PDA

View Full Version : Just a Random Thought I had on Evolution vs. Creationism...



Phrost
16th July 03, 05:47 PM
If you're so convinced some omnipotent "god" created everything, then why should any scientific theory regarding all this threaten your beliefs?

Why not just sit back, shut the fuck up, and let the scientists figure out how your "god" did it?

Unless you feel somehow that lowly human scientists are somehow more intelligent or capable than your diety, where's the harm in letting them dig up the facts that show how life, the world, and the universe really happened?

Why do the religious have so much fear and scorn for science, when it too, through his creations, is a product of their god?

joen00b
16th July 03, 05:49 PM
I think the religious folks get pissed off when they see it as God having an indirect influence on creation instead of a direct influence.

Merauk
16th July 03, 05:50 PM
Why do the religious have so much fear and scorn for science, when it too, through his creations, is a product of their god?

About as many religous people believe that creationism is an absolute truth as they do the Earth is flat. It would be like me saying that every atheist wants to have Christmas trees ripped down and burned as an affront to their senses.

Kiko
16th July 03, 05:53 PM
I'm religious. Creation stories are symbolic. Evolution sounds great.

Science is about miracles, if you think about it the right way.

Phrost
16th July 03, 05:55 PM
About as many religous people believe that creationism is an absolute truth as they do the Earth is flat. It would be like me saying that every atheist wants to have Christmas trees ripped down and burned as an affront to their senses.

And for some reason you're making the assumption that I'm targeting every Christian instead of the specific individuals who hold the beliefs I've called into question.

NarcisPrince
16th July 03, 06:07 PM
I'll tell you this though Phrack. As a Biochemisty/Physicist I can tell you that at the highest echelon of science , Physics, many Physicists believe in some supreme conscious power. I guess the main reason for this is that Physicist make it their life work to figure out why everything is the way it is. Chemist, Biologists, Mathematicians, all of them derive their field's understanding from these Physicists. When something weird cannot simply be explained and must be just accepted for the time being, many Physicists just attribute it to some kind of "God" or conscious supreme power. Hell I mean Einstein himself was once quoted in saying "God doesn't play dice". He couldn't and wouldn't accept some of the principles behind Quantum Theory and Statistical Mechanics, and he hated Heizenburg's theory flat out about uncertainty. Most lower echelon scientists are the "hard core" evolutionists, many of the giants like Einstein were pretty spiritual/god fearing people, even though they represented the pinnacle of science. Ironic isn't it? :beatup:

Merauk
16th July 03, 06:14 PM
And for some reason you're making the assumption that I'm targeting every Christian instead of the specific individuals who hold the beliefs I've called into question.

It has nothing to do with religion it has to do with extremism. You could just as easily talk about vegetarians, militant atheists, etc. People are on the extreme fringe of society following some warped belief structure (religious or not) are nuts by definition, insane people by definition donít react well to logical thought. Or you could just as easily write your question backwards.

If you're so convinced some omnipotent "god" didnít create everything, then why should any belief regarding all this threaten your facts?

Why not just sit back, shut the fuck up, and let the priests figure out how your "DNA" did it?

Unless you feel somehow that lowly priests are somehow more intelligent or capable than your DNA, where's the harm in letting them dig up the facts that show how life, the world, and the universe really happened?

Why do the scientific have so much fear and scorn for religion?

joen00b
16th July 03, 06:17 PM
It has nothing to do with religion it has to do with extremism. You could just as easily talk about vegetarians, militant atheists, etc.

What does PETA have to do with this conversation?

Sithray
16th July 03, 06:19 PM
Show me a famous scientists, known by EVERYONE, (IE Hawking, Einstein) who does not believe in some sort of God, and I will give you a BJ.

It's not that Religious types hate when God is put into question by scientists, it's the fact that mere humans can be so arrogant as to think they know the answers, so therefore use flawed science to believe what they wish.

TRUE scientists who have far surpassed common science, admit they have no choice but to believe that some higher power directs the universe.

I for one believe in the big bang. I also believe in **SOME** evoloutionalist ideas, but I believe there is an omnipotent factor directing all things.

Angrie the Strategist
16th July 03, 06:31 PM
At one point I would care to explain what "scientific" really means (like I've done 829049234 times on 38042823492343 threads) to the mass of uneducated and illiterate that make residence on CTC, but now I simply don't care.

In any case:

a) I highly doubt you are a physicist NarcisPrime because your claims (all of them) are absolute bullshit. What is more likely is that you took a class or two in highschool (and you probably still attend this same highschool) and now fashion yourself as Biochemist/physicist. How do I know this you ask? Because any and all physicists that have at least a masters degree (ie something that qualifies them as "physicist") know how to spell Heisenberg.

b) Pure scientific logic/reasoning arrives on only 1 stance regarding god: We don't know, but if forced to gamble on it then betting on "doesn't exist" seems fairly safe. Can he/she/it exist? Yes, it is quite possible.

c) "No choice but to believe in god" is completely over the top.

Sithray
16th July 03, 06:46 PM
c) "No choice but to believe in god" is completely over the top.

If you are gonna quote me, at least quote me right.


some higher power

What I mean by that, is something outside the realm of known science...you can pretty much make that out to be God or a totally new dimension of science, one we cannot yet comprehend.

It's all in how you perceive things. I prefer to believe that that higher power is God.

Phrost
16th July 03, 06:54 PM
It has nothing to do with religion it has to do with extremism. You could just as easily talk about vegetarians, militant atheists, etc. People are on the extreme fringe of society following some warped belief structure (religious or not) are nuts by definition, insane people by definition donít react well to logical thought. Or you could just as easily write your question backwards.

If you're so convinced some omnipotent "god" didnít create everything, then why should any belief regarding all this threaten your facts?

Why not just sit back, shut the fuck up, and let the priests figure out how your "DNA" did it?

Unless you feel somehow that lowly priests are somehow more intelligent or capable than your DNA, where's the harm in letting them dig up the facts that show how life, the world, and the universe really happened?

Why do the scientific have so much fear and scorn for religion?

Touche'

As I stated in the thread title, it was a random thought that jumped in my head while reading a thread on my website, on the topic of abortion.

My own understanding of things does not conflict with the concept of a higher consciousness, just one that is as whimsical and given to petty desires of glorification as is the Christian "God".

I'm only an Athiest in the sense that I do not think there is an individual intelligence directing things behind the scenes for its own reasons. Everything and everyone, as I see it, is part of the same consciousness, but through the haze of "ego" this has been lost. When we die, the "ego" is what dies, but the "energy" in the purest sense of physics, not glowing Ben Kenobi talking to Luke bullshit, lives on.

And such is our immortality and transcendence.

Sithray
16th July 03, 06:56 PM
Ashes and dust..ashes and dust.

Phrost
16th July 03, 06:59 PM
So I guess here's a better question for you Christicans:

Do you think that after death, you will travel to a 'place' in which you will be either rewarded or punished for your actions in life?

Ouden
16th July 03, 08:05 PM
Why must we have another of these threads!? Why? why? Why? why? Why? Why? Why? Why? I think we should have scientists look into why we continue to pound each other over the head with the same arguments.

joen00b
16th July 03, 08:31 PM
Why must we have another of these threads!? Why? why? Why? why? Why? Why? Why? Why?

It looks like Ouden was in a Hong Kong action flick and one of these threads killed his master...

NarcisPrince
16th July 03, 08:32 PM
It's funny how everytime anyone on internet boards lays any sort of claim to having first hand knowledge someone has to make it a point to toss out something along the lines of "I call bullshit". The fact that you feel it absolutely necessary to address my claims to my own education as "a)" rather then addressing the actual thread itself first without ever having met me, is a vibrant example of an inferiority complex of some sort that you have. You're right on one thing though, no I don't have my MS in either of the sciences mentioned above, just two BS degrees and currently a 2nd year student at USC working on a doctorate. No need to address what exactly I have done or not done with my education, stick to the fucking thread. Phrack says he is into ass kicking martial arts and tapping the shit out of folks, why don't you "call his bullshit" with your loud mouth? Maybe because he'll bend your ass in two and stuff your arm up your ass. Thanks for the Heizzzenbeeerg spelling correction, I knew I would need a spelling and grammar bitch sooner or later for posting.

downinit
16th July 03, 08:37 PM
I believe God exists. That way I can also blame him when my whole life is fucked to pieces. I can also listen to Terrible Lie by Nine Inch Nails and punch things and then overdose on tylenol with a bottle of wine or go on a disasterous killing spree while screaming "LOOK WHAT YOU'VE BROUGHT ME TO, GOD! FUCK YOU!". I mean, umm, pretend I never said that.

Merauk
16th July 03, 08:49 PM
just two BS degrees and currently a 2nd year student at USC working on a doctorate.

Degree's in and from?

Angrie the Strategist
16th July 03, 08:51 PM
That's all very nice. Why don't I call Phrack's claim as bullshit? Probably because when he said it first it sounded likely that he really was a kickboxer. Your post on the other hand was clearly not true.

But the fact remains you are not a physicist. You are a student that may or may not become a physicist (at a 2nd rate school, too, if I may say so). I called bullshit and guess what, you folded. Do you know what that means?

Game, set, match.

Cybsled
16th July 03, 09:19 PM
I can give you one reason why science fears religion.

It's because centuries ago the church would burn scientists at the stake ;/ Gallileo had to back down when the church got pissed at his theories to avoid being executed. Who needs progress? kekeke

Kwill
16th July 03, 09:19 PM
These guys are tougher than a doctoral committee: you better have references or they gonna call you on it.

Energiser
16th July 03, 09:22 PM
I was going to reply to this thread, but then i figured i'd probably be better off sticking a shoe-horn up my ass and running around screaming DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD! WHICH OLD WITCH? THE WICKED WITCH!

so i did.

Kwill
16th July 03, 09:25 PM
I can give you one reason why science fears religion.

It's because centuries ago the church would burn scientists at the stake ;/ Gallileo had to back down when the church got pissed at his theories to avoid being executed. Who needs progress? kekeke

Questioning the status quo, which in Gallileo's time was determined by the church, was to question the social order and the very fabric of society. So saying things weren't the way the authorities said they were was akin to trying to overthrow order and instilling chaos. By saying the earth revolved around the sun, he was saying the church, and therefore thier interpretation of God's word, was wrong. The earth, and humanity, wasn't the center of the universe. Scary stuff back then.

