Does evolution contradict creationism?

Talk Origins ^ | 1998 | Warren Kurt VonRoeschlaub

[shubi]

There are two parts to creationism. Evolution, specifically common descent, tells us how life came to where it is, but it does not say why. If the question is whether evolution disproves the basic underlying theme of Genesis, that God created the world and the life in it, the answer is no. Evolution cannot say exactly why common descent chose the paths that it did.

If the question is whether evolution contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis as an exact historical account, then it does. This is the main, and for the most part only, point of conflict between those who believe in evolution and creationists.

[shubi]

Nice personal attack disguised as debate.

I know the TOE quite well. I point out that creationuts, like yourself, throw everything in and the kitchen sink that is not in the TOE (like original creation) to fool people into joining their cult, and you having no legitimate argument just insult me.

Nice try.

[shubi]

And God distributed the dino bones in chronological order in the strata as a practical joke.

[shubi]

The TOE is the most elegant theory ever confirmed.
Darwin is a genius. Live with it.

[kipita]

Someone earlier in the last century said, "...things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler...". I thought he was a smart guy, but I can't seem to remember his name.

Nobody should care what I believe, I've just been starting facts, in a simple way. The scientific Godless world is relatively easy to understand and predict. Evolution without divinity (a driving force), seems more of a belief than established fact.

[Michael_Michaelangelo]

[kipita]

As I have said before, there are no true closed systems in nature. However, the Laws of science are an excellent guideline.

[conservative_crusader]

"Oh, yeah, gotta watch out for those militaristic babies!"

I'll have you know, that given in history, had there not been a certain baby, "Ishmael" was his name, the entire Arabic world would not exist. Or are you going to argue with something that is canonically accepted?

"So, was your god too busy or too lazy to do it himself?"

You really think you're clever don't you? Okay I'll play your game, If you're so important, why doesn't God reveal himself to you right now. Answer: Because he wants you to be faithful. But since you won't accept that, I'll be satisfied to rip your fallacious arguments to shreds.

In answer to your question, It is not your place to argue with the morality of a supreme being, you have yet to disprove that one does not exists, whereas I have proved one exists in post #126. Argue that, and then I might lend some credence to your arguments.

[balrog666]

In answer to your question, It is not your place to argue with the morality of a supreme being,

Is it really your place to speak for any such being or beings? I didn't think so.

you have yet to disprove that one does not exists,

Humm, prove a negative through logic, huh? Wow, you are even more ignorant than I realized.

... whereas I have proved one exists in post #126.

Really? Which one?

Argue that, and then I might lend some credence to your arguments.

[Sigh] You have "proved" nothing except in your own mind. Your inability to understand that obvious point tells us everything to know about you and your "arguments".

[conservative_crusader]

"And God distributed the dino bones in chronological order in the strata as a practical joke."

Are you suggesting that the existence of dinosaur bones contradict creationism? That's ridiculous. The Bible says two things about this, First, that the Earth was created in seven(7) days, and second that a day is as long as a thousand (1000) years. I personally understand the latter to mean that the meaning of a "day" in Genesis, is metaphorical, much like the phrase "back in the day of "Insert favorite era here."" So If this is true, then the creationist position is defended from arguments that dinosaurs contradict creation.

[conservative_crusader]

"So who is arguing differently? How many times must the incredibly obvious be pointed out to you?"

Every time someone says that evolutionism is correct they seem to imply that because evolution is correct, creationism is false. Evolutionism and creationism do not contradict each other. This is the title of the thread.

[Safrguns]

As for your analogy with balls rolling uphill, where exactly to you think this applies to evolution? The whole underlying premise of the almighty TOE is that there is no God... because Darwin WAS an atheist, and was faced with the difficult task of explaining the existance of life without creation. A ball cannot roll uphill unless it is constantly being pushed. If God were to somehow cease to exist, all life would immediately cease to exist as well... even bacteria would no longer be able to consume all of the dead flesh, and the universe as we know it would immediately spin randomly into chaos.

[Safrguns]

The TOE is the most elegant theory ever confirmed. you mean confirmed by atheists.

[conservative_crusader]

"Is it really your place to speak for any such being or beings?"

I am as an ambassador, it is my place to speak for God.


"Humm, prove a negative through logic, huh? Wow, you are even more ignorant than I realized."

I've already proved that a god exists, the only way for your position to stand, is for you to prove that wrong. You would not be proving a negative, you would merely use what is given to say that my argument is false. '

I love your Argumentum Ad Hominem Attack. Will you ever stop using fallacies?

"Really? Which one?"

