Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

[Feba]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

Science without religion is lame.

I disagree, strongly. Science kicks ass. Haven't you ever seen Bill Nye, Carl Sagan; or ffs even the Discovery Channel?

If a god is awesome for creating the universe in a week, look at science. Our universe started as a big-ass explosion, and formed many of its fundamentals in fractions of a second. It could've been caused by other dimensions crashing into each other. Or our universe might just have spontaneously created itself. That all sounds pretty kickass to me.

You don't need rose coloured glasses to appreciate how beautiful and amazing our world is.

[Malacite]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

But its not a conspiracy, its become ingraned behavior to prohibit the discussion of god in science. Sorry, but here in America, making these little public clubs and not allowing people to question the establishment is the bane of science itself.

Yet another point Bill Maher makes. If someone starts talking about the possibility of other forms of life out in the universe (and IIRC we have found some traces of bacteria on mars?) they are crazy; but the moment you bring up Relgion "Oh, it's their faith" "you can't question or talk about that" we all just have to magically shut up and drop it.

Umm... no? How is another form of life any crazier than an invisible man living in the sky who sent his only son (born to a virgin no less) only for him to die? Don't even get me started on what a total scam Scientology is...


I agree largely with the 10 commandments and teachings like being a good person etc, but I refuse to commit to any religion on the grounds that no one fucking knows and likely never will know the truth and nothing short of God himself showing up and smiting the wicked while making a divine proclamation telepathically to all humanity will convince me otherwise.

[Ziero]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I disagree, strongly. Science kicks ass. Haven't you ever seen Bill Nye, Carl Sagan; or ffs even the Discovery Channel?

Einstein > Nye/Sagan.

Also, you're taking the quote wrong. It's not saying that the act of science in and of itself needs religion, it's that living a life based solely on science, solely on black and white, mathmatical thinking without some sort of faith or belief that those wonderous things are wonderous is "lame".

Yet another point Bill Maher makes. If someone starts talking about the possibility of other forms of life out in the universe (and IIRC we have found some traces of bacteria on mars?) they are crazy; but the moment you bring up Relgion "Oh, it's their faith" "you can't question or talk about that" we all just have to magically shut up and drop it.

Umm... no? How is another form of life any crazier than an invisible man living in the sky who sent his only son (born to a virgin no less) only for him to die? Don't even get me started on what a total scam Scientology is...

I agree largely with the 10 commandments and teachings like being a good person etc, but I refuse to commit to any religion on the grounds that no one fucking knows and likely never will know the truth and nothing short of God himself showing up and smiting the wicked while making a divine proclamation telepathically to all humanity will convince me otherwise.

To be blunt, Scientology isn't a religion in any way, it's a cult and a scam thought up by a pedophile who wanted to milk people for their money. It's no more of a religion then Satanism...which started off as lectures in some auditorium in Californa that people had to pay to get into.

Most religions have the same basic beliefs, infact many of the ancient religions have a lot in common at their core, but differ greatly in the details. Sadly most people who follow religions latch on to the details which often contradict the origins, the real reason, the religion was even started. And it's those details, those often completely abstract, often contradictory ideals and "rules" that create the problems so many people wind up having with religion. The core and the beliefs aren't the problem, the details are.

[Malacite]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

To be blunt, Scientology isn't a religion in any way, it's a cult and a scam thought up by a pedophile who wanted to milk people for their money. It's no more of a religion then Satanism...which started off as lectures in some auditorium in Californa that people had to pay to get into.

Tell that to Tom Cruise please. I used to think he was a pretty cool guy, then I found out he bought into that BS. Poor Isaac hays had to quit south park after they poked fun of it too wtf - _ -

And now he's dead.

[DieselBoy09]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

God has no basis in scientific theory unless the scientific theory is to explain god. Science is to be objective, measurable, observable and ideally repeatable. I do not object to a belief in god or the idea of god driving your thirst for science and the understanding of life as it did for Einstein and many great theorists as passion, curiosity and belief are the things that drive science. I believe in a god fervently and never waiver in my beliefs in the least. I belief in evolution, micro and macro, but I also believe that if you trace everything back to the beginning that there is or might be a god (now explaining the existence of that god even in terms of religion is a proverbial dead end and never ending story). Science is to be built on facts and the relatively concrete, not the completely abstract, that marriage is only meant for your own mind and conception of reality. Science and religion should NEVER intertwine in theory. It stifles the understanding of the world and the most precious thing even religious people would desire, the understanding of god and its creations.

