Creation vs. Evolution
Thursday, September 11, 2003 by grayhaze | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
I thought I'd pre-empt this discussion before Kona's comment in the other thread sparked it off there. There is concrete proof that we evolved, but no proof that we were created. What's you're opinion, and why?
To quote Phoebe from Friends: "I guess the real question is who put those fossils there and why?"
To quote Phoebe from Friends: "I guess the real question is who put those fossils there and why?"
 |
|
Page 27 of 56 | |
|
|---|
Jafo
Reply #522 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:16 PM
Reply #522 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:16 PM
Ah...hope abandoned you, I'm afraid.....
To amend that analogy slightly.....what if instead of a cement mixer you had a dozen mindless robots and an eternity to 'fiddle' with potential ways to add one component to another.......eventually, sooner or later, all the right bits would be in the right places....and you'd have an accurate definition of 'evolution', [whereas 'God' could just be the the guy who kicks all the junk into the corner, says 'stuff it' and goes watch the football]....
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #523 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:20 PM
Reply #523 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:20 PM
Ah, so it's all sorted then. I am God...
Fuzzy Logic gives generous greetings to all his blessed minions
Fuzzy Logic gives generous greetings to all his blessed minions
Frogboy
Reply #524 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:54 PM
Reply #524 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 4:54 PM
If human civilization lasts another 20,000 years it would be surprising.
"Civilization", as we know it, has only been around for around 5,000 years.
We may have only developed a complex language as recently at 50,000 years ago.
A million years ago we were basically a bipedal chimp.
The problem is that "very bad things" happen to earth quite regularly.
Case in point: Anyone ever been to Yellowstone national park? Old Faithful, geizers, etc. You know why they're there? The entire part of that state is the top of a super volcano that goes up every once in a long long while. When it goes up, it'll wipe out most of North America. It's overdue.
We also get, every 20,000 or so years, an asteroid hit that is enough to wipe out civilization pretty good. Not kill off all humans (nothing I'm mentioning would cause our extinction as a species). But ensure that 4 or 5 billion humans starved to death or worse.
People also worry these days about global warming. Technically speaking, we should be more worried about global cooling. We're actually in the warm spot in the middle of an ice age (we're in what's called an interglacial period). Historically the earth was much warmer.
Of course, global warming could have a bad effect too of causing the ice caps to melt which would alter the currents in the Atlantic which would in turn cause cooler summers (it's not cold winters that cause ice ages but cool summers).
We don't live on a very safe planet for long term complex life. It wouldn't take a lot to mess up civilization.
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #525 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:00 PM
Reply #525 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:00 PM
That is so true. At the end of the day Humans are just a minor biological species in an ever evolving ecosystem. Surviving natural elements is precarious at best. We are just lucky to have survived long enough to attain intelligence.
With so many natural threats around it's only a matter of time...
With so many natural threats around it's only a matter of time...
Chris TH
Reply #526 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:10 PM
Sounds like Brad's been reading Bill Bryson?
In any case, you're well informed
Reply #526 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:10 PM
| The problem is that "very bad things" happen to earth quite regularly. Case in point: Anyone ever been to Yellowstone national park? |
Sounds like Brad's been reading Bill Bryson?
In any case, you're well informed
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #527 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:14 PM
Reply #527 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:14 PM
Yellowstone is just a huge caldera. It's only a matter of time before it blows. It is estimated an eruption of Yellowstone would leave somewhere as far away as New York under 3M of ash 
Get yer brollies out
Get yer brollies out
Chris TH
Reply #528 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:22 PM
According to the Bill Bryson book I mentioned it happens (on average) every 600,000 years and the last eruption was 630,000 years ago (I think I got that right )
Maybe those atomic shelters in the backyard could be a good idea after all
Reply #528 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:22 PM
| Yellowstone is just a huge caldera. It's only a matter of time before it blows |
According to the Bill Bryson book I mentioned it happens (on average) every 600,000 years and the last eruption was 630,000 years ago (I think I got that right
)Maybe those atomic shelters in the backyard could be a good idea after all
kona0197
Reply #529 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:29 PM
you have to convince some of the people here first that there is a God. they want proof. I need none of course.
Reply #529 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:29 PM
| Evolution is the cement mixer God is the technichan. [Jafo?] |
you have to convince some of the people here first that there is a God. they want proof. I need none of course.
Jafo
Reply #530 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:50 PM
Reply #530 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:50 PM
Kona...'you need none' implies you have none which in turn suggests there is none which signifies that he/she doesn't exist, which......
kona0197
Reply #531 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:51 PM
Reply #531 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:51 PM
I need no proof of God because I believe in God.
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #532 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:54 PM
Reply #532 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:54 PM
And I believe in little green men 
Fuzzy Logic wonders if that qualifies for a date with Scully?
Fuzzy Logic wonders if that qualifies for a date with Scully?
Aleatoric
Reply #533 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:58 PM
Reply #533 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 5:58 PM
papidon,
The computer (watch, etc.) analogy is flawed. While many of the background forces (radiation, etc.) are random, the interrelationships between atoms and molecules have an affinity for certain combinations. Given enough time, that affinity, moderated by the random forces, can increase complexity (Jafo's random computer assembling robots
).
Frogboy,
That is an excellent argument for our need to eventually colonize other planets (even if we have to shape them or live in domes). Sooner or later, something will do severe damage to a portion of this planet (or even all of it). If we don't grow outward, we will surely die.