NarcisPrince
16th July 03, 09:26 PM
I hope you're at least an Ivy League graduate in a reputable field talking like that. USC is top 30 nationally ranked school and a couple years ago was named the number one higher education center in the nation by U.S. News & World Report as well as other ranking institutions after it kicked UCLA's ass. Yes, I know how much of a second rate or even third rate school UCLA is to be beaten out by USC (insert sarcasm here). In fact our school and physics department is SOOO shitty, that Stephen J. Hawking flew in from England for several days as a guest lecturer for our grad students in the fall of 2001. To point out just how weak our school is, I'll humbly admit that the California Institue of Technology chose to partner up with our campus instead of UCLA (you know that 3rd rate school we beat out) for the major portion of theoretical work being done now. My sarcasm aside, stop with the petty attacks on posts with your know-it-all chatter. How you can take up this arrogant mantle with other people you've never met before and assume shit without a shred of evidence is simply pointless. In any case, toss out all the witty tennis combacks you want, the bottom line is you're a dumbass for calling anyone's bullshit on the net without knowing them in real life and I'm done arguing on the net because we both know it's useless. /rerail thread.

Shorrtee McHeals
16th July 03, 09:27 PM
It's funny how everytime anyone on internet boards lays any sort of claim to having first hand knowledge someone has to make it a point to toss out something along the lines of "I call bullshit".

OMG YOU MISSPELLED HEIZNEBERG YOU HIGH SCHOOL DROP OUT!!!11!!1!!1!

NarcisPrince
16th July 03, 09:31 PM
OMG YOU MISSPELLED HEIZNEBERG YOU HIGH SCHOOL DROP OUT!!!11!!1!!1!

LoL, OH NOZ I M1sp3lled !!!! Back 2 sezaame streeet 4 meh ! Count: "Blah blah, today's word is HEIZENBUUUURG childrenz blah!" :beatup:

Angrie the Strategist
16th July 03, 09:41 PM
I didn't assume anything. The second I read your post I knew with absolute certainty (position and velocity) that there was no way you were a physicist. And what do you know, I was right.

You then went on to whine about how "everyone on the net" persecutes you. Maybe that's because nobody believes the claims you are making, much like Ratskeller and Malachy.

Anyway, time for you to pucker up and gg.

Merauk
16th July 03, 09:44 PM
without a shred of evidence is simply pointless

Degree's in and from?

Phrost
16th July 03, 09:47 PM
Well to clear up the record, I'm not a kickboxer per se, but I understand that saying such is just semantics as most people say kickboxer to describe any full-contact style of fighting.

Besides, kickboxers taken off their feet are generally as threatening as a shark on a sidewalk.

Anyway, I sincerely want to know what the Christians believe will happen to them after death, in precise terms, without any beating around the bush.

NarcisPrince
16th July 03, 09:51 PM
Degree's in and from?
Bachelor's in Biochemistry and Physics, right now I'm doing grad work at USC here in LA. :beatup: The whole God issue though is really individualized most of the time. IMO you can be from any sort of background and go either way. Lately though, I've noticed more and more people trying to walk the fence with either believing or not, the hybrid type theory mentioned earlier by a poster is becoming more and more poplular as of late. Having faith in some of what is said in religion as well as not denying the scientific evidence provided by researchers makes a lot of sense to the general public.

Halfrican
16th July 03, 09:56 PM
I hereby claim this thread for "gay"

joen00b
16th July 03, 10:04 PM
Anyway, I sincerely want to know what the Christians believe will happen to them after death, in precise terms, without any beating around the bush.

It depends on your religion. Mormons think that if they're good enough and holy enough, they themselves will become gods.

Kalric
16th July 03, 10:24 PM
. USC is top 30 nationally ranked school .

Yall did have Carson Palmer too. Why so much Hate to UCLA.

Well Phrack, if you want to know my thoughts, I believe in God who created all. But i also think that evolution was highley possible. With that, i dont think we will ever know what "really" happens when we die, till we exprience it.

I couldnt tell you in words how i honestly feel. I guess you can say its like believeing in Santa Claus, but at the same time you wonder how on earth he does it all. "There's no way he can do it all by himself"

And so with that, i believe that maybe God didnt do it all on his own, as in maybe he "was the spark that started the fire". Get what i mean. Tell me what you think Phrack.

Nikalos_2
16th July 03, 10:29 PM
Flare and Phrack met up in real life.

They both haves mouths, they both have cocks

Any proof they didnt suck each other's cocks?, they both have mouths.....and cocks, but no real proof that they didnt suck each other's cocks.


This shit is old. People are going to believe what they want to believe.
Its best to just play "who is going to be right" at the end of the game we call life.

Shorrtee McHeals
16th July 03, 10:30 PM
I couldnt tell you in words how i honestly feel. I guess you can say its like believeing in Santa Claus, but at the same time you wonder how on earth he does it all. "There's no way he can do it all by himself"

HULK SMASH!

Merril
17th July 03, 02:48 AM
Hoo boy, the shits on now, I'll be lucky to get out of this thread alive... but...

I'll speak to Merauk's contention first in the context that he presented it. First of all, a lot of early scientists WERE priests. Back in the days that schooling was exclusively church run before monarchies faded and were replaced by today's republics, priests play-acting at being scientists all 'for the glory of god' were a hell of a lot more common than FBI agents running around trying to prove the existence of extraterrestrials/supernatural phenomena/grandiose global international government conspiracies are today.

To be very to-the-point, the person who pioneered most of modern genetics... Gregor Mendel, didn't even believe in evolutionary theory at all. He was in fact, a creationist. Don't believe me? Fine, I respect that but click here (http://www.mendelweb.org/MWsapp.html) please before wasting time with pointless contradiction.

Merauk's contention is not only valid, it's also historically on-target. Funny isn't it? Btw... I think this kind of obviates the need for further bickering between Angrie and Narciss... because frankly, Narciss is also correct about what he said about Einstein. Or maybe I'm just plain as WRONG (http://condor.stcloudstate.edu/~lesikar/einstein/) about that as Narciss. Yes tho Angrie, backing up claims is a good thing so I give you props for that.

As for myself? I was raised in a traditional Christian Family. I went to a Christian church. What's going to happen to me after I die? Honestly, I have NO F'ing idea. My consciousness could implode. I could relive my worst moments and fears for all eternity. I guess I could play poker with God. Maybe try to take Hell over from the Devil. Or maybe something else altogether. Maybe nothing would happen. Maybe I'd just cease to be. And there's at once a frightening and sobering thought as well as one that gives you some finality. The nihilist outlook on death. Maybe I'd be reincarnated.

Which would I prefer to be the case? Honestly I've studied lots of religions and belief systems in my lifetime, and I think a combination of buddhist reincarnation, taoist philosophy, christian afterlife, with just a dash of zen mysticism suits me the best. It's a pity that most of all that is to help you cope and not to describe what happens, eh? One thing is for certain. We'll all find out, eventually... the hard way.

As far as science and religion being mutually exclusive? No. I don't think they are. As a matter of fact I think they feed off of each other. To an extent, science is as much a religion as religion is a science. As Merauk said, the danger is taking one or the other to the extreme point.

Okay, I think I'm about all done agreeing with Merauk. Frankly the shit is scaring me.

Halfrican
17th July 03, 04:59 AM
I would decapitate a whore, forrrrrr youuuuuuuuuuu

Chantress
17th July 03, 07:55 AM
Phrack, I am not afraid of science at all. I enjoy reading and learning about it and sincerely hope the pursuits of it continues. What troubles me is the incredible amount of credence that is given to a theory that is deemed statistically impossible. Statistica tells us that it is highly unlikely that amino acids could evolve into human in 100 billion years, and yet evolutionist proclaim it took a mere 5 billion. There is also a lack of evidence to support this theory. The theory does not threaten me at all. I am vehemently opposed to it becuase I do not want people to be mislead by a THEORY that is misrepresented as a FACT from the time they are 5 years old in grade school. I make no bones about the fact that Creation is just as much of a theory as evolution. Honestly, I think when looking at the full picture of facts, it takes less faith to believe in God and creation rather than Darwin and evolution. After all, even Darwin recanted his theory.

As to what happens when we die. Even among most Christians this is a point of contention. However, i do think that all believe we will be judged for how we lived our lives. It is the results of this judgement and when it will occur that is debated so much. Personally, I dont study it all that much as it seems relatively unimportant. If I live the life I am supposed to then I will be rewarded. If I dont, i will be punished. If I am wrong about everything and religion is all a hoax, I had a good time living life and doing the good things that I can for people, and I made the earth a beter place to be, I hope. No matter what happens, living my life based upon Biblical principles I come out ahead.

Cybsled
17th July 03, 08:11 AM
Statistically impossible is always a subjective phrase depending on what number set is being used.

Kitska
17th July 03, 09:06 AM
Bachelor's in Biochemistry and Physics, right now I'm doing grad work at USC here in LA.

You're right on one thing though, no I don't have my MS in either of the sciences mentioned above, just two BS degrees and currently a 2nd year student at USC working on a doctorate.

Don't you need masters degree to start working on doctorate? Why do those statements look different? So are you graduate student or working on doctorate? May be you've just confused words and ment to say different, but people will not trust someone who can't follow their own stories. And you still haven't said what school you got your BS from, I just see another post from Merauk "Degree's from?"

Phrost
17th July 03, 09:21 AM
Statistically impossible is always a subjective phrase depending on what number set is being used.

Exactly my thoughts. In an infinite span of time, it is entirely possible that enough random factors could come into play that an entire race of sentient grapes might dominate galaxies. Heck, in all actuality, in an infinite span of time it's almost guaranteed it would happen.

People that feel that the fact that things appear organized proves the existence of a diety behind the scenes directing it all, generally aren't able to grasp the concept of infinity.

Yes, given enough time, a room full of monkeys (well, immortal monkeys perhaps) COULD bang out a copy of the Bible, or however the analogy goes.

Kwill
17th July 03, 09:41 AM
My thoughts on this subject this morning are:

Why is it so important for some people to show there isn't a divine presence? I think because the world is a cruel, unfair place to be and it's hard to accept the idea of a divine who wouldn't step in and make things right for everyone.

Which most religions spend a lot of time explaining. And athiests of course just say yeah, it's a cruel unfair place because there's no one out there and it's all just random.

Scientists are people, too, and some can reconcile what they find with their inner faith, others cannot. Just because they are scientists doesn't mean they are right about matters of the spirit.

Merril
17th July 03, 09:47 AM
Why is it so important for some people to show there isn't a divine presence?

Heh. A question which really drives people nuts: If we create god in our own image, how the heck did we come up with the concept in the first place?

Kwill
17th July 03, 10:23 AM
Because of what I just said: people looking for answers to life's mysteries.

