Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,432 Year: 3,689/9,624 Month: 560/974 Week: 173/276 Day: 13/34 Hour: 0/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation vs Evolution music! Gotta hear this!
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 16 of 33 (194996)
03-28-2005 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 1:53 PM


'Purpose Driven Mic'
That's clever. I like that.
I'm really more of a "MC Frontalot" kind of guy, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 1:53 PM Destinylab has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6044 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 17 of 33 (195020)
03-28-2005 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Destinylab
03-27-2005 6:56 PM


about this song...
From "about this song" after "Are We Accidents":
We believe all life and all the life creates is by the grace of God in his timing and will, nothing is new under the sun. All that man accomplishes through science, medicine, invention is taken from the earth and it's creations. We believe we were created, and that these truths are self evident. Those who claim wisdom through human means are foolish.
So, Destinylab, are we to trust science, or not?
You first claim science is born of God and creation, then claim that "wisdom through human means" is foolish - I would say science and the scientific method are quite "human means". Hopefully you realize that science and medicine have proceeded based on empirical evidence, and that simply by using faith these fields of study would still be stuck in the Dark Ages. Evolution theory is born of the same methods that have given us the insight into the rest of science/medicine/invention - so why is evolution different?
It seems to me it is you who is ignoring the beauty of God's creation. All evidence within God's creation points to an old earth and the theory of evolution.
Unless you think God's creation is a lie...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Destinylab, posted 03-27-2005 6:56 PM Destinylab has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:12 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Destinylab
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 33 (195080)
03-28-2005 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by pink sasquatch
03-28-2005 6:07 PM


Re: about this song...
You first claim science is born of God and creation, then claim that "wisdom through human means" is foolish - I would say science and the scientific method are quite "human means".
I very much respect science and what has been accomplished through it. What I am speaking of is people that put in there faith in the scientific community like there is no question about evolution. This is simply not true. Science will always be incomplete because of the exclusion of all unknown and unobservable things that are beyond our comprehension.
You cannot teach a dog auto mechanics. The tools and the car are right in front of him but if we put all our earthly means into this one goal it would never happen. I believe we are the same. There are things right in front of us and all around us that we cannot comprehend or explain. They simply are not added the equasion. God is looking at us like we look at the dog and saying,"duh!" God is the only TRUE scientist. Therefore we are fools to put our complete faith in the science of man.
Creation is self evident. If you do not agree then you are lying to yourself. You are without excuse.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities, his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
John 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made that was made.

"Creationist Flavored Music"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by pink sasquatch, posted 03-28-2005 6:07 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 03-28-2005 11:14 PM Destinylab has replied
 Message 20 by pink sasquatch, posted 03-28-2005 11:30 PM Destinylab has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 19 of 33 (195082)
03-28-2005 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 11:12 PM


Re: about this song...
But there is NO question about evolution. It happened.
There is a question about how evolution happened, but Evolution itself is FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:12 PM Destinylab has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:41 PM jar has replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6044 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 20 of 33 (195085)
03-28-2005 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 11:12 PM


self-evident
Creation is self evident. If you do not agree then you are lying to yourself. You are without excuse.
It seems to me you are claiming to know God's intent and methods by claiming that evolution cannot be part of His creation. If that is so, then you are without excuse.
There were times when people "knew" that demons caused disease, the Earth was flat, and the sun revolved around the Earth. These things were self-evident, the Bible was cited as proof of this self-evidence, and those who suggest otherwise based on natural evidence were labeled heretics and sometimes tortured and executed.
Now we know that this knowledge that was so "self-evident" a few hundred years ago is incorrect.
Would you argue otherwise?
If you examine the reality of God's creation you'll find the evidence for evolution therein - unless you do not trust that evidence, for perhaps you believe God to be deceitful through His creation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:12 PM Destinylab has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:05 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

Destinylab
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 33 (195089)
03-28-2005 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
03-28-2005 11:14 PM


