General discussion

Evolution vs science

The course of human understanding and development is in denial if allowed to counter known science and accept the preached word. A battle for sure, but to deny what science has given us in medicine, geology and other well documented facts or strong theory and deny it should not be a test of faith but our involvement to the world we have come to know. The sky is blue and candy tastes sweet and lemons are sore is part of our understanding and no one will argue they're not, but go beyond that seems a rather religious fervor is all likely. The link below can show what can happen if we forsake science and what it has wrought.

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/bill-nye-science-guy-hits-evolution-deniers-123047918--abc-news-tech.html

Can we thought what has made us better off? -----Willy Happy

Discussion is locked
Follow
Reply to: Evolution vs science
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Evolution vs science
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Supposedly advanced and intellectually enlightened people...

......should have no trouble determining which of the following two statements makes more sense:

1) The universe and everything in it was formed billions of years ago, and the processes that have led to life as we know it today have followed a scientifically proven path, the fact of which is supported by considerable physical, geologic, chemical and mathematical evidence.

2) The universe and everything in it was formed in six days, six thousand years ago, by a giant invisible wizard who willed it to exist.

Come on, people.

- Collapse -
If it was formed billions or even trillions of years ago

where did the material to do so come from? It was either always there or some giant unseen wizard pulled it out of his hat. Or maybe...just maybe...we are within that giant wizard and it is within us.

- Collapse -
I'm reminded of....

.....the pot-smoking scene from "National Lampoon's Animal House." Can't find it on YouTube though.

- Collapse -
This it?
- Collapse -
Kind of

It's a recreation of the scene by......I have no idea who those people are. But it's the same dialog so I suppose you get the idea.

- Collapse -
Could you not think that one unintended consequence

of the way we've used our scientific knowledge is that further evolution of our species might be stunted?...and that, eventually, another species will usurp our place as the most intelligent life form on the planet? Be nice to Cheetah while you can. Happy

- Collapse -
Sit and wait or....

We as a whole peoples if allow ourselves to be "stagnant" in any future thinking, we'll deny ourselves the future plateaus that are possible. I like to think this is all good, but it can all end if applied to our non-existence as "the bomb" or anything that can become our downfall. At the same time we can't become so involved in non-progressive acts of our own doing be allowed to dismiss or lessen our understanding. We have to leave our comfort zone if only to allow ourselves sometimes to reflect upon. Most of the time that's good but I'm sure someone will provide the "bad". -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
I've always said that the Bible tells us what God did

not how. We've been figuring that out for thousands of years.

Diana

- Collapse -
(NT) Well said. I'll have to "borrow" that.
- Collapse -
(NT) You have my permission
- Collapse -
Just like you don't ask a physicist

to explain the properties of matter to a two year old, such may be why God chose simple terms for early man. Even Jesus wasn't straight forward when answering questioners. His responses were to challenge the minds of people to figure things out on their own. We do need to be careful of being too literal in our interpretations of the scriptures. Otherwise there wouldn't be so much more written to explain the book than there is withing the book itself.

- Collapse -
(NT) Isn't that normal?
- Collapse -
On or about the 13th century

As i understand it, around the 13th century a "great review" of religious text was done. The sum total of all this is what was accepted to be "the good book" some scripture was abandoned and others subdued or written to be understood better, in other words the Bible was reintroduced. This is from memory and wish I could link it somewhere. I find it rather interesting as the 1st century itself was a "cleaning house affair" as early Christian factions had their beliefs in one way or another accepted wholly or parts or not at all. So much is dragged on until as centuries came and went, a more finalized version and even that was brought into a version we now call the King James. At least one can accept the differences between old and new testaments. The whole idea I'm trying to sort out is that our accepted Christian beliefs came about a religious process of human endevour. A good example is the Latter Day Saints adding to it, in their version. Strange that in the 19th US history when the Morons came about, it was detested and looked down or worse, traditional religion sought to eliminate them. One reason they moved West to the "promised land". -----Willy Shocked

- Collapse -
(NT) i'm thinkin' Willy means Mormons
- Collapse -
Yep, but in this election year,

I think there are some here who will chuckle. Wink

- Collapse -
(NT) I apologize for that honest mistake
- Collapse -
Some interesting listings
Religious people (and some that were not) who contributed to science

As for the Mormon religion, I believe their biggest deviation from "traditional" Christian belief is that Jesus didn't just walk among the people mentioned in the biblical New Testament. I'll defer clarification of that tidbit to those who've read more about Joseph Smith.
- Collapse -
There are other interesting tidbits

Did you know that a Jewish family migrated to Costa Rica 2500 years ago and they were the ancestors of the Native Americans?

They didn't have the know how to cure animal hides to write on but could smelt gold to make the tablets. Of course the tablets were pure gold and I guess they had to be kept separate from each other because, let's face it, if you put that many gold tablets on top of each other, they are going to be flattened.

Just a couple of things I learned from a couple of lovely young ladies that came to my door.

Diana

- Collapse -
(NT) Oye vai (sp)

CNET Forums