Kitska
17th July 03, 10:29 AM
There is hell, because people are being sent there:

HELL (http://my.netscape.com/corewidgets/news/story.psp?cat=50900&id=200307170841000266564)

Merril
17th July 03, 12:08 PM
Because of what I just said: people looking for answers to life's mysteries.

Okay. I didn't present that as well as I should have. My exact wording should have been slightly more agnostic. I beg forgiveness, I was a little tired and bored when I posted.

Reworded: We create God in our own image, and God creates us in his... who went first?

Actually, I think you could make a haiku out of that or something. Oh well... now I KNOW I'm tired and I'm outta here.

Boanerges
17th July 03, 12:10 PM
Exactly my thoughts. In an infinite span of time, it is entirely possible that enough random factors could come into play that an entire race of sentient grapes might dominate galaxies. Heck, in all actuality, in an infinite span of time it's almost guaranteed it would happen.

People that feel that the fact that things appear organized proves the existence of a diety behind the scenes directing it all, generally aren't able to grasp the concept of infinity.

Yes, given enough time, a room full of monkeys (well, immortal monkeys perhaps) COULD bang out a copy of the Bible, or however the analogy goes.

Bad analogy. There are, maybe, 70 or so keys on a typewriter (104 on your keyboard but some aren't essential to typing). So, mathematically, we could determine the number of computations (non-exclusive sets) that hitting a keyboard to produce any work out there would take. There's a fixed number of keystrokes and a fixed number of letters to enter.

What are the odds that, when you go outside, your motorcycle will suddenly fly apart and turn into a gas grill, complete with side burner and tank? We would first need to figure out how often motorcycles fly apart spontaneously. Then we would need to figure out what subset turn into grills as opposed to toasters, lampposts or even nothing at all.

Sounds absurd, doesn't it?

I have as good a grasp on infinity as a finite mind can have. But the assertion that hydrogen (plus a TON of dark matter that we can't see or detect) somehow exploded, formed the universe and life just happened by chance is equally absurd. Putting odds on it happening is about as accurate as guessing that there is a 1 in 2348587343870 chance your motorcycle will spontaneously turn into a grill.

I don't reject science but don't sit there telling me Evolution is a fact when there are gaping holes you can drive a truck through. More importantly, don't stifle debate on Evolution, especially in public classrooms where some people consider any attempts to point out flaws in Evolution as a violation of the mythical separation of church and state because if Evolution isn't true then Intellignet Design (or Creation) must be. Even if I did not believe in God, Evolution is VERY lacking in its science.

Do I believe in Heaven and Hell? Yes. What are they like? I'm really not sure but Heaven is described as a place of no more tears and Hell is described as eternal weeping and gnashing of teeth. I really don't think much description beyond that is necessary.

Incidentally, props to everyone for not turning this into another knock-down drag-out fight. Much <3 for civil discussion on this.

Kitska
17th July 03, 01:06 PM
1)I have as good a grasp on infinity as a finite mind can have. But the assertion that hydrogen (plus a TON of dark matter that we can't see or detect) somehow exploded, formed the universe and life just happened by chance is equally absurd. Putting odds on it happening is about as accurate as guessing that there is a 1 in 2348587343870 chance your motorcycle will spontaneously turn into a grill.


2)Do I believe in Heaven and Hell? Yes. What are they like? I'm really not sure but Heaven is described as a place of no more tears and Hell is described as eternal weeping and gnashing of teeth. I really don't think much description beyond that is necessary.


1)So it is absurd to think that through some physical and chemical processes something else formed, but it is not absurd to say that something or someone created the universe and life from nothing? That statement has no basis, sorry ;)

2)So lets say you went to heaven, and lets pretend you can know what's going on in this real world. You see your granddaughter get killed in the horrible car accident from someone who got drunk while they were on duty but left work earlier then usual because their relative made them upset (according to theory of probability these events happening all in order that would cause the death of your granddaughter are close to those of bike turning into a grill). But question is, you are not going to cry being in heaven and witnessing all of these events and knowing that your granddaughter happened to be at the place of an accident and not somewhere safe, leaving her parents crying and suffering?
And for Hell. You are there and your worse enemy getting royally screwed. Wouldn't that bring a big grin to your face? :biggrin:

NarcisPrince
17th July 03, 01:27 PM
Don't you need masters degree to start working on doctorate?
No, you don't. Once you begin grad school, you either finish up grad courses first two years and "Master out" of the program or continue onto the 3rd year and keep going until your respective dissertation is finished and you can defend in front of panel. BS degrees were also from USC, going away for grad school financially was not an option for me. :(

Kwill
17th July 03, 02:06 PM
I beg forgiveness...

You can beg prettily when I flog you for your insolence.

Kwill
17th July 03, 02:07 PM
keep going until your respective dissertation is finished and you can defend in front of panel.

There's the rub, my friend, it's that pesky dissertation =)

Vigil
17th July 03, 02:08 PM
I do beleive their must be a afterlife because if their isn't it would suck just to die and become nothing.

Cybsled
17th July 03, 02:08 PM
Evolution is taught in schools because evolution does occur.

What you have an issue with is currently taught ideas as to what causes evolution. You're associating the word "evolution" automatically with darwinism, which is like me saying "Cars suck because you have to wind a crank to start them and they top out at 20 miles per hour on a well paved road".

Kalric
17th July 03, 02:09 PM
I do beleive their must be a afterlife because if their isn't it would suck just to die and become nothing.


Word.

Vigil
17th July 03, 02:10 PM
I believe in Jesus not god btw...because he died for somone else and anyone who does that has big balls...also is a very nice guy.

Kalric
17th July 03, 02:12 PM
I believe ina Jesus not god btw...because he died for somone else and anyone who does that has big balls...also is a very nice guy.


Hahah, he must have been.

Phrost
17th July 03, 02:14 PM
The failure in your argument is that you're supposing that the universe itself is an enternal entity, and you still fail to grasp infinity.

And in an infinite span of time, an infinite number of universes would spawn and die, giving rise to an infinite diversity of forms of existence, occurrances, and phenomena that we would consider unlikely if not impossible.

You're still seeing the sun being drawn across the sky with a chariot.

Vigil
17th July 03, 02:19 PM
The failure in your argument is that you're supposing that the universe itself is an enternal entity, and you still fail to grasp infinity.

I understand and know how the universe works...big bang occurs universe expands then stops and contracts ...rinse and repeat. My point is that their must be somthing beyond us either some cosmic being or divine entity because if their isn't it would suck balls to just die and become nothing.

NarcisPrince
17th July 03, 02:21 PM
Cyb, is your avatar from Lufia: Fortress of Doom series? Not the SNES ones, but the ones with the cool cut scene storylines on Sega Saturn I think? :D

Cybsled
17th July 03, 02:26 PM
Heh everyone thinks that, but its actually Il Pallazzo from Excel Saga. Although given its a spoof anime, they probably got his design from familiar villians ;p

Straylight
17th July 03, 02:31 PM
I believe that some dudes sat down...wrote the Bible...and because it's such a GREAT piece of literature with some very good lessons to teach and deep meaning in various passages, it transcended the ages to become a timeless work. There are other timeless works out there, too, you know...who knows...in 2000 years, there might be a religion based in the fact that Tom Clancy is god, and Jack Ryan is Jesus... (I'd toss my hat in on that one, by the way.)

In short:

I don't believe in god, but I believe there was a hella nice dude named Jesus that had a killer ego and got shafted by Romans and Jews.

I also believe in evolution....because if Neanderthal man hadn't have had sex with monkeys, we wouldn't have so many niggers in the world today.

That is all.

NarcisPrince
17th July 03, 02:37 PM
I also believe in evolution....because if Neanderthal man hadn't have had sex with monkeys, we wouldn't have so many niggers in the world today.

This is one of those blunt statements that requires balls even on message boards, you have my respect if not for political correctness, but certainly for being honest about what you believe. :D

Straylight
17th July 03, 02:40 PM
You think that's bad, it'd take all day for me to tell you about dirty Jews. :)

Vigil
17th July 03, 02:53 PM
I just don't like affirmative action mainly because I am apostolic christian...I am a bit darker then normal and I am a immigrint from another country. On apps and etc...I have to put myself as cacasian(white basically), but asians, african-americans, and hispanics get brownie points. This sucks ass because I gotta compete with everyone, but they dont. Which is odd because its step backwards then forward. If everyone is considered "equal" then they dont need points...giving them points only makes the world more racist.

Kitska
17th July 03, 03:49 PM
Everyone is going to die and turn into

NOTHING

Ouden
17th July 03, 03:54 PM
People that use large text in red underlined italics over and over in every single thread go to hell.

Kwill
17th July 03, 03:56 PM
I believe in Jesus not god btw...because he died for somone else and anyone who does that has big balls...also is a very nice guy.


You believe in Jesus what? That he was divine? Or that he was a guy who would die for his beliefs because he had an idea? What you wrote doesn't make any sense.

You can't believe in someone else -- "belief in Jesus" means you think he was the son of God, not just some guy. So you believe in God then. Otherwise, maybe you mean you believe in his ideas about life, some of which don't require a belief in God I suppose.

Anyway, I think you need to explain more fully what you mean.

Kitska
17th July 03, 04:00 PM
People that use large text in red underlined italics over and over in every single thread go to hell.

Just like all gay people? :biggrin:

How about people who use large text in red underlined italics bold? :devface:

Vaziel
17th July 03, 04:05 PM
This discussion reminds me of that movie Contact where the aliens talked to that whore who liked the taxi driver guy who ended up beating on that fat jewish guy with the phone wile Ray talked to Karen after she got sexually assaulted by the guy in the corvette!

What the fuck was I talking about? :(

joen00b
17th July 03, 04:22 PM
Actually, Jews all believe in Jesus, believe he was a Rabbi, believe he was persecuted by Pilate, believe he did die on a cross, but do NOT believe he rose from the dead or is the son of God. He was just another Rabbi with a good amount of charisma.

Sabore Wallace
17th July 03, 04:28 PM
Phrack,

I only read your first post, I'm too busy to read 4 more pages of religious zealot BS.

But I hope you weren't trying to hit the whole length of Christians with this. For myself, you can study whatever you want. But I find it hard to believe in any scientific theories so far. I mean "The big bang"? Explain to me how all the huge chunks now known as planets that broke apart from the massive piece of matter when it exploded became so round?

Either way actually I stay away from both sides. Both sides will never be able to show me proof. Science will always be theories, Religion will always be faith. I don't see how they can provide any proof in either direction.

