CreateDebate


Debate Info

155
222
No Yes
Debate Score:377
Arguments:337
Total Votes:394
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No (146)
 
 Yes (156)

Debate Creator

gocreation(61) pic



Is Evolution Science?


No

Side Score: 155
VS.

Yes

Side Score: 222
1 point

Darwin said if his theory be true, there should be transitional fossils.

Where are they?

Side: No
3 points

In reality basically every fossil is a transition fossil, but what you are probably looking for are these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listoftransitional_fossils

Side: Yes
outlaw60(8861) Disputed
1 point

Why is it Progressives are upset about apes being in zoos and not evolving into humans ?

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

evolution and paleantology are full of fraud with no-names desperate to make a name for themselves, the list of transitional fossils is full of proven frauds such as

"the feather imprints of the London Archaeopteryx fossil specimen were forged. Evidence for this is that

the feather impressions appear only on the slab, not on the counterslab.

the surface texture is different between the feathered and unfeathered areas;

slightly elevated "blobs" appear which are not always matched by depressions on the counterslab;

the feathers show "double strike" impressions.

Hairline cracks which pass through both bones and feathers could have formed by slight movements to the slab after the cement was in place.

Under magnification, the limestone appears different in fossil and non-fossil areas of the specimen.

Unknown material appears within the matrix in the fossil area.

An x-ray chemical analysis showed chemical differences, including silicon, sulfur, and chlorine in the fossil area that were not present in the non-fossil area.

These points indicate that the feather impressions were made by someone impressing feathers in a cement-like matrix that was added to the stone. Without the feathers, Archaeopteryx would be identified as the dinosaur Compsognathus, not as a transitional fossil."

In spite of frauds, they still are listed as true transitional species. Your religion is like a cult pushing lies strongly to keep it's followers buying whatever they sell

Side: No
SlapShot(2607) Clarified
1 point

Hey new meat.

I probably should not waste my time with you, since if you don't know about all the transitional fossils then you are pretty clueless about the topic.

But never let it be said I did not try to enlighten!

Here is a partial list.

Hope you have some time to read? LOL.

There are thousands of Transitional Fossils!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listoftransitional_fossils

Side: No
SatintLater(283) Disputed
2 points

NO ONE ASKED YOU SLAPSHOTITEYTOY!!!*

Side: Yes
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Randomness did not create, you need information to make DNA.

Evolution takes more faith in nothing and Randomness then faith needed for belief in God. At least you can prove God with common sense and reasoning. Evolution is ridiculous!

If evolution were true we would have life forms sprouting out of nothing all day.

What is it like hair dye, it stopped after it evolved so far because nothing is intelligent?

And aside from changing properties for adaptation there is only things growing with an intelligent designer. Scientists putting together to make. That's still not random nothing!

Look at the Giraffe. How did evolution work backward from a dead body? Their long neck getting water needs a valve that would necessitate it's survival. A valve it would be dead before knowing it needed. There are many animals that evolution could not be possible. Because of the process, unless you can evolve from dead and from nothing!

Side: Yes
Kelnius(5) Disputed
1 point

If you give me the name of a city near you, I can tell you the closest museum near you that has transitional fossils on display. Pretty much every museum of which has a fossil hall has transitional fossils, and even a lot which don't will occasionally have an exhibit with transitional fossils on display, or a facsimile of a rarer fossil.

But this is so easy, I don't even have to do it for you. Google "transitional fossil museum" and your town or local CBD, and I guarantee that you'll find a fossil that you can look at with your own eyes.

Side: Yes

The theory of evolution is at best an idea about history and prehistory, not observable science. If evolution is occurring now, it's moving too slowly to be studied and verified. If it happened in history we cannot go back in time to observe it, so how can we prove it's scientific authenticity for sure? We can't, so right now it remains an unprovable, unscientific theory.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
2 points

It's not even a theory, it's a hypothesis and a waste of time trying to twist every scientific discovery to fit the hypothesis.

Side: Yes
Poseidon(61) Disputed Banned
1 point

Have you read 1984, Mr. Thought Police? What the fuck are you doing on a debate site if you can't handle having someone question your beliefs?

Side: No
AlofRI(1839) Clarified
1 point

Theory; Hypothesis, those are intellectual thought processes. Unproven fiction is entertainment. Funny, what some people take seriously. Oh, well, to each his own.