Re: about this song...
Evolution is a fact? It is admittedly unobservable, lacking fossil evidence, dependent upon scientific consensus, and essentially a belief system about past life on Earth. The following quotes are from leading and well known scientists and researchers.
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), "Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?" Paleobiology, vol. 6(1), January 1980, p. 127
"Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory."
Ronald R. West, PhD (paleoecology and geology) (Assistant Professor of Paleobiology at Kansas State University), "Paleoecology and uniformitarianism". Compass, vol. 45, May 1968, p. 216
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that 'a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein'."
Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University), as quoted in "Hoyle on Evolution". Nature, vol. 294, 12 Nov. 1981, p. 105
"Echoing the criticism made of his father's habilis skulls, he added that Lucy's skull was so incomplete that most of it was 'imagination made of plaster of Paris', thus making it impossible to draw any firm conclusion about what species she belonged to."
Referring to comments made by Richard Leakey (Director of National Museums of Kenya) in The Weekend Australian, 7-8 May 1983, Magazine, p. 3
"The entire hominid collection known today would barely cover a billiard table, ... the collection is so tantalizingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often so fragmented and inconclusive, that more can be said about what is missing than about what is present. ...but ever since Darwin's work inspired the notion that fossils linking modern man and extinct ancestor would provide the most convincing proof of human evolution, preconceptions have led evidence by the nose in the study of fossil man."
John Reader (photo-journalist and author of "Missing Links"), "Whatever happened to Zinjanthropus?" New Scientist, 26 March 1981, p. 802
"A five million-year-old piece of bone that was thought to be a collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib, ...He [Dr. T. White] puts the incident on par with two other embarrassing [sic] faux pas by fossil hunters: Hesperopithecus, the fossil pig's tooth that was cited as evidence of very early man in North America, and Eoanthropus or 'Piltdown Man,' the jaw of an orangutan and the skull of a modern human that were claimed to be the 'earliest Englishman'.
"The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone.'"
Dr. Tim White (anthropologist, University of California, Berkeley). As quoted by Ian Anderson "Hominoid collarbone exposed as dolphin's rib", in New Scientist, 28 April 1983, p. 199
"We add that it would be all too easy to object that mutations have no evolutionary effect because they are eliminated by natural selection. Lethal mutations (the worst kind) are effectively eliminated, but others persist as alleles. ...Mutants are present within every population, from bacteria to man. There can be no doubt about it. But for the evolutionist, the essential lies elsewhere: in the fact that mutations do not coincide with evolution."
Pierre-Paul Grass (University of Paris and past-President, French Academie des Sciences) in Evolution of Living Organisms, Academic Press, New York, 1977, p. 88
"The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that natural selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well."
Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), "The return of hopeful monsters". Natural History, vol. LXXXVI(6), June-Jule 1977, p. 28
"And in man is a three-pound brain which, as far as we know, is the most complex and orderly arrangement of matter in the universe."
Dr. Isaac Asimov (biochemist; was a Professor at Boston University School of Medicine; internationally known author), "In the game of energy and thermodynamics you can't even break even.". Smithsonian Institute Journal, June 1970, p. 10
"Why do geologists and archeologists still spend their scarce money on costly radiocarbon determinations? They do so because occasional dates appear to be useful. While the method cannot be counted on to give good, unequivocal results, the number do impress people, and save them the trouble of thinking excessively. Expressed in what look like precise calendar years, figures seem somehow better ... 'Absolute' dates determined by a laboratory carry a lot of weight, and are extremely helpful in bolstering weak arguments.
"No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. This whole bless thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read."
Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon: ages in error". Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol.19(3), 1981, pp.9-29. Reprinted in the Creation Research Society Quarterly, vol. 19(2), September 1982, pp. 117-127 (quotes from pp. 123 and 125)
"The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling that explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results. This is supposed to be hard-headed pragmatism."
J. E. O'Rourks, "Pragmatism versus materialism in stratigraphy". American Journal of Science, vol. 276, January 1976, p. 47
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact."
Dr. T. N. Tahmisian (Atomic Energy Commission, USA) in "The Fresno Bee", August 20, 1959. As quoted by N. J. Mitchell, Evolution and the Emperor's New Clothes, Roydon Publications, UK, 1983, title page.
Warning. You have merely cut and pasted the entire content of this post from 12 Quotes from Leading Evolutionists, or some derivative page. See Forum Guidelines, and especially rule 6: "Never include material not your own without attribution to the original source." You must always acknowledge your sources; and this applies no less for a source that is quoting others. You did not access these references yourself; so you must quote the source you did use.
You should also check rule 10. "Do not cut-n-paste long excerpts into message boxes. Please instead introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference." It is a discussion forum; you are expected to make an actual argument in your own words. Giving one quote, with links for the rest and some commentary in your own words, would be more in line with what is expected. Never quote the entire content of another page. Selections to back up your point are okay.
AdminSylas
This message has been edited by AdminSylas, 03-29-2005 12:49 AM