Does that really matter? I mean a god must exist, which one is real, is left up to faith for the moment.

"You have "proved" nothing except in your own mind. Your inability to understand that obvious point tells us everything to know about you and your "arguments"."

Oh this is a wonderful argument, not only are you demeaning me, you are using even more Ad Hominem fallacies. Your only response to my argument, is that I have proved nothing. Generally, the argument is that I can prove nothing, which is a fallacy. I honestly believe you really don't care what is true, you just like arguing with people smarter than you. It makes you feel big!!!

[balrog666]

The whole underlying premise of the almighty TOE is that there is no God...

Buzz, wrong. But you knew that already, didn't you, Mr. Troll?

...because Darwin WAS an atheist,

Buzz, wrong. But you knew that already, didn't you, Mr. Troll?

...and was faced with the difficult task of explaining the existance of life without creation.

Buzz, wrong. Gee, I wonder which Creator he was referring to in the text?

A ball cannot roll uphill unless it is constantly being pushed.

Buzz, wrong, Sysiphus. Ever hear of momentum? Magnetism? Air pressure?

If God were to somehow cease to exist, all life would immediately cease to exist as well...

Which god? And why do you believe that all life would cease to exist?

...even bacteria would no longer be able to consume all of the dead flesh,

Why not?

and the universe as we know it would immediately spin randomly into chaos.

Huh? What does that even mean?

[Safrguns]

You asked where Crusader's analogy fit into evolution. I answered. Your confusion is understandable, because your belief system is based only upon that which man can understand. My point is that God is much larger and much more involved than anyone knows or is capable of comprehending. My if-thens are based upon what God says in His Word about who He is. Please don't expect me to prove what can only be held by faith.

[balrog666]

I am as an ambassador, it is my place to speak for God.

Well, Mr Ambassador, tell that to all the other theists including the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Invisible-Pink-Unicornists ...

When you guys work it out between yourselves, then call us.

I've already proved that a god exists, the only way for your position to stand, is for you to prove that wrong. You would not be proving a negative, you would merely use what is given to say that my argument is false. '

What position are you referring to here?

In any case, you have already established your inability to understand the uses and limits of logic.

Does that really matter? I mean a god must exist, which one is real, is left up to faith for the moment.

I think that all the other theists including the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. might just care.

Oh this is a wonderful argument, not only are you demeaning me, you are using even more Ad Hominem fallacies. Your only response to my argument, is that I have proved nothing.

Good, stayed offended, that way you don't have to learn anything.

Generally, the argument is that I can prove nothing, which is a fallacy.

Don't waste time with more strawmen.

I honestly believe you really don't care what is true,

That's true. My desires don't influence the nature of reality.

you just like arguing with people smarter than you. It makes you feel big!!!

More projecting on your part. I think you need to get a life.

[derheimwill]

And God distributed the dino bones in chronological order

No, TOE assumes a chronology based on their order.

[conservative_crusader]

"Well, Mr Ambassador, tell that to all the other theists including the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Invisible-Pink-Unicornists ..."

They would agree with me. God or a god must exist.

"When you guys work it out between yourselves, then call us."

We already have it worked out, a god exists, beyond the shadow of a doubt.


"What position are you referring to here?"

I am referring to the position saying there is no god. If that is a misrepresentation of your position then argue your position, then say so.

"In any case, you have already established your inability to understand the uses and limits of logic."

I am quite well versed in logic, all I have "established" is that a god must exist, you are arguing ad hominem that I am incapable of understanding logic.


"I think that all the other theists including the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. might just care."

They do care. They all believe there is a higher power of some kind. A higher power must exist, given my that post #126 is true. Point out the error in that post and you would win the entire argument. But since you refuse to argue anything other than I can't prove anything, I win by default.

"Don't waste time with more strawmen."

So I did prove there is a god?

"That's true. My desires don't influence the nature of reality."

Then you forfeit even the right to argue. Quit arguing a subject if you don't care about it.

"More projecting on your part. I think you need to get a life."

You can't even identify an insult when you see one.I think you need to learn how to argue.

[Jehu]

TOE suggests life from the immaterial. Is TOE based strictly upon naturalistic processes or not? If it is, describe to me in any way possible how TOE accounts for symbiotic life? I'll even give you the species (Yucca Moth/Yucca Plant of the American southwest)

I'll be watching to see if you smuggle in any concept of Teleology. You want to propose all species descended (ultimately) from single celled animals (That is part of TOE), then give me some equations that describe this "scientific" process! LMAO

[balrog666]

Here you go:

Just keep wailing away.