Side: No
1 point

it is quite difficult to say if evolution is science or a religion . Starting off with , evolution is a theory which states that we evolved from tiny creatures . While scientists claim that we evolved from tiny cells ( microorganisms). Different religions have different teachings. Let's take the case of Christianity. Christianity says that there were two people Adam and Eve on earth, and by them we came . While Islam doesn't believe in evolution as well . No abramanic religions believe . While Sikhism doesn't have a point to make in any of the two matters . But Sikhs believe in recarnation which doesn make since and can relatively go with evolution as well . Every religion believes in their own respective teachings

Side: No
1 point

No. But the STUDY of it is! If some people studied it as much as they study ancient fiction, they might learn something.

Side: No

Evolution is a lie. Creation is truth. Science is finding the truth. Evolution isn't science.

Side: No
1 point

The answer is both yes or no depending on what you mean by evolution if you mean sub-species variation like Darwin's experiments of course it is science it is what we observe it is fact now the theory of evolution itself making claims such as the origin of life and the species-species or genus-genus evolution cannot be observed and lies under historical science to be debated. Now theories can be scientific however evolution does not provide bedrock penetrating arguments for its factual claim. If you want to find the truth for yourself go search and be open minded you will find it. I first came in an Evolutionist and came out a Creationist. Good luck!

Side: No
1 point

In part it is and in part it isn't

Creation DID jump into existence on DAY 5 and DAY 6

Evolution has several components that are correct.

Evolution combining Astronomy, Archeology, Biology, etc...

But even in Evolution's own claims, there is blanks that are positioned for expanding knowledge. Why? Because there is much FAITH also NEEDED in Evolution.

It still takes believing in a hypothesis, but you become dumb though when the hypothesis keeps from learning because what can be learned and needs to be learned doesn't fit the model that's trying to be proved.

But Adaptation is not the same as Evolving to a different species

Man wasn't an ape, even if our structures are "similar."

Man was likely hunched over with wider jaws that changed with adaptation

But still not EVER an ape.

The earth is probably millions of years old, and there was likely a cataclysmic event in space that placed the earth where it is today. That event was an act of a Creator

Days 1, 2, 3, and 4 where Not likely 24 hours

Time was created ON DAY 4

DAY 5 was the 1st recorded 24 hour DAY in Genesis.

In Genesis 2 through Genesis 4 the details of the creation story are expanded, to give a detailed account of the days.

http://biblehub.com/kjv/genesis/1.htm

http://biblehub.com/kjv/genesis/2.htm

http://biblehub.com/kjv/genesis/3.htm

http://biblehub.com/kjv/genesis/4.htm

The author of Genesis documented creation in a highly intelligent order from Day 1 to completion.

Side: No
1 point

One of the evidences for billions of years is distant starlight. Trying to have growing plants, etc without a sun or time doesn't get around this problem since the stars were created on the same day as the sun and moon.

Side: Yes
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

How do you know the age in comparison? Couldn't the earth be older than thought to be or visa versa? Is all data you have conclusive fact? If so, show me.

Side: No
1 point

Explain to me how they found a trilobite stepped on by a human

Side: No
Cartman(18205) Disputed
2 points

They didn't.

Side: Yes
1 point

No, the theory of evolution has always been a mystery to me. I dont understand how we humans couldve cime from fish or what many say even an amoeba. So no evolution isnt science because it makes no sense.

Side: No
Cartman(18205) Disputed
0 points

You understand all of science except for evolution?

Side: Yes
mwduncan(48) Disputed
1 point

Yes, precisely it just makes no sense to me how us humans could have possibly come from a more primitive species

Side: No
0 points

Evolution is a Religion.

I am a Christian. Christianity is a religion.

Christianity states that in the beginning was God.

Evolution states that in the beginning there was a big bang.

So I believe in the beginning God and evolutionists believe in the beginning dirt.

Side: No
Cartman(18205) Disputed
3 points

Evolution makes no mention of a big bang. The theory of evolution is different than the big bang theory. That's why they have 2 different names.

Side: Yes
Grenache(5564) Disputed
2 points

If evolution is a religion then aren't you afraid the evo-god is going to leave you like this as a monkey?

