The Big Bang isn't quite analogous to Biogenesis, because the Big Bang was the beginning of time. The English language isn't really equipped to talk about these things, but at the risk of being non-technical, ""before"" the Big Bang, cause and effect didn't exist. They're a product of the passage of time, which only exists inside the universe.
Also kind of important, the Big Bang Theory is much more vast in its claims than "an explosion happened a long time ago".
Creation or Evolution
Started by: Morphius | Replies: 162 | Views: 6,385
Jul 31, 2013 3:51 PM #1053545
Jul 31, 2013 4:53 PM #1053585
Quote from FusionThe Big Bang isn't quite analogous to Biogenesis, because the Big Bang was the beginning of time. The English language isn't really equipped to talk about these things, but at the risk of being non-technical, ""before"" the Big Bang, cause and effect didn't exist. They're a product of the passage of time, which only exists inside the universe.
Also kind of important, the Big Bang Theory is much more vast in its claims than "an explosion happened a long time ago".
I just wanted to find an example, Fusion.
Jul 31, 2013 5:25 PM #1053610
It's important to be accurate in debates. I'm fully aware of what you were trying to do, but if your example isn't valid, then that's a *flaw* in your argument.
Jul 31, 2013 5:38 PM #1053625
Then what species would God be?
Jul 31, 2013 6:08 PM #1053652
Quote from MolgeraThen what species would God be?
..what are you talking about?
Jul 31, 2013 6:25 PM #1053673
Quote from MolgeraThen what species would God be?
None. He's a spirit or whatever He is. He's definitely not Human though. How about Spritus Omnipotenti? I think calling Him either God or one of his names is preferable. I use God in day-to-day conversation and Jehovah in more serious stuff. I believe the closest to an official name would be Yahweh, which is used by the Jews.
Jul 31, 2013 6:52 PM #1053702
Quote from '[NaimadMatrixNinja2000;1053673']None. He's a spirit or whatever He is. He's definitely not Human though. How about Spritus Omnipotenti? I think calling Him either God or one of his names is preferable. I use God in day-to-day conversation and Jehovah in more serious stuff. I believe the closest to an official name would be Yahweh, which is used by the Jews.
Ah that makes sense.
Jul 31, 2013 7:28 PM #1053757
God is an ever shrinking pocket of unknowns. The more science discovers, the smaller "god" becomes. Creation doesn't make sense, and evolution is proven.
Jul 31, 2013 8:16 PM #1053814
Quote from CobaltGod is an ever shrinking pocket of unknowns. The more science discovers, the smaller "god" becomes. Creation doesn't make sense, and evolution is proven.
But there is a possibility that God may or may not have to do with evolution. Besides, how did we get to Earth in the first place?
btw this vid should be appropriate for this subject.
[video=youtube_share;ha_9Omn9obk]http://youtu.be/ha_9Omn9obk[/video]
Jul 31, 2013 8:38 PM #1053844
Quote from MolgeraBut there is a possibility that God may or may not have to do with evolution.
...no, it's one or the other. Either he did or he didn't.
Quote from MolgeraBesides, how did we get to Earth in the first place?
The video I posted explains the procession of evolution from the very beginning to the emergence of humans. It's a plausible theory based on the evidence available to us. Did you watch it?
Aug 1, 2013 12:30 AM #1054015
They found amino acids on a comet somewhat recently. They think amino acids were carried here on a comet and later formed into proteins, DNA, cells, etc. At least that's one working theory.
Science by no means has all the answers, nor does it claim to. But once new evidence comes to light, theories are adjusted accordingly. The evidence it does have proves evolution more and more. The point of a scientific theory is that it's falsifiable, and no evidence has come to light to falsify evolution. Just one example is where fossils are found in relation to the sedimentary strata. If even one fossil was found in the wrong strata, evolution would fall apart. But that has yet to happen. Here's the quote straight from Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show On Earth
Quite a good read if you're genuinely interested in learning about Evolution.
Science by no means has all the answers, nor does it claim to. But once new evidence comes to light, theories are adjusted accordingly. The evidence it does have proves evolution more and more. The point of a scientific theory is that it's falsifiable, and no evidence has come to light to falsify evolution. Just one example is where fossils are found in relation to the sedimentary strata. If even one fossil was found in the wrong strata, evolution would fall apart. But that has yet to happen. Here's the quote straight from Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show On Earth
It is a fact that literally nothing that you could remotely call a mammal has ever been found in Devonian rock or in any older stratum. They are not just statistically rarer in Devonian than in later rocks. They literally never occur in rocks older than a certain date. But this didn’t have to be so. It could have been the case that, as we dug down lower and lower from the Devonian, through the Silurian and then even older, through the Ordovician, we suddenly found that the Cambrian era – older than any of them – teemed with mammals. That is in fact not what we find, but the possibility demonstrates that you can’t accuse the argument of being circular: at any moment somebody might dig up a mammal in Cambrian rocks, and the theory of evolution would be instantly blown apart if they did. Evolution, in other words, is a falsifiable, and therefore scientific, theory
Quite a good read if you're genuinely interested in learning about Evolution.
Aug 1, 2013 2:24 AM #1054112
Quote from Vertigo
Science by no means has all the answers, nor does it claim to. But once new evidence comes to light, theories are adjusted accordingly. The evidence it does have proves evolution more and more. The point of a scientific theory is that it's falsifiable, and no evidence has come to light to falsify evolution. Just one example is where fossils are found in relation to the sedimentary strata. If even one fossil was found in the wrong strata, evolution would fall apart.
Yo, not to argue or disagree or anything but, we all know that when scientists find out that animals they called "related" have nothing to do with eachother at all they just change it up, reclassify to some new other group and then say they were right.
Aug 1, 2013 2:33 AM #1054118
Could you clarify or provide examples, Naimad? I don't think that ever happens, or at least when they do reclassify things you've misunderstood the motivations or reasoning behind that decision.
Aug 1, 2013 11:50 AM #1054350
Well, I believe in creation but that doesn't mean i disagree with evolution. I would just like to point out that for some people unless they've had something happen which they humanly impossible to explain then they don't wanna here shit about creation. Creation and evolution pretty much mesh into each other. I don't know why people insist on make 1 to 2 hrs of debate videos wondering if God exist or not. I just remembered what someone told me " Satan's greatest trick was making mankind believe he didn't exist ".
Aug 1, 2013 1:44 PM #1054407
Quote from FusionCould you clarify or provide examples, Naimad? I don't think that ever happens, or at least when they do reclassify things you've misunderstood the motivations or reasoning behind that decision.
It doesn't. If a biological classification is changed there's no collective effort from "scientists" to pretend they were always right. He's talking out of his ass and I guarantee he isn't going to post anything to back up his claim.
Quote from Apex-PredatorCreation and evolution pretty much mesh into each other.
Not really, the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. I'm content with simply accepting that there isn't enough evidence to understand how life began. Saying "god did it" is a cop-out and has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.