Does anyone really believe that evolution explains away God?

The theory of evolution has got nothing to do with the theory of god.

I hate it when people try and associate religion with science.

 

What is this "theory" of god?

 

The theory goes that the universe and life within it was created by a being or other sole creator, referred to as 'god'.

Its so very silly.

 

When the big bang theory first came out it was an actual proof that god existed although i myself am not a christian. Einstein was a christian and when it was 1st realised that their may have been a big banf it actually explained that god existed.

The atheist view for thousands of years has been that the universe has always existed from the beginning of time. IT is only recently that athiest have started to beleive in the big band which actually proves the existence of god.

I myself do not believe in the big bang as it is explained but i believe ina similar concept.

 

Einstein was born Jewish and never practiced any major religion in his adulthood. That's like saying Benjamin Franklin was a Protestant when in fact he was a Deist.

http://www.adherents.com/people/pe/Albert_Einstein.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein#Religious_views

Read.

 

I agree with you there. Science is an evaluation of evidence that we can percieve in our reality. Religion is the belief and science, if I may, of what is outside of our reality and how it effects our reality. I think science should be taken seriously, and Religion should use it to help interpret the literality of religious writings.

But then here you go a couple posts later doing the exact thing you say you hate.

You're saying that it's "so very silly" because it conflicts with science, which by your own admition have nothing to do with each other, right?

 

But many people thinks that God explains away evolution.

 

I agree with you mostly but science isn't used to interpret books. If there is a god, I doubt 'it' will have any relation to those so called holy books.

I call it so very silly for many reasons. Nothing to do with its relation to science, I judge religion on its merits alone.

Science is a process, part of that process is to state a theory. Religion is a statement of a theory but no other logic is applied.

 

If the popular theory of God is true, then it does explain away evolution as it relates to humans.

And that is a very big 'if'!

 

True, and I guess it is because they believe the creation account in the Bible is to be taken literally. Like the 7 days. If God created all the animals and humans within a week of eachother, then it definately can't fit with evolution, but in other parts of the Bible a reference to a "day" in God's eyes can actually mean a very long time, and in fact God is outside of time, so who's to say that each of those seven "days" wasn't equivilent to millions of our days.

 

You don't need to take a science class to see that all this carbon dating is flawed. The identifying of primate man is flawed as well. Calling a set of bones found in a layer of earth a Neanderthal man "or whatever other type of primitive man" due to this flawed process, can be easily as labeled as ridiculous as you label the Bible.

Fossil facts are fossil evidence. Never should they be the same. I have no problems in people coming up with evidence. However, there is a problem when people call evidence fact with NOTHING to back that up.

Thinking the Bible would make me jump off a bridge is just plain silly.

Col

 

Of course its flawed, whatever makes you happy

The bible is a flaw, that makes me happy.

 

Snappy comeback

 

Here's a good site for any Christians (and non Christians) who are curious about whether or not you can believe in evolution and creation without contradiction:

http://www.answersincreation.org/

 

We have facts, we have genes from the past humans, and we can compare it to our own. We can compare genes of all life forms that have not gone to be completely rock, and we can see what changed were made.

Genes, what we have in the nucleus of all cells in the body except our blood cells, and specifically the red blood cells, contain our entire genetic code. Much of it is the same as a chimps and a Neanderthals - in fact 99% is. The variants are small, but significant in that it means we cannot interbreed with the cousins and relatives of man (however we are so close to Neanderthals because we share a common ancestor it is plausible offspring could be produced - however it would likely be sterile). We can see with genetics that Chimps, Man, Neanderthal, Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis, Homo Heidelbergensis, and all of the other Homo genus, along with the Pan group all came from a common ancestor - as we are both in the Hominini classification by genes, by genes. This is not theory, this is not evidence, this is not fairy tale sock puppetry time - this is fact. It is a Fact that Humans share all but an insignificant amount of their DNA with Chimps. Yet that insignificant bit separates us enough to see where we diverged in our evolution. If you go a step back to a common ancestor before the divergence of chimp and man, there was another that diverged to make Gorillas - a similarly related primate but not in the hominini class, rather it is in the gorrillini class. Genetically we can see clearer differences in the genes, however we still share most of the same - whereas with chimps it is nearly a copy. When chimps split off they evolved into what they are today from the Hominini ancestor, while the other side spawned many branches to the Homo tree, when Chimps were finally solid in what they were, and evolved more slowly but more absolutely - our side suffered through adverse conditions. We spawned more than thirteen different kinds of humans! Erectus alone had several subspecies and sub races, and so did homo sapeins - our own species and race!

There is nothing grand or amazing about us except we outlived the rest of them, and our brains held the evolutionary physical steps to create a smarter and better Homo. Now, we're doing the opposite. We're getting dumber. We're devolving. There is no more survival of the fittest, there is no more challenge to man, there are no more hardships that thin the population to the best fit to keep on living. Stupid people are mating with stupid people, making more stupid people! In nature, the sick, the ill, the defective - they are usually killed before they can mate. That is Evolution in progress, that is prevention of genetically weak animals from propagating more like them.

We have done this form of selection to dogs with specific features and by our own hands, the collective hand of mankind we created dog breeds. We influenced evolution and made dogs what they are today through selecting adaptive traits that were beneficial and helped with their tasks. You'll probably say "That's not evolution" - BUT IT IS, it is the very purpose of evolution and survival of the fittest theory of Darwin!

When an animal adapts a new and better appendage, a better and more absolute method of doing something, it will survive, it will have offspring, and those that inherit the trait will live and continue, while the others that do not will likely die. Eventually the population is replaced by the better animal, and the older ones die off. That is adaptation and evolution, eventually it gets to a point where they become a new species - as has been shown in birds and beaks. Island populations isolated, adapting, and evolving to fit their surroundings!

What we did with dogs is that but on a faster scale, dogs can mate in two years, so we were able to advance the evolution of dogs into breeds within the time it took us to domesticate until today. German Shepherds are bred for intellect, and capacity for learning, along with absolute obedience. Jack Russel Terriers were bred from dogs that were smaller, and as each smaller dog was allowed to breed the variances let them get so small as to be able to attack small rodents - as designed. And in the most EXTREME form of selective breeding of useless adaptations that we imposed upon nature has to be the chihuahua. We created that damn dog, not some arcane God who is making things as we go along. We did it. We evolved (or devolved) that breed of dog. If we continued doing it further we may create a subspecies of canines that can no longer mate with other more ancient breeds (or specifically the Wolf - the father species of the modern dog breeds).

I'm sure you'll find some nifty little talking point to pick on and ignore the entire post just to attempt and discredit it - but when you look at everything you can see that it is mans hand now that is influencing real evolution that is factual, not theory, and not evidence. When we do it by selective breeding of animals, we are proving it with fact. Otherwise dogs don't really exist.

 

I love it. Jackuul takes the time to write massive amounts of information - complete with graphs, and cited sources. And yet with all that data, the religious person says "what a crock". No rebuttal, no sources, and nothing to back it up. Jackuul..don't bother man. Some people rather live in a fantasy. He clearly took 8th grade biology class in Kansas or something.

 

Does anyone read Jackuul's posts? I stopped after his dissertation about cheese and world domination, or something like that lol.

 

I scan past them most of the time, personally. The world domination thing has gotten tired. I missed the cheese diatribe though. Jackuul seems to switch positions from thread to thread too; so generally, its all very confusing. But I think confusion is a cornerstone of the Jackuul empire

 

Sigh. Please send the thread you're referring to so I can see how out of context your assertions are.

 

Where in that post do I reference either?