actually, i dont know which to believe, from scientific theories, it has been proven that life evolved from simple organic sources. biochemically, this argument is true, it has been proven experimentally, in the religious angel, God created man from mere dust, this has some proof, because everything inthe human body contains a chemical element called carbon, this is obtained from burning or 'decaying' substances. if someone else has a different view, do get in touch with me

Kimba, you speak in parables (following a good example, are you? )
Let me restate my question:
How do you know that your quotes are coming from God? How do you verify the fact that they come from God? What leads you to that conclusion?

or in other words: how do you know that the bible is God's word? How can you trace the words in the Bible back to God?

Fluffy:

@KAG

God wil not speak to you just to convince you that He exists. He is too wise for that, next thing you will ask Him to change stones into bread when you are hungry and it does not work that way.

I wouldn't ask for stone to be turned into bread when I'm hungry, I would ask that stone be turned into bread for the millions of children that are starving to death as we speak, if God did, that I, and many other non-believers, would be her number one fans. So why doesn't God work that way anymore?

However He personally speaks to those who love adore and worship Him, but it does not mean you are not important to Him. there will come a time in your life when you will have a personal encounter with Him or when His Holy spirit will touch you.

Because regardless of who you are or wether you believe in Him, God wants you to have fellowship with Him.

Well until the day God reveals herself, I remain a friendly atheist *waves* (Yes, I finally decided on atheist on it's own)

kimba:

@KAGThanks for your dictionary definitions, but note, its only dictionary definitions. God did not intend that man take "religion" as the end of the road, God did not intend that it be relegated to a piece-of-paper affair ". He intends that man have a meaningful relationship with Him. See the kind of relationship God intended to have with Man right there at Eden, when God comes down in the cool of the day to talk, and have fellowship with man. After man sinned, he had to make sacrifices to appease God. Christ came as the ultimate sacrifice, but still man wont believe in Him.

Well, there's at best minmal evidence of Jesus dying for anyone's "sins", so you'll excuse me if i don't believe in your God needing to sacrifice himself to save just one section of his creation, from himself. I feel we've strayed from the OP.

Isnt it sad that God has been doing everything to reach out to man, since Eden, yet man would rejects. Anyway, theres still time to believe. Make hay while the sun shines.

No he hasn't, really, really, he hasn't.

I just quoted those references, Psalms, Isaiah and Paul from my head, if you want me to do a Genesis to Revelation detail, just pick your Bible and read.
If God would give you a personal call, you'll be preaching Jesus on Nairaland tomorrow morning.

I've read, the Bible, read most of it several times, still think Pratchett is a better writer than all the authors in the contained in the Biblical cannon, and believe R. R. Martin pwns the Nicene council in the editing department. .

Creation!!!!!! Simple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

exactly!!!!!!!!!! evolutin is a scientic theory!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@KAG

Answering your question on why God does not turn stones into bread for the starving,

God made sure that there are enough resources on earth for everyone to have enough. It is because some
people are so greedy and only think about enriching themselves that there are so many left starving.

So God has allready provided for all of us, but we are the once not using the resources to everyone's advantage.

Dam it! I aint no ape or monkey . Whacha lookin @? , Look I a gorrilla

I am a lioness dam it, not a monkey
I evolve from the tribe of the Lions

lioness:

Dam it! I aint no ape or monkey . Whacha lookin @? , Look I a gorrilla

I am a lioness dam it, not a monkey
I evolve from the tribe of the Lions

But you like some monkey bone to chew on, don't you

Oh My! Does that mean i've been eating humans yet to evolve LMAO

nferyn:

But you like some monkey bone to chew on, don't you

lioness:

Oh My! Does that mean i've been eating humans yet to evolve LMAO

@nferyn and others like him
@ anyone who thinks the theory of evolution is anything but a stupid theory
ARRRRRRRGHHHHHH!!!
HERE comes these pseudo-intellectuals who know nothing about nothing totting their false knowledge about. I happen to be a biochemist and I know that the theory of evolution  is exactly that, A THEORY!!! there's absolutely NO evidence to support evolution. It's just a load of elaborate crap. THE WHOLE UNIVERSE STINKS of creation. Intelligence!!, intelligence suggets a personality, which indirectly leads a reasoning person to conclude that a god of some sorts exists somewhere. Ever heard of the theory of Intelligent design?

okay simmy, so what exactly do you believe

I believe in intelligent design i.e creation
Exactly who the creator is, is a topic for another forum

dude.

intelligent design is bollocks.

A ridiculous attempt to subvert science with metaphysics

the simple solution is to seperate the physical/scientific from the spiritual

finish

so from a spiritual standpoint, we were created by God in his image, and from a physical standpoint, we evolved from  simpler lifeforms over a great period of time.

trying to fuse the two results in the hideous pseudoscience known as intelligent design.

Please don't allow yourself to be misled. Believing in the theory of evolution does not mean you should ditch your spiritual beliefs. By definition, the spiritual is not to be reasoned out or discussed. It is to be accepted on FAITH.

if ID takes hold it will set a precedent that could open the door for the further subversion and perversion of the body of knowledge untill it becomes just another pack of senseless mumbo jumbo.

I beg of you, erase ID from your mind as fast as you can,   in the long run it will only harm you and others.

Also, to clarify, simmy-  as a Biochemist, you of all people should know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis.

And if you truly are a scientist, in the future refrain from making emotionally charged statements that are factually inaccurate and logically inconsistent.

the phrase 'there's absolutely NO evidence to support evolution' directly contradicts 'the theory of evolution  is exactly that, A THEORY!'

if you cannot figure out why, then I will be very interested in knowing who on earth credited you with a degree in science.

simmy:

@nferyn and others like him
@ anyone who thinks the theory of evolution is anything but a stupid theory
ARRRRRRRGHHHHHH!!!
HERE comes these pseudo-intellectuals who know nothing about nothing totting their false knowledge about.

What exactly are you saying? Is insulting now considered a form of argumentation as well?

simmy:

I happen to be a biochemist and I know that the theory of evolution is exactly that, A THEORY!!! there's absolutely NO evidence to support evolution.

Here we go, throw in another logical phalacy. an argumentum ad verecundiam, an argument from authority, doesn't work with us, pseudo-intellectual. [i]Simmy [/i]isn't a pseudonym for Michael Behe, is it?
Go and read this thread and tell me where exactly the evidence is missing? Do you have any idea what a scientific theory is?

simmy:

It's just a load of elaborate crap. THE WHOLE UNIVERSE STINKS of creation.

How so. I would be very interested in finding the evidence for the intelligent desing hypothesis (or any other variation of creationism). Calling it a theory is giving it far too much credit. If you miraculously do happen to have the evidence, please present it in this thread.

simmy:

Intelligence!!, intelligence suggets a personality, which indirectly leads a reasoning person to conclude that a god of some sorts exists somewhere. Ever heard of the theory of Intelligent design?

Well your reasoning definitely follows different neural pathways than mine. I have heard of Intelligent Design. Calling it a theory is giving it far too much credit.

simmy:

@nferyn and others like him
@ anyone who thinks the theory of evolution is anything but a stupid theory
ARRRRRRRGHHHHHH!!!

Maybe you can tell us why it's a stupid theory.

HERE comes these pseudo-intellectuals who know nothing about nothing totting their false knowledge about. I happen to be a biochemist and I know that the theory of evolution is exactly that, A THEORY!!!

Oh boy, not another scientist with no idea of what a scientific theory means "In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it often does in other contexts. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena, which originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations made that is predictive, logical and testable" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory).

there's absolutely NO evidence to support evolution.

Really? That would be news to the approximately 99% of biologists who accept evolution, it would also startle all the major universities, hospitals, etc that teach, and/or study evolution.