If you want to preach creationism, do it in your home, talk about it with your children, feel free to believe what you believe, but creationism is NOT science, it is a belief.

lol, even if I were to ever manage a private religious institution that offered educational classes, I would teach evolution in the science class and then teach the religious beliefs in contradiction, in the classes having to do with religion. I would feel my students would be ill prepared to understand biology, genetics, microbiology, ecology, etc... without understanding evolution as it ties in with most of the biological sciences.
______________________________
(getting back to the original poster: creative design can include evolution and evolution does not need to exclude creative design. The reason there is such a divide is because of the firm reliance on scripture some religious individuals hold, or the firm stance on previous beliefs. The scientific concept of evolution must be separate, but it still does not rule out completely the idea of an invisible guiding hand, just the idea of such should not be included in the scientific theory and is up to the individual's beliefs and ideas. In reality, if the individual decides to, there is no inherent reason why the theory and the belief can not be viewed in tandem to the individual. )

[Yellow Mage]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

it's that living a life based solely on science, solely on black and white, mathmatical thinking without some sort of faith or belief that those wonderous things are wonderous

You don't pay attention to Feba very much, do you?

You're missing out. He says interesting things.

Also, so I can have a hand in this discussion, I consider myself a religious person. I don't have a problem with science or knowledge of any kind (call me anti-anti-intellectual), and I once had an inspiring science teacher who proclaimed that the more she personally learned about how the world works, the more she felt her personal belief in a deity justified.

Granted, she was about as Republican as you could get (a claim she made herself, immediately followed by saying that our current president is the only one to have ever made her ashamed to say that), but honestly, if that woman didn't get you to think, you just weren't sentient to begin with.

[Feba]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

Einstein > Nye/Sagan.

Bullshit.

Even if Sagan couldn't totally kick Einstein's wrinkly cheating ass any day of the week, Einstein would certainly agree that science kicks ass, if for no other reason than his involvement with the creation of nuclear weapons.

it's that living a life based solely on science, solely on black and white, mathmatical thinking without some sort of faith or belief that those wonderous things are wonderous is "lame".

No, it's not. Those things are not lame, and nor are they wondrous. If I look at a tree, I know that it grew out of a seed, that it gets its energy through photosynthesis. If I cared to, I could find a wealth of information on exactly how it lives and dies. There's nothing to wonder about there, as a practical matter. That doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the beauty of the leaves changing in autumn, just because I understand why they do it.

One day, I went to a baseball game. Last baseball game I've been to, if I remember right; I am not a big sports fan. I find more entertainment in the atmosphere of the place than the game itself. My seats were far enough back to be giveaways, but not so far back that we were under shelter. It decided to rain, fiercely. I got soaked, as did those I was with. As soon as the rain cleared, a rainbow popped up; very large but somewhat faded.

If I cared to think about it, I'd know that that's a result of rays of sunlight, traveling at unimaginable speed, struck some collection of rainwater in just the right way to split the light into different colors in the sky. Just because I see a rainbow and understand that the colors come from a prism effect, and not a pot of gold, doesn't mean that I do not enjoy the sight.

You no more need religion in order to appreciate life and all of its beauty than you need alcohol and drugs to enjoy a night out. There's nothing wrong with having it for yourself, but if you need it in order to find your life worthwhile, you need help.

To be blunt, Scientology isn't a religion in any way, it's a cult and a scam thought up by a pedophile who wanted to milk people for their money.

To be blunt, there is no difference between a religion and a cult. A religion is a religion, no matter how small-- and a cult is a cult, no matter how large. It's like trying to determine the difference between a lake and a pond-- for all the descriptions you can make, there will always be one on a side that people say should be on the other. Scientology is a poor example because so many people simply have such negative opinions of it; but more so because people can't relate it to their religion. There is no similarity in Xenu and Jesus; there is similarity in the Holy Trinity and Allah. A better example would be Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and Mormons.