My question is rather this, being religious myself. In most christian beliefs, and mine included, "assume" that the god that created earth may not be the only god. He is our god, over our universe, but not to say there isn't other gods over other universes. It's also said that if you live straight and narrow life and strive to perfection afterdeath, you also can become a god yourself.

Anyway, bottom line question is always....

"Where did it all start?"

With religion, who/what created the first human, and who/what created that god that created the first human? Then who created that god? Where did it all begin?

Science, where did that first organism come from? How did it all come to live and breathe? You all must admit, the human body is still the most fascinating item on our planet. How it all works as one, with a natural power source and the ability to grow and learn. Putting the mind itself into a world of its own. But how did this earth get here, if there was a "big bang" who created that first large mass of rock?

Both sides will always be at war, and both will never provide proof unless a miracle comes from the religious side to prove to everyone what is right. Otherwise we could all make theories, yell, scream, bicker and hate each other over it for the rest of our lives.

Ouden
17th July 03, 04:34 PM
I believe in a great Grape Ape in the sky

Nikalos_2
17th July 03, 04:51 PM
The sun is going to burn out in 5 billlion years!

Straylight
17th July 03, 05:13 PM
What's the difference between dog shit and niggers?
When dog shit gets old it turns White and quits stinking.

eFFIX
17th July 03, 05:38 PM
I mean "The big bang"? Explain to me how all the huge chunks now known as planets that broke apart from the massive piece of matter when it exploded became so round?


That would be because of a couple of things...

1.) Gravity...

2.) The Sphere is the perfect shape... Something to do with Volume compared to surface area...

Shit explodes, everything gets vaporized, gravity kicks in. Things start to collect around each other. The sphere is just the natural shape that unrestricted atoms end up in.

Sorta like...

You have a electro magnet of whatever shape, suspended inside a box. Inside the box is full of loose iron fragments. There is no gravity in the box so all the iron frags are floating in the box filling it up (think blowing up a baloon, all the molecules just don't sit in one corner of the baloon, they spread out to maximize the volume of the baloon. You turn on your electro magnet. Now you have a force pulling all the iron frags to the center. the iron frags are going to be drawn to the magnet, and layer up around it evenly, as the magnetic pull is going to be pretty even in every direction.

Now given the shape of your magnet, the shape the iron frags are going to take will be slightly different, but it will end up spherical in the end. If you were using a perfect sphere shaped magnet, where all the force was equal, you would end up with a perfect sphere of iron frags collected around it. If you had a rectangular shaped magnet, you'd end up with an eggshaped cluster of iron frags, that becomes more sphere, and less egg, the larger that it gets.

So in your big bang, you have the heaviest atoms/molecules/whatever, pulling in other lighter molecules, and over however long of a time period it takes for shit to get settled, you end up with all the nifty spheres that fill the sky.

Simply put, shit likes to be in a sphere, it's the perfect shape.

Tigerstorm Starweaver
17th July 03, 05:53 PM
Phrack, you attack too much with questions you can't even answer for your side.

I don't fear anything save God alone. The biggest problem Christians have with science are the scienticians who have a huge problem with Christianity. You have your religion of Godless circumstance, and we have ours of Divine will.

I personally have no problem with empirical science, nor do I get upset and wrapped around the axle at secular science, but I get frustrated where secular science is heralded as empirical and therefore law. To understand creationism you must take your faith in science and attempt to apply it to theology. I can't explain how to do it. Faith simply doesn't have words to do it justice.

The most frustrating thing about these arguements is that your side can't stick to the topic. When I ask "Why couldn't God have created it all?", most often the person changes the topic to God not existing due to the presence of wrong/evil in the world. The simple truth is this: God does exist and the evil/wrong in this world is keeping you in the dark. Just where it wants you. God can create it all. That is why no one can argue it otherwise.

As to the afterlife, I'm going to Heaven. That's about the long and the short of it.


~TS

Syth
17th July 03, 06:04 PM
Anyway, I sincerely want to know what the Christians believe will happen to them after death, in precise terms, without any beating around the bush.


Well, since I didn't see anyone answer I guess I'll take a shot at it. I'll try to explain what I think as best I can, thought it may be a tad confusing. Christians belive that God has a place from them in heaven. Jesus died for us (sinners) and allowed us to have a relationship with God, If you "walk you life" with Jesus and give yourself to him and let him into your heart and live as a christian. Then you will get your place in heaven. Don't get that confused with that you have to be all stuck up and holy. Because you can and will be forgiven for your sins since you can have a 1 on 1 relationship with god. Jesus will forgive and forget, if you go about it in the right manner. Sorry if that seems confusing, I don't explain stuff like that very well, but trying my best.

Chantress
17th July 03, 06:28 PM
Evolution is taught in schools because evolution does occur.

What you have an issue with is currently taught ideas as to what causes evolution. You're associating the word "evolution" automatically with darwinism, which is like me saying "Cars suck because you have to wind a crank to start them and they top out at 20 miles per hour on a well paved road".


Technically, you are the one misinterpreting the term evolution. What you are describing is called adaptation. This is the change inside a species to adapt to a new environment. Your body does this when you go from a low elevation to a high elevation. Your O2 absorbtion rate adapts itself to the new environment, you do not evolve and become a higher order of human being. Just look at those whacky people in Colorado and Alaska! Evolution has never been proven to occur, and since it takes billions of years to prove evolution, it can not be reasonably proven to occur within any reasonable time frame, unless transition fossils or bones can be found. If these vast amount of evolutionary changes take place as a staunch evolutionsit would alledge, where are all the transition fossils? If it merely happens over night, why do we not see one species giving birth to another more highly evolved species? I have no problem with people educating, what irks me is when people miseducate. Present the facts for what they are, not some convulated theory that has little to no basis in reality, and can never be proven. At least religion presents itself for what it is, something that requires faith.

Kwill
17th July 03, 06:33 PM
Actually, Jews all believe in Jesus

Welll....that's a little bit of an exaggeration, *all*. Maybe some believe he might have been a historical figure. But that's like saying Christians believe in Mohammed. Sure they do, but he doesn't have any significance -- Edit: in their own belief system, not in the world at large.

Jesus said he was the Messiah. The Jews say no he isn't, we are still waiting for that person. Some Jews said, yeah, I think he is, and became Christians. Other non-Jews said hey, these are great ideas, I am going to become a Christian too.

"May not a man be a Christian who cannot explain how the nativity of the son differs from the procession of the Holy Spirit? If I believe in the Trinity in Unity, I want no arguments. If I do not believe, I will not be convinced. The sum of religion is peace, which can only be when the definitions are as few as possible and opinion left free on many subjects. Our present problems are said to be waiting for the next Ecumenical Council. Better let them wait until we see God face to face." -- Erasmus, 1522


And also this: The Minister and his lay visitor, both Protestants, had talked over amiably the differences between their creeds. It was a beautiful lesson in toleration, which the minister neatly summed up: "Yes we both worship the same God, you in your way and I in His."

Okay, on a roll here:

"The Turks tell their people of a Heaven where there is a sensible Pleasure, but of a Hell where they shall suffer they don't know what. The Christians quite invert this order; they tell us of a hell where we shall feel sensible pain, but of a Heaven where we shall enjoy we can't tell what." John Seldon, 1650

Vigil
17th July 03, 07:28 PM
Basically I believe in his teachings...he didn't see a difference between the rich and the poor. He treated the theives, whores, and beggers at the save level as prominant society. Sadly the Jewish temples didn't like this and convinced the government to get rid of him...because at the time the Jewish temples would only let the rich be a part of god. I would say he was more of a revolutionary rather then a messiah.

Tegian
17th July 03, 08:01 PM
Technically, you are the one misinterpreting the term evolution. What you are describing is called adaptation. This is the change inside a species to adapt to a new environment. Your body does this when you go from a low elevation to a high elevation. Your O2 absorbtion rate adapts itself to the new environment, you do not evolve and become a higher order of human being. Just look at those whacky people in Colorado and Alaska! Evolution has never been proven to occur, and since it takes billions of years to prove evolution, it can not be reasonably proven to occur within any reasonable time frame, unless transition fossils or bones can be found. If these vast amount of evolutionary changes take place as a staunch evolutionsit would alledge, where are all the transition fossils? If it merely happens over night, why do we not see one species giving birth to another more highly evolved species? I have no problem with people educating, what irks me is when people miseducate. Present the facts for what they are, not some convulated theory that has little to no basis in reality, and can never be proven. At least religion presents itself for what it is, something that requires faith.

No. Cyb was right

ev∑o∑lu∑tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (v-lshn, v-)
n.
A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.

You actually went right back to what he said people are doing, you went right back to a darwinistic theory of adaptation due to enviromental influences.

Many things evolve and there is fact behind it, like for example bacteria. And if you say that is not true you should really shoot youself.

And of course evolution can also pertain to the theories of darwin but the term does not revolve around his findings.

And lastly just because creationist think they are sure that the evolution of species is wrong, that in no way means that they are remotely right. I wonder what the probability of some being existing outside of time creating a entire earth and 239823 different animal species

Cybsled
17th July 03, 09:49 PM
Evolution is in essense adaptation. An idea form for a given environment. You also just agreed with me in a way...what is debated is rapidity of change and causal mechanisms, how and when does a new species appear. I've hashed this out before in a previous thread.

Although I find the rest of your statement interesting. You've already claimed you think all geological theory is flawed in a nutshell, so why care about fossil records? They'd just be wrong anyways and not prove anything because you cant date stuff by strata or uranium isotope dating, right?

Sabore Wallace
17th July 03, 10:03 PM
So Effix... what about all these planets with no gravity? I can understand the Earth being round given your example, since we have such a strong pull in gravity. But most (all?) the other planets don't as far as I recall. Yet they turned out sphere.

I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong here, and definitly not trying to act like I know a whole lot about space and physics. Far from it, though both interest me dearly. So in nothing but interest do I ask this.

Ouden
17th July 03, 10:07 PM
Narf Narf They Interest Me Narf Narf

Nikalos_2
17th July 03, 10:09 PM
Enough about your wife, Sabore

Merril
17th July 03, 10:28 PM
So Effix... what about all these planets with no gravity? I can understand the Earth being round given your example, since we have such a strong pull in gravity. But most (all?) the other planets don't as far as I recall. Yet they turned out sphere.


Gravity is directly proportional to total mass. And the geometric shape of a planetoid sized piece of matter for the most part will tend towards a sphere. The relative size of a planet will depend on its proximity to the sun, and its overall composition. Mercury will have a high relative mass, with very little atmosphere or diameter. The near central planets will have lower relative mass, more atmosphere and diameter. The outer planets will have even less relative mass, even more atmosphere and gargantuan diameter. At the periphery of the solar system, you'll basically have some glorified spherical rocks as most of the solar systems mass has been drawn in closer towards the sun.

