@suzianne said<<2) I agree, but I have to add that "cancel culture" was created by those who want to keep people from being "woke".>>
1) Yes, exactly. I've been beating that drum here for years.
2) I agree, but I have to add that "cancel culture" was created by those who want to keep people from being "woke". Being woke is a good thing. Most white people, for example, could benefit from waking up and learning more about black culture. They aren't savages, and continuing to claim so holds ou ...[text shortened]... eeds more freedom of thought. There's nothing like seeing the light bulb come on in a young person.
Who are the people getting canceled? Liberals or conservatives?
@kellyjay saidI’m sorry. Science cannot definitively answer those questions at the moment. These things take time. In fifty, a hundred years I feel sure there will be a scientifically proven theory. HOWEVER, just because science doesn’t have the answer at the moment does not open the door to a God designer.
I am in total agreement Creation cannot be proven, it is not based on scientific evidence though that evidence may support it. Creation is a narrative, a story passed down through time that speaks to the beginning of the universe.
Now if you have an alternative based on evidence please provide that. You mentioned evolution as if that was an different choice but evolution ...[text shortened]... ng! Something and somewhere are part of everything so no evidence there. What do you have but faith?
1 edit
@kellyjay saidYou make stupid statements like this.....
You should study the whole thing everything was created by God, nothing was created that wasn’t created by Him and for Him.
Creation is a narrative, a story passed down through time that speaks to the beginning of the universe...
And that means I have to study the bible?? If you had some integrity you would provide the part of the bible that ... speaks to the beginning of the universe ..
@pianoman1 saidyou cannot prove evolution, it is a theory. End of.
Except that creationism is a belief which, as you say, cannot be proved, whereas I think you are on slightly shakier ground with evolution. There is some scientific evidence to back it up.
On that note one thing that has been established which ticks the boxes of both camps is common ancestry, was the discovery of Mitochondrial Eve, demonstrated by dr Rebecca Cann.
@medullah saidThis is becoming silly. You cannot prove a God designer. End of.(to quote you), but at least I have fragments of scientific proof for evolution.
you cannot prove evolution, it is a theory. End of.
On that note one thing that has been established which ticks the boxes of both camps is common ancestry, was the discovery of Mitochondrial Eve, demonstrated by dr Rebecca Cann.
@josephw said
Don't you?
@fmf said
Both Pianoman1 and josephw have much in common: they both think more should be done by society to intervene when the wellbeing of a child is threatened by unbalanced adults.
@josephw said
Don't you?
No, not if the definition of "unbalanced" is related to beliefs regarding things like young-Earth creationism and evolution and certainly not if society seeks to interfere in family life.
@pianoman1 saidWell, that is faith, not science, faith in science maybe. So you are complaining about creation not being scientific. You think it may be solved is not science; it is wishful thinking.
I’m sorry. Science cannot definitively answer those questions at the moment. These things take time. In fifty, a hundred years I feel sure there will be a scientifically proven theory. HOWEVER, just because science doesn’t have the answer at the moment does not open the door to a God designer.
To make a judgment call on what is possible, you should have an idea of how it occurred. Do you have an idea how it all occurred?
We can cast aside the evolution versus creation because they are not even remotely related to the same topic, do you agree?
I think a designer fits the evidence in life with or without evolution, considering the code within life that directs all processes. Do you think that code came to be by accidentally mixing chemicals? What seems more reasonable to you when you think about the informational coding in life, mindlessness, or agency?
@rajk999 saidRead the whole Bible.
You make stupid statements like this.....
Creation is a narrative, a story passed down through time that speaks to the beginning of the universe...
And that means I have to study the bible?? If you had some integrity you would provide the part of the bible that ... speaks to the beginning of the universe ..
@medullah saidIt is short-sighted to say "End of".
you cannot prove evolution, it is a theory. End of.
On that note one thing that has been established which ticks the boxes of both camps is common ancestry, was the discovery of Mitochondrial Eve, demonstrated by dr Rebecca Cann.
"Theory" is about the best you can do in Science now. Calling things "law" fell out of favor, because too many "laws" have exceptions: Law of Gravity [Relativity], Ohm's Law [Reactance], etc.
My main beef with Creationism is that it is not a Scientific theory, in that it offers zero explanation of how any processes work. As such, I don't think it deserves an equal audience with Evolution.
@pb1022 said🙄
<<Most white people, for example, could benefit from waking up and learning more about black culture. They aren't savages, and continuing to claim so holds our societies back.>>
There are savages in the black race, just like there are savages in the white race and every other race. Your tendency - and the tendency of liberals - to view people in terms of race and to form op ...[text shortened]... lantation and rejected white daddy liberal and white momma liberal as their masters and benefactors?
@bigdogg saidHow it works in life is due to the coding in life; we can find many of the features we have in our code in biology, so we know how it is happening. How nothing can produce everything isn't a solution worth exploring; why do we date something billions of years old if there was no beginning? Something that transcends the physical universe as a first cause seems the most reasonable to me, show me how I'm wrong.
It is short-sighted to say "End of".
"Theory" is about the best you can do in Science now. Calling things "law" fell out of favor, because too many "laws" have exceptions: Law of Gravity [Relativity], Ohm's Law [Reactance], etc.
My main beef with Creationism is that it is not a Scientific theory, in that it offers zero explanation of how any processes work. As such, I don't think it deserves an equal audience with Evolution.