Side: Yes
AveSatanas(4237) Disputed
2 points

Evolution has nothing whatsoever to do with the big bang. It only describes the process by which life diversified, not the process by which it emerged. Also, religions require a deity or supernatural doctrine. Evolution has neither of those things. It literally cant be a religion because its missing all the necessary components of a religion

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
2 points

Evolution is the or a key component of the religion of Naturalism, in which you believe nature justifies your life so you are exempt from Hell. To say it has nothing to do with belief in the big bang or abiogenesis is dishonest, they all kiss each other in today's perverted sciences which basically are designed to allow for sexual perversion with no objective basis of morality.

The deity of evolution is material, nature, and your own mind which in evolutionary religion is believed to be nothing but chemical fizzes causing a hologram of you which is self-justified making you exempt from Hell, so you (even though it's not really you in your belief but rather is a manifestation of chemical fizzes) are equal to nature and are your personal contact point of your deity which is nature, hence the religion of Naturalism. And what a stupid deity you serve, one which gives life no real value or meaning, no real purpose, and holds you chained to death. Pitiful religion you have there.

I understand evolution better than you do.

Side: No
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Why is atheism authoritative in academic denial of God, when multidisciplinary studyies show atheism underdeveloped, bias, and academically unreliable?

Side: No
IAmSparticus(1516) Clarified
1 point

No. Just no.

Side: No
0 points

If an animal develops mutations, is there any beneficial ones?

Side: No
2 points

Yes, there are beneficial mutations.

e.g.:

"Another mutation of E. coli facilitated amino acid catabolism under starvation conditions, enabling the mutant to outcompete the parental wild-type. This increased catabolism resulted from a genomic rearrangement (Figure 3). The first step of this rearrangement was insertion of an indigenous IS5 element between the promoter and a CRP-binding site (catabolite regulatory protein) of the starvation inducible cstA gene."

and:

"Hence, certain environmental conditions seem to favor bacteria with specific genes duplicated. This may have provided the organism a temporary increase in gene expression of those duplicated genes, which apparently helped the organism cope with the higher temperature."

https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/mutations/a-creationist-perspective-of-beneficial- mutations-in-bacteria/

See also:

here and here

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
2 points

The genome of a creature is programmed to respond to environmental changes within limits. That is not mutation, it is adaptation. The fact that a lot of people have developed dark skin does not mean they have evolved differently from idiots like you. The variations that express themselves are not additional DNA in the genome.

Your making a huge leap of cartoon animated beliefs without evidence to imply that such changes result in little swimmy critters morphing into people gradually or suddenly at any point in time or over huge spans of times during millions of years.

This whole argument a few of you buffoons are making trying to equate adaptation with evolution is just a smokescreen attempting to hide the fact that you believe in evolution while never being able to see it happen and nobody has ever seen it happen....because it does not happen, adaptation is not evolution.........and why should you care anyways, you think you are as good as God so you cannot be in Hell as a sinner.......like you said, you don't care, so why do you want to argue about it? I think you are a liar, full of doubletalk, fooling yourself into believing you are exempt from Hell.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Clarified
2 points

Those mutations are not evolution, they are adaptations which the genome is programmed for. Why don't you read that entire article? The article fully supports what I am saying and contradicts from beginning to end belief in evolution. Evolution is a belief, it is not science.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

That is not a mutation, it is an adaptation triggered by environmental stress.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

How dumb that is will immediately become apparent as soon as you look up what a mutation is.

Please provide the definition of mutation...

Side: No
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Here is evidence!

Will you look? You ask for evidence, then you don't look!

https://youtu.be/EQbrEGP2NAc

82 scientist got together with mathmatical equations and developed a list of minimal required expectations, and scientific properties that would have to exist or have occurred in order to have any reasonable expectations of the existence of alien life.

We exist by miracle! Science proves God!

https://youtu.be/EQbrEGP2NAc

Side: No
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

DNA is a combination of code that is not mathematically possible in even a small sense.

The creating of life is not possible without intelligent design.

Every law in science tells evolution is not possible.

The only ones who are foolish enough to buy it are basically science cooks. Take tomatoes sauce mozzarella and chicken and you can make chicken parmigian.

So we throw things together by some knowledge and intelligence, and we unite them with the helping hand of a science chef, and wow it happens to grow together.