Sabore Wallace
17th July 03, 11:37 PM
So then what exactly brought the theory of the "Big Boom"? Was there any scientific findings to make this theory, or was it just some guy daydreaming and thinking that would be one hell of a cool way for the planets to be created?

joen00b
17th July 03, 11:47 PM
I forget who, but someones sig is:

At first there was nothing, which promptly exploded.

Ouden
18th July 03, 12:01 AM
that's my sig

eFFIX
18th July 03, 12:44 AM
So then what exactly brought the theory of the "Big Boom"? Was there any scientific findings to make this theory, or was it just some guy daydreaming and thinking that would be one hell of a cool way for the planets to be created?

The big bang doesn't really explain how atoms and shit were created... Since thats pretty much the same as saying God created everything... As far as we'll ever know, it's just always been there.

Really doesn't matter eigther way.

The Big Bang the way I see it, is more of how our current Universe was created. Not the actual atoms, but the current configuration of planets/stars/suns/etc...

Since if you consider the whole gravity thing, and depending on if the Universe is contracting, or expanding in it's curret time, I really don't know. But as sure as everything that comes up, goes down, everything in the universe is eventualy going to get closer together.

Now who knows how many trillions of billion of whatever years it would take for things to start getting clumped together. But you figure, there has to be a center of the universe somewhere, and eventually everything is going to get drawn towards it. And the speed at which things are drawn in will increase as the mass of whatever it is, that is at the center of the universe increases over time.

So you figure eventually there is prolly going to be enough energy and etc scrunched up into a tiny space, that everything goes atomic and detonates in a huge fiery inferno again ;)

The fact is, who knows how many universes have come and gone. Only thing that remains constant is time.

Me personally, I can't wait for the day when contact with another form of life is made. Since if were the only ones here, then God defeneteley needs to learn about efficiency.

I guess thats about the closest thing to faith that I believe in.

I don't believe in the little green men, and UFO's and all that other stupid crap. But i defeneteley believe that there is sentient life out there somewhere. I just doubt i'll ever live to see contact made.

Boney
18th July 03, 12:59 AM
i dont worry about things i cannot change. if the universe was created by fucking monkeys who were circle jerking each other and the spunk turned into a universe it doesnt affect us either way.

Vigil
18th July 03, 02:20 AM
Me personally, I can't wait for the day when contact with another form of life is made. Since if were the only ones here, then God defeneteley needs to learn about efficiency.

This will never happen because its not possible, their could be life out there but we can't contact each other physically. The closes thing to alien is Mars...at one point in time it was like the earth.

BlindPatriotism
18th July 03, 02:43 AM
Phrack said


you still fail to grasp infinity

I like that. Sorry for the splice and dice but that is a killer quote to bring up against mortals, end a debate and silence a crowd.

Ouden
18th July 03, 02:59 AM
This will never happen because its not possible, their could be life out there but we can't contact each other physically.

That's one stupid ass comment.

Vigil
18th July 03, 03:07 AM
That's one stupid ass comment.

Your failing to realize that physics has proven we can't directly go from point A to point B with a ship. First off all you would need infinite energy source(the closest thing to this is cold fusion, which is so far impossiable to do)...second of all you would need materials which won't take damage at high temperatures...third of all you would need somone or some robot to pilot the ship at high speeds and not die...fourth of all even if you do figure out how to do this the nearest star I believe is about 20 or so light years away...so either you gotta sustain somone through cryogenics(which is impossible) or you have to eat shit for 20 years.

deadcat
18th July 03, 03:14 AM
What's the difference between dog shit and niggers?
When dog shit gets old it turns White and quits stinking.
Bwahahahaha!

I had to bury my face in a pillow to stop laughing!

Nikalos_2
18th July 03, 03:53 AM
some robot to pilot the ship at high speeds and not die.


Dying robots....

Vigil
18th July 03, 04:05 AM
Dying robots....

Ok so they dont break apart if they used robots.

Boney
18th July 03, 04:16 AM
mars is only 35 million miles away on august 27, should send a probe there imo

Halfrican
18th July 03, 04:45 AM
We need to send astronauts to Mars for no real reason at all

Straylight
18th July 03, 06:54 AM
What's the difference between a jew and a pizza?
A pizza doesn't scream in the oven.

deadcat
18th July 03, 07:04 AM
hahaha

Chantress
18th July 03, 07:48 AM
Evolution is in essense adaptation. An idea form for a given environment. You also just agreed with me in a way...what is debated is rapidity of change and causal mechanisms, how and when does a new species appear. I've hashed this out before in a previous thread.

Although I find the rest of your statement interesting. You've already claimed you think all geological theory is flawed in a nutshell, so why care about fossil records? They'd just be wrong anyways and not prove anything because you cant date stuff by strata or uranium isotope dating, right?

I can see I have not communicated clearly my thoughts on geology, or evolution for that matter. If, as we read in the Genesis account of creation, God created a mature man and a mature woman, and he created trees and not just seeds, and he created full grown animals, not infintile ones, then it would stand to reason that he created an earth that is mature as well. Is evolution possible given a very large span of time? I dont know, I have yet to see suffecient evidence to support the claims. If it is part of a mature earth's history, then yes. However, I dont know what a mature earth's history is for the most part. Mostly I see a lot of circular reasoning, and touting of a theory as fact, when it is not only unproven, but probably unprovable in our lifetimes. The geological record is there. It tells us some things, but given shifts in tectonic plates, along with other seismic activity, it is at best a general guide, and not something that could possibly give us an accurate timeline of events.

Like i said before, at least religion is up front about what it teaches, it requires faith. Science on the other hand, touts its ideas that are unproven as fact and tries to convince the masses that theories are the answer to all of lifes questions. I dont buy it, and until science starts to present its theories as what they are, men's sometimes educated guesses, then I will continue to teach the facts of the matter....a theory is an unproven idea that many times people try to play off as a fact.

I hope I communicated more clearly my thoughts on this matter this time. :)

PS> In case it comes across this way, I do not have anything ill-will towards evolutionist or the anti-Bible crowd. I think those people are wrong, however I disagree with people that I go to church with about religious matters as well. Note to Kela: Just because two people disagree about something does NOT mean they should never discuss it. If multiple people disagree then it does not mean that multiple people should not discuss it in an open forum. The free and open exchange of ideas is what leads us to become more educated and more sophisticated. Yes, even on CTC.

Straylight
18th July 03, 08:03 AM
What would you call the Flintstones if they were black?
Niggers.

Cybsled
18th July 03, 09:33 AM
Actually, tectonic plates helped geologists alot in finding the relative age of things, not vice versa. It was a major revolution when they were discovered.

But your paragraph pretty much agreed with what I said. No amount of evidence would ever satisfy you because under your set of rules its all worthless, unless you were given a VHS of a wild boar giving birth to a Hippo or you were walking along the street one day, looked over, and saw a mouse sprout wings then fly away.

I see you as just being uncomfortable with the idea that every animal thats alive today wasnt here when the earth was created (sorry, when god decided to make animals on the earth he made previously). Despite what the brainwashed posters on this board spout, if you look at real scientists with creationist backgrounds, they are some of the prime supporters of the rapid change evolutionary theory because they feel thats more in line with divine intervention. The majority of people over time finally accepted the "non bible friendly" notion that the earth wasnt the center of the entire universe and everything revolved around us. It will be just a matter of time before notions evolve...er sorry, adapt...to fit in with more current information on the subject of species changing.

Straylight
18th July 03, 10:09 AM
What's the difference between a nigger and a snow tire?
A snow tire doesn't sing when you put chains on it.

Xate-
18th July 03, 10:50 AM
So then what exactly brought the theory of the "Big Boom"? Was there any scientific findings to make this theory, or was it just some guy daydreaming and thinking that would be one hell of a cool way for the planets to be created?

I had questions like these and others that were making me really curious awhile ago, and someone recommended a couple books to me.

If you really want answers to questions and others like these, I recommend the same ones to you now, the universe in a nutshell, by stephen hawking (the guy that implied space and time began with the big bang), rather than asking people here. Another good read is a brief history of time, by stephen hawking. These are both very good books that explain a lot about the universe, time, space, the big bang, etc.

Oh, you should read one of these books too, Effix.

Tegian
18th July 03, 11:34 AM
I can see I have not communicated clearly my thoughts on geology, or evolution for that matter. If, as we read in the Genesis account of creation, God created a mature man and a mature woman, and he created trees and not just seeds, and he created full grown animals, not infintile ones, then it would stand to reason that he created an earth that is mature as well. Is evolution possible given a very large span of time? I dont know, I have yet to see suffecient evidence to support the claims. If it is part of a mature earth's history, then yes. However, I dont know what a mature earth's history is for the most part. Mostly I see a lot of circular reasoning, and touting of a theory as fact, when it is not only unproven, but probably unprovable in our lifetimes. The geological record is there. It tells us some things, but given shifts in tectonic plates, along with other seismic activity, it is at best a general guide, and not something that could possibly give us an accurate timeline of events.

Like i said before, at least religion is up front about what it teaches, it requires faith. Science on the other hand, touts its ideas that are unproven as fact and tries to convince the masses that theories are the answer to all of lifes questions. I dont buy it, and until science starts to present its theories as what they are, men's sometimes educated guesses, then I will continue to teach the facts of the matter....a theory is an unproven idea that many times people try to play off as a fact.

I hope I communicated more clearly my thoughts on this matter this time. :)

PS> In case it comes across this way, I do not have anything ill-will towards evolutionist or the anti-Bible crowd. I think those people are wrong, however I disagree with people that I go to church with about religious matters as well. Note to Kela: Just because two people disagree about something does NOT mean they should never discuss it. If multiple people disagree then it does not mean that multiple people should not discuss it in an open forum. The free and open exchange of ideas is what leads us to become more educated and more sophisticated. Yes, even on CTC.

Geology easily gives good evidence of timelines, one can actually dig through different prehistoric ages. And the odd thing is that which you might already know, is that geology is trying to look at the evidence of a great flood that may have occured, but of course since it is inaccurate you wouldn't be much interested in a biblical story actually being somewhere near a fact.
It is fact that species change, you can see it anywhere. It makes no absolute sence to take the creation story that literally. Have you ever looked at a frog? It goes from a tadpole that has the characteristics of a fish to an frog which has the traits of an amphibian. But of course that and fossil records were probably put there by the devil to trick us.
Also the church as a whole has no opposition to evolution, and many believe in a divine power that started the process.

