RE: Evolution vs. Religion

RE: Evolution vs. Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

liks2plzlf -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 1:57:29 PM)
So your saying that the Jews have not become a nation in the land promised Abraham, and Jerusalem is not the capitol?

FullCircle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:10:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady If evolution is true, then why didn't every cell continue to evolve? Why did frogs not continue to evolve? What stalled a shark's evolution? God ran out of ideas. Once you've made a green jumpy thing you can't really top that. Why aren't there any square fish this is what I wonder. They all seem to be the same shape with that same fin thing. God surly has a set square?

LafayetteLady -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:23:59 PM)
Oh, but frogs come in all kinds of pretty colors! Of course some are also deadly, but.... As for square fish, go to McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King. Without the fin thingies, I think they would sink. But I could be wrong. I don't have any fins and I float really good.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:24:53 PM)
Square fish wouldnt be an optimum design in water.

FullCircle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:32:53 PM)
God creates the rules therefore a square fish would work fine. Trust me. He is testing one as we speak.

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:34:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: (b) the universe is eternal, i.e. matter and energy always were. that's pretty much the way i see it. always was, always will be. hannah lynn I think perhaps you mean that the multiverse may be eternal. Our particular universe itself is quite another thing.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 2:43:01 PM)
So you believe in god?

FullCircle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 3:04:39 PM)
Yes but only on days of the week beginning with X... Xunday, Xueday, Xednesday etc. edited: misspelt Xunday.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 3:13:58 PM)
LOL

thishereboi -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 4:28:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Square fish wouldnt be an optimum design in water. Good point, not to mention, the breading would get soggy[:'(]

dcnovice -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 7:12:47 PM)
http://www.marcjohns.com/blog/2010/02/a-square-fish-if-you-wish.html

vincentML -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 7:37:50 PM)
quote: Actually what you (and others) inferred was completely wrong. I wasn't speaking in the least about conflicts between the two. Mine was a purely scientific question regarding why evolution seems to have stopped with some species. The people who answered it best are the ones that pointed out that it evolution is a process that potentially takes thousands or millions of years, so the human race isn't going to necessarily see it since they are minor changes. It is everyone else who feels, what to me is an irrational need, to present their argument regarding God vs. evolution. If all you wished to know was a little about the process of Evolution, I wonder why you titled this thread "Evolution vs Religion." The title seems to contradict your assertion you were not looking for arguments regarding God vs Evolution. Just curious, yanno.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 7:58:29 PM)
As with every religious thread, vincent, this one took upon itself a life of its own. [:D]

vincentML -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 8:04:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl As with every religious thread, vincent, this one took upon itself a life of its own. [:D] absolutely agree tazzy and it would be kinda disappointing (to me) if they didn't [:)] The Title on this one certainly lead us down that path. i am not complaining at all. i just wondered if LL recognizes the contradiction between the title and what she was seeking.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 8:17:46 PM)
Does seem a bit "God vs Darwin"ish.

eihwaz -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/21/2011 8:29:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz A question that several other respondents and I inferred from the OP is whether belief in an ultimate divine Creator necessarily conflicts with evolution. Actually what you (and others) inferred was completely wrong. I wasn't speaking in the least about conflicts between the two. [...] It is everyone else who feels, what to me is an irrational need, to present their argument regarding God vs. evolution. Then I stand corrected. In my (our) defense, the title Evolution vs. Religion is suggestive that the thread's topic included that question. Also, this thread is the latest in a series on cm exploring the proper relationship between science and religion. There are several of us for whom this topic is of real, even passionate, interest. So, thanks for providing the opportunity for the continuing discussion, even if you didn't intend it, and especially for requesting that we avoid the usual theist-vs-atheist bashfest -- which we almost did!

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/22/2011 2:22:41 AM)
quote: I think perhaps you mean that the multiverse may be eternal. Our particular universe itself is quite another thing. well i have a problem with the big bang. where did the matter & energy come from if there was noting before it. i think i go with the expansion/contraction model myself. hannah lynn

vincentML -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/22/2011 9:02:01 AM)
quote: Also, this thread is the latest in a series on cm exploring the proper relationship between science and religion. There are several of us for whom this topic is of real, even passionate, interest. So, thanks for providing the opportunity for the continuing discussion, even if you didn't intend it, and especially for requesting that we avoid the usual theist-vs-atheist bashfest -- which we almost did! i agree that it is of passionate interest, eihwaz. Passionate is the operative word, so a bashfest is not to be surprising. would be nice if we could have civil bashfests, however. LOL! oxymorons, i know, but what the hell. At least we are slinging only words and not stones [:D]

vincentML -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/22/2011 9:20:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: I think perhaps you mean that the multiverse may be eternal. Our particular universe itself is quite another thing. well i have a problem with the big bang. where did the matter & energy come from if there was noting before it. i think i go with the expansion/contraction model myself. hannah lynn Agree, i have a lot of trouble visualizing multiverses and i know zip about the phyiscs supporting the theory. Would definately appreciate any help on that. i feel like i am in the position of the flat-earthers who could not visualize the global construct. Logically, if we assume matter and energy are eternal (an assumption that goes back to ancient Greek philosophers btw) and we assume the Law of Conservation of mass/energy then your statement "if there was nothing before it." is an error. Mass/energy always was. The problem with the contraction model from my understanding is that spectral evidence (i think) shows the rate of expansion is increasing due to the force of dark energy (whatever the hell that is), so i am at a loss to imagine what gravitational countering force would create a contraction. From what i have read the accumulation of material and the subsequent big bang was born from another universe. That is the theory, at least. Puzzles me it does but fun to speculate over [:)]

DomKen -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/22/2011 9:53:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Agree, i have a lot of trouble visualizing multiverses and i know zip about the phyiscs supporting the theory. Would definately appreciate any help on that. i feel like i am in the position of the flat-earthers who could not visualize the global construct. Logically, if we assume matter and energy are eternal (an assumption that goes back to ancient Greek philosophers btw) and we assume the Law of Conservation of mass/energy then your statement "if there was nothing before it." is an error. Mass/energy always was. This gets fairly counter intuitive but I'll try to explain. Conservation of Mass/Energy and all the other rules of physics only apply in this universe. The universe literally began when the Big Bang started. Before that moment the laws of physics simply don't apply. We have simply no way of knowing where the mass/energy came from, if it even came from anywhere. quote: The problem with the contraction model from my understanding is that spectral evidence (i think) shows the rate of expansion is increasing due to the force of dark energy (whatever the hell that is), so i am at a loss to imagine what gravitational countering force would create a contraction. From what i have read the accumulation of material and the subsequent big bang was born from another universe. That is the theory, at least. Puzzles me it does but fun to speculate over [:)] Dark energy and dark matter are attempts to explain phenomena we see in the universe that otherwise fail to conform to the rules of phsyics. For instance distant galaxies are moving in ways that imply there is a lot more mass in the universe than we can "see." Contraction is on shaky ground because even with the upper most mass estimates the universe doesn't appear to be massive enough to ever reach a point where the expansion stops and all the matter starts moving back together.

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875