"Creationist Flavored Music"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 03-28-2005 11:14 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by jar, posted 03-28-2005 11:48 PM Destinylab has replied
 Message 24 by nator, posted 03-29-2005 12:00 AM Destinylab has not replied
 Message 31 by Sylas, posted 03-29-2005 12:33 AM Destinylab has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 22 of 33 (195091)
03-28-2005 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 11:41 PM


Re: about this song...
I'm sorry but those are simply old nonsense quote mining jobs and will get little more than a chuckle here.
Yes, Evolution is a FACT. No question, no doubt FACT. Anyone who says otherwise is simply wrong. Period. No question. WRONG!
You're free to your own beliefs, that's not an issue. You can come here and say you don't believe evolution happened. That's fine. No problem.
But you would be wrong.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:41 PM Destinylab has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:16 AM jar has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 23 of 33 (195093)
03-28-2005 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 12:33 PM


Re: Thanks for the replies!
quote:
We all have the same evidence in front of us, the difference is how you interpret the evidence. I simply do not have enough trust in man to believe in evolution.
Do you accept that paternity tests that use DNA are reliable?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 12:33 PM Destinylab has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:11 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 24 of 33 (195096)
03-29-2005 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 11:41 PM


Re: about this song...
link
Denver, Colorado, February 16, 2003 -- A first-of-its-kind statement on evolution signed by over 200 scientists was unveiled today at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual convention in Denver, Colorado, following Lawrence Krauss's topical lecture entitled "Scientific Ignorance as a Way of Life: From Science Fiction in Washington to Intelligent Design in the Classroom." The statement -- sponsored by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), a nonprofit organization that defends the teaching of evolution in the public schools -- reads:
Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate scientific debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism of evolution. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of the public schools.
The 220 signatories are a distinguished group. Almost all hold PhDs in the sciences. They include two Nobel prize winners, eight members of the National Academy of Sciences, and several well-known authors of popular science books such as Why We Age, Darwin's Ghost, and How the Mind Works.
And they're all named Steve.
Eugenie C. Scott, the executive director of NCSE, explained the significance of the statement. "Creationists are fond of amassing lists of PhDs who deny evolution to try to give the false impression that evolution is somehow on the verge of being rejected by the scientific community. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Hundreds of scientists endorsed the NCSE statement. And we asked only scientists named Steve -- who represent approximately 1% of scientists."
Steven Weinberg, professor of physics at the University of Texas, Austin, and recipient of the 1977 Nobel Prize in physics, added, "Of course science isn't decided by manifesto; this statement pokes fun at such efforts. If you want to know whether scientists accept evolution, you should look in the scientific literature. There you find that evolution is alive and well, as a central and unifying principle of science."
Warning. This entire post is nothing in your own words, but entirely cut and pasted material. See Forum Guidelines, and especially rule 10. "Do not cut-n-paste long excerpts into message boxes. Please instead introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference." It is a discussion forum; you are expected to make an actual argument in your own words.
AdminSylas
This message has been edited by AdminSylas, 03-29-2005 12:53 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:41 PM Destinylab has not replied

Destinylab
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 33 (195097)
03-29-2005 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by pink sasquatch
03-28-2005 11:30 PM


Re: self-evident
It seems to me you are claiming to know God's intent and methods by claiming that evolution cannot be part of His creation. If that is so, then you are without excuse.
I would have no problem with God using evolution, the problem is the lack of physical evidence in the fossil record and lack of transitional fossils.
The other thing you seem not to take into account is that most evolutionists are pushing athiesism. So how do they go hand in hand?
The other things you say were never proclaimed self evident, nor is there a verse in the Bible that claims it should be. The truth of a Creator being self evident is something that we are being held accountable for.
This message has been edited by Destinylab, 03-29-2005 12:06 AM

"Creationist Flavored Music"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by pink sasquatch, posted 03-28-2005 11:30 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by nator, posted 03-29-2005 12:17 AM Destinylab has not replied

Destinylab
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 33 (195099)
03-29-2005 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by nator
03-28-2005 11:53 PM


Re: Thanks for the replies!
Do you accept that paternity tests that use DNA are reliable?
Do you accept that DNA is an encoded language that is another proof of a Creator? DNA could not have formed by chance.

