is also a spark. And religion, when actually followed, is one of them. As is art, compassion,love,education, and even science. We just have a very difficult time extending such positives past our immediate tribes. Much like a troupe of chimps, Go-rillas, or orangutan's.

I accept it all as Gods plan to begin with. And Milliman, again, the Industrial revolution cannot be used as an example of natural selection. Why is that? Because it aint "natural", has happened in 100 years or less, "against what? Billions of years of the earth"? Even tho there might be some of the same results...............................................Rich

Rich - I think you are close to something profound here. Consider the possibility that man has the potential to be a lot more than he is and is still undergoing evolutionary struggles to shape and choose his future. Embedded within much of Christianity is the notion of "salvation". This extends from the believe that humanity suffers from spiritual weaknesses (i.e. lack of development and exercise) and is in dire need of redemption and God's grace to save him from the one area that he seems to stubborn and unwilling to adapt to. For myself I see Creation still in profound motion with loud birthing pangs and it is screaming as a mother at humanity to wake up and move along and step up to what our purpose is in things. Some will make it, some will not. But Christianity asserts that the new species born of the Son of Man through God's Grace will prevail and step us to unimaginable joy, fulfillment and unbounded good things.

OD

 

[Monolith]

Will creationists please stop invoking the second law of thermodynamics? As an ex chemist this is offensive because it shows a basic lack of understanding of the second law of thermodynamics.

If it were valid, mineral crystals and snowflakes would also be impossible, because they, too, are complex structures that form spontaneously from disordered parts.

The Second Law actually states that the total entropy of a closed system (one that no energy or matter leaves or enters) cannot decrease. Entropy is a physical concept often casually described as disorder, but it differs significantly from the conversational use of the word.

More important, however, the Second Law permits parts of a system to decrease in entropy as long as other parts experience an offsetting increase. Thus, our planet as a whole can grow more complex because the sun pours heat and light onto it, and the greater entropy associated with the sun's nuclear fusion more than rebalances the scales. Simple organisms can fuel their rise toward complexity by consuming other forms of life and nonliving materials.

Thus the error is assuming the earth is a closed system. It isn't, the sun is our external energy source.

In addition, chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. That is the second misinterpretation of Darwinism. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.



As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence "TOBEORNOTTOBE." Those hypothetical million monkeys, each pecking out one phrase a second, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison of Glendale College wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

I love you.

Although, i have a strange feeling that milliman still wont understand.

 

[OceanDude]

Will creationists please stop invoking the second law of thermodynamics? As an ex chemist this is offensive because it shows a basic lack of understanding of the second law of thermodynamics.

If it were valid, mineral crystals and snowflakes would also be impossible, because they, too, are complex structures that form spontaneously from disordered parts.

The Second Law actually states that the total entropy of a closed system (one that no energy or matter leaves or enters) cannot decrease. Entropy is a physical concept often casually described as disorder, but it differs significantly from the conversational use of the word.

More important, however, the Second Law permits parts of a system to decrease in entropy as long as other parts experience an offsetting increase. Thus, our planet as a whole can grow more complex because the sun pours heat and light onto it, and the greater entropy associated with the sun's nuclear fusion more than rebalances the scales. Simple organisms can fuel their rise toward complexity by consuming other forms of life and nonliving materials.

Thus the error is assuming the earth is a closed system. It isn't, the sun is our external energy source.

In addition, chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. That is the second misinterpretation of Darwinism. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.



As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence "TOBEORNOTTOBE." Those hypothetical million monkeys, each pecking out one phrase a second, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison of Glendale College wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

Bandaid I thought you were into medicine not engineering ? A "system" depends on where one draws the line. Run a Möbius strip around the bubble of Creation and tell me where the energy is coming from. Stick to medicine .

On medical matters I would like to know though where the program resides within the human body that decides which genes to select from the mother and which from the father when natural selection tries to produce the next evolution of humans and how that program knows which gene is superior to others? It all sounds like a card game to me with somone pulling trump and jokers out of the deck. Who's the dealer?

"Somethings rotten in the state of Denmark."
OD

 

[bandaidwoman]

Bandaid I thought you were into medicine not engineering ? A "system" depends on where one draws the line. Run a Möbius strip around the bubble of Creation and tell me where the energy is coming from. Stick to medicine .

I use to be an organic chemist before medicine. Remember, evolution does not attempt to explain agenesis, thus, only what happened to development of life afterwards. It really doesn't give a flying flip about agenesis of life and is very strictly utilitarian in that sense. As for the mobius strip, quantum mechanics attempts to reconcile how matter and energy can arise from nothing so I'll let the physicists take over.

On medical matters I would like to know though where the program resides within the human body that decides which genes to select from the mother and which from the father when natural selection tries to produce the next evolution of humans and how that program knows which gene is superior to others? It all sounds like a card game to me with somone pulling trump and jokers out of the deck. Who's the dealer?