Kitska
18th July 03, 12:24 PM
1)I can see I have not communicated clearly my thoughts on geology, or evolution for that matter. If, as we read in the Genesis account of creation, God created a mature man and a mature woman, and he created trees and not just seeds, and he created full grown animals, not infintile ones, then it would stand to reason that he created an earth that is mature as well. Is evolution possible given a very large span of time? I dont know, I have yet to see suffecient evidence to support the claims. If it is part of a mature earth's history, then yes. However, I dont know what a mature earth's history is for the most part. Mostly I see a lot of circular reasoning, and touting of a theory as fact, when it is not only unproven, but probably unprovable in our lifetimes. The geological record is there. It tells us some things, but given shifts in tectonic plates, along with other seismic activity, it is at best a general guide, and not something that could possibly give us an accurate timeline of events.

2)Like i said before, at least religion is up front about what it teaches, it requires faith. Science on the other hand, touts its ideas that are unproven as fact and tries to convince the masses that theories are the answer to all of lifes questions. I dont buy it, and until science starts to present its theories as what they are, men's sometimes educated guesses, then I will continue to teach the facts of the matter....a theory is an unproven idea that many times people try to play off as a fact.

1)If God created mature man and woman, why do people give birth to immature beings? Why not just give birth to mature men and women?

Didn't you say before that religion/bible is also just a guide to live by; so how does it make it any better then the "general guide" you don't want to accept?

2)Theories are usually proven by facts, studies, research. Sometimes they may start as a guess, but for the theory to become real scientific theory it has to be proven. To say that theory is an unproven idea is not true, not always true at least.
I think you are just being stubbron and saying those things not really believing in them yourself :P

eFFIX
18th July 03, 12:43 PM
Oh, you should read one of these books too, Effix.

Heh, nthanks, i'll continue to be ignorant on the specifics of the subject. Which is why i said that this is how I understand it ;)

I'm with Bone on stuff like this. I doesn't really effect me in any way, i can't effect it, so I don't care :)

Saying that there was nothing, and then bam, we got something, is about as silly, as saying God created the universe. They have about the same amount of credibility, since you can't prove any of them.

But a big bang seems perfectly acceptable to me under the whole universe contracting/expanding, when there is matter/energy already in existance. And i could see it happening again given enough time.

I think it's just the whole, human concept of needing shit before to build something that makes things like this hard to grasp. Since to build a house you need materials. So it only seems ligical that to build a universe you would need prior materials as well. Just seems wierd, big bang or god, that shit just appeared outa nowhere ;)

IMHO, it's just always been there, or it's been there for so damn long, that it really doesn't matter where it came from. So I'm not gonna burst a blood vessil in my brain thinking about it ;)

Angrie the Strategist
18th July 03, 01:20 PM
Well, I didn't want to chime in again but you (Chantress and crew)clearly are not aware that both speciation and microspeciation have been observed. What does that mean? We have witnessed evolution

It has been seen in many species, in fact there has been a case in which salmon from the same river evolved into a completely new species in just 13 salmon generations.

Evolution is not a quack theory, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of it. You just are not aware of it and therefore assume it does not exist. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

What does this mean? Evolution does happen and evolution is most likely the theory that explains how life develops. Is it complete? Probably not, we still don't know much and therefore there are gaps in the theory. Does that mean it's wrong? No.

In defense of science, science never says anything is a fact. Theories can be tested and if wrong, they will be thrown out the window. It's obvious to me you have barely studied science because there is no such thing as a scientific fact.

Ouden
18th July 03, 01:33 PM
Your failing to realize that physics has proven we can't directly go from point A to point B with a ship. First off all you would need infinite energy source(the closest thing to this is cold fusion, which is so far impossiable to do)...second of all you would need materials which won't take damage at high temperatures...third of all you would need somone or some robot to pilot the ship at high speeds and not die...fourth of all even if you do figure out how to do this the nearest star I believe is about 20 or so light years away...so either you gotta sustain somone through cryogenics(which is impossible) or you have to eat shit for 20 years.

2 for 2 on the stupid comments, gg

Sabore Wallace
18th July 03, 04:07 PM
I think it's just the whole, human concept of needing shit before to build something that makes things like this hard to grasp. Since to build a house you need materials. So it only seems ligical that to build a universe you would need prior materials as well. Just seems wierd, big bang or god, that shit just appeared outa nowhere ;)


Not like building a house, it's more like the question of. "What came first? The chicken or the egg?" You need a chicken to lay an egg, but the chickens hatch from the egg, and neither of them coulda just appeared out of the clear blue sky right?

joen00b
18th July 03, 04:12 PM
Not like building a house, it's more like the question of. "What came first? The chicken or the egg?" You need a chicken to lay an egg, but the chickens hatch from the egg, and neither of them coulda just appeared out of the clear blue sky right?

In nature, living things evolve through changes in their DNA. In an animal like a chicken, DNA from a male sperm cell and a female ovum meet and combine to form a zygote -- the first cell of a new baby chicken. This first cell divides innumerable times to form all of the cells of the complete animal. In any animal, every cell contains exactly the same DNA, and that DNA comes from the zygote.

Chickens evolved from non-chickens through small changes caused by the mixing of male and female DNA or by mutations to the DNA that produced the zygote. These changes and mutations only have an effect at the point where a new zygote is created. That is, two non-chickens mated and the DNA in their new zygote contained the mutation(s) that produced the first true chicken. That one zygote cell divided to produce the first true chicken.

Prior to that first true chicken zygote, there were only non-chickens. The zygote cell is the only place where DNA mutations could produce a new animal, and the zygote cell is housed in the chicken's egg. So, the egg must have come first.

Now that this is answered, please move on.

Straylight
18th July 03, 04:13 PM
How come there aren't any Mexicans on Star Trek?
They don't work in the future, either!

Sithray
18th July 03, 04:15 PM
Well DUH!! Everyone knows that in the future we have finally exterminated them!!

joen00b
18th July 03, 04:27 PM
How come there aren't any Mexicans on Star Trek?
They don't work in the future, either!

I believe they mutated into the Klingons on the Original Series. If you notice: They run in packs, they like to fight (but only when they outnumber their opponents), they think their 'rides' are the coolest thing in the universe, they like to cause trouble and then say it was the other guys fault... you get the point.

deadcat
18th July 03, 04:34 PM
They also like bladed objects.

Sabore Wallace
18th July 03, 04:37 PM
But I never saw them steal much.

What do you think when you see a mexican riding a bike?

"That could be my bike"

What do you think when you see a black guy riding a bike?

"That could be my nigger"

Rognar
18th July 03, 04:42 PM
People as a general rule need something to believe in to make theyre worthless existance have some form of meaning.They simply dont want to believe that when your dead the only thing still alive in you is the worms gnawing at your decaying flesh.Oh and we should send spheres to mars!

Sithray
18th July 03, 04:57 PM
People as a general rule need something to believe in to make theyre worthless existance have some form of meaning.They simply dont want to believe that when your dead the only thing still alive in you is the worms gnawing at your decaying flesh.Oh and we should send spheres to mars!

Your comment sounds like something a 15yr old Goth wannabe would say.

C-R-E-M-A-T-I-O-N

When I die I will sleep, I will not think, I will not dream. I will not exist. I do not beleive in life after death or re-incarnation. I do not believe in this worlds perception of Hell, nor do I believe in this worlds perception of Heaven.

joen00b
18th July 03, 05:07 PM
Oh my Goth, I am so Depeche!

Vigil
18th July 03, 05:13 PM
Instead of you always giving people a hard time try posting what you think about the subject...so edleast I know what your talking about.

Sithray
18th July 03, 05:17 PM
Instead of you always giving people a hard time try posting what you think about the subject...so edleast I know what your talking about.

Should read:


Instead of always giving people a hard time, try posting what you think about the subject,[/b[ so [b]at least I know what you're talking about.

Not to be a stickler...tee hee hee

Kiko
18th July 03, 05:20 PM
"whimsical and given to petty desires of glorification" ? If that's your impression of a higher conciousness, Phrack, - even if it's someone else's version - then I'm kinda curious where you came up with it. But it explains why you think we're all fools. -=shrug=-

I prefer theological discussions the way the Jesuits taught us at college.. usually involving good scotch and an open mind.

BlindPatriotism
18th July 03, 05:34 PM
It has been seen in many species, in fact there has been a case in which salmon from the same river evolved into a completely new species in just 13 salmon generations.

Sigh, lost my post so now you get the quick and dirty version.

When making such assertions please provide references as I can provide many disputing such claims. For example look at the Fruit Fly and the attempts made on it through intelligble manipulation to alter its DNA. Nothing of the like has happened; rather what you get are Fruit Flys with crumpled wings, 1 eye etc. No new type of fly or a fly with a new DNA (Naturalism and Modernity-1996, I think) . Moreso evolution as it is understood in its true sense of the word is supposed to be unguided. Having an intelligible being manipulating the outcome (ie. exposure to radiation etc.) is hardly considered unguided.

Seldom do I engage in such discussions anymore as they are futile. Most people are merely looking to solidify their positions and make sure they are somewhat intellectually credible. Very few people are willing to alter their worldviews based on any amount of information presented, theist, atheist, agnostic or otherwise.

You stated that the gaps in evolutionary theory do not disprove its credibility. You also went on to say nothing science states is factual. Those two statements hinge upon faith as much as any religious claim.

Angrie the Strategist
18th July 03, 06:41 PM
You have no idea what you are talking about.

a)I don't know the specific Nature there results were published in, but rest assured they are real.

b) There is no faith involved in science. To be scientific a hypothesis must be able to be shown false by some method. We can show evolution is false if we see evidence against it. Unfortunately for you, there is no such evidence. Notice I said evidence, not speculation and intuiton, faith and mere questioning. EVIDENCE. On the other hand, there is overwhelming evidence that evolution does indeed occur, and by overwhelming I really do mean overwhelming. Why do whales have bones that they no longer use but resemble what would be feet in a land dwelling animal?

c) My statements are not mutually exclusive. Evolution is probably an incomplete theory. However, it is highly unlikely that it is completely wrong. Can it be wrong? Yes. But that is precisely what makes science different from faith.

d) Before you even think about saying: "But so and so people did so and so test and didn't see evolution occur!", I highly suggest you go read a book on logic and promptly turn to the page regarding syllogisms.

Sabore Wallace
18th July 03, 06:49 PM
a)I don't know the specific Nature there results were published in, but rest assured they are real.