It's just a load of elaborate crap. THE WHOLE UNIVERSE STINKS of creation.

No it doesn't, but that's just my opinion, however, many christians believe God used evolution to create.

Intelligence!!, intelligence suggets a personality, which indirectly leads a reasoning person to conclude that a god of some sorts exists somewhere. Ever heard of the theory of Intelligent design?

Yes, and I wouldn't call it a theory, I wouldn't even call it an hypothesis. By the way, did you catch the Dover trial in America?

@nferyn
sorry if i sounded insulting, i didnt mean to,  i tend to argue with a lot of passion. i apologise.
Evolution only explains a plausible way in which the fittest came to be fit< it doesnt explain how they got there in the first place.When darwin wrote the origin of species very little of the complexities of lifewas known and so , so much was taken for granted. I still maintain that the theory of evolution is elaborate nonsense. Simply stating that simple organisms evolved into complex multicellular organisms like humans stretches the limits of imagination. Saying that this a case of extreme oversimplificationis an understatement. Evolutionists tend to cover up their inplausible arguments with time. Millions and millions of years give organisms enough time to evolve into whatever they want they say!!!!Thats pure balderdash! Anyone who understands even remotely how complex the dna sequence of a gorilla is will realize how close to impossible evolution is. Its like asking a gorilla to randomly punch away at a keybooard and getting him to type out the complete works of william shakespaeare at his first or second or even third attemot. think,  even if he has a million or billion years to work , how possible is such a feat? Please don't lets get carried away by the proponents of evolution jsut because it's the theory in vogue right now and because being anti-religious is considered intellectual. Evolution is crap!!Note that I am not arguing in favour of any religious sect.
@darkmanzero
Scientists like me decided to grace evolution with the term theory, please don't lets get carried away by semantics,  the same scientists graced intelligent design with the same term.some scientists believe in evolution and consider i.d as crap while others like me think i.d is tha bomb and consider evolution as crap
catch ny drift?
Its also obvious u have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what I.d is about if u consider it as an attempt to mix science with metaphysics or spiritual stuff.
I'll surf the web and get u the link which explains the concpt of intelligent design in the simplest and most concise way
NOTICE that I am not arguing in favour of ANY religious sect even though I happen to believe in the xtian God. This arguement has little to do with religion

simmy

I respectfully put it to you that it is you who have no idea what ID is.

I much less respectfully declare that you have absolutely no idea what evolution is.

If you wish to contest these points, please do so clearly and intelligently. Spewing random gibberish doesn't help your case.

dakmanzero:

simmy

I respectfully put it to you that it is you who have no idea what ID is.

I much less respectfully declare that you have absolutely no idea what evolution is.

If you wish to contest these points, please do so clearly and intelligently. Spewing random gibberish doesn't help your case.

My guy if u say so no shaking
I'm spewing random gibberish??
No wonder you believe in evolution, 1ce again you're interpreting carefully planned and thought out action as random occurences that somehow come out as text in a language you understand!!!
Pls dont take this personally, i've alread y apologised for being slightly rude earlier, ok?

oops, sorry about the gibberish thingy

I must confess, I read the earlier 'AAARGH' thread together with your 3-point rebuttal and I didnt notice the change of tone till I read it again just now

I guess I should be the one apologising, then!

It's all good;no shaking

On the issue of randomness vs intelligent design, read these books:

CHAOS:making a new science    by james glieck

the blind watchmaker by richard dawkins, available online, ask @nefryn nicely and he'll point you to the site

the selfish gene   by richard dawkins



As a computer scientist I have been interested in nonlinear dynamics since I encountered it in school. There are remarkable patterns to the interaction of forces of nature that can be described only as awe-inspiring. Unfortunately, if taken outside their full context such patterns can be misinterpreted as intelligent design. ID proponents exploit this to mislead people such as yourself, especially if they notice your religious beliefs are giving you problems accepting evolution.


