Go to first unread
Back
to top
Origin of the Species
WatchThis discussion is closed.
Report
#21
(Original post by magicalsausage)
They can only co-exist if you take Genesis as a moral tale rather than absolute fact. That said I know many christians (probably the majority of the christians I know) who see absolutely no conflict between their faith and their belief in evolution - good on them!
They can only co-exist if you take Genesis as a moral tale rather than absolute fact. That said I know many christians (probably the majority of the christians I know) who see absolutely no conflict between their faith and their belief in evolution - good on them!
0
Report
#22
(Original post by operato)
my biology teacher thinks that they co-exist together
my biology teacher thinks that they co-exist together
0
Report
#23
(Original post by operato)
my biology teacher thinks that they co-exist together
my biology teacher thinks that they co-exist together
A day was probably just a term used to descrie a period of time by the author of Genesis, since there was no concept of months and years at that time.
0
Report
#24
(Original post by magicalsausage)
I don't see how you can believe at once that man was created in the state we know today by God and that man has come to its current state through evolution from single celled organisms.
I don't see how you can believe at once that man was created in the state we know today by God and that man has come to its current state through evolution from single celled organisms.
but that's what my biology teacher said.
0
Report
#25
(Original post by operato)
i don't believe in either creation story or evolution lol
but that's what my biology teacher said.
i don't believe in either creation story or evolution lol
but that's what my biology teacher said.
0
Report
#26
(Original post by magicalsausage)
I don't see how you can believe at once that man was created in the state we know today by God and that man has come to its current state through evolution from single celled organisms.
I don't see how you can believe at once that man was created in the state we know today by God and that man has come to its current state through evolution from single celled organisms.
0
Report
#27
(Original post by tkfmbp)
OK well take the first animal/bird/whatever created by God. If in this time period that God chooses before the next stage of evolution is formed, we actually move up and up till we reach humans, then surely God has also created the human, since he instigated its evolution.
OK well take the first animal/bird/whatever created by God. If in this time period that God chooses before the next stage of evolution is formed, we actually move up and up till we reach humans, then surely God has also created the human, since he instigated its evolution.
0
Report
#28
(Original post by magicalsausage)
So what is your mysterious Third Way - I am intrigued!
So what is your mysterious Third Way - I am intrigued!
i'm quite neutral to be honest but i pick and pull at other people's ideas.
0
Report
#29
(Original post by operato)
sexual reproduction evolved from asexually reproducing orgasm...
or it just always existed that way. have you noticed that in almost all(i say almost because i don't know every organism) sexually reproducing organism there are 2 sexes?
sexual reproduction evolved from asexually reproducing orgasm...
or it just always existed that way. have you noticed that in almost all(i say almost because i don't know every organism) sexually reproducing organism there are 2 sexes?
0
Report
#30
(Original post by magicalsausage)
But all this happened overnight. And God specifically creates man, he does not simply appear.
But all this happened overnight. And God specifically creates man, he does not simply appear.
0
Report
#31
(Original post by tkfmbp)
That's if you take the story literally. Many people don't believe it is literal. Most of the NT isn't, so why should the OT be ?
That's if you take the story literally. Many people don't believe it is literal. Most of the NT isn't, so why should the OT be ?
oh i have to add, it was the egyptians who gave us 24hr days
0
Report
#32
(Original post by PhilipsCDRW)
Which is simpler, God or evolution?
Occam's razor.
Evolution theory is full of gaps, and impossibilities. And denying the existence of God or supernatural creation is a philosophic not scientific decision.
Which is simpler, God or evolution?
Occam's razor.
Evolution theory is full of gaps, and impossibilities. And denying the existence of God or supernatural creation is a philosophic not scientific decision.
Surely God is a redundant element. Evolution is not. Without evolutionary theory you could not explain why we can make the observations we do when we find fossiles and other evidence for an evolution. The existance of a supernatural creation is redundant however and thus Christianity falls on Ockhams razor. Ockhams razor is not about simplicity, its about what elements of a theory are necessary in order to explain how a given input can yield the observed output. Or, as Einstein stated it "A theory should be as simple as possible, but not simpler!"
0
Report
#33
(Original post by tkfmbp)
That's if you take the story literally. Many people don't believe it is literal. Most of the NT isn't, so why should the OT be ?
That's if you take the story literally. Many people don't believe it is literal. Most of the NT isn't, so why should the OT be ?