"Somethings rotten in the state of Denmark."
OD

The genes are dumb. It doesn't know which is superior. the environment decides. Sickle cell disease protects a black man from the ravages of malaria but when he moves to cold climates, it potentially destroys and maims him.

 

[Rich46yo]

I may be occasionaly "profound" and a "starving artist" type. But being around Bandaidwoman makes me feel like a dumb fuck!.............Rich

 

[OceanDude]

There is cause for hope Rich. Some people extract terrific sexual gratification for just that kind of condition and there is much need and purpose in this role. The trick is in getting such to pay for it or commit to supporting one for life and dealing with the inability to recriprocate the pleasure.

Just teasing with ya,
OD

 

[John H.]

Evolution - because it happens constantly all the time...

Which do you believe in Creation or Evolution? What do you base your belief on?

Hi Sweatshopchamp,

I believe Evolution because there is information to back up the subject that can be proved and it makes sense. And new information comes out all the time adding to the credibility of Evolution. And in Nature things DO evolve naturally so - anyone that has studied biology, plant sciences, etc. knows - I have a farm and see the proof of life everyday and have developed an ever greater appreciation for life honestly speaking.

Remember, always - religion IS MAN-made - in an effort to "answer the unanswerable" and it is not always very accurate, honest, complete, open-minded, objective, etc. and THAT is the problem with religion. I feel there is a vast void between God (or Whoever you perceive Him to be and whatever you call Him) and religion. Look at the Middle East and its history HONESTLY and see for yourself what religion does to Humanity and how it destroys people "in the Name of...". The Real God would NEVER have a thing to do with all that BS! I do feel God KNOWS human beings and what they are capable of doing - from ALL perspectives - and I am quite sure He would NEVER put human beings "in charge" of His thoughts and desires. I think too many people have been seeing too many "visions" in an effort to control others and profit from human beings' natural fear of the unknown. I believe the answers are really in Nature and the Natural World mostly - God given.



Take Care, John H.

 

[John H.]

Creation, evolution to me is a theory, and it seems like a good one, but more and more people are proving it wrong. I think Creation is the best "theory" and I base my beliefs on Genisis.

Hi Jgirl,

Remember the Bible WAS WRITTEN by MAN - over a long period of time and about 250 YEARS AFTER the death of Christ. Remember this world is at least MILLIONS of years old and that this world existed LONG before the "happening" we are constantly told about that happened ONLY about 2,000 years ago. Remember that the source of that story is from a region of the world where there is a LOT of heat, humidity, sand blowing everywhere, UNemployment, desolation and not a lot of hope - and a lot of people clammering for power over others and "a free ride" financially speaking. Remember those same people have been killing each other for THOUSANDS of years over whose "god" is the "true god" and whose "religion" is the "true religion" - AND NOW we have that misinformation, hatred, bigotry, power-trips, etc. in this country - something Our Founding Fathers DESPERATELY wanted to PREVENT from happening here. They wanted people to believe in whatever BUT they ABSOLUTELY DID NOT want "religion" getting into the affairs and everyday operations of the government and they ABSOLUTELY DID NOT want the government preventing people from practicing their religious beliefs - they wanted EACH TO BE ENTIRELY SEPARATE and that EACH HAVE NO CONTROL OVER EACH OTHER.

I have no problem with someone "believing" but those beliefs MUST be based on as much information FROM ALL SOURCES ALL THE TIME AND OBJECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE - and HONEST - and NOT SHOVED down the throats of others.

If God or Christ have something to say, THEY - THEY - will say it THEMSELVES and NEVER put humans in the power to speak FOR Them EVER. Or have humans "say They said" EVER! They KNOW the possibilities and the dangers of human beings...

Take Care, John H.

 

[John H.]

Yep!

I believe in sex.

Hi Maniclion,

I honestly think most people that "know me" would certainly agree with that - I believe most definitely in Sex too. It certainly IS REAL - AND WONDERFUL. AND SACRED.

Take Care, John H.

 

[John H.]

That would possibly be the original homosexual act.

Hi Kbm,

Maybe so because Homosexuality - as with Heterosexuality and BiSexuality - ARE COMPLETELY NATURAL AND RIGHT and ARE variations of Sexuality. In ALL THINGS IN LIFE - INCLUDING SEXUALITY - there IS VARIETY - VARIATION. PERIOD.

Take Care, John H.

 

[Monolith]

wtf

Is John H. Johnny? They sure talk the same.

 

[OceanDude]

All I know is I am looking forward to the day that John H. can show some "VARIETY - VARIATION" in his posts. If Nature had wanted man to preach variation I am certain that Nature would have come down and told us that itself.

OD

 

[maniclion]

µMinds want to know

 

[John H.]

wtf

Is John H. Johnny? They sure talk the same.

Hi Monolith,

I AM "John H.". I do not know who "Johnny" is - he is not me though. Actually I have not read any of his posts yet - I'll look.

Take Care, John H.