"Creationist Flavored Music"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by nator, posted 03-28-2005 11:53 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by nator, posted 03-29-2005 12:21 AM Destinylab has not replied

Destinylab
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 33 (195100)
03-29-2005 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by jar
03-28-2005 11:48 PM


Re: about this song...
Yer funny! If evolution is a fact then prove it. Facts are proveable and observable right? Why don't you educate me?

"Creationist Flavored Music"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by jar, posted 03-28-2005 11:48 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by nator, posted 03-29-2005 12:31 AM Destinylab has not replied
 Message 32 by jar, posted 03-29-2005 3:50 AM Destinylab has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 28 of 33 (195101)
03-29-2005 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Destinylab
03-29-2005 12:05 AM


Re: self-evident
quote:
I would have no problem with God using evolution, the problem is the lack of physical evidence in the fossil record and lack of transitional fossils.
What kind of fossil evidence you you believe is so lacking that makes thousands of scientists over the last century or so a bunch of dunderheads for not realizing it?
Also, what is your definition of "transitional fossil"?
quote:
The other thing you seem not to take into account is that most evolutionists are pushing athiesism. So how do they go hand in hand?
They are?
That's news to me.
Where are they doing this? In the biology textbooks? Maybe at scientific conferences, right?
I'd better tell the several Christian scientists I know pwesonally, all of whom accept the ToE, that they are actually athiests and push it on people.
quote:
The other things you say were never proclaimed self evident, nor is there a verse in the Bible that claims it should be. The truth of a Creator being self evident is something that we are being held accountable for.
What does this mean? Either something is self evident or it isn't.
What is so "evident" about your particular version of a Creator? Why is it not "evident" to many others?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-29-2005 12:18 AM

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."--Thomas Jefferson
There is no greater threat to civil liberties than an efficient government. -jar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:05 AM Destinylab has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 29 of 33 (195102)
03-29-2005 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Destinylab
03-29-2005 12:11 AM


Re: Thanks for the replies!
quote:
Do you accept that DNA is an encoded language that is another proof of a Creator? DNA could not have formed by chance.
Please answer the question.
Do you accept that paternity tests that use DNA are reliable?
Yes or no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:11 AM Destinylab has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 30 of 33 (195107)
03-29-2005 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Destinylab
03-29-2005 12:16 AM


Re: about this song...
quote:
If evolution is a fact then prove it. Facts are proveable and observable right? Why don't you educate me?
Evolution for Beginners
At a minimum, three things are needed for evolution to happen. Birth (we know that happens), death (we also know that happens), and genetic variation (and we know that happens). More specifically, 1) the births of many more individuals than can survive, to give the maximum genetic potential; 2) the disproportionately high percentage of deaths of organisms who are less well suited to their environments and predatory conditions, and therefore are unable to leave as many offspring; and 3) genetic variation to produce the raw material of physical change, which is then acted upon by natural selective forces. All of this has nothing to do with the species wanting to evolve into another species. Creatures do not choose to evolve. If the environment and food supply changes, or if the species relocates to a new environment, or a new species enters the area and competes, evolution will probably occur- or the species may become extinct.
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
From a respected Biology textbook:
Since Darwin's time, massive additional evidence has accumulated supporting the fact of evolution--that all living organisms present on earth today have arisen from earlier forms in the course of earth's long history. Indeed, all of modern biology is an affirmation of this relatedness of the many species of living things and of their gradual divergence from one another over the course of time. Since the publication of The Origin of Species, the important question, scientifically speaking, about evolution has not been whether it has taken place. That is no longer an issue among the vast majority of modern biologists. Today, the central and still fascinating questions for biologists concern the mechanisms by which evolution occurs.
- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology 5th ed. 1989, Worth Publishers, p. 972
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-29-2005 12:31 AM
Same warning as for Message 24. To stay within guidelines, you should say something yourself on the subject.
AdminSylas
This message has been edited by AdminSylas, 03-29-2005 12:55 AM

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."--Thomas Jefferson
There is no greater threat to civil liberties than an efficient government. -jar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:16 AM Destinylab has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024