When you read these, you will understand more about how evolution is meant to occur, and what physical forces cause it to occur. It truly is wonderful.

I hope you like maths, though- theres plenty of mathematics involved but not too much.

As a footnote, yes I do believe I was created by GOD. But as I said earlier, the spiritual and the physical must be kept seperate or we risk destroying the credibility of the body of knowledge.

simmy:

Evolution only explains a plausible way in which the fittest came to be fit< it doesnt explain how they got there in the first place.

If I understand what you wrote correctly, I agree evolution does not explain the origins of life, nor does it attempt explaining it. That's left to the chemists and biochemists .

When darwin wrote the origin of species very little of the complexities of lifewas known and so , so much was taken for granted.

But the theory has come a long way since then, and it still remains unfalsified.

I still maintain that the theory of evolution is elaborate nonsense. Simply stating that simple organisms evolved into complex multicellular organisms like humans stretches the limits of imagination. Saying that this a case of extreme oversimplificationis an understatement.

Many things stretch the limit of imagination, but that doesn't make them wrong.

Evolutionists tend to cover up their inplausible arguments with time. Millions and millions of years give organisms enough time to evolve into whatever they want they say!!!!Thats pure balderdash!

No it isn't.

Anyone who understands even remotely how complex the dna sequence of a gorilla is will realize how close to impossible evolution is. Its like asking a gorilla to randomly punch away at a keybooard and getting him to type out the complete works of william shakespaeare at his first or second or even third attemot. think, even if he has a million or billion years to work , how possible is such a feat?

Except evolution isn't random, and there's nothing to suggest a gorilla's dna didn't arise without evolution.

Please don't lets get carried away by the proponents of evolution jsut because it's the theory in vogue right now and because being anti-religious is considered intellectual. Evolution is crap!!Note that I am not arguing in favour of any religious sect.

Why bring religion into the fray? You do evolution =\= atheism, and many (most?) christians accept evolution?

@darkmanzero
Scientists like me decided to grace evolution with the term theory, please don't lets get carried away by semantics, the same scientists graced intelligent design with the same term.some scientists believe in evolution and consider i.d as crap while others like me think i.d is tha bomb and consider evolution as crap
catch ny drift?

Scientists like you don't know what a scientific theory is, others that do, graced evolution with the term theory. They also know that ID is not a scientific theory for reason which include, it doesn't have any empirical evidences, makes no predictions, and more importantly can't be falsified.

Its also obvious u have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what I.d is about if u consider it as an attempt to mix science with metaphysics or spiritual stuff.
I'll surf the web and get u the link which explains the concpt of intelligent design in the simplest and most concise way
NOTICE that I am not arguing in favour of ANY religious sect even though I happen to believe in the xtian God. This arguement has little to do with religion

Darkman is right though, just ask the poster boy of ID, Michael "astrology is science" Behe. If you still aren't convinced, look up the Dover board, the authors of the Panda's thumb, and even Pat Robertson's statement after ID was stopped from being taught.

nferyn:

[i]Simmy [/i]isn't a pseudonym for Michael Behe, is it?

That would be funny, but unfortunately (or fortunately) Behe, unlike Simmy, actually accepts evolution concepts like common descent.

the irony of life is, atheist claim people who believe in God are illogical, confused and unscientific. yet they make it a point of duty to hold on to an idea, that was founded by a VICTORIAN scientist. whose only tool was his eyes and a notebook. whose whole submission were based on a limited geographical area. this was at a time when they hadnt even invented penicilin. pls what was darwins pedigree that gave him the right to exp[lain the origin of life ?. he prob knew less about biology than an A level student of today. in the sciebntific method the jump from observation is hypothesis,then experimentation, before theory can be made. darwin jumped from observatin to theory in a millisecond, and all of scientific evolution has been built on that foundation, always warping observation and experimental results to fit the mould