Translation = "I have no sources, but I think I heard about it once from someone"

Angrie the Strategist
18th July 03, 07:21 PM
Liar, liar pants on fire is the best you can do? I didn't hear this from anyone, I read the results myself.

Let's be honest with each other, you have probably never even read a single issue (of the many) of Nature, or any science journal for that matter, (which I am fairly sure published this paper) in your life. So what exactly do you know about what has and hasn't been published?

Nothing.

Operating on speculation (aka faith) can be dangerous can it not?

Merril
18th July 03, 07:31 PM
If, as we read in the Genesis account of creation, God created a mature man and a mature woman, and he created trees and not just seeds, and he created full grown animals, not infintile ones, then it would stand to reason that he created an earth that is mature as well.

If you go strictly by the measure of time given in the account presented in Genesis' first chapter then yes. However... what you have failed utterly to account for is that the bible places the creation of the sun after the creation of plantlife. This is presents something of a nightmare of causality owing to the fact that plantlife derives its existence from the sun's radiation. Furthermore, without the sun, there can't be day or night. To make sense of this you need to read between the lines and appreciate the true span of time involved. You also need to allow the Genesis story the role it deserves: a metaphor of creation that is intended to guide understanding.

You have access to a bible do you not? Read 2nd Peter 3:8 please. I think that one verse sheds more than enough light on the subject. I don't know what your version says, but mine reads: "But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

As far as things being brought into existance fully formed? I see no mention of that. Things being created in opposition to physical laws, nope. Everything being unpacked and uncrated on a one week schedule? That's one hell of a UPS bill. I don't think trying to understand how creation happened demeans God or the idea of God in any way. If anything I think it instills us all with a sense of awe and wonder. It also leads to a hell of a lot more questions.

Let's assume for a moment that God caused a point singularity to destabilize catastrophically and spew out the universe. This universe spreads and galaxies form, suns are born and they spew out clouds of matter which eventually coalesce into planets. A very few of these planets give rise to life. Fewer still have life which becomes fully sentient. In a moment of divine humor God decides to say 'I did all of this' after his own fashion and let a entire race of sentient beings try to puzzle out who the hell he is and what the hell he meant. This IS a God we're talking about. And that's one hell of a joke with a punchline of enormous consequence. All so millenia later, we can come back to him and maybe say 'we finally understand.'

Do we fully understand now? I believe people think they have a pretty good 'bead' on things, but no. I don't believe they really do. In another thousand years or ten thousand years perhaps. But we're not ready to appreciate the humor of eternity just yet.

BlindPatriotism
18th July 03, 07:53 PM
Why so defensive Angrie?

If it's a pissing match you want I'll stack my academic credentials against yours; you first.

Faith is believing in that what you have not yet seen for lack of a better explanation. You cited gaps in the linking of events yet believed in the conclusions.

You stated that your worldview is based on theories which are constantly changing and may very well disprove their predecessors.

Research findings are largely influenced by the funder. There is incredible pressure to report conclusive findings to get further support. Evidence that oftens disproves a hypothesis is disregarded. I imagine we all have all heard of the head that was buried by a dentist in Philadelphia I believe. More than 500 Doctoral papers were produced in the first year citing this find as the missing link before the dentists emerged and acknowledged that he made the head of mixed parts and buried it (as cited in the writings of Malcolm Muggeridge).

Kalric
18th July 03, 07:57 PM
Ok. So i got to thinking. If some folks on here do believe in evolution, do you think life evolved on other planets, solar systems, galaxies?

Im not syaing if they believe in UFOs or Aliens. Just if they believe life can be created elsewhere in the univers.

And if sience did find life on other planets, suppose on Io, was this created from God himself.

I want to here other people's opinion before i give mine.

Kwill
18th July 03, 08:01 PM
Why so defensive Angrie?

If it's a pissing match you want I'll stack my academic credentials against yours; you first.

Faith is believing in that what you have not yet seen for lack of a better explanation. You cited gaps in the linking of events yet believed in the conclusions.

You stated that your worldview is based on theories which are constantly changing and may very well disprove their predecessors.

Research findings are largely influenced by the funder. There is incredible pressure to report conclusive findings to get further support. Evidence that oftens disproves a hypothesis is disregarded. I imagine we all have all heard of the head that was buried by a dentist in Philadelphia I believe. More than 500 Doctoral papers were produced in the first year citing this find as the missing link before the dentists emerged and acknowledged that he made the head of mixed parts and buried it (as cited in the writings of Malcolm Muggeridge).


Wow. You, sir, are someone I would enjoy meeting.

Kwill
18th July 03, 08:08 PM
Also, I would like to take a stand and say that jokes the promote stereotypes hurt everyone: they promote intolerace, strife, hatred and senseless violence against people. If you can objectify people and make them less than human through humor, you can hurt and kill them with no remorse.

Sabore Wallace
18th July 03, 08:24 PM
No one is discriminated Kwill.

Mexican jokes are about theft, welfare, 80 people per household (minimum) etc.

Black jokes of course usually refer to slavery, or one blantant name of "nigger", afro's and fried chicken and cornbread.

White people are inbred, fat, stupid, bucktoothed, can't dance, can't jump homebread American rednecks.

Honestly as long as they're posed in forms of humor and jokes who cares? It's not full blown honest hatred towards another race.

Kalric
18th July 03, 08:32 PM
I have a friend who's family is from India. As one might note, his family is in the Hotel business. They own a Comfort Suits in Austin. He told me about a guy getting mad at him and calling him a Sand-nigga.

I busted out laughing at that one.

Diggler McFeely
18th July 03, 09:08 PM
I once took a stand against people taking a stand. Then, I realized I was sitting down.

Vigil
18th July 03, 09:22 PM
Let's be honest with each other, you have probably never even read a single issue (of the many) of Nature, or any science journal for that matter, (which I am fairly sure published this paper) in your life. So what exactly do you know about what has and hasn't been published?

Just curious how would you know what somone on a message board does in their real life time? I just dont like the fact that some people blindly state stuff about somones background in RL when they dont know squit. Please stick to the subject and please dont take this as a flame I dont know if you have a degree or if you don't ...dosn't make a difference because a certain Harvard drop out by the name of Bill Gates now runs the world. I dont think by falsly attacking peoples background will help in pushing your point across...just a note, continue with the debate. :D

Ouden
18th July 03, 09:32 PM
Instead of you always giving people a hard time

Where's the fun in that?

Angrie the Strategist
18th July 03, 09:33 PM
You just don't get it. I have no faith in evolution because I am willing to accept that it may be wrong.

The salmon experiment is just one of many times people have seen speciation. Could it have been faked? Yes. Is it likely that hundreds of other such experiments were also faked? No.

As to Sabore not having read Nature, well I know because I know, have a little faith in me, ok?

Ouden
18th July 03, 09:40 PM
Purple gorilla's aren't known for their reading comp.

Chantress
19th July 03, 07:02 AM
1)If God created mature man and woman, why do people give birth to immature beings? Why not just give birth to mature men and women?

Didn't you say before that religion/bible is also just a guide to live by; so how does it make it any better then the "general guide" you don't want to accept?

2)Theories are usually proven by facts, studies, research. Sometimes they may start as a guess, but for the theory to become real scientific theory it has to be proven. To say that theory is an unproven idea is not true, not always true at least.
I think you are just being stubbron and saying those things not really believing in them yourself :P

I did not say it was JUST a good book to live by, I did say it was a good book to live by.

Theory are NOT proven. Things that are proven are LAWS of science. Theories are ideas that have either A) not been proven or B) are not provable. Creation and Evolution are both theories. One is up front about the fact that it is a theory, the other tries to pass itself off as a fact, and as taught as such in schools all across America.

On Cyb's point, I would not need to see a VHS of it happen, I prefer DVDs! :) I would require something greater than a bone fragment of part of a skull of one animal that some artist rendered to look like a humanoid by guessing what the rest of the creature looked like. I am open to the evidence. I have already reviewed much of it, and did not find it significant enough to warrant a belief in evolution.

As I have said, evolution is possible, and God may have created the eco system to work in that fashion. However at this point in time I see the evidence as hit and miss at best. As for science and geology, I hope they continue. The more they progress the more they reaffirm that there is a greater power, even if they wont admit it.

Straylight
19th July 03, 07:36 AM
Why do niggers cry during sex?
The Mace.

Yarha
19th July 03, 10:02 AM
Let's be honest with each other, you have probably never even read a single issue (of the many) of Nature, or any science journal for that matter, (which I am fairly sure published this paper) in your life. So what exactly do you know about what has and hasn't been published?

Ahh, well, I've read many a volume of Journal of Chemical Physics (JChemPhys as it's called by us lazy buggers), SPIE proc. and journals, Phys. Rev. Letters, am a card-carryin' member of the American Physical Society (dedicated to the diffusion of the knowledge of physics - stupid motto), designed genetic algorithms that mimic evolution to solve problems, and I'm STILL not up onna recent biological evolutionary theory stuff.

I think I've read mebbe one or two articles from Nature.

Well, granted I'm a physicist who's spent 3 years inna commercial software world (but I'm about to go back into physics, Yay!), so my brain is a bit dust-covered. :p

In my experience, it's rare but not impossible to find a physicist who believes in creationism 100-percent. The only one I know is a graduate of MIT. Scientists can be just as goofy as anybody else when you get them outside their field of specialty. All that critical thought process sometimes goes down the drain.

Feet of clay, feet of clay. And that's murder on the instep.

(As an aside, I once told somebody I was a physicist and he said, "Wow! I never meet any physicists" to which I replied, "That's funny, I meet them all the time."

Ohyah, and the old joke about Physical chemists: "Physical chemists are those people who, when they're with chemists, talk about physics; when they're with physicists, talk about chemistry, and when they're with each other, talk about sex.")

Yarha, Physics is Phun: Cosmetology or Cosmology?

PS: Funny, I remember Phrack banning Xio for a mildly tasteless Mexican joke onna old Cazic Thule board. Change of management, change of policy, eh? Can't say I like it much.

Kwill
19th July 03, 10:08 AM
PS: Funny, I remember Phrack banning Xio for a mildly tasteless Mexican joke onna old Cazic Thule board. Change of management, change of policy, eh? Can't say I like it much.

It is true that I was much more hard line on the racist/sexist jokes, but I did find to my chagrin that censorship is a slippery slope. :(

Yarha
19th July 03, 10:13 AM
It is true that I was much more hard line on the racist/sexist jokes, but I did find to my chagrin that censorship is a slippery slope. :(


The slope ain't THAT slippery, especially if you're wearin' cleats so's you know where you stand. :)

Yarha, Slippery Slopes or Silly SOBs?

