WrongPlanet.net an anti-christian site?

Post Reply New Topic

If G'Ma had that kind of equipment, Pops might have already been elsewhere.

So you are not discrediting "macro-"evolution because it hasn't been observed for million of years (ie, non-observed and tested for that period of time, therefore it is false), but rather, stating that it may be not accurate because of that limitation? if that is so, then I believe the science agrees with that, I mean, after all, the scientific theory is falsifiable.

If mutation is a fact, and natural selection is a fact, then evolution is a fact.

AngelRho needs to stop checking creationist sites and start reading some actual science books.

Natural Selection is obvious, and mathematically provable, if you acknowledge that genetics works in a particular way.

I'm no expert mathematically, but I can believe that with ease.

By Zeus' beard, this thread is still going? Guys, listen to TheBicyclingGuitarist, he's spot on. There is nothing real to Creationism. I have yet to hear an argument from a Creationist that isn't full of logical fallacies in some manner, or misquoting a scientist, or using a scientists words out of context. 'Creation Science' is a serious misnomer- there are no Creation 'Scientists' who are working within the framework of scientific methodology, with falsifiability. I fully expect them to cherry pick their data, and additionally they are working with a foregone conclusion- this is unscientific. They are not out to falsify their beliefs. They are connecting widely separated dots with mental gymnastics and disingenuity. I don't know why people bother arguing with them. TheBicyclingGuitarist, you shouldn't bother debating Creationists, because they don't deserve the attention you give them. There is not a shred of evidence for anything they say. Does a geographer debate a flat Earther? I heard once, a quote about a scientist debating a creationist: "That may look good on your resume, but not mine"- words of wisdom. There is no debate- there is no credibility in Creationism.

Not even that God might have lit the fuse for "Big Bang"?!

The Big Bang was not an explosion- but I accept that as an option for an unknown period of time, though I don't believe in the supernatural. However, Creationists don't view that as an option, but as the only answer

Well, whatever it was ...

I have no problem with the idea/thought/fact/whatever that things might/can/could/should "evolve", per se, and I say that in that kind of way since I really know virtually nothing about "evolution" anyway. All I know is that it makes absolutely no sense for me to believe things somehow "just began happening" or whatever out of nowhere and maybe even out of nothing however long ago ... and here we are now! However, and having grown up in what I call "a KJV-only cult", as such, I also think the dogma of the so-called "literalist-creationalist" or whatever is just as goofy as at least some of the stuff I hear around here!

Its more complicated then stuff just randomly beginning- it took almost 2 billion years to make the transition from organic molecules to nucleotides to single celled organisms (if that is the way it worked- there are simple infectious agents such as viruses (just a protein sheath with DNA or RNA) & prions (literally just protein- causes things like Mad Cow, Kuru...) that are not technically alive, and they may have come first, thus we can see where life could have began by their example of simplicity)), and then almost another 2 billion years for multicellular organisms to appear. Once this happened things started to get more 'rapid' on the scale of hundreds of millions of years. There were two known genesis of life on Earth (I proscribe to this theory, at least)- first, the Ediacaran biota (also referred to as 'non-analogue pre-Cambrian or Vendian life) began appearing, and it was essentially not related to life as we know it. Eventually Cambrian life appeared, in a vast explosion of diversity, replacing the Ediacaran in a few million years. It took hundreds of millions of more years for life to get even more complex.

Much of the life from this period was very soft and didn't fossilize well. Fossilization is a very tricky process, and conditions must be perfect for good fossils to be made. Thus I think there is probably even more to the story of the Earth that we may never know due to this.

If I'm going to be frank- to many people, its probably way too boring to want to accept. The idea that God did it is much more exciting, as it gives a purpose that they can understand. But I maintain that there is no purpose, at least that we can understand- perhaps a divine being set these things in motion (unlikely to me), but it is extraordinarily complex and beautiful, and Young-Earth Cretinists- sorry, Creationists- mar this beauty with flagrant ignorance to what the history of this planet really is because it goes against what their literal interpretations of an ancient book say.

there are some very interesting theories regarding just that,
remember that it isnt neccesarily that there wasnt anything before that, only that we cant detect it in any way and have no way of knowing.

My point, exactly!

Certainly not!

Isn't the Big Bang explosion still going and the noise of the explosion can be heard using specific tools?

That's what I heard on one of the Stephen Hawking videos.

More accurately it is an expansion. The 'noise' is called the Cosmic Microwave Background. I think the CMB is more a product of the chaotic nature of the early universe and not leftovers of an explosion. It was incredibly dense and hot and expanded rapidly (relatively speaking). If it were to be an explosion, there would need to be an 'outside'- as far as we know, there is no 'outside' to the universe. Even if the multiverse theory were to be true this would still be the case. It is generally referred to as an explosion for sake of simplicity, I believe

Correct. It is an expansion, not explosion. The term "Big Bang" is a misnomer, but is pretty well established now. As for the universe having an "outside", consider the following:

Möbius strips are really cool, a piece of paper where the front side and the back side are the same! They are easy to make: just give a half twist and join the ends of a strip of paper. They have unusual qualities too. If you cut a Möbius strip right down the middle all the way around, you don't get two separate pieces. The paper is still in one piece, but now has two sides. Mind blowing.

Just as a Möbius strip is a piece of paper where the front side and back side are the same, perhaps the universe can be thought of as something like a multi-dimensional Möbius strip where its inside and outside are the same. I dunno, just throwing this out there. I have pondered such matters all my life: existence, reality, consciousness, science, history, languages, religions, mythologies, psychology and the relationships these all have with and to each other.