- 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: The Scientific Establishment Is Finally Starting To Take Intelligent Design Seriously
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:19 pm to Guntoter1
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:19 pm to Guntoter1
quote:
That has been shown to be statistically impossible.
What was the equation?
So far as I know, scientists can only guess what the conditions were at that time, and can only guess at what exactly would constitute Earth's first lifeform. They don't even agree on what the process could have been that spurred it.
With so many unknowns, there's no way someone calculated that. Just another BS creationist talking point.
0
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:20 pm to Flats
quote:
Lightning strikes bro. You've gotta add the lightning strikes. Like Dr Frankenstein.
Nah dude, you gotta cast demons into a herd of pigs... Or spit into the dirt then rub it into someone's eye.
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:22 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Luckily, evolution doesn't say anything about abiogenesis - and it doesn't need to.
True, but evolutionist do!
And they say it without any evidence.
In fact all of the evidence (so far) has shown that life can not begin randomly. The evidence shows that there has to be at least a cell wall already in place with the dna already present. Hmmm I wonder how that could happen naturally.
This post was edited on 5/19/22 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:23 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Well sure, if you look at it only from a scientific perspective. That's what makes scientists look like fools.
What other perspective do you have access to outside of your sight, smell, taste, touch, and hearing? Because those are the only perspectives I'm aware we humans can use to make sense of the world around us.
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:24 pm to Guntoter1
quote:
True, but evolutionist do!
And they say it without any evidence.
In fact all of the evidence (so far) has shown just that life can not begin randomly.
"Evolutionists" claim that "life began randomly"!
Keep fighting those windmil... err... dragons!
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:27 pm to Azkiger
quote:
"Evolutionists" claim that "life began randomly"!
Yes
Enlighten me on how life began
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:35 pm to Azkiger
Dude. You should never put family photos on this site.
This post was edited on 5/19/22 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:46 pm to Guntoter1
quote:
Guntoter1
Another one beaten senseless by the citation needed stick...
Posted on 5/19/22 at 9:51 pm to Flats
quote:
In a lot of their eyes, yes. Look at the thread title; it just talks about people taking it seriously. Not hawking it, not teaching it in schools, just taking it seriously. That offends people of a different religious nature.
Yes, I don’t hardly share my feelings about evolution, and neither does my church even take a stance on it. Yet I’m crazy when I share in a thread like this my opinion and belief.
Posted on 5/19/22 at 11:49 pm to the_truman_shitshow
quote:
If this is the direction to where mainstream is headed, you can be certain that they will not point towards Yahweh. This is most certainly reinforcing their narrative of the existence of aliens and extraterrestrials.
Exactly. Anything that comes out of the sky to "visit" is of evil origin.
Posted on 5/19/22 at 11:52 pm to aubie101
quote:
Yep, but science fears opening the door to something that they can't comprehend or quantify
They dreamed up quantum physics to cover this.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:02 am to Gaspergou202
quote:
The Intelligence is God, and he created everything billions of years ago including the process of evolution.
I have a hard time with billions. Or evolution.
God created the earth and sky and everything in it in 7 days, resting the 7th. In scripture it says a day is like a thousand years to the Lord. So around 7000 years to create, including man, in his image, never to evolve from His image (if you can find in the bible where he allowed man to evolve let me know. There was only one change he made to man and that was to limit his lifespan from thousands of years to 120 years).
Given 7000 years to create, limiting the lifespan of man to 120, we only have a few generations before we get to the birth, life, and death/resurrection of Jesus. And then 2022 years since. We looking at 10,000 years or so.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 3:44 am to Guntoter1
quote:I'd not picked up on that "dispute". There are folks in this thread who believe in neither though.
I have read the entire thread and you guys are arguing apples and oranges.
First of all ID does NOT dispute evolution.
Addressing your post about ID, first off, people assume the intelligent designer must be God. Within the ID thesis, that is patently false. All ID requires is a scientifically advanced interloper.
Second, there are actually two points ID theorists interface with. One is "genesis of life", as you put it. The other is an inexplicable and incongruent phenotypic jump to genus Homo from the presumed progenitor, Australopithecus, in the fossil record.
Neither of these points is fully sorted out scientifically. I'm personally agnostic on ID. The arguments in its behalf are plausible, as are those of abiogenesis and evolution. Both deserve full scientific questioning and pursuit.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 4:13 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The arguments in its behalf are plausible, as are those of abiogenesis and evolution. Both deserve full scientific questioning and pursuit.
Agree.
I approached ID with skepticism but surprisingly found it to be a compelling theory.
I have found that most people who argue against it are arguing against a straw man because they assume they know what it is without doing any research.
Abiogenesis , in my opinion, is actually the least science based theory of the 3.
Evolution has, what appears to be, overwhelming Circumstantial evidence in its favor.
The flaw in the argument of the pure evolutionist is that they apply this overwhelming evidence to Precambrian life, when in fact evolution theory compleatly falls apart.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 4:37 am
Posted on 5/20/22 at 5:37 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Yes, I don’t hardly share my feelings about evolution, and neither does my church even take a stance on it.
Perhaps because it's a losing argument?
To admit evolution is to eliminate the need for a creator or intelligent designer.
People of European descent have a percentage of Neanderthal DNA. The Chinese very likely have Homo Erectus DNA. The conclusion being that multiple species of humans existed on earth simultaneously and mated.
Not only did we evolve from bonobos, but all species are related. Common ancestry, DNA, and the phylogenetic tree.
It's been my experience that people (inclusive of those believing in a God) discount and ignore evidence if it conflicts with their worldview, instead of changing the worldview to one supported by fact. A much more difficult process, but my definition of growth.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 5:49 am to MNCTigah
quote:
To admit evolution is to eliminate the need for a creator or intelligent designer
This is, of course, not true.
Evolution May conflict with fundamental Christian belief in biblical genesis but it certainly does not explain how life began or for that matter how the universe began.
There is plenty of room for evolution and a creator to coexist.
Just because the Adam and Eve story may not be “historically accurate “ does not mean that God is now proven to not exist.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 5:57 am
Posted on 5/20/22 at 5:55 am to MNCTigah
quote:Evolution has nothing whatsoever to do with the elimination or need of a creator or intelligent designer.
To admit evolution is to eliminate the need for a creator or intelligent designer.
quote:You really don't know what you are talking about.
Not only did we evolve from bonobos
quote:That is quite an ironical statement, given various other posits in this thread.
It's been my experience that people (inclusive of those believing in a God) discount and ignore evidence if it conflicts with their worldview, instead of changing the worldview to one supported by fact.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 6:08 am to Guntoter1
quote:Even then, the 'conflict' is basically just with literal interpretation. Otherwise, Genesis Ch1 sequencing is actually quite interesting in terms of tracking biospheric development.
Evolution May conflict with fundamental Christian belief in biblical genesis
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 6:09 am
Posted on 5/20/22 at 6:18 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Even then, the 'conflict' is basically just with literal interpretation. Otherwise, Genesis Ch1 sequencing is actually quite interesting in terms of tracking biospheric development.
I agree
Glad you noticed
Page 10 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News