So then let's pretend that can happen with no chef. And then call it evolution.

And ignore math and all other science principles because we want to insult the Creator with random nothingness, which I'm pretty sure would not be a wise thought in the end.

.

Side: No
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Why does Israel and God's Word and Jesus divide huge significant effects to everyone in the entire world, a mid point in half, like God is the center of the entire world, even the universe?

The below shows something crazy, that in no way was in the hands of an old Jewish guy to control.

We all know Jesus is so part of the destiny of the world that even TIME is divided by the knowledge of Him - A.D. and B.C.

But this is found in the ancient texts hidden.

The world and languages go from reading left to right or right to left. Most written languages were in process of developing. Like time, written language is directed like a directors chair perched in Jerusalem.

All languages EAST of Jerusalem write Right to Left.

All languages WEST of Jerusalem write Left to Right.

We have this also - torh spelled reading in two directions in Hebrew. Backward and forward with YHWY in the middle.

Are There Hidden Codes

in the Biblical Text?

The secrets of the Torah are revealed... in the

skipping of the letters.

Rabbi Moses Cordevaro, 16th century

Torah Codes

49 (72) letter sequences:

• Genesis TORH - in Hebrew at a 49 letter interval pattern

• Exodus TORH - in Hebrew at a 49 letter interval pattern

• Leviticus ? YHWH in a 7 pattern, square root of 49

• Numbers HROT - in Hebrew at a 49 letter interval pattern

• Deuteronomy HROT - in Hebrew at a 49 letter interval pattern

• Leviticus (in Intervals of 7) - YHWH

The Torah Always Points to YHWH!

The Torah Codes

• Weissmandel, H. M. D., Torath Hemed, 1958.

• D. Michaelson, “Codes in the Torah,” B’OR Ha

Torah, Number 6, 1987.

• D. Witzum, E. Rips, & Y. Rosenberg, “Equidis

tant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis,”

Journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statis-

tics, August 1994.

• J. B. Satinover, “Divine Authorship? Computer

reveals startling word patterns,” Bible Review,

Side: No
SlapShot(2607) Clarified
1 point

A genetic mutation is deemed beneficial if it produces a physiological trait that enables the animal (or plant) to thrive and to produce offspring in its specific environment.

All species have genetic mutations. You have some right now. So do I. The thing is we never know about them unless they cause a problem. And if they indeed are an advantage, in time they will be passed on and then "selected in" and will in time become the norm. As we will prevail over the less-fortunate members of our species who were not endowed with the advantageous physiological trait that the mutation produced.

So...this is what we call Selective Inheritance. It is the driving force of Evolution. We "select" and then our off-spring "inherit" the mutations that are advantageous for living in their environment.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

Don't forget to look at that list of Transitional Fossils.

SS

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
2 points

Evolution is never seen, it cannot be scientifically studied. You are describing adaptations which are genetic changes triggered in response to changes in the environment, calling it "selective inheritance", and adding the huge leap of evolution which you strongly believe actually has happened and will continue to happen.

The fossils you refer to as "transitional" are complete animals. To believe they were changing into different animals is something you can show only in cartoon animations. My guess is that some if not most of those "transitional fossils" are documented frauds anyways. I've seen the lists before, I did a college term paper on the one which was announced on an April 1st, I forget which year it was, but it was supposed to be a fish coming out of muddy waters turning into a reptile. It was taken seriously by evolutionist in spite of obviously being an April fools joke, and I've seen it referenced in lists of "transitional species" more than once. They predicted they would find the bones of the critter, then they went looking, and viola!!!! there it was!!!!! and it was phony!!!! but evolutionists bought it and still sell it.

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

can you show us a "transitional" species which shows the change from a two chambered heart to a four chambered heart?

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
0 points

selective inheritance is the driving force of racial superiority. It's why us whites dropped our tails quicker than the blacks, so they are better at basketball and we are smarter. Just kidding.....but really, this is what evolution leads to and it was crucial when Derwin popularized belief in evilootion.

Side: Yes
4 points

Evolution is actually a combination of SEVERAL SCIENCES.

Including: Biology; Chemistry; Anthropology; Zoology; Botany; Geology; Genetics; and physiology.

And guess what?

