Need Some Education On EVOLUTION? Start Here! Perry & Axal take note!

by Seeker4 178 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Asheron

  See you at the Evil Evolutionist CULT meeting.
• 

  thetrueone

  Just looking for any responds.........um didn't get any sorry.....I shall disapear
• 

  Qcmbr

  I was suggesting that its only really faith if its founded in something true - thereafter I'd argue it becomes delusion. The faith placed in the flat earth was not actually faith - i.e. it couldn't benefit their experience of the world since it was untrue - it was delusion, faith in the earth as a globe that allowed explorers to sail over the horizon was real faith - based in something true that benefitted them by its truth. If a christian has faith in something untrue then it has no power it is delusion - but that which a christian has faith in, if true, would grant great benefit by its truth. Thus far in my trip over the horizon I've had to junk many cherished beliefs that I once mistook as faith and found to be false but I have also found many things to have faith in that work.
• 

  lonelysheep

  Ok....thanks, and sorry. The typed words only go so far sometimes.
• 

  TopHat

  asheron, No one has said your cult was evil....You yourself said your cult was evil.

  I guess you and the cult will be around again soon?
• 

  Asheron
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Hmmm, I go out to eat for a few hours and look at this debate! A couple of observations:

  Theists have it over evolutionists/science in one key aspect, and that is at Gen 1:1 "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Tada! Can't argue with that. One sentence, lets move on. It's such a nice easy way to explain things.

  Science has the burden of explaining the data, and they can't do this in a sentence. In fact, it's really boring. It can be tedious. If you didn't like science in high school, you proabably couldn't be bothered to learn the intricacies, the data. It is time consuming and we have lives. New discoveries often lead to explanations that require more then a 5th grade understanding of biology. But the data is there. You can argue about what it means, but the fact that things evolve and adapt is proven more and more each day.

  I realize that it is easier to believe that someone created everything. It require no thought, no proof. Science tries and tries to show the evidence, and all they get is loud arguements, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  It isn't a cult. A cult isolates itself from others. You might remember the JW thing..... Science, who do they isolate themselves from? What are they hiding? What could possibly be their reason to point out an invisible god is just that, invisible and inactive in the affairs of mankind today. This makes evoultionists a cult?
• 

  Seeker4

  Wow! I was gone for a few hours and this thread took off!

  Apostate Kate, I'm not sure where to begin. I've seen your list of "scientists" who believe in the Genesis account of creation before, and it's been discussed on a few other posts. Because a fringe element that happens to include a few PhDs wants to accept an acient creationist myth as literal, well, so be it. There are some bright engineers who still argue that men didn't land on the moon.

  Unfortunately for you and them, a literal view of Genesis is about the easiest thing to disprove, in a hundred different ways. Take your list down to the Museum of Natural Science and argue with them about how the views of these "scientists" believing in a literal Genesis account should be included in the display. You'd get tossed out on your arse, just the way creationism has been tossed out on its arse everytime the issue has gone to court. There's a reason for that - a total lack of supporting evidence.

  It's interesting that the head of the human genome project happens to be a believer in God, and is quite outspoken about it. Yet he noted that Darwin could not have hoped for a greater proof of evolution than what is found in DNA and the mapping of the genome. As several have noted here: accepting scientific evidence doesn't rule out being able to believe in god.

  Also, screaming "you're a cult" at believers in evolution, and your list of cult characteristics as you try to apply them to supporters of science, is silly. Though we do have those Tuesday evening meetings where our leader outlines how we're going to take over the world! The evolution cultists are thinking of merging with the gravitation and quantum mechanics cults, and perhaps even letting in the continental drift and nuclear physics cults.

  And RAF, your posts are almost incomprehensible, even allowing for your difficulty with the language. But, from what I can figure out, you seem to completely misunderstand the scientific concept of theory . Let me share this definition from Wikipedia:

  "In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of naturalphenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation."

  In other words, in science, evolution is a fact and natural selection is the theory of how it works, in the same way that electricity is a fact and the flow of electrons is the theory of how it works. Get it? You are using the word theory in a completely different way than it is used in science. "It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition." That is, in science, evolution is a fact.

  Also, your talk of missing links and the faked fossils is about as outdated as the WTS's old evolution book, and that's probably where you got it from! If that's what you're placing your ideas about evolution on, you need to fast foward your research about a century or so! Please go check out the NY Times article and get some actual background on the topic.

  S4
• 

  Asheron

  Seeker,

  ontsay alksay boutsay the eetingsay.

  Asheronsay
• 

  RAF

  ATJ : I realize that it is easier to believe that someone created everything. It require no thought, no proof. Science tries and tries to show the evidence, and all they get is loud arguements, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  The very old bible state that GOD is EVERYTHING means Science by itself " IT " is everything

  the fact that most of you comes from the JW with is very inaccurate understanding of the bible is a probleme to understand this (but most religions get into the teaching which doesn't help to understand the concept of GOD.

  S4 : your talk of missing links and the faked fossils is about as outdated as the WTS's old evolution book

  Oh please ... No comment !
  And I guess that you can understand that there are "Theories" and "Theories" means more or less probable as facts ... NO? if you don't I understand why you accept the theory of evolution as a fact.

  Voilà ...