creation science vs. evolution

[Toad2001]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

The frozen water in the Arctic would have almost no impact if it suddenly melted. Its a thin layer and simply floats on the Arctic ocean, and wouldn't make much of a difference. If the ice and glaciers in Greenland melted, the world's Oceans would rise by about 20 feet. Antarctica on the other hand is where the water is. Almost 70% of the Earth's fresh water is frozen there. On average its 7000 feet thick! If that continent suddenly melted, the Earth's Oceans would rise by over 200 feet.<br />Welcome to global warming.

 

[CrappieFisherman]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Aint a very pretty picture is it?<br /><br />But of course thats exactly right, arctic ice, though not the skimmed over puddle that Toad2001 makes it to be, is an ice cube floating in water<br /><br />studies have shown that the arctic ice is thinning, and the antarctic shelf is calving at an alarming rate.<br /><br />The good news ... people that bought a few miles inland cause they couldnt be on the beach, here comes the beach!<br /><br />The bad news ... the people that bought quite a few miles inland, here comes the beach!

 

[Toad2001]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Hi Coleman, I meant to say "relatively" thin layer... <br /><br />Apparently worse case scenario is that we can expect a 3 foot ocean level rise in the next 100 years.<br />No need to move (or speculate for real estate purposes.)

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

dang Ralph, you don't lose many debates do ya? <br />have to agree with your statements re: people being<br />exposed to all sides/opinions in theory, but it<br />would take a giant leap from where we are. it<br />certainly would be wonderful if there weren't<br />radicals on both sides polarizing people in this<br />country.<br />I have to say though that the radical right will<br />most certainly not be flexible in the least due<br />to zealous religious beliefs. if they had their<br />way, there would be no sex education taught and<br />several important literary works would be banned.<br /><br />a few years back, we put our eldest son into a<br />private christian school. when they told him that<br />his harry potter book was written by a devil<br />worshiper and that it was a sin to read it, we<br />promptly withdrew him. it is this kind of narrow<br />minded extreme right thinking that most concerns<br />me. they are the least tolerant people I have ever<br />met in my life.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Have to say this has been a very interesting thread, to say the least.<br /><br />A couple of things. The problem I would have teaching either evolution or creation in school is there is not enough physical evidence to support either. I personally believe in creation. I don't believe that a complex mammal, like a human, evolved from some single celled organism in some primordial mud puddle. The complexities of many of the organisms on this planet are far beyond the scope of evolution......in my opinion.<br /><br />If someone asked me to prove what I believe, I guess I couldn't. The same could be said for evolution. Everyone wants to point to carbon dating as a reliable source for determining the age of this planet, and it is as unreliable as any other source. Just the other day, while sitting in the doctor's office, I read an article in a science journal. Scientist's took a snail, killed it, crushed its shell, and then carbon dated the shell. The results..............the carbon dating told the scientists that this snail was Thirty thousand years old! Yet the snail was dead less than a day.<br /><br />Everything breaks down at a different rate, thats why carbon dating and radio carbon dating are unreliable.<br /><br />So, neither creation or macro-evolution can be scientifically proven. And thats a fact. That is why this should be taught as theories, for both cases.<br /><br />Tell the kids something like, "Some people believe that humans, and other life forms have evolved over a long period of time, .......other people believe that a Superior being created the inhabitants of this planet. There is not enough proof to absolutely prove either theory, so we introduce both to you as theory only".<br /><br />As I have said before, for me personally, there is no doubt that God created the Heavens and the Earth. That is my belief. And just like I can't disprove Evolution, nobody can disprove Creation.<br /><br />Mellow, you might have the record for most posts on a thread. Kenny's gonna be jealous.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

You nailed the problem MY - Zealots can be dangerous, regardless what they are zealous about. The extreme Left is as inflexible as the extreme Right and neither has all the answers or the tolerance to allow people to hear the other sides POV and decide for themselves. They fear people will decide they are wrong.<br /><br />The best way to combat zealotry is information, discussion and debate. In this case, you explain the different explanations in an unbiased way and let people decide for themselves or you avoid the subject.<br /><br />Some on both sides of this particular issue rather try to prove the other side is wrong (and stupid) and keep their opinions out. That is wrong in my opinion. More information and discussion is always best. Let people decide for themselves. People should not fear alternate points of view. It is the worst trait of human beings.<br /><br />By the way, for the record, I think the theory of evolution is likely correct. I don't think it precludes God's hand in creation.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I believe in creation too Carpy, but I don't see<br />it as a science. put aside carbon dating for a sec. & <br />take a look at this. decide for yourself:<br /> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html <br /><br />if you want an example of evolution, take a look<br />at some of the arctic species. arctic fox & hare,<br />snowy owls and polar bears. these animals have <br />evolved to live in their enviornments and have<br />developed white coats/fur/feathers for camoflauge.<br />the same species that live in different enviornments<br />have not.<br /><br />it sure is nice to have a long/complex discussion<br />here without any mudslinging <br />well done all!<br />M.Y.

 

[SCO]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Wish I had time to go through Rabbits post step by step, but most has been covered in this 200+ post. What stands out though is the charge that evolutionists require faith to believe it. Just because you put forth a lot of claims that evolution is baseless and more and more silly of an idea with time doesn't make it so. I find exactly the opposite to be true. Frankly, I'd rather believe in creation. If you want to pick one thing, out of that list,or any other lisrt, your chioce, I'll debate it with you(though not till next week) .

 

[mattttt25]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

good point MY. i'm just upset that this thread may overtake the "boat listing to port" thread in total posts.