They ALL AGREE on Evolution. The fact is so prevalent in those sciences that we don't even discuss the matter, if it's true or not. We take it for granted becasue of all the decades and mountains of evidence. None of which is EVER disputed successfully. We take Evolution as matter-of-fact as, say, a chemist would when examining water, in saying that it is H20.

And a theory is MORE than just a fact! It is a collection of facts that have all been tried and proven and observed time and again.

So.........Evolution = More than One Science.

All those sciences (about 10 different disciplines) agree on Evolution.

There has NEVER been a proven discovery that refutes Evolution. Or even questions it. The only thing the nay-sayers--of which there are virtually NONE outside of the Church--can do is ask us why we cannot explain some fact. Never mind that we HAVE explained about 98% of Evolution. All we have left really is to figure out Abiogenesis. And so, the only thing the naysayers HAVE is that. So they say god did it.

Which of course is absurd and is a total cop-out.

There is so very much evidence for Evolution that the only reason a person would disagree with it is because their superstitions, err, their religions, tell them they need to.

NO man of science today disagrees with it. It simply is. not. done.

Hope this helps.

SS

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
2 points

Comeon, Slappy, if you really want people to respect you as a scientist, you need to be honest. I think you are well aware that the inventor of the MRI machine which revolutionized modern medicine as well as inventions used in satellites which could not function without his invention is a man who is a true scientist, highly accomplished, and highly respected in the scientific community....and is a young earth Creationist. I can present a list of dozens if not hundreds of similar accomplished and respected scientists.

Your assertion:

"There is so very much evidence for Evolution that the only reason a person would disagree with it is because their superstitions, err, their religions, tell them they need to.

NO man of science today disagrees with it. It simply is. not. done.

Hope this helps.

SS"

IS A FLAT OUT LIE!!!!!! A scientist is supposed to deal in observable facts, and your dishonesty in this kind of stuff casts doubt on your character. To me it says you are desperate to cling to evolutionary belief. You have made statements like this many times, and it shows you really are trying to fool yourself and seem to be succeeding by the way you refuse to trust God and hide behind your faciasde of evolution.

In evolution, you are abusing the word theory to describe belief, a hypothesis. It is completely unnecessary for science. You can't show me anything in science dependent on evolutionary belief. All scientific observation and study needs no belief in evolution. The only thing you need to believe in evolution for is to support your hope of escaping reality in death while you excuse yourself for inventing whatever morality seems to fit your wants at any given moment.

And there are many proven discoveries which refute evolution, I can show you dozens. You will have to do all kinds of mental contortions and avoidance of facts to brush them aside. I have offered to present you such lists of scientists and facts which dispute evolution many times, I have posted many of them and provided links which lead to dozens or hundreds of these things. Evolutionary belief has science cornered only behind the wall of your mind which you set up trying to block God out, and all you are doing is blocking yourself out from life hoping in death for relief.

Side: No
SlapShot(2607) Disputed
3 points

The true professional scientist with a Master's degree or higher level of education who believes believes in Creation is very rare.

About the same percentage of those who suffer from mental illness.

That is...maybe one in a couple hundred!?

What does this tell you?

Especially when you couple it with the f act that any psychiatrist will tell you religious delusions are one of the mist common symptoms of psychosis!

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_proof.htm

Side: Yes
outlaw60(8861) Disputed
1 point

How is it apes are still in zoos ? They should evolved already !

Side: No
2 points

How is it Americans came from England, but there are still English people....

Side: Yes
sylynn(626) Disputed
1 point

Evolution does not state we evolved from apes, but rather apes and human share an ape-like ancestor

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Evolution is a belief which excludes contradictory data in SEVERAL SCIENCES. People who believe in evolution agree that all contradictory data should be ignored.

Side: No
Atrag(5201) Disputed
2 points

What data contradicts evolution?

Side: Yes
Harvard(651) Clarified
1 point

You forgot to include Physics

Side: No
1 point

Yes I did.

So let's add that to my laundry list of sciences that combine to support evolution.

I also should have added geochemistry and thermodynamics.

Also all those sciences have combined to refute the possibility of many Bible stories.

Cracks me up....these biblical Literalists. They believe a collection of Bronze Age myths over 95% of professional scientists working in the areas of geology, biology, physics, Anthropology, Cosmology, geochemistry, and genetics.

How does one get so brainwashed?

