Evolution

[Clockwork]

Evolution is simply a part of life, and that can't be denied with the fossil evidence that surrounds us everywhere.

However, I do not believe the existence of a higher being can be written off simply because there is no physical evidence yet: it could be entirely within His will that there be none. That is the point of faith, is it not - to believe? The bible is merely a book written for simple minds thousands of years ago, and it is not to be strictly followed any longer, and neither should one find one fallacy within it, wave it in the air and say, "this can't possibly be true," and conclude that God doesn't exist because of that.

I think evolution and a God could exist hand-in-hand. Just because we descended from apes doesn't mean there isn't a god.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Originally Posted by Draconysius

Looking at humans and primates comparatively, it's pretty obvious what similarities we have. I have no problem believing humans evolved from primates. I think why most creationists don't want to believe in evolution is, because they want to feel superior to all other forms of life.

I don't know if you're confused about this or not, but in case you are, and so no one else is, because this is a common misconception, I'm clearing it up.

The primates we are similar to that are living today--monkeys--are NOT what we evolved from. We did not evolve from monkeys.

What happened is monkeys and humans evolved from a common ancestor.

[PutridLily]

It could be said that evolution cannot be the stand alone cause of existence; with what did evolution begin?

This only stands if we presume that something cannot come from nothing. However, we don’t know this to be true; perhaps we are misguided by common principles. For instance, it could be quite possible that all something comes from nothing. This might not be illogical, although it seems.
In fact, we don’t know that there ever was ‘nothing’.

Any conclusion that is drawn from this debate can only be an assumption. Of course, that is an assumption in its own.

[KlaudiaGaya]

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Evolution and God do not make sense together. Perhaps there isn't enough cognitive dissonance in this topic, but they just DON'T MAKE SENSE TOGETHER.

I don't mean to question your opinion, but I believe in God and I think that's not something that is incompatible with the evolution theory. But then I'm a spiritualist, so to me, both make sense together.

God in the spiritualistic view is the Creator and the main element of the universe from which the other two elements sprung: the spiritual and the material. In this concept, there's not only one universe existing but many, which is something some scientists have been studying lately in Quantum Physics (look for the BBC Parallel Dimensions Documentary for more information).

The material dimension in which we live could be destroyed and it wouldn't affect the other spiritual dimensions because they are the main ones. Things that happen in the spiritual dimension may influence the existence in the material one, so life is intertwined in these superposed dimensions.

My personal opinion on the Big Bang, which I make from the spiritualistic view and the Quantum Physics theories, is that the universe in which we live was really created once, but there were other dimensions before that and there'll always be, whether this one ends some day or not.

Ok, now you can stare and point your fingers at me... I'm sure many are laughing now! Any comments?

[Cyntrox]

Are you talking about the astral and mental planes?

[KlaudiaGaya]

Originally Posted by Cyntrox

Are you talking about the astral and mental planes?

Yes, I am.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by KlaudiaGaya

I don't mean to question your opinion...

This already sets you off on the wrong foot.

...but I believe in God and I think that's not something that is incompatible with the evolution theory. But then I'm a spiritualist, so to me, both make sense together.

Any 'creator' God is incompatible with evolution, as is any 'guiding' God. It seems absurd that a God would create such bad designs that could be so EASILY improved upon, and if evolution was guided--then it was guided in inferior directions.

Of course evolution was never 'guided' in that sense, but was driven by natural selection, and environmental stressors.

God in the spiritualistic view is the Creator and the main element of the universe from which the other two elements sprung: the spiritual and the material. In this concept, there's not only one universe existing but many...

A) If God is a creator [see before] then he's a bad creator. The eye is wired backwards, upside down, we have left-over organs, body parts, muscles, etc., from when we were troglodytes. If there is a 'great creator' then I suspect he'd be wiser than me. Unless you assume that the creator is a dip shit, and can't make a Panda's Thumb useful.

B) Infinite-world-theory is speculated upon, and is not scientific fact, and is no where near it yet. It was first introduced in literature actually, by Lois Borges. Check out, the, "Garden of Forking Paths." I think that is it at least.

...which is something some scientists have been studying lately in Quantum Physics (look for the BBC Parallel Dimensions Documentary for more information).

I already have a grasp of quantum mechanics. BBC does it justice, but there is no way to understand the theory even in the slightest without understanding the greatest languages: mathematics and physics.

The material dimension in which we live could be destroyed and it wouldn't affect the other spiritual dimensions because they are the main ones...

Proof of this? I don't see any. You just evoked science which does not deal in the supernatural [see spiritual (anything)].

...Things that happen in the spiritual dimension may influence the existence in the material one, so life is intertwined in these superposed dimensions.

See above.

My personal opinion on the Big Bang...

I don't care about any personal opinions. I want facts. That's what you don't understand. The best kind of lie is the kind mixed with a bit of truth, and the best kind of bullshit is the kind of bullshit that is mixed with science--thus making it pseudoscience. It's all more convincing to the layman, or the fool, but you do nothing at all to whet my intellectual appetite.

