Skip to comments.
Rebutting Darwinists: (Survey shows 2/3 of Scientists Believe in God)
Worldnetdaily.com ^
| 04/15/2006
| Ted Byfield
Posted on 04/15/2006 11:44:16 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500 ... 721-727 next last
To: RHINO369
Why do you think the theory of evolution as somehow hurt society?
Please informe me if you ever receive an answer to this question. Thus far Californiajones has adamantly refused to answer this question, despite claiming -- baselessly -- that the theory of evolution has hurt society.
461
posted on
04/16/2006 4:34:01 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Right Wing Professor
My faith is not the result of geography...
As to whether or not it is bizarre to believe in God's omniscience and omnipresence -- well, either you do or you don't. If you do, the only honest thing is to take it to its logical conclusions: that God created heaven and earth and chose a certain tribe of stiff necked sinners to either bless seven times more than any other tribe, or curse -- all as a sign to point to Him. Again, what faith has to do with locality or peculiar historicity of where the Jews lived back then, you have not made clear. Either God is above it all, outside of Time and yet able to penetrate the daytoday lives of sinners as well as pull up and pull down kingdoms -- or He is Not.
462
posted on
04/16/2006 4:37:43 PM PDT
by
Californiajones
("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy" - Thomas Aquinas)
To: jennyp
Because Darwin infers that we do not have an immortal soul.
That's the crux of it.
And that's the problem with its fallout on society.
If we have no immortal soul, it's just fetal tissue.
Euthanasia's okay. Even murder, incest, rape, theft, adultery, etc.
There are moral implications to Darwin and that is and has always been the problem.
463
posted on
04/16/2006 4:40:41 PM PDT
by
Californiajones
("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy" - Thomas Aquinas)
To: RHINO369
No, actually more people have died because of the godless totalitarians in the past one hundred years than in the entire history of mankind. Think Mao, Ho Chi Mihn, Stalin, Che Guevara/Castro, Lenin, Trotsky, even the South African Communist Party is a murdering lot.
464
posted on
04/16/2006 4:43:53 PM PDT
by
Californiajones
("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy" - Thomas Aquinas)
To: Californiajones
Because Darwin infers that we do not have an immortal soul.
How? Please be specific.
465
posted on
04/16/2006 4:44:54 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Californiajones
"No, actually more people have died because of the godless totalitarians in the past one hundred years than in the entire history of mankind. Think Mao, Ho Chi Mihn, Stalin, Che Guevara/Castro, Lenin, Trotsky, even the South African Communist Party is a murdering lot."
Ok now try to tie a scientific theory that states the fittest survive with a political theory that states all shall be equal otherwise we'll kill them. Capitalism is an economic version of evolution.
Oh and don't pretend like genocide is a new invention, its been around forever. The only reason more people died this century is because there are many more people.
To: GSlob
A number of humans still have a small tail!
467
posted on
04/16/2006 5:26:32 PM PDT
by
mad_as_he$$
(Never corner anything meaner than you. NSDQ)
To: RHINO369
Ok now try to tie a scientific theory that states the fittest survive
More specifically, it is that the fittest reproduce and pass their traits on to subsequent generations. It is possible for an organism to be "unfit" regarding reproductive ability, yet still survive to die of old age.
468
posted on
04/16/2006 5:31:52 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: mad_as_he$$
"A number of humans still have a small tail!"
Indeed, the number of humans [the word should be put in inverted commas, 'humans'] are evolutionally backward. Genetic engineering has not as yet figured out the necessary corrective measures, but will probably come up with them in the next century or at most two. Spiro, spera.
469
posted on
04/16/2006 5:35:39 PM PDT
by
GSlob
To: Dimensio
" More specifically, it is that the fittest reproduce and pass their traits on to subsequent generations."
And to be even more specific, it's that the fittest will have a higher probability of reproducing and passing on their traits. It's not a certainty; there are random elements at play, such as a freak mudslide, or a very rare virus that kills the otherwise fittest organism. Natural selection is a statistical concept.
470
posted on
04/16/2006 5:37:48 PM PDT
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is grandeur in this view of life....")
