1. Wait'n 2 WIN A GAME!
    Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    109
    25 Nov '05 03:33
    I am confused with this, after having to do a project about evolution and how the earth was formed.
    Give me ideas, I am an open book, so to speak
  2. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    25 Nov '05 03:58
    Could be either, or both, or neither. I'm afraid that's not much of an answer. Sorry. Tough question.
  3. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    25 Nov '05 04:21
    Originally posted by PatrioticDog
    I am confused with this, after having to do a project about evolution and how the earth was formed.
    Give me ideas, I am an open book, so to speak
    It's true. God does not exist.
  4. Joined
    21 Oct '04
    Moves
    17038
    25 Nov '05 04:32
    Originally posted by PatrioticDog
    I am confused with this, after having to do a project about evolution and how the earth was formed.
    Give me ideas, I am an open book, so to speak
    Its not true, God Does exist. 😛
  5. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    25 Nov '05 04:52
    or C) It's true and God does exist.
  6. Standard membertelerion
    True X X Xian
    The Lord's Army
    Joined
    18 Jul '04
    Moves
    8353
    25 Nov '05 05:38
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    or C) It's true and God does exist.
    To round it out

    D) it's not true, God does not exist
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    25 Nov '05 07:32
    Originally posted by PatrioticDog
    I am confused with this, after having to do a project about evolution and how the earth was formed.
    Give me ideas, I am an open book, so to speak
    The scientific evidence is solid and undeniable (unless you are wearing blinders or have no scientific education). So this leads to several possible conclusions:
    1. God made the world using a process called evolution.
    2. God made the world using some other method but made it in such a way that it appears that evolution took place.
    3. There is no God.
    None of the above can be proved using scientific methods and are a matter of faith. However whichever you believe, the theory of evolution is still valid and is a very important and usefull theory in the field of Biology. Infact almost all of Biology and medicine are tied to evolution in some way.
  8. Standard memberdj2becker
    Tiger's ghost
    Shetland cemetery
    Joined
    01 Oct '04
    Moves
    11855
    25 Nov '05 07:55
    Originally posted by PatrioticDog
    I am confused with this, after having to do a project about evolution and how the earth was formed.
    Give me ideas, I am an open book, so to speak
    Do not be confused by the term 'evolution'. Micoevolution is purely scientific and observable. Macroevolution is a fairy tale for adults.
  9. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    25 Nov '05 07:58
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    The scientific evidence is solid and undeniable (unless you are wearing blinders or have no scientific education). So this leads to several possible conclusions:
    1. God made the world using a process called evolution.
    2. God made the world using some other method but made it in such a way that it appears that evolution took place.
    3. There is no God.
    ...[text shortened]... e field of Biology. Infact almost all of Biology and medicine are tied to evolution in some way.
    Infact almost all of... medicine [is] tied to evolution in some way.

    Really? Please elaborate.
  10. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    25 Nov '05 08:17
    Originally posted by dj2becker
    Do not be confused by the term 'evolution'. Micoevolution is purely scientific and observable. Macroevolution is a fairy tale for adults.
    They are, of course, the same process.
  11. Standard memberdj2becker
    Tiger's ghost
    Shetland cemetery
    Joined
    01 Oct '04
    Moves
    11855
    25 Nov '05 12:46
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    They are, of course, the same process.
    Variations within a kind have been observed. The transition of rock to human is purely wishful thinking.
  12. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    25 Nov '05 13:22
    Originally posted by dj2becker
    Variations within a kind have been observed. The transition of rock to human is purely wishful thinking.
    Please, do enlighten me... Who says rocks has evolved into humans?
  13. Standard memberdj2becker
    Tiger's ghost
    Shetland cemetery
    Joined
    01 Oct '04
    Moves
    11855
    25 Nov '05 13:45
    Originally posted by stocken
    Please, do enlighten me... Who says rocks has evolved into humans?
    In the long run that's what it boils down to. Apparently there were rocks upon which it rained for millions of years until it formed a chemical soup, from which all life evolved, or so they say... 😉
  14. Standard memberKnightWulfe
    Chess Samurai
    Yes
    Joined
    26 Apr '04
    Moves
    66095
    25 Nov '05 13:482 edits
    Evolution is a theory of its own, not core to the whatever theory you choose to believe as to the origins of the universe. Yes, the theory of origin is inclusive of evolution, but not the other way around.

    Specifically of the theory of origins - Those who profess to be Evolutionists generally follow the big bang theory, or something similar. Christians (and those other regilions who base from the Bible.) are Creationists. In regards to these two theories (Big Bang and Creation) - they CANNOT coexist. Big Bang professes that life began some 4.6 billion years ago. Creationism professes that God created life about 11,000 years ago. As Creationism suggests life started at that point, it is also in contradiction with the theory of evolution, although I have known many a Christian that tries to explain evolution and/or scientific evidence that "proves" the theory.

    For Evolutionists, fossils, carbon dating and science empirically back up their belief.
    For Creationists, faith backs up their belief.

    So how do Creationist debunk the theory of evolution? Most that I have spoken to claim that all of these things that are found (dinosaur bone fossils, etc....) were placed there by God (or some say by Satan) to confuse and test man along the path to salvation.

    Hope this helps.
  15. Standard memberHalitose
    I stink, ergo I am
    On the rebound
    Joined
    14 Jul '05
    Moves
    4464
    25 Nov '05 13:58
    Originally posted by KnightWulfe
    Evolution is a theory of its own, not core to the whatever theory you choose to believe as to the origins of the universe. Yes, the theory of origin is inclusive of evolution, but not the other way around.

    Specifically of the theory of origins - Those who profess to be Evolutionists generally follow the big bang theory, or something similar. Christian ...[text shortened]... (or some say by Satan) to confuse and test man along the path to salvation.

    Hope this helps.
    I'm afraid from your post it seems like you a have a very small sample of creationists to have reached such profound conclusions.

    Creationism is further divided into young-earth - and old-earth creationism.

    Both have their own origin model. The old-earth model fits rather snuggly into the big bang and evolution. The young-earth model is more complex with its own ad hoc theories to explain phenomenon such as carbon dating and fossils. Among the more knowledgeable circles of the young earth adherents, you won’t find people claiming God to have placed decoys to confuse us - that is just baloney.
Back to Top