Also, in relation to my attempt at derailing this thread into something that might be somewhat civil, and YM's comment above; is it just me, or do science teachers tend to be better at arousing the desire to learn in students? I've had fun teachers in other subjects, but never ones that made me want to study and learn things more than I had to to do well. I've had at least three good science teachers; one of which started off the school year by lighting his desk on fire, and later making a bomb (and having us all make mini-bombs).

Of course, one of those science teachers was another sort of arousing, if you know what I mean.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

Yet another point Bill Maher makes. If someone starts talking about the possibility of other forms of life out in the universe (and IIRC we have found some traces of bacteria on mars?) they are crazy; but the moment you bring up Relgion "Oh, it's their faith" "you can't question or talk about that" we all just have to magically shut up and drop it.

You may think people are like that, but its increasingly becoming the opposite. I mean, here you were just talking about an invisible man, emmaculate conception and showed no concept behind the meaning of Christ's life, other than him being made to die.

I just find it funny we have people here who want to save the animals, allow gay marriage but when it comes to religion they just bash it at every turn. Such "tolerant" minds minds we have here. Makes me wonder if you do slurs toward other races or homosexuals under your breath.

Also find it amusing that a bunch of people that generally keep to themselves in public life are the target of such angsty people. Seems you can't get more intolerant and hateful than a Far-left Atheist Vegan, at least on the internet. And here I thought the straight-edge kids and conservative talk show hosts were fucking annoying.

But then, they only seem to exist on the internet. Every Athiest, Vegan, Pagan or even Wiccans seem more polite in real life than thier online counterparts. But then, that's just the anonimity of the internet for you.

[Raydeus]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I believe in something like God* but do not believe in any religion** whatsoever. Which is probably more dangerous and annoying for any church than me simply being just another crazy and lost atheist.

Crazy rambling ahead, click at your own risk.

(This will probably end my chances of running for president in 2012 )****

*I believe in something, be it the order of it all or simply a sort of interconnection of all the matter in the universe resembling the way the braincells work as a whole to make consciousness posible. You pick, since I have no proof of anything which makes all of it simple conjectures on my part.

And I also think theres a good chance that at the same time things like the Star Trek approach to evolution are able to take place or maybe did in the past. As in a single advanced race seeding the universe with forms of life in their resemblance. But that wouldn't make them gods either, the same way humans wont become gods if they ever invent advanced AIs and androids.


** Like I've said before, to me religions are simply organizations created and run by humans for a purpose (which can vary from religion to religion) without a single divinity involved in the process. And as such should be considered as the organizations they are with all the good and the bad points about them. Sindicates, goverments, fast-food chains etc. are all examples of this.

This doesn't mean religions are inherently bad, but in my opinion the same care an investor puts in a company he has money into is the same care a person has to put in the religion they are investing their faith, money and time on.

PS> Oh right on topic. <_<

I'd really like seeing any proof to creationism.

Evolution has a lot of evidence simply lying around on earth, and even if science still can't prove everything simply didn't go hocus pocus and appeared, at least it (science) has much more evidence supporting their own claims.

[Icemage]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I know this is the Off-Topic section and all, but if we can turn down the level of animosity a few ticks, it'd be appreciated.

/moderatorhat


Icemage

[Malacite]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

You may think people are like that, but its increasingly becoming the opposite. I mean, here you were just talking about an invisible man, emmaculate conception and showed no concept behind the meaning of Christ's life, other than him being made to die.

I just find it funny we have people here who want to save the animals, allow gay marriage but when it comes to religion they just bash it at every turn. Such "tolerant" minds minds we have here. Makes me wonder if you do slurs toward other races or homosexuals under your breath.

I was just giving a quick summary to illustrate a point; one is not more preposterous than the other. You can't bash someone for believing in one thing but then turn around and say your own beliefs are off limits.


EDIT: >.> hey, my best friend is a wiccan and the nicest woman you could ever meet.


Personally I tend to lean towards something akin to either Gaea or the Force; That there is some kind of higher power but it's not sentient and is simply there to grant life to the universe. Nice, simple and understandable without going into the impossibilities of "if there is a God, then what created God?" I prefer to think of it as something similar to energy since physics teaches us that Energy can not be created or destroyed (See: Conservation of Mass) and as such simply exists.