...which I make from the spiritualistic view and the Quantum Physics theories, is that the universe in which we live was really created once, but there were other dimensions before that and there'll always be, whether this one ends some day or not...

You are thinking string-theory, and so far that is the most laughable theory in the universe. So far it has been used to solve absolutely nothing, and cannot predict anything, yet. So until I see it covering the bases of the infinitely large [special relativity] and the infinitely small [quantum mechanics], then I will take it seriously.

...Ok, now you can stare and point your fingers at me... I'm sure many are laughing now!

Doing it.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by PutridLily

It could be said that evolution cannot be the stand alone cause of existence; with what did evolution begin?

This only stands if we presume that something cannot come from nothing. However, we don’t know this to be true; perhaps we are misguided by common principles. For instance, it could be quite possible that all something comes from nothing. This might not be illogical, although it seems.
In fact, we don’t know that there ever was ‘nothing’.

Any conclusion that is drawn from this debate can only be an assumption. Of course, that is an assumption in its own.

Any conclusion drawn from here may be an EDUCATED assumption. The educated assumption is this: evolution is right. And by educated, I mean so probable that it's not even funny. It's like flipping a double-head coin.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by Clockwork

Evolution is simply a part of life, and that can't be denied with the fossil evidence that surrounds us everywhere.

However, I do not believe the existence of a higher being can be written off simply because there is no physical evidence yet:

There is no physical evidence of his existence to start with. Also, there is no evidence that there is no Zeus, or Hera. Why do you decide to believe certain things? Is it because it comforts you to do so? Seems like you don't really know what your up and down is.

...it could be entirely within His will that there be none. That is the point of faith, is it not - to believe?

The point of faith is to blindly follow anything you are fed, and it's not dangerous if the person feeding you the things are wise, but many times they are not.

The bible is merely a book written for simple minds thousands of years ago...

And simple-minds today accept it just as well, and so do you--in a sense.

...and it is not to be strictly followed any longer, and neither should one find one fallacy within it, wave it in the air and say, "this can't possibly be true," and conclude that God doesn't exist because of that.

Actually, the bible says that God is infallible, and thus is there is a fallacy in the book, then using the correct logic you are forced to conclude that the Judeo-Christian God is a farce. That God does not exist...it's the truth.

I think evolution and a God could exist hand-in-hand. Just because we descended from apes doesn't mean there isn't a god.

Our ancestors (aka our great great great...etc. grandparents) were ape-like, but they were not apes. God and evolution do not go hand in hand, because if God created the universe, then he created all the apparent 'laws' in it, and evolution is a good system, but a perfect universe this is certainly not. There are too many flaws in many organisms, and the living machines to be counted. God is either incompetent, or stupid.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Klaudia, you made very huge and unbased assumptions with your argument.
First, you assumed that if there are parallel universes (which I also believe), one of them is the spiritual world we have grown up to believe in. There's no reason to believe this.

they are the main ones.

You said that regarding the astral plane. What makes you say this?
This has stopped being speculation and has become fiction writing.

You also said:

The material dimension in which we live could be destroyed

Well, if they are parallel universes, nothing makes one any more special than the other. If our universe can be destroyed, the other one sure as hell can too.

Lastly (for now) you contradicted yourself in the same paragraph:

The material dimension in which we live could be destroyed and it wouldn't affect the other spiritual dimensions

Things that happen in the spiritual dimension may influence the existence in the material one

I really doubt there's such a thing as 'pandimensional osmosis'.
Assuming there are other universes, either they are isolated one from the other, or they can interact with each other. Why should your hypothetical astral plane not be influenced by our plane, but the other way around is perfectly reasonable for you to believe in.

[biohazard]

If this discussions needs more support on the creationism side, I can help a little with that. To be honest, I believe both. I believe in Science, but I also believe that something had to start everything.

What if the superior Deity (God) actually created the universe and earth, but only the first living cells that started life. Then, we could conclude that evolution caused new species to arise, and alas, came humans.

The whole story about Adan and Eve could just represent the first humans that evolved from appes. The six days in which the universe was created does not exactly have to represent 6 earth human days. What if each day represents millions of centuries? There is no specification, so it could also be interpreted that way.

[biohazard]

Originally Posted by PinstripesAndPithHelmets

Second, how can any physical evidence point to the validity of Creationism? Creationism assumes that an all-powerful deity made the universe. How the hell is anyone supposed to prove that? The evidence points to evolution. What do we have that supports this theory? Darwin's "Origin of Species" and every natural history museum in the country. They may not be perfect, but they're a hell of a lot more plausible than "The world was created, as is, in six days."

Creationism is very hard to prove. It can only be believed by faith. But what if, as I previously said, the universe was created in a primitive form, and evolution took place along with creationism?
I beleive strongly in the theory of evolution, but it could go along with creatinism if you put some imagination into it.

[Circle V]

Stephen Hawking said that asking what happened the precise moment of the Big Bang may be the same as asking what is ten miles north of the North Pole-- maybe there was no "before," no "beginning."