 

[oddjob]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Ok....I believe god was an extra-terestrial. I've been convinced ever since I saw that movie/documentary "Charriots of the Gods". This theory can dovetail with the other two (creation and evolution). <br /><br />Finally,..I came up with a trol I mean post to this thread. <br /><br />MY I dont think it is necessary to teach the practice of religion in our schools. But the bible is a good reference for history and geography. So is the koran if you want to understand the mind of the muslim.....maybe we should educate are children of all the different religions and customs as a sociaty.....Oops...dang then we have a whole slew of libs naming their perversions as a religion. <br /><br />Ok keep it out!

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

SCO, this thread is not about which is right. It is about whether people should be allowed to hear all the explanations and decide for themselves. <br /><br />If we want to debate which is right or wrong, we should start another thread so we do not risk confusing two important issues.<br /><br />The debate has raged since Origins was published and will likely rage on, as it should. People should be allowed to hear it all and decide. That is what separates this country from most others on the planet.

 

[SCO]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

The charge is leveled that those that believe in evolution do so because they are biased towards it since it is flawed and they cant see that because of that bias. Part of the reasoning for including creation in schools is based on that charge which Rabbit makes, which is something like(not a direct quote and I am not saying Rabbit says this, it is the general rationalle based on rabbits charge)"there is no real scientific basis for creationism, but there isn't for evolution either" I am perfectly happy to take it to another thread though. Who can disagree with" It is about whether people should be allowed to hear all the explanations and decide for themselves.". It is not about that Ralph, it is about whether or not creationism should be taught as science. Furthermore, maybe churches should be required to present the theory of evolution so everyone can decide for themselves, and not in a ridiculing way.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I believe the evolution you are talking about is called micro-evolution Mellow. And yes, I believe that micro-evolution occurs and can be proved, but not macro-evolution. I don't believe my ancestors were swimming around in some puddle of goo. Macro-evolution cannot be proved.<br /><br />I also believe that natural selection is what many people call micro-evolution. Lets pretend for a moment that Arctic foxes used to be brown. As it often occurs in many species, lets suppose some of these arctic foxes were born with lighter coats, some even white. Many of the brown foxes probably died because their fur was brown and they were easily spotted by their prey. But those white foxes were able to catch their prey easier because they blended with their surroundings. Because the white foxes were more successful at hunting they lived longer, and passed their genes on to the next generation, until generation after generation later, they were all white. Is that evolution, or natural selection? <br /><br />This is just a made up example, I am not saying this is what happened.<br /><br />My above theory is just that, a theory. I can't prove it. <br /><br />Just look at the human brain. With all of our technology, we still really have no idea of what the human brain is capable of. How did we develop such complex organs, and why? I personally believe that we are to complex to have developed into what we are. I believe God made us this way. I can't prove it, but I don't have to. Because I have faith, I believe in something I can't see. <br /><br />I agree Mellow, great discussion.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

keep in mind the white fox is a mutated fox with<br />different genes. it would take say a few 100,000<br />years for them all to become white probably.<br />so it is both natural selection and evolution.<br />if it makes sense in micro, it also leads one<br />to think that it works in macro. but it would<br />take millions upon millions of years. humans did<br />not evolve from monkeys. we both however have<br />a common, ecxtint ancestor. if you put human DNA<br />next to an orangatang, there are VERY few diff.<br />would have only taken a few mutaions over several<br />million years.<br />that doesn't mean that it isn't part of the grand<br />design as Ralph stated earlier.

 

[LadyFish]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

A little late to chime in but IMHO, children should receive an education in biology. However, explain that there are some people, who as a matter of faith believe in some form of creationism, but at the same time explain the law/theory of evolution and that neither of these can be proven. Also explain, there are debates within specialist topics of evolution, but it is a theory that no-one has yet falsified. That's how science works.

 

[SCO]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I wouldn't disagree with that Ladyfish, but would think that would be insufficient for the creationist to be relegated to that inferior status in the debate. I would imagine they'd want a full chapter devoted to the flood carving the grand canyon, the human footprints by the dinosaur tracks, etc.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

SCO, Ladyfish's idea may not be what people who believe creation could be satisfied with but it would be better then what is done now.

 

[SCO]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

It's that slippery slope. Do we allow things that arent valid science to be taught as science. They certainly would in Iran, and in fact they would stone you for presenting evolution. Personally, before going down that road, I'd rather strike evolution from the public school curriculum. Leave church studies and evolution to the colleges and Universities. In public school we have to find common ground for what we teach our children since the attendance is mandatated by law(home school not always an option). That Idea makes me want to agree with Ralphs point. I hate it that Evolution would have to become unmentionable... but then again, so many things are nowadays....especially anything to do with race.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Hey Mellow, if i'm gonna be a mutant, then I pick Wolverine.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Ahhhh your right homeschooling is not always an option. I have to go on the record here and say we do homeschool our kids now and even though we are very active Christians we do present the evolution theory( as a unproven theory ) but, one of the classes our Kids have is an in depth Bible study that spends alot of time on creation.If you ask my Kids the Creation theory makes sense and evolution is foolish. Hmmmmm...... I guess its how its presented. I on the otherhand was taught in public schools and after I became Christian this was a thing that I struggled with for quite awhile. After spending hours and hours studing the 2 "theories" I have come to believe what my Bible says is true. Now Im no great writer or speaker so I apologise to MY and anybody else that was asking for an explanation or proof of the creation theory but I just have to say if it was presented as a possability back in school when I was growing up maybe it would not have been as hard for me to make up my own mind......Even something that we dont beleive can become believable if its pounded into our heads, I think we can all agree on that.