Posted on 02/10/2009 8:25:43 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
You have been repeatedly warned about personal abuse on these threads. Get civil or get out. That applies to everyone else as well.
There's a Sunday show on locally here in Houston called "The Things That Matter Most". Even though I'm not particularly religious I enjoy it because they usually have interesting guests and thought provoking commentary.
But they really bummed me out this weekend by continually referring to Intelligent Design "science".
What "science" ? There is none. Zip, zero, nada.
The existence of a Creator is not a falsifiable hypothesis. You cannot prove there is no "Creator".
Hence there is no creationist or ID "science".
There are arguments pretending to be such, but they ain't.
I didn’t start it...this is what I responding to:
“I am sure Jesus is real proud of you for lying in his name.”
Still, I could have found a better way to express myself.
Being able to speak as neither creationist nor Darwinist, I’d say your question is irrelevant since the oil company wants s geologist that can find oil not advise on evolution, creation, or low fat cooking.
Find oil for the oil company and I can believe the earth was formed last night.
Except that there is a tremendous amount of science involved in finding such. It ain't like the old days where you find an oil seep and follow the structure for an anticline to find more. For example, conodonts are both marker fossils and an indicator of the temperature at which the formation has been subjected to, which in turn tells you if the formation is in the petroleum window. Paleontology. Hard science.
Creationists don’t believe in crude oil.
“Research by Stanley Miller and colleagues suggested that while adenine and guanine require freezing conditions for synthesis, cytosine and uracil may require boiling temperatures.[22] Based on this research Miller suggested a beginning of life involving freezing conditions and exploding meteorites.[23] A new article in Discover Magazine points to research by the Miller group indicating the formation of seven different amino acids and 11 types of nucleobases in ice when ammonia and cyanide were left in a freezer from 1972–1997.”
Did you catch that? Freezing conditions AND exploding meteorites! It's a bit like Col. Sanders on Ice, just stir a few ingredients (ammonia and cyanide....um..ummm..good!) together, stick them in the freezer for 25 years and out comes (maybe, suggested) 7 amino acids and 11 not so secret recipe types of nucleobases.
Who says The House of Darwin lacks humor!
That's true if you were starting from scratch, with no tower. Obviously you'd have to come up with a plan for the foundation. Just as if you were trying to evolve life from a barren planet, you'd have to come up with a mechanism for the first life.
But that's not the situation we find ourselves in. Life is here, and evolution just describes it. Just as since the Eiffel Tower is already built, an engineer can figure out what keeps it up without reference to how the foundations were built. The foundation could be built in many different ways, and it wouldn't matter to a description of the iron superstructure.
The theory supposes everything came from little bugs, so WHENCE THE LITTLE BUGS, sir?
It doesn't matter. Evolution describes what happens after the little bugs are already here. I'm sorry, I can't say it any clearer than that, and your inability to comprehend it (if in fact you still don't get it) doesn't make it sophistry.
The origin of life isn’t even regarded as a part of evolutionary theory.
In my mind there is a theory of evolution and a cult of evolution. You can recognize a cultist when they come unglued when someone begins questioning evolution and most particularly begins bashing anyone discussing their own ideas about origins, abiogenesis, etc.
So apparently your memo is not getting out!
I guess if you look at the bright side, the more they are here posting this nonsense, the less they are out there in the "real world" scaring normal people away from Conservatism
Another red flag of liberalism planted here, metmom!
“It doesn’t matter.”
Yes sir, it does matter. A theory is required to answer such questions, otherwise it is a junk theory. WHERE DID THE BUGS COME FROM sir?
What if single-celled life forms came to Earth in comets? And evolved from there? The two can be separate concerns.
But one (evolution) would not exist without the other.
In chapter one of any virtually any textbook addressing evolution, it begins with origins.
Time to deal with it.
That’s right and it’s all very sad. There is very little critical thinking in this country and most of the world.
It's not an idle question because natural selection is supposed to lead to the creation of species but if we cannot find a good descriptive definition of species what has natural selection created?
Says who? The theory of evolution doesn't depend on where the bugs came from, any more than the theory of gravity depends on where matter came from. Your insisting on it doesn't make it so.
Not believing in fake crap science from laughable web sites doesn’t make one a liberal. :-)
I've said often that I don't agree fully with most evolutionary theory. I think life forms can imprint changes in their own DNA within their lifetimes and then pass that on to their offspring. I also think that organisms can change and adapt within certain limitations within their own lifetimes. That takes a lot of the randomness out of most evolutionary theory.
I have also said that I do not see ID in and of itself as an affront to the geological record - just efforts to impose a Young Earth mindset on such. Which leaves one's faith to decide if a higher power created life and gave it the power to adapt, spread and develop.
“[a good] theory is required to answer such questions, otherwise it is a junk theory.
Says who? The theory of evolution doesn’t depend on where the bugs came from, any more than the theory of gravity depends on where matter came from.”
since you don’t seem to know what sophistry means, I shall point it out clearly in your argument here.
You try to equate evolution’s requirement for a theory of “WHERE THE MICROBES CAME FROM” for some requirement for Newtonian gravity to explain where matter came from. To the casual observer it seems like an equation, because you have equated two things. This is a classic sophistric argument.
evolution DEPENDS on microbes, tiny little critters, as the base of its theory. without explaining where the microbes came from, it makes no sense. Gravity does not DEPEND on knowing where the matter came from. We can detect the force, and we have other definitions of matter, such as inertia. It fits perfectly into the surrounding science and theory hand in glove.
evolution on the other hand, dangles, SEPERATE FROM ALL GOOD & NORMAL & PROPER SCIENCE, with no base, and no purpose, other than to provide a religious context for those who don’t want to believe in God.
The question was about the personal beliefs of the geologist being hired by the oil co. and whether the company really was all that concerned about such.
And what you call ‘hard science’ involves a great deal of interpretation based upon personal belief or bias.
Perhaps you know of a company that asks whether a potential new hire is an evolutionist or a creationist. I don’t.
Hence my answer.
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.