why? becos accepting that there is a god would make us accountable for our actions to someone else (god forbid that we be accountable for what we do)

the theory of relativity has been demonstrated empirically to some degree so has newtonian physics, thermodynamics, and others. has any part of the chain of evolution been demonstrated conclusively empirically?. Even the original synthesis of the 20 laevo-amino acids could not be duplicated in a lab under the most contrived of conditions

the usual cop-out is that it took billions of years, but even strains of viruses that mutate so many times in few years that it would be equivalent to a worm turning into a whale have not been shown to mutate into anythin more complex than they originally were. different, more adaptable but not more complex

there are so many hole in this so-called theory that only a fool would believe it. it is more plausible that life from outer space came to earth in a spaceship than organic material in the sea fused into a bacterium.

and any one out there who wants to argue on scientific facts and not mass-hypnosis can bring it on

xcape


Read james moore and adrian desmonds' foreword to Charles Darwin's "The Descent Of Man" to find the answers to your questions on how he came about his evidence.

Understand that the theory of Evolution as it exists today has been proven repeatedly by other scientists, and is used to make important Biological deductions today.

It is concievable that some science that has benefited you in this life has as its basis and explanation, the theory of evolution.

The answer to anything in science is simple: read.

xkape:

the irony of life is, atheist claim people who believe in God are illogical, confused and unscientific. yet they make it a point of duty to hold on to an idea, that was founded by a VICTORIAN scientist. whose only tool was his eyes and a notebook. whose whole submission were based on a limited geographical area. this was at a time when they hadnt even invented penicilin.

Firstly, what does atheism have to do with evolution? Secondly, You do know people like Galileo and Newton were before Darwin, yes? I guess we should all revert to the geocentric model, and disregard everything Newton came up with. Finally, the theory has come a long way is Darwin.

please what was darwins pedigree that gave him the right to exp[lain the origin of life ?.

He didn't explain the origin of life, but he did at one point offer up a suggestion that it was started by YHVH.

he prob knew less about biology than an A level student of today. in the sciebntific method the jump from observation is hypothesis,then experimentation, before theory can be made. darwin jumped from observatin to theory in a millisecond, and all of scientific evolution has been built on that foundation, always warping observation and experimental results to fit the mould

In all honesty, I have no doubt that Darwin knew more biology than you.

why? because accepting that there is a god would make us accountable for our actions to someone else (god forbid that we be accountable for what we do)

Okay? If that's what you think evolution is about, it's not surprising that you oppose it.

the theory of relativity has been demonstrated empirically to some degree so has newtonian physics, thermodynamics, and others. has any part of the chain of evolution been demonstrated conclusively empirically?. Even the original synthesis of the 20 laevo-amino acids could not be duplicated in a lab under the most contrived of conditions

Yes.

the usual cop-out is that it took billions of years, but even strains of viruses that mutate so many times in few years that it would be equivalent to a worm turning into a whale have not been shown to mutate into anythin more complex than they originally were. different, more adaptable but not more complex

there are so many hole in this so-called theory that only a fool would believe it. it is more plausible that life from outer space came to earth in a spaceship than organic material in the sea fused into a bacterium.

and any one out there who wants to argue on scientific facts and not mass-hypnosis can bring it on

I suspect you know next to nothing about evolution and it's theory. How about you point out the many holes in the theory of evolution.[quote][/quote]

Guys stop all this crap, religiously we have to believe it cos it is in the bible and transcends canality, scientifically, we have to follow suit cos it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that man evolved

yEAH! GO SERGIO!

dats wot ive been saying since!

seperate spiritual and physical!

lets all be happy!

proests on one side, professors on the other!






"and we shall have, peace, " - Darth Sideous

simmy:

@nferyn
sorry if i sounded insulting, i didnt mean to, i tend to argue with a lot of passion. i apologise.

Appology accepted. Why the pasion in the first place?

simmy:

Evolution only explains a plausible way in which the fittest came to be fit< it doesnt explain how they got there in the first place.