Scientists have been able to create amino acids and even protobionts (molecular compounds that behave similarly to living cells) by subjecting chemicals to conditions similar to those found on early Earth.

[biohazard]

Originally Posted by Circle V

Stephen Hawking said that asking what happened the precise moment of the Big Bang may be the same as asking what is ten miles north of the North Pole-- maybe there was no "before," no "beginning."

Scientists have been able to create amino acids and even protobionts (molecular compounds that behave similarly to living cells) by subjecting chemicals to conditions similar to those found on early Earth.

There is no evidence that the world has existed forever. It is possible that the universe had no beggining, but hard to beleive. Most things we know have a beggining and an end. It is a very hard concept for our simple minds to understand.

What if the universe all started from chaos and disorder? What if it started as nothing, and slowly became what it is now? What if it has always been this way, and there is no beggining or end? And why do the things we know have a beggining and an end?
The only thing I know that cannot be created or destroyed is an atom, the building block of everything. It could also be possible that atoms have always existed, and that they united over the centuries to form the universe and its components.

[Circle V]

Recent science suggests that energy and matter may be the same thing.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Energy and matter IS the same thing. As for recent, it depends on your definition of recent. Einstein was the one that discovered this, and that's old science.

[Circle V]

GOD DAMN YOU JILLIAN.

Anyway. Yeah. Space-time continuum, gravity is just terrain, nothing really exists except shifting patterns of probability. So there.

[Drake Dun]

Originally Posted by biohazard

I beleive strongly in the theory of evolution, but it could go along with creatinism if you put some imagination into it. [emphasis added]

Imagination is good stuff for flights of fancy, fiction, art and what have you. Not quite the ticket for modeling the world around us, I'm afraid.

Drake

[PutridLily]

Originally Posted by Onetwothree

Any conclusion drawn from here may be an EDUCATED assumption. The educated assumption is this: evolution is right. And by educated, I mean so probable that it's not even funny. It's like flipping a double-head coin.

Sure, evolution ‘happens’, and to some extent we have proof of that. Which I’m not against. However, something evolving does not explain the reason for the existence of it.

[PinstripesAndPithHelmets]

Originally Posted by biohazard

Creationism is very hard to prove. It can only be believed by faith. But what if, as I previously said, the universe was created in a primitive form, and evolution took place along with creationism?
I beleive strongly in the theory of evolution, but it could go along with creatinism if you put some imagination into it.

It's possible. That's the Deist take, anyway. But the issue at hand pertains to the evidence supporting Creationism, of which there is none, nor will there ever be. Whether or not an omnipotent being built the world and its systems is not the question; the question is, "can anyone prove that?" The answer is a resounding no.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Originally Posted by biohazard

Creationism is very hard to prove. It can only be believed by faith. But what if, as I previously said, the universe was created in a primitive form, and evolution took place along with creationism?
I beleive strongly in the theory of evolution, but it could go along with creatinism if you put some imagination into it.

See, that's what a lot of people do. They say "a day might have been a million years, what's a day to God?" But the problem is, then you're choosing the believe the bible isn't literal. So which parts of the bible are literal, and which aren't? I think you have to take it all or nothing.

[Cyntrox]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

See, that's what a lot of people do. They say "a day might have been a million years, what's a day to God?" But the problem is, then you're choosing the believe the bible isn't literal. So which parts of the bible are literal, and which aren't? I think you have to take it all or nothing.

I am quite sure that the whole "day" thing is a mistranslation: It originally said "period."

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by Underwater Ophelia

See, that's what a lot of people do. They say "a day might have been a million years, what's a day to God?" But the problem is, then you're choosing the believe the bible isn't literal. So which parts of the bible are literal, and which aren't? I think you have to take it all or nothing.

If it wasn't literal, why do we have the sabbath? Also, the word used for day is Yom, which is known to mean a 24 hour day, because that word is used from then on throughout the entire book.

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by PutridLily

Sure, evolution ‘happens’, and to some extent we have proof of that. Which I’m not against. However, something evolving does not explain the reason for the existence of it.

To some extent we have proof? What about the irrefutable fossil record, microbiology, the variation in species, etc?

[Onetwothree]

Originally Posted by biohazard

If this discussions needs more support on the creationism side, I can help a little with that. To be honest, I believe both. I believe in Science, but I also believe that something had to start everything.

What if the superior Deity (God) actually created the universe and earth, but only the first living cells that started life. Then, we could conclude that evolution caused new species to arise, and alas, came humans.

The whole story about Adan and Eve could just represent the first humans that evolved from appes. The six days in which the universe was created does not exactly have to represent 6 earth human days. What if each day represents millions of centuries? There is no specification, so it could also be interpreted that way.

Humans didn't evolve from apes, the word used in the bible was yom for day, and the word is used throughout, thus it really was a literal DAY. That God is known to be disproven because it makes no sense. Judeo-Christian God is b.s. in a hand basket.