Side: Yes
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Lots of physics prove God!

18 “Come now, and let us reason together,”

Says the Lord,

“Though your sins are as scarlet,

They will be as white as snow;

Though they are red like crimson,

They will be like wool.

19 “If you consent and obey,

You will eat the best of the land;

20 “But if you refuse and rebel,

You will be devoured by the sword.”

Truly, the mouth of the Lord has spoken.

http://www.khouse.org/articles/2003/482/

Rabbinical Tradition

The ancient Hebrew sages believed, of course, that God created the heavens and the earth. However, some of them believed that the Word of God was the very template with which He did it.

This strikes some of us as simply a colorful exaggeration that goes beyond any direct evidence.

There are hints here and there. There are two well-known references to the creation in the Scripture:

Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. Let’s look “underneath” the text of each of these.

Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

In Hebrew:

Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew

If you examine the numerical values of each of the Hebrew letters, and the numerical value of the words (see chart), and apply them to this formula:

The number of letters x the product of the letters

÷

The number of words x the product of the words

You get 3.1416 x 1017. The value of π to four decimal places!

.....Hmm.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In Greek:

John 1: 1 in Greek

This time if you take the numerical value of each of the Greek letters (see chart), and the numerical value of the words, and apply them to the same formula:

The number of letters x the product of the letters

÷

The number of words x the product of the words

You now get 2.7183 x 1040, the value of e. Curious!

.

Significance?

Each of these is another of those puzzling ostensible “coincidences” that are too astonishing to dismiss, and yet present challenges in suggesting any real significance.

3 And taken together, they do evoke some conjectures.

There are, however, at least two problems: why just four decimal places (they both deviate from the fifth place onwards) and what do you do with all the “extra zeroes”?

Matt 11

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants.

26 Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.

27 All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

28 “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.

29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”

Jesus calls chasing after the world a yoke. He compares His yoke, and says it is easy and restful. A yoke is a bar guided.

We all wear a yoke, we are all slaves, one yoke leads to adoption as children, the others never are

released from their yoke.

No certificate of freedom.

Your yoke determines if you will remain a slave to a cruel taskmaster or if you will be born again and be renewed daily till you see Him as He fully is, and are changed in a twinkling of an eye.

FYI, twinkling of an eye is a scientific term. It's the aperture of light through the pupil of the eye. It's a fraction of light and time in the lowest divisible form.

The Bible has more science in it then you can imagine!

It's interesting they used a knowledge they couldn't have scientifically defined or knew of.

The field of biology has now discovered it is restricted by the boundary conditions of the information sciences. Its historical love affair with Darwinism is now being shattered by advances in microbiology, highlighted by the disturbing revelations of Michael Denton, Philip Johnson, and Michael Behe, et al., revealing biology's apparent immunity to truth and reason.

But now the field of physics, too, is in turmoil. Quantum physics has resulted in the abandonment of causality, the cornerstone of empirical science. And whether we address the units of length, mass, or time, we discover that they are composed of indivisible units that ultimately cannot be divided without losing their "locality."

The more one knows about particle physics and quantum mechanics, the more provocative these "science fiction" episodes become. Indeed, it was Dr. Albert Einstein that admitted,

People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between the past, present, and the future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

And as physics goes, so too the entire field of cosmology. I believe it was Paul Davies who observed,

It is as if our entire universe is nothing more than a thought in the Mind of God.

The current genre of virtual reality films, while still retaining many of the moral deficiencies that have come to characterize the products of our entertainment industry, can still be provocative and useful in conceptualizing our present situation: we find ourselves in what can be accurately described as a digital simulation.

And transitions in and out of our space-time - from one "hyperspace" to another - is a potential rationalization of the more disturbing UFO reports and other apparent visits from dimensionalities other than our own.

It is also a way of conceptualizing the strangest transition of all: the harpazo, the "Great Snatch," which Paul alludes to in

1 Thessalonians 4:16 -18 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-53.

(A "twinkling of an eye" is not to be confused with a blink; at the speed of light passing through the retina, it is about 10-43 seconds - the very digital boundary of time itself.)

http://www.khouse.org/articles/2000/190/

.