To: connectthedots
There is a scene in the last couple of episodes of STNG where Picard is traveling in and out of different times and an amomale is getting bigger and bigger ripping space apart. The legendary Q takes him to Earth several billion years ago and while they are standing over a bubbling puddle of goo asks him what would happen if life on Earth had never started - "it's about happen to right there in that pool" says Q. Picard leans over and blocks some of the sunlight and Q says "oops there it goes - oh too bad Jean Luc."
Was it that simple or that complex? Was God that indirect? I don't know but some day if he shows up I'll ask him. In the meantime I still wonder about books left out of the Christian Bible and what the mean.
If God wants to fry me for wondering then so be it. It is my business to wonder and I have made many lives better for it.
It is our nature as a species to wonder and if you believe in Creation then God made us that way. If you believe in ID or Evon then we wonder to improve our position on this rock. Either way I'll take it. Ideas can be changed but beliefs can't.
471
posted on
04/16/2006 5:42:51 PM PDT
by
mad_as_he$$
(Never corner anything meaner than you. NSDQ)
To: Dimensio
More specifically, it is that the fittest reproduce and pass their traits on to subsequent generations. It is possible for an organism to be "unfit" regarding reproductive ability, yet still survive to die of old age. I think this is one of the most misunderstood parts of the theory of evolution.
With the human line, and with many other parts of the animal kingdom, it is populations which evolve, not just individuals. When a population passes on its genes successfully it is not so much "survival of the fittest (individuals)" but survival of the most adapted group. Culture plays a significant roll in the human line.
For example, primitive groups usually revere elders, and try to keep them alive past reproductive or, in males, active hunting age. The memories and skills of elders may be vital to the survival of the entire group. They perform many important educational and nurturing functions even though they may be past the age when they can contribute in other ways.
Sometimes I think those who hate evolution deliberately misunderstand points like this in a vain effort to convince themselves and others how "bad" evolution is.
472
posted on
04/16/2006 5:43:49 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Interim tagline: The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT!)
Meanwhile, it would be easy for science to confuse a common Creator for a common ancestor. From a purely physical standpoint the two are not much different WTF? placemarker
473
posted on
04/16/2006 5:45:44 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist)
To: BMCDA
Hey! Welcome back ;^) I'm not really here. Really.
474
posted on
04/16/2006 6:09:37 PM PDT
by
tortoise
(All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
To: js1138
475
posted on
04/16/2006 6:45:44 PM PDT
by
jennyp
(WHAT I'M READING NOW: "The Great Influenza" by Barry)
To: Right Wing Professor
That's the kewl thing about creating a god in your image and likeness: you get to fantasize about all the mean things the god will do to people who bested you in argument. LOL, there is a LOT of that on these threads.
476
posted on
04/16/2006 6:48:33 PM PDT
by
jennyp
(WHAT I'M READING NOW: "The Great Influenza" by Barry)
To: Lucky Dog
If your assertion is true [speciation may result from something trivial], then the postulated mechanism driving evolution must be seriously questioned. Worded differently, my point is, if speciation occurs without sufficient, environmental, natural selection pressure (creating a survival benefit for certain mutations), those critics who maintain that the theory of evolution is flawed have huge traction for their contention.Sufficient is defined by what happens, not what you wish might happen. Much, if not most speciation occurs due to sexual selection, not superior physical prowess. That means, in most instances, that the female chooses her mate based on some arbitrary seeming criteria, like bright colors.
477
posted on
04/16/2006 7:01:22 PM PDT
by
js1138
(~()):~)>)
To: mad_as_he$$
Ideas can be changed but beliefs can't. I didn't always believe in Jesus Christ, the only Son of God; the God of the Bible. Therefore, your statement is false.
To: js1138
When an evil person is looking for some sheep's clothing, he will not look to ideas that are associated with evil. Thus much evil has been done in the name of God and in the name of religion, and now, in the name of science. You are a fool if you think the evil resulted from God, religion, or science. Oooooh, that's pithy. And so true.
479
posted on
04/16/2006 7:14:13 PM PDT
by
jennyp
(WHAT I'M READING NOW: "The Great Influenza" by Barry)
To: Californiajones
My faith is not the result of geography... Yeah, it is. If you were in India, you'd be Hindu. If you were in Punjab, you'd be Sikh; in Afghanistan, you'd be Muslim, in Sri Lanka, Theravada Buddhist.
Heck of a way to do metaphysics.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500 ... 721-727 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson