Replies

I do not have time right now to totally get into this argument, but Einstein's thoery of "The Big Bang" in many ways goes totally against evolution.

Lewis is one of the greatest thinkers of our time. No, he was not a biologist, but his thoughts and opinions have been considered among the most inlighting and thoughtful of any in the last century.

And you are absolutely wrong if you think "life from non-life" has nothing to do with macro-evolution. "Life" had to evolve!!! according to Darwin.

If life has no purpose (as evolution suggests) then why do humans spend their lives trying to prove its purpose. Look how many people have posted on this very subject. The matter of "origin of life" has been important to humans for 1000's of years--it is no different today.

I do not have time right now to totally get into this argument, but Einstein's thoery of "The Big Bang" in many ways goes totally against evolution.

WHAT?!?

How, exactly, does a theory on the origins of the cosmos contradict the theory of evolution? There is no logical connection whatsoever.

I understand why you won't get into the argument. It's a total fabrication, there's no contradiction whatsoever, but you think that it makes you sound smart to make the claim.

Lewis is one of the greatest thinkers of our time. No, he was not a biologist, but his thoughts and opinions have been considered among the most inlighting and thoughtful of any in the last century.

I still wouldn't have trusted him to perform open-heart surgery. A person can be brilliant without being an expert in a specific field. There is no evidence to suggest that CS Lewis was a well-researched biologist. As such, he has no credibility on the issue of evolution.

And you are absolutely wrong if you think "life from non-life" has nothing to do with macro-evolution. "Life" had to evolve!!! according to Darwin.

So? How life came into existence has no bearing on "life evolving". The ultimate origins of life has absolutely no relevance to the theory of evolution. Only those ignorant of the theory or fundamentally dishonest make such a claim.

If life has no purpose (as evolution suggests)

Evolution suggests no such thing.

then why do humans spend their lives trying to prove its purpose.

Because humans feel more comfortable if they can claim to have easy answers.

but Einstein's theory of "The Big Bang"

You are joking? Aren't you?

Lewis is one of the greatest thinkers of our time

and its always Winter but never Christmas on these threads

"I do not have time right now to totally get into this argument, but Einstein's thoery of "The Big Bang" in many ways goes totally against evolution."

First of all, Einstein didn't come up with The Big Bang so much as his General Theory of Relativity implied an expansion in what was thought to be a static universe. Secondly, I know of nothing in either theory of relativity which suggests that the theory of Evolution is impossible. Please elaborate if you're going to make the argument.

""Life" had to evolve!!! according to Darwin."

When simulating the specific conditions of the early Earth in a lab, we've seen certain amino acids and other compounds necessary for the formation of early lifeforms begin to form spontaneously. Getting from that point to the point of Prokaryotes has not yet (to my knowledge) been accomplished.

"If life has no purpose (as evolution suggests)"

Strawman argument - the theory of Evolution neither states nor implies this. That you infer it is a personal matter of faith for you. The theory of Evolution looks at what was, what is, and attempts to explain how we got from one to the other; purpose doesn't factor into that in any way, shape, or form.