.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

All those sciences (about 10 different disciplines) agree on Evolution

Correction: People who believe in evolution agree on evolution. Science is the study of nature by observation, evolution cannot be observed, all sciences support the Biblical description of life and reality much easier than evolution. You do not have to deny any observable facts of nature or life to support the Biblical view of reality. You have to ignore a lot of scientific facts to uphold evolutionary beliefs.

Side: No
SlapShot(2607) Disputed
1 point

If you go to bed and there is no snow on the ground but wake up the next morning and there is two feet of snow on the ground you can rightfully claim that it snowed overnight.

Without having to be have seen the snow falling.

Same deal with Evolution.

We have so much evidence with DNA and fossils and the hundreds of different forms of radiometric dating that we can rightfully say Evolution occurred without having seen it.

And with the snow thing, one comes to the right conclusion without performing any if the millions if tests we have for decades regarding the veracity if evolution! Yet...the claim of snow during the night is true and value and goes unquestioned.

Except for maybe a few religious nuts who claim it did not snow due to currently understood meteorological methods, but that God did it.

Case rested.

SS

Side: Yes
gocreation(61) Disputed
1 point

Before Darwin's book came out, the majority of the scientists believed in special creation. Who really made up the theory of evolution were the armchair philosophers who never even spent a second in a laboratory. Slowly the philosophers took over the scientists

Side: No
1 point

Atheist David Berlinsky must be a fairytale... and of course anyone who challenges the theory is stripped of funding or kicked out of the field. Imagine if that were the science path years ago. The world would still be flat.

Side: No
3 points

SlapShot gave the best explanation so far but basically science is a process of observations and theories based upon them. Evolutionary theory is based on many observations ranging from the fossil remains discovered to the differences and similarities of existing species of life forms.

For those of you who are religious I just want to point out that evolutionary theory is only a conflict with your religion if you rely on a strict literal interpretation of your religion's ancient literature, such as its fables of creation. There is no reason why a God who could make everything that exists could not also have made the process we observe and label as evolution, and if that's true then rejecting evolution would actually be a rejection of one part of what your God made.

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

If you knew what you were talking about, you would not be using "if" as the central point of your argument. What you allude to as "a God" is not God, it's a straw man which is easily shown to be ineffective in your life because the straw man God you invent is self-negated so it cannot be God. And it is you who is religious, fabricating your pride and beliefs to think you are justified for living when your dying proves you cannot possibly justify your life. Death is justice against your life and it is deserved justice. You think you can assert your right to live outside of Hell and you conduct yourself religiously in that pursuit....it's insanity, you are not living in reality, you are being religious and condemned to eternity outside of Heaven and you know where you are going though you do your best to fool yourself into denying it.

Side: No
Grenache(5564) Disputed
3 points

All you ever do is give us death threats, which of course is based on the literal interpretation of scriptures, which I already challenged.

And we are not arrogant or insane for not agreeing with you. That's just your own ego asserting you must be better than those who disagree.

Side: Yes
KNHav(1918) Disputed
1 point

Explain the principle of random. Does random actualy occur anywhere in nature, or in universe?

Side: No
2 points

That is why the Progressives are still upset that apes are in zoos and have not evolved into men ! Progressives just can't figure that one out !

Side: Yes
3 points

You do realize that humans ands apes share a common ancestor, and our evolutions were different and we came out as being on top.

We didn't come from apes, but apes and us came from somewhere.

Side: Yes
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
0 points

Maybe you came from the uncle of an ape and maybe you look like a monkey......I have heard that they taught an ape to speak around 300 words in sign language, now I see they taught one to type. People really have done wonderful things, now they are teaching apes to type!

Side: No
2 points

I find it interesting that there are some people who look at science as if science is doing something. From where I'm sitting science is simply trying to understand that which already exist assuming those involved get it right!

Especially in this day and age I do not bother to ascertain whether or not an unknown, unfamiliar creature has been discovered Why because as always when man gets involved one doesn't know what to expect so with mankind crossbreeding species that shouldn't be crossbred and now that he has access to gene splicing I have no doubt we are going to have and already had bazaar looking species. Of course with all the secret labs we have nobodies going to say where the species came from so were left to assume they must be from outer space or the era of dinosaur age hasn't left yet!

Side: Yes
2 points

I do think evolution is science. There is quantifiable evidence for evolution and we can see it everywhere. However, the kind of evolution I am referring to is microevolution, not macro

Side: Yes