- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Evolution vs intelligent design question.
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:33 pm to The Calvin
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:33 pm to The Calvin
quote:
What is an "evolutionist"? Is that similar to a "Gravitist" or one who believes in Gravity?
Not sure you linked the right post. Evolutionist is a common term, though. Did I use it in some way you deemed derisive? If so could you afford the courtesy of a quote and response/link to the actual post?
For example, evolutionist is a term used to describe Dawkins by friend and foe alike, because evolution and atheism are the basic limit of his offerings. OTOH, I believe Dawkins and others have used the same term to describe --- God forbid --- nonatheists who are proponents of evolution theory. I believe the term used in those instances is "theistic evolutionist".
Bottom line though, if "evolutionist" was something I posted, it likely referenced Dawkins or others who are all-consumed by use of evolution as a vehicle to promote their atheist faith. That is my normal contextual use.
0
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:36 pm to The Calvin
I actually prefer the term darwinist, as there are many IDers who believe that some form of evolution has occured, and is occurring. The darwinists simply believe that life evolved from matter
Dar·win·ism (där'wi-niz'?m)
Dar'win·ist n.
Dar'win·is'tic adj.
Dar·win·ism (där'wi-niz'?m)
Dar'win·ist n.
Dar'win·is'tic adj.
This post was edited on 3/20/14 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:38 pm to The Calvin
quote:
No one is stopping anything, champ. The term was made up
Oh my, I should have read this before posting above.
Is there a dictionary source you'd like to cite which does not include the word "evolutionist"?
quote:Dawkins would be apoplectic at being characterized in such a heretical way relative to his beliefs.
commonly used by Christians to try to gain equal rhetorical footing
This post was edited on 3/20/14 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:51 pm to Scoop
quote:
origin of DNA
Panspermia
Posted on 3/20/14 at 4:53 pm to StripedSaint
quote:who knows
Panspermia
Posted on 3/20/14 at 5:09 pm to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:
I will see if I can find it, but basically he said the odds of DNA coming into existence on its own (i.e. without some sort of creator) were impossible even using the oldest of estimates for earth.
Thanks.
This was kind of the point of the OP though it predictably turned into a shite show.
It wasn't a religious argument at all.
The OP was intending to ask why those that believe evolution rules out intelligent design cite DNA but do not attempt to explain where DNA originated. DNA is the lynch pin of any such discussion, not evolution.
I'll go one step further: The other side of this argument thinks that they can't believe in evolution and intelligent design concurrently. They certainly can unless they abide by the idiocy that the Earth is 5000 years old.
I don't have the arrogance you see on one side and the stupidity seen on the other side.
DNA has the fingerprints of intelligent design and I do not believe the Earth is 5000 years old.
This post was edited on 3/20/14 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 3/20/14 at 5:29 pm to theunknownknight
An eyeball is so complex that it could not have been brought into existence one step at a time . The retina, cornea etc were assembled all at once. Darwin said he could not explain it.
The similarity of structure does not Necessarily mean evolution. Animals have spines. Doesn't mean one spine changed into the next.
No one knows how old the earth is. It takes an assumption either way. The evidence can fit either way.
I don't know, but I don't like being looked down on because evolution is more scientific. I think it is just as religious as creator.
Also it is not Science as the term is usually used . Science can put a man in the moon because of two things. Observation and experimentation. This is not available to study evolution. No one argues with evolution within a species . We argue over evolving from one specie to another.
Ben Stein has a cool movie about this. All the evolution skeptics are not dummies hustling for a buck. But many are, I know.
The similarity of structure does not Necessarily mean evolution. Animals have spines. Doesn't mean one spine changed into the next.
No one knows how old the earth is. It takes an assumption either way. The evidence can fit either way.
I don't know, but I don't like being looked down on because evolution is more scientific. I think it is just as religious as creator.
Also it is not Science as the term is usually used . Science can put a man in the moon because of two things. Observation and experimentation. This is not available to study evolution. No one argues with evolution within a species . We argue over evolving from one specie to another.
Ben Stein has a cool movie about this. All the evolution skeptics are not dummies hustling for a buck. But many are, I know.
Posted on 3/20/14 at 5:32 pm to zeebo
quote:
An eyeball is so complex that it could not have been brought into existence one step at a time . The retina, cornea etc were assembled all at once. Darwin said he could not explain it.
Lol
Posted on 3/20/14 at 5:38 pm to zeebo
quote:
An eyeball is so complex that it could not have been brought into existence one step at a time . The retina, cornea etc were assembled all at once. Darwin said he could not explain it.
The similarity of structure does not Necessarily mean evolution. Animals have spines. Doesn't mean one spine changed into the next.
No one knows how old the earth is. It takes an assumption either way. The evidence can fit either way.
I don't know, but I don't like being looked down on because evolution is more scientific. I think it is just as religious as creator.
Also it is not Science as the term is usually used . Science can put a man in the moon because of two things. Observation and experimentation. This is not available to study evolution. No one argues with evolution within a species . We argue over evolving from one specie to another.
Ben Stein has a cool movie about this. All the evolution skeptics are not dummies hustling for a buck. But many are, I know.
I'm not PRO evolution as much as I am AGAINST a mechanical/absolute view of inerrancy when in comes to Genesis 1.
Translated: I don't believe Genesis is a science book. I believe it's a theology book.
I think science is a GREAT thing, but in its truest sense, knowing its limits yet constantly seeking the truth. If that's evolution, so be it. It's a compelling theory.
When I see posters make fun of biblical faith, however, and then hypocritically cling to the level of faith necessary to grasp inductive conclusions, I call them out.
This post was edited on 3/20/14 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 3/20/14 at 5:49 pm to zeebo
quote:Some single cell organisms have photosensitive loci. Various primitive forms like flatworms have symmetric photosensitive organs on either side of the head. Slightly more advanced sealife (certain clams?) have eye organs open to water but with a restrictable opening to aid focusing -- basically an eye without lens or cornea. Small jump there to a transparent gel or surface serving as cornea/lens.
An eyeball is so complex that it could not have been brought into existence one step at a time
This post was edited on 3/20/14 at 5:57 pm
Posted on 3/20/14 at 8:25 pm to zeebo
quote:
No one knows how old the earth is. It takes an assumption either way. The evidence can fit either way.
Posted on 3/20/14 at 10:49 pm to Scoop
Evolution is an impulse initiated and controlled by an intelligent designer. DNA is just a blueprint. You don't just drop a blueprint off at a building site and come back a week later to find a building. Someone or something has to read the blueprint and build the building. Call that God or the Universe. The impulse of evolution is driven by intelligent design. If that is not a cosmic joke I don't know what is.
Posted on 3/20/14 at 11:43 pm to BeerCity
Right. So millions of species just popped up out of thin air, fully grown with some vague innate knowledge of how to survive in various climates and ready to reproduce at the drop of a dime in a couple days and fill an entire planet
I have my reservations about the guy with the wand
I have my reservations about the guy with the wand
Posted on 3/20/14 at 11:58 pm to BeerCity
quote:
Evolution is an impulse initiated and controlled by an intelligent designer. DNA is just a blueprint. You don't just drop a blueprint off at a building site and come back a week later to find a building. Someone or something has to read the blueprint and build the building. Call that God or the Universe. The impulse of evolution is driven by intelligent design. If that is not a cosmic joke I don't know what is.
lol this is some next level trolling right here
Page 13 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News