Kona,
As a scientist who does believe in God, I think it's possible to have both evolution *and* God. There is no fundamental conflict there. The wonders of our universe and our ability to learn to understand them speak volumes for the glory of God.
The computer (watch, etc.) analogy is flawed. While many of the background forces (radiation, etc.) are random, the interrelationships between atoms and molecules have an affinity for certain combinations. Given enough time, that affinity, moderated by the random forces, can increase complexity (Jafo's random computer assembling robots
).Frogboy,
That is an excellent argument for our need to eventually colonize other planets (even if we have to shape them or live in domes). Sooner or later, something will do severe damage to a portion of this planet (or even all of it). If we don't grow outward, we will surely die.
Kona,
As a scientist who does believe in God, I think it's possible to have both evolution *and* God. There is no fundamental conflict there. The wonders of our universe and our ability to learn to understand them speak volumes for the glory of God.
Bangkokboy
Reply #534 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 7:13 PM
Reply #534 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 7:13 PM
the little green men report great difficulty believing in fuzzy.
Frogboy
Reply #535 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 7:41 PM
Reply #535 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 7:41 PM
Unfortunately, we have no way to colonize other planets.
Despite what some people say, we can't go to Mars until we invent "shields" to keep up from getting zapped by interstellar radiation.
Bryson is great btw.
Aleatoric
Reply #536 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 8:38 PM
Reply #536 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 8:38 PM
Actually Brad,
you're right, as far as it goes right now. But it is a goal we should strive toward, even if it takes a century or so to get there. While we could experience a world wide disaster in the next couple of centuries, the odds are, fortunately, small. But when it comes right down to it, as a civilization, we either have to give ourselves options to mitigate such catastrophies, or we will, sooner or later, fail.
There is only growth, or death. (I prefer growth)
I like Bryson's stuff, also. First saw him on the Learning Channel (IIRC), where the Yellowstone caldera was the topic of the program. Looked up and found other items of his to read.
you're right, as far as it goes right now. But it is a goal we should strive toward, even if it takes a century or so to get there. While we could experience a world wide disaster in the next couple of centuries, the odds are, fortunately, small. But when it comes right down to it, as a civilization, we either have to give ourselves options to mitigate such catastrophies, or we will, sooner or later, fail.
There is only growth, or death. (I prefer growth
)I like Bryson's stuff, also. First saw him on the Learning Channel (IIRC), where the Yellowstone caldera was the topic of the program. Looked up and found other items of his to read.
Hus
Reply #537 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 9:31 PM
Look where growth has gotten us thus far. Due to growth in our so-called knowledge, we made machines which in turn led to a change of events to cause global warming, holes in the ozone, polluted waters, nuclear spills, etc. It reminds of a scene from a movie, 'The Time Machine', the newest one, just came out on DVD not too long ago. Well anyway he travels to the year 2056 or something like that and see's we have now colonized the Moon. Well long story short, we screw up the Moons orbit and it starts to crash into earth. Now as physically/scientifically inconceivable that is, the point remains...growth at what expense?
Reply #537 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 9:31 PM
| There is only growth, or death. (I prefer growth |
Look where growth has gotten us thus far. Due to growth in our so-called knowledge, we made machines which in turn led to a change of events to cause global warming, holes in the ozone, polluted waters, nuclear spills, etc. It reminds of a scene from a movie, 'The Time Machine', the newest one, just came out on DVD not too long ago. Well anyway he travels to the year 2056 or something like that and see's we have now colonized the Moon. Well long story short, we screw up the Moons orbit and it starts to crash into earth. Now as physically/scientifically inconceivable that is, the point remains...growth at what expense?
Aleatoric
Reply #538 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 10:30 PM
Reply #538 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 10:30 PM
Hus,
Growth is better than stagnation, no matter what the side effects might be. Concerning things like global warming (at least the part of it that can be attributed to human behaviour), etc., growth and progress are the only realistic ways in which we can meaningfully address those issues. You can't flip a switch and have those problems go away. You can't stop progress in it's tracks, even for a little while. And even if you managed it, the cure would be worse than the disease.
Growth is not without risk, but trying to stay static, or even go backward, will cause *more* problems than growth will. So to answer your question about 'growth at what expense?', the cost of growth is *less* than the cost of not growing.
It's true that technological advances can be associated with side effects, problems, and misuse. But you can't put the genie back into the bottle. The only effective answer is to learn more and grow more and apply that to the problems, and then work to address any new ones that come up.
There are those who reflexively oppose any new progress based on ideas about potential harm, even if that progress might effectively address some of our current problems. In the misguided attempt to mitigate all possible harm, we leave ourselves without the tools to mitigate the harm that has already been done.
'Because it's there' is a biological imperative. Whether we evolved or were created from whole cloth, growth is an integral part of our character. Growth is life, and life is growth (banal as it may sound). We either grow (as individuals and as a species) or we are as good as dead. Growth is painful and expensive, failure to grow is fatal. There is *no* middle ground.
Growth is better than stagnation, no matter what the side effects might be. Concerning things like global warming (at least the part of it that can be attributed to human behaviour), etc., growth and progress are the only realistic ways in which we can meaningfully address those issues. You can't flip a switch and have those problems go away. You can't stop progress in it's tracks, even for a little while. And even if you managed it, the cure would be worse than the disease.