Evolution Theory, I guess that's what you're referring to, does not explain how the fittest became to be fit and it is not intended to explain how life started in the first place.

Let me repeat myself (from another thread):

Evolution is both a fact and a scientific theory. It is a fact that in the past there were countless life forms that are no longer here. It is a fact that these lifeforms differed depending on the time they lived on our planet.
The theory of evolution offfers a scientific explanation for that fact. It explains that all current life forms originated from a common ancestor and diverged and evolved over time. The processes that caused these changes are:

* natural selection
* sexual selection
* gene drift

All these processes work from the natural genetic variations witin the populations that stem from sexual recombination, mutations and DNA copying errors.

simmy:

When darwin wrote the origin of species very little of the complexities of lifewas known and so , so much was taken for granted.

Yes, and what's your point?

simmy:

I still maintain that the theory of evolution is elaborate nonsense.

based on what evidence and:or observations exactly?

simmy:

Simply stating that simple organisms evolved into complex multicellular organisms like humans stretches the limits of imagination. Saying that this a case of extreme oversimplificationis an understatement.

Why? Because you cannot understand how it hapened? What is an oversimplification of what exactly?
Be precise in what you consider improbable and I'd be happy to provide a possible explanation.

simmy:

Evolutionists tend to cover up their inplausible arguments with time. Millions and millions of years give organisms enough time to evolve into whatever they want they say!!!!Thats pure balderdash!

That is because you cannot conceive the impact of geological time. Take for instance the evolution of the incredibly complex camera eye. It goes so fast on geological timescales, that it cannot even be detected in the fossil record. The article by Dawkins should give you even more insight in how the evolution of eyes is not only possible, but very beneficial and probable.

simmy:

Anyone who understands even remotely how complex the dna sequence of a gorilla is will realize how close to impossible evolution is.

Only if you consider Evolution to be random. Which it isn't. Natural selection and sexual selection are anything but random processes.

simmy:

Its like asking a gorilla to randomly punch away at a keybooard and getting him to type out the complete works of william shakespaeare at his first or second or even third attemot. think, even if he has a million or billion years to work , how possible is such a feat?

Very improbable, but your description does not even remotely compare to evolution theory. Natural and sexual selection are [b]not [/b]random processes.

simmy:

Please don't lets get carried away by the proponents of evolution jsut because it's the theory in vogue right now and because being anti-religious is considered intellectual.

I have studied it on a level that allows me to declare it is rock solid.

simmy:

Evolution is crap!!Note that I am not arguing in favour of any religious sect.

It most definitely isn't.

simmy:

@darkmanzero
Scientists like me decided to grace evolution with the term theory, please don't lets get carried away by semantics, the same scientists graced intelligent design with the same term.

Not one biologist working in research with even very limited accomplishments has called intelligent design a theory. It does not deserve that label. It is religion disguised as science. Only layman can fall for that crap.

simmy:

some scientists believe in evolution and consider i.d as crap while others like me think i.d is tha bomb and consider evolution as crap

Well why don't you give me an outline of the scientific theory of ID? As far as I know it does not exist.

simmy:

catch ny drift?
Its also obvious u have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what I.d is about if u consider it as an attempt to mix science with metaphysics or spiritual stuff.

It is just that. Give me even one thing that ID would predict.

simmy:

I'll surf the web and get u the link which explains the concpt of intelligent design in the simplest and most concise way

I thought you were a scientist. Why don't you reference a scientific peer-reviewed publication that explains the concept of intelligent design.

simmy:

NOTICE that I am not arguing in favour of ANY religious sect even though I happen to believe in the xtian God. This arguement has little to do with religion

It does have everything to do with religion. ID is a political movement, not a scientific school of thought. The Wedge document by the Discovery Institute makes the socio-political motives of ID abundantly clear.

This guy has believed this evolution crap, hook line, sinker