Not just Individuals....their environment as well. Is the Architecture of the individual the same as the Architecture of Evolution? Obviously not, they may both evolve differently. The Architecture of Evolution transcends the Individual and is perpetuated outside a Physiological form. The composite of the individuals determine the Garden and the evolution of the Garden detrains the composition of the Individuals, they are distinct. The physiological form of life is not the source of life but life in a physical form. The Architecture of both are determined by prescribed laws for their existence. There is a means to exist outside the physiological form for those willing to reach far enough to find it.Â
But a law requires repetition. If something is actually "true" in the scientific method, not just considered a fact, it needs to be demonstrable. Gravity is a law. It can easily be repeated. Evolution is mistakenly ( or on purpose ? ) taught as science, when it definitely is not science. Even then, the scientific method is still flawed. It relies on things that can be seen and felt, measured and weighed. Not all things that are true fit into such requirements. Trusting in evolution is no different than trusting in politicians. But.. creationism has the same problem... they are not trustworthy either.
I have to disagree with you there. Trusting scientists who make available their experiments and theories in an attempt to portray as much a degree of objectivity as humanly possible and in order to allow external scientific testing is a far cry from trusting politicians, who rely on their own vested and pure subjectivity that cannot be taken and questioned with scientific method. Evidence of evolution as a theory has its equivalence of demonstration - predictable and explainable observation. Scientific law and scientific theory are not opposites and exclusive nor does one hold more scientific credibility or weight than the other. The fact that age is an inevitable killer can not be "repeated" but observed. Does this mean this is any less true? You're manipulating semantics. Do you have a better explanation than creationism and evolution?
I find it halarious how creations on this forum constantly get simple facts wrong, try to change up their stories and make ignorant comments. The "I need to see an ape evolve into a man" argument is so ludacris I find it hard to believe you'd do this to yourself on a public forum... And I think BRUm is bang on. I constantly hear creations say, "Evolution is just a theory." Yes, and theories require facts, otherwise it's a hypothesis. I learned that in grade 6 for pete sake. IsraeI look up theory, then look up hypothesis. You and the other creationists on this thread need to learn the difference, because this has been brought up too many times. And IsraeI, what don't you get about a common anscestor? No, we didn't evolve from apes, you're correct. Apes evolved from a common anscestor with humans. What about that can't you get? I watched an interesting series of videos on YouTube called "Why smart people believe in religion?" or a title to that effect. Ran across one video where the producer of the videos explains how beliefs harden after many years, making it nearly impossible for people in their 50s and beyond to change beliefs when they get to that age. I for one can't ever see my mom or dad ever come out of their denial about God and religion because they've had that belief since birth or at a very young age. I on the other hand, made a concious decision about my beliefs at 21 years old, maybe just in time. For years I was maybe more anti-religion than I thought, although I hid it to avoid conflict with my parents. You mean I made you questioning your beliefs again? Another good point.
What??? If you're going to debate science with me, leave out the wacky sect statements because I have no idea what you're talking about.
The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today. Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few: The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life. existence of God. The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day. And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents. Does God exist
Blue Star Ent.'s post is so flawed. I don't think he could tell the difference between faith and a belief formed using facts if his life depended on it. The complexity of our God points to a deliberate Designer who not only created God, but sustains him today. Dontcha think? Surprise surprise, I've heard this one before. This really proves nothing other than our planet happens to be one of the planets that is capable of sustaining life. It's more a matter of sheer probability, rather than a divine creator. If you consider the billions and billions of planets out there in our universe, would you imagine there are maybe a few others like ours, that just happen to be poised to sustain life? Because something holds a low probability in the part of the universe we've discovered doesn't mean "God did it" and it's really not convincing evidence that God exists.
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life: It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees. proof of GodWater is a universal solvent. This property of water means that thousands of chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels. Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body. Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees. Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter. Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water. The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands. existence of God The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people. The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously. Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.
Popotalk, I fully respect how incredible, awe inspiring and mysterious our planet, its resources and mankind are. In fact, I often find myself unable to find a view or belief either way when I contemplate this perfection. This thread, however, is not a debate about deism, rather the process of evolution and its science, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive. One quick point about your post that agitated me. Your source is clearly biased: Water does not act a certain way so that fish can live in the winter. This is completely backwards. Fish have adapted over the years to accommodate their surroundings, not the inverse. That's like saying basketball makes people taller when we know that tall people go to basketball.
All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!! Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual. existence of God Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop. Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it. Human DNA ----- Ape DNA ? I don't think so.
So you think it was made in a lab by a bunch of scientists ? It might not be who we call 'God' but some supreme 'imaginary friend' made something out of nothing in his 'lab' eons ago.
Yet you have no problem believing in God. I take it that you have seen God with your own eyes, talked to him with your own mouth, heard him with your own ears? Is it so, Mate?