I don't know about there being a Heaven or a Hell but I'm fairly sure there is such a thing as a soul. The only way to ever really disprove this would be to clone someone and see if said clone retains every last trait and memory of the original. If they do, then there isn't a soul and personalities are defined by experiences, genes and electronic impulses in the brain. If the clone is (very) different, then it's safe to say there is in fact a soul since we have two of the same person but with different personalities (though even that could be a grey area; I'm no psychiatrist or biologist)

The shitty thing is we'll never know (at least in our life times) as I just don't see any government ever sanctioning human cloning. Though I did see a story the other day on CNN that was borderline with some woman having a new kidney made from her own stem cells (though is that really cloning or just genetic manipulation?)

[Feba]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

The only way to ever really disprove this would be to clone someone and see if said clone retains every last trait and memory of the original.

Genes do not work that way. Even if you made a perfect clone, it would obviously have different traits and memories. Nature v. Nurture and all that. See also: identical twins. They're separate people, although (in some cases) they are genetically identical. Also, for the hell of it, google chimera. And let's not forget multiple personality disorder. To keep it simple, the idea that two people being similar or dissimilar in personality would prove or disprove the existence of a soul is asinine.

At best, you could start talking about souls when we start copying and simulating human brains in computers. IIRC they're already simulating small portions of rat brains. But then copies of simulations going wrong would say a lot more about whatever is emulating the brain than whether there is a soul or not.

Also, for reference, what you're talking about is called human reproductive cloning. There is a clear distinction between it and cloning for medical purposes, in terms of professional ethics.

[The Mauva Syndicate]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I'd really like seeing any proof to creationism.

BLASPHEMER (jk!) What more proof could you possibly need than the actual words God wrote down. He says he did it and therefor he did it, You unbeliever!!!!

But seriously - that's it. That's the sum total of Creationism's proof. The Bible. No evidence. No Carbon14 dated relics.

Nothing.

Nada.

Bupkus.

So on the one side you have two billion years of paleontological evidence, fossils, mineral evidence (e.g. Oil) carbon dating, the speciation of life and all of it's myriad strangeness (um, examine Cambrian life - Weird doesn't begin to describe it) and the actual changes we have witnessed since we started noticing things change (e.g. Galapagos Finch's).

On the other side you've got nothing but a few paragraphs in a book.

And yet the Book is considered truth and the evidence is considered red herrings planted by Satan to test the faith of the faithful - which is a logical trap anyone who's ever taken logic can see a mile away.

It does not merely defy logic, it deiefies illogic - and create an environment where the "Palinites" and other religious conservatives eschew intellect and embrace ignorance.

I Once saw a piece of Grafitti that said "The creation of Artifical Sentient Life will destroy western religions - only Buddhism will survive" I think that is a very true thing - and the intentional stuffing of their collective heads in the sand and refusing to "believe" in reality will be it's cause. They carry with them the seeds of their own destruction - if only the rest of us can survive.

[Raydeus]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I'd would like to start by reaching a definition of soul. Every person I've asked gives me a slightly different response even in the same religion/train of thought.

It's like the old "Is it a wave or a particle?" kinda thing.

[Lmnop]

Re: Creative design and Evolution, what's the big deal?

I bet "lame" in that quote is more of the real definition of the word. Bill Nye is plenty cool, but "lame" meaning "impaired" implies science simply cannot give you all of the answers (though the same could be said of the other way around -- religion doesn't answer all of your questions either). No need to make it out like Ziero just hates Chemistry.

Feba, my "inefficiency" reference was sorta a double use. The inefficiency is the way we attempt to teach that results in so many falling through the cracks. Somewhere along the lines, it came to be that saying you even enjoyed learning was a slow social suicide. And where does it get us? Inefficient adults. Wow. That sounds cliche.

(not that I'm a model of efficiency... indeed, I was a victim of public schools as much as the next guy)

Btw Mauve, you could show me definitive proof that it was actually aliens that created humans and I'd still believe in God. Not all of the religious types tread on ignorance.