"Of good times and riches
And son of a bitches
I've seen more than I can recall."

- Jimmy Buffett

PS: Oh, and it's funny how people say, "If you're a scientist, what are you doing playin' an online game?" I remember one guy I worked with who was COMPLETELY ADDICTED to Magic: The Gathering. He was fantastic in electromagnetic simulation, too. Another was building a HALF-SCALE REPLICA of George Washington's 'Mount Vernon' estate. OMG, BOZO! *cough* Sorry, that just slipped out. ;)

Steps
19th July 03, 10:32 AM
Not that I need to chime in here, but what the fcuk... Tip toe through the tulips playing a GD 'uke, Tiny Tim and all, right? Been in some god awful places, seen alot of faces and some of them old [email protected]@rds well they never made it back to the world. Without tipping my own misserable hand here gents, I've walked the walk INTO and out of the valley and mutha fcuker it wasn't a nice hike!

Sometimes I wonder why, and sheeeet, sometimes I wake up on the floor, edge of my back full of cold sweat, in a down syndrome pose rocking back and forth naked and crying like a b*tch from dreams I've long since repressed. Funny thing is they got this real nasty habit of shaking loose and coming to the top like fine creme in a butter churn and it's me that's all the time shook up over it. Do I believe? Ya damn skippy, but what it is ain't maybe the same as the next brother or sister. About why, it don't know if the techs and the thumpers really feel a great disdain for one another but I know when the family reunion happens once a year in Utah the boys in the white smocks, lab coats and glasses always got start some sh*t at the table with the straw hat and over-haul types and lemme tell you it ain't pretty or nice. Mostly they knock over the table and the jello gets dirt in it and I'll ask you this, who here likes dirty jello? Especially that lime green stuff with fruit inside shaped in the form of a fish? Fcuk me running...

Meanwhile, not that I gotta brag about it, somewhere in a lab under the ground with these magnetic-thinga-ma-jigs and accelarators, we got this mouse and this little [email protected]@rd is about as close as close can be to what we call the code for stranded pairs. Anyway, lasers, evaprative cooling and a little bi-product called BEC for short is gonna blow all of us apart when we all figure out what it isn't doing and we can apply it to that little mouse. In ending I'd like to thank these folks for bringing it all together. Maybe even tied it up nicely.

Yarha
19th July 03, 10:41 AM
Er. Bose-Einstein condensation applied to genetic material separation, mebbe? Um..I don't grok that at all, but that's ok!

Yarha, Grokless

Steps
19th July 03, 10:57 AM
I am telling you, the implications shall be so far reaching that even I will be able to Grok it all in. From what I am told, and this is to stay between just you and I Yarry-Bebe, the cats in Los Alo and JPL are trying to understand why close to Kelvin was the key and how to unlock the door at a snails pace. So instead of the frantic race, on the biological side of the house, these hip cats are going Astro-Phy diving in the deep end of the pool. Make sense? Naw but it is another angle in the wrinkle of time, space, human evo and why we are who and more importantly maybe that answer Douglas A. was looking for thumbing rides through the galaxy. :p

ODNS

Kiko
19th July 03, 11:05 AM
If Hawking wrote more like Steps, I'd understand the universe better!

Tegian
19th July 03, 12:38 PM
I did not say it was JUST a good book to live by, I did say it was a good book to live by.

Theory are NOT proven. Things that are proven are LAWS of science. Theories are ideas that have either A) not been proven or B) are not provable. Creation and Evolution are both theories. One is up front about the fact that it is a theory, the other tries to pass itself off as a fact, and as taught as such in schools all across America.

On Cyb's point, I would not need to see a VHS of it happen, I prefer DVDs! :) I would require something greater than a bone fragment of part of a skull of one animal that some artist rendered to look like a humanoid by guessing what the rest of the creature looked like. I am open to the evidence. I have already reviewed much of it, and did not find it significant enough to warrant a belief in evolution.

As I have said, evolution is possible, and God may have created the eco system to work in that fashion. However at this point in time I see the evidence as hit and miss at best. As for science and geology, I hope they continue. The more they progress the more they reaffirm that there is a greater power, even if they wont admit it.

I don't get it, so you are in favor of scientific progression, but you won't except anything until it is proven to without a doubt. You obviously have a low level of understanding of how one is to look at science.

And fossil evidence is much more solid then you make it out to appear. We have found many whole fossils of certain things. One for example is Archaeopteryx, the half bird half lizard. And I could be wrong but I believe whole skulls of early humans have been found not just fragments. And most of them show a progression in shape from apes to us.

Though all in all I am confused. You accept facts that were written in a book thousands of years old, with no proof behind in whatsoever. And yet you have no "faith" whatsoever in something that has been studied for many years and that may not be a solid fact, but has been proven more to a point then any other theory.

Kalric
19th July 03, 02:12 PM
Hahah Steps, that was great.

Chantress
19th July 03, 10:03 PM
I don't get it, so you are in favor of scientific progression, but you won't except anything until it is proven to without a doubt. You obviously have a low level of understanding of how one is to look at science.

And fossil evidence is much more solid then you make it out to appear. We have found many whole fossils of certain things. One for example is Archaeopteryx, the half bird half lizard. And I could be wrong but I believe whole skulls of early humans have been found not just fragments. And most of them show a progression in shape from apes to us.

Though all in all I am confused. You accept facts that were written in a book thousands of years old, with no proof behind in whatsoever. And yet you have no "faith" whatsoever in something that has been studied for many years and that may not be a solid fact, but has been proven more to a point then any other theory.

No proof? That statement is about ignorant as me saying that you should disregard all scientific findings because you cant prove the theory of evolution. As I said before, religion doesnt lie about the faith it requires, evolution as a theory of origins does. There is ample evidence to lend credibility to the Bible as a historical document from at least 1500BC till 100AD if nothing else. The prophesies in it, which are specific unlike modern prophesy, were made hundreds and sometimes over a thousand year before an event was to occur, and they were fulfilled. There are more copies that date closer to the manuscript than the Illiad or the Odyssey, yet I would bet you dont question those for one second regarding their authorship or closelness to their original work. On the bone fragments, i'm not over downplaying it. I am presenting what it is in all the cases i have seen. Perhaps you know of one where it is not a small bone fragment, I would love to see and examine it for myself. (pictures would do) However, I have seen quite a bit of "evidence" for gradual progression style of evolution, and none of it can conclusively be stated to be anything other than adaptation or mutation.

eFFIX
20th July 03, 12:03 AM
adaptation or mutation.

Adaptation and mutation are part of evolution lol... It sure as hell isn't, oh shit i gave birth to a different species!

If your lucky, you end up with some mutation that makes you stronger and better at survival, and as a result pass this stronger set of genes down the line. If your unlucky, you get some shitty set of genes, and end up as part of the food chain...thus those genes don't get reproduced.

Given enough generations, it's quite possible that the gene tree from the original mutation, to it's current form wouldn't resemble anthing remoteley similar to it's original. Since there are bound to be mutations in the mutated gene line, that would branch off, and branches from that, and so on. As the mutation that promote survival are passed on, and new mutations that build on the old ones go down the line.

Tegian
20th July 03, 02:06 AM
No proof? That statement is about ignorant as me saying that you should disregard all scientific findings because you cant prove the theory of evolution. As I said before, religion doesnt lie about the faith it requires, evolution as a theory of origins does. There is ample evidence to lend credibility to the Bible as a historical document from at least 1500BC till 100AD if nothing else. The prophesies in it, which are specific unlike modern prophesy, were made hundreds and sometimes over a thousand year before an event was to occur, and they were fulfilled. There are more copies that date closer to the manuscript than the Illiad or the Odyssey, yet I would bet you dont question those for one second regarding their authorship or closelness to their original work. On the bone fragments, i'm not over downplaying it. I am presenting what it is in all the cases i have seen. Perhaps you know of one where it is not a small bone fragment, I would love to see and examine it for myself. (pictures would do) However, I have seen quite a bit of "evidence" for gradual progression style of evolution, and none of it can conclusively be stated to be anything other than adaptation or mutation.

I do notice now that I overstated that there is no proof of any events in the bible. I guess I was more referencing the creation story, which I probably should have stated.

here are your larger then bone fragment examples

Archaeopteryx: http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/birds/archie2.jpg


early human (dated between 154,000 to 160,000): http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/03/sci_nat_enl_1055253299/img/1.jpg


lots of non bone fragment skulls: http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/a_tree.html

and mutation and adaptation are the essence of evolution, if you believe in that then it would make no sense for us to not have changed in the ammount of time that we have existed

Chantress
20th July 03, 09:05 AM
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ19.html

http://www.creationscience.com/

Adaptation is not necessarily evolution. With adaption the change in species is not required. With evolution, the adaptation must lead to a change in species either over a period of thousands of years or instantly at conception. If you are taking the stance that adaption is always evolution, then according to your definition I would have to agree in part that evolution does in fact occur. However, since you are misinterpreting the word adaption and stretching it to fit your theory, I would also have to disagree.

Tegian
20th July 03, 12:41 PM
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ19.html

http://www.creationscience.com/

Adaptation is not necessarily evolution. With adaption the change in species is not required. With evolution, the adaptation must lead to a change in species either over a period of thousands of years or instantly at conception. If you are taking the stance that adaption is always evolution, then according to your definition I would have to agree in part that evolution does in fact occur. However, since you are misinterpreting the word adaption and stretching it to fit your theory, I would also have to disagree.

I never said adapatation was necessarily evolution. It is the essence of it, something has to mutate or adapt to become a different form. A change in species would just be a dirastic change, and most of the time it isn't thousands of years and more like millions.

I would guess that you trust the beliefs of several scientist over the millions that believe in Archaeopteryx. But of course that wouldn't make sense.

The liquidation is cute, but I do not see how it disproves dinosaurs or early humanoid species. And I may have missed it but I didn't see anything that said that this would throw off carbon dating. We don't only date things relative to their depth in sediment.

Straylight
20th July 03, 06:17 PM
Actually, I think that one night, and probably by accident, some kid in a lab at Cal Tech is going to seriously do something that will -really- fuck the entire universe up.

You can quote me on that.

And....

Straylight
20th July 03, 06:17 PM
What do you get when you cross a retard with a gang banger?
Someone who spray paints on a chain link fence.

Shorrtee McHeals
12th August 03, 11:49 PM
Evolutionists cant explain how life began, and Creationists cant explain to Evolutionists how God didnt have to begin since he has always been, so the stalemate goes on!

Energiser
13th August 03, 12:34 AM
quit bumping old threads you poop nugget.