This is why this thread has gone around in circles so many times and is inevitable to fail. People like myself can provide scientific documentation and explanation that are not based on opinion, while others, such as you popotalk, argue against it with opinion and no scientific basis whatsoever. "I don't think so" "Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it." "All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent" "but some supreme 'imaginary friend' made something out of nothing in his 'lab' eons ago. " Evidence? Proof? No. Just what you have inferred. These statements are just ridiculous. I think a new thread should be opened to only those who have scientific evidence on both sides. You're not going to get the response you want and neither are we, so what's the point? It's all as silly as quoting the bible to refute a theory which has undergone a century of experimentation. It just doesn't work.
Please provide the scientist name... Lets do this Again...... Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous explosion of energy and light, which we now call the Big Bang. This was the singular start to everything that exists: the beginning of the universe, the start of space, and even the initial start of time itself. Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen." Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in Physics, said at the moment of this explosion, "the universe was about a hundred thousands million degrees Centigrade...and the universe was filled with light." The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter. Give any name of a scientist that the universe was there and always existed. Again.............. An imaginary scientist Eons ago made the universe in his laboratory.
Did you see the information about how the global warming scam was discovered ? For those who remember last year, the devious ( yes devious ) operations of the IPCC were exposed by someone hacking their emails. Please read : What ? Not checked, information is not being checked ? What kind if science is that ? I will tell you... JUNK science. What ? Refusing requests of information...? Someone here was talking about transparency among "scientists". If they are truly on a quest for truth, what is it that they have to hide ? Like I said, the scientific method is being trashed. Another quote : What ? A scientist that can not keep good records ? That is NOT a scientist. If not, what is he ? How about a propagandist ? ( missionary, apostle LINK ) A better explanation will probably be found when you seek it yourself. I am just like you, but without faith in religion or science. Law and theory are of course not the same, why would they be two different words ? The word "law" literally means "the way a thing works". The word "truth" can be put in the place of the word "law" LINK A "theory" is a supposition, a premise. I am not being devious with semantics. This is plain English. Many people work from a dualistic point of view. They assume things because of dualism. But there are many times more than just two sides to a story. Show me where evolution or creation is happening, scientifically, ( real science ) and I will believe it. Please do it by PM. I do not trust organizations that are willing to lie and cover up things. The "hockey stick" graph was deliberately cut off to try and prove something that does not exist. The earth is actually cooling in many places. Brum, trust in your common sense, it is a better guide than current so-called science or religion in learning how you/we got here.
I was with the rest of us, cheering with glee when the hacked emails came out from the university. I see your point there about the scientific community, it is somewhat troubling that I agree with you that anthropogenic climate change is a scam. I know all about the tactics they used with the hockey stick graph and such. I remember one day seeing on the front page of wikipedia under the recent news section: "Global warming proven". It is a different story, though, regarding their climate change hoax and evolution as the former has only been around for a couple of decades. Scientists, palaeontologists, genealogists et al have had a hundred years to scrutinise what started (allegedly) with Darwin. For me it's more of a case of contrary evidence. I have read a lot supporting it, but from the people who opposite it I don't actually see any evidence. Where are the studies conducted which show the opposite? It is common sense to side with a group who actually have something to show. It's like Deism, the lack of evidence against god is not proof. The same goes for this, in fact more so considering there is a mountain of evidence supporting it. I wholeheartedly agree with you on dualism my friend. You won't see me trapped within the political left-right paradigm. I do, however, support and carry moral dualism, which I find quite interesting. If you're interested at all I believe the only logic in reference to the universe's morality is that one ought to realise that objectively there is no good or evil, but simultaneously hold the view that subjectively, and in order for us to function as a progressive race, there is good and evil. If this makes sense, I want to shake your hand.
This is operating from the point of dualism. Dualistic thinking assumes that the other side is wrong, just because the first side produces what looks to be a valid point.... at face value. Dualism and its assumptions can be done away with by looking at... facts ! Most people can not keep an open mind, because in the end, they believe what they WANT to believe. This is dualistic thinking, but is a good point.
You're too quick to judge me as dualistic. I didn't necessarily say that the opposition is incorrect for not having studies and data, I just want to see them. You can't realistically expect someone to read material, see that it makes personal logical sense and then ask them to believe in another idea which is based wholly on criticism of this data with none of its own. I'd be more than happy to view any alternative evidence. This reminds me of a time I went to see David Icke live. On the door there was an old woman who was selling hardback books. She said to me "It's nice to see younger people here. Here, this is what the government doesn't want you to know." and she pushed one of the books into my hands that was illustrated with the famous "Creation of Adam" Sistine Chapel painting my Michelangelo, but with an alien pressing fingers with man, not god, implying mankind, because of his blatantly differing and superior abilities over all other life, was placed here by intelligence indeed, but that of extraterrestrial.
That is good news. It sounded like "one or the other" to me. Take a look at this, then : LINK The key word in that quote is "realistically". Some people are able to accept things that "sound" like opposites, but in reality are different sides of the same truth. Do you remember the proverb about the five blind men who came upon an elephant ? This is getting into subjective territory, and I have to get to work, but please realize, even true science is flawed. It can only operate in things that register with the senses.