0
Report
#34
oh i have to add, it was the egyptians who gave us 24hr days
0
Report
#35
(Original post by magicalsausage)
No, 24 hour days are natural - the time it takes the earth to rotate. And yes I know that it is not exactly 24 hours but that is beside the point. And whilst this will have been different at the time the earth was created, when Man appeared it was certainly as today (more or less). It is not as if the Egyptians just decided out of nowhere how long a day would last - it is fairly obvious.
No, 24 hour days are natural - the time it takes the earth to rotate. And yes I know that it is not exactly 24 hours but that is beside the point. And whilst this will have been different at the time the earth was created, when Man appeared it was certainly as today (more or less). It is not as if the Egyptians just decided out of nowhere how long a day would last - it is fairly obvious.
0
is there any real proof of macroevolution - species from species, plants to fish to amphibhian, to reptile, to bird,or mammals, to eventually us? Well, we assume we're at end of the chain, but there are so many other species around, so they must all have taken a different route in this journey of evolution.
0
Report
#37
(Original post by JnA)
is there any real proof of macroevolution - species from species, plants to fish to amphibhian, to reptile, to bird,or mammals, to eventually us? Well, we assume we're at end of the chain, but there are so many other species around, so they must all have taken a different route in this journey of evolution.
is there any real proof of macroevolution - species from species, plants to fish to amphibhian, to reptile, to bird,or mammals, to eventually us? Well, we assume we're at end of the chain, but there are so many other species around, so they must all have taken a different route in this journey of evolution.
Otherwise I dont really understand what you mean with "real" proof. There is plenty of evidence to support thetheory, and in science thats as good as it gets. You could always come up with some fantastic scenario where all the evidence is misleading, but the question is if such a scenario is likely or not. When it comes to evolution the case is that you have so much compelling evidence that such a scenario simply is not a reasonable theory. With all the evidence we have macro evolution is certainly a very likely theory. Dont confuse this with thinking that evolution has never been prooved. It is simply the scientists way of saying: "We considder all possibilities, but so far we are pretty certain this is what happened..." Unlike a police investiogation Science doesnt end up with a conclusive trial. Science is always in the process of investigartion and thus the most certain answer you will ever get is that it is extremeley extremely likely (Eaven if this means it is so likely that it would be foolish to think anything else).
0
Report
#38
(Original post by Jonatan)
LOL, I think you misunderstood the point here. one hour is defined as 1/24 times the length of a day. Thus if teh egyptians had defined one hour to be 1/10 times the length of a day we would have 10 hours a day. I know that you have these days picked other more accurate definitions in order to maintain an accurate constant for the second, but still the reason we have roughly 24 hours a day is that the egyptians found out that it was easy to divide a circle into 24 eaqually large sectors. They used this principle to construct sundials. Thus the length of an hour is the amount of time needed for the shadow of the sun to move past one of tehse sectors. Had the egyptians divided the circle into 6 parts instead, we would have 6 time units per day.
LOL, I think you misunderstood the point here. one hour is defined as 1/24 times the length of a day. Thus if teh egyptians had defined one hour to be 1/10 times the length of a day we would have 10 hours a day. I know that you have these days picked other more accurate definitions in order to maintain an accurate constant for the second, but still the reason we have roughly 24 hours a day is that the egyptians found out that it was easy to divide a circle into 24 eaqually large sectors. They used this principle to construct sundials. Thus the length of an hour is the amount of time needed for the shadow of the sun to move past one of tehse sectors. Had the egyptians divided the circle into 6 parts instead, we would have 6 time units per day.
0
Report
#39
(Original post by JnA)
is there any real proof of macroevolution - species from species, plants to fish to amphibhian, to reptile, to bird,or mammals, to eventually us? Well, we assume we're at end of the chain, but there are so many other species around, so they must all have taken a different route in this journey of evolution.
is there any real proof of macroevolution - species from species, plants to fish to amphibhian, to reptile, to bird,or mammals, to eventually us? Well, we assume we're at end of the chain, but there are so many other species around, so they must all have taken a different route in this journey of evolution.
0
Report
#40
(Original post by magicalsausage)
Why should we consider ourselves as the final product? We are destined to be superceded by a more evolved species just as we superceded the specii from which we came.
Why should we consider ourselves as the final product? We are destined to be superceded by a more evolved species just as we superceded the specii from which we came.
0
X
new posts
Today on TSR
-
TSR Answers: calculated gradesEducation experts answered your questions - watch what they said
- Deferring a year - Should you?
- Latest as Cummings set to make statement
- Do your parents help you pay for uni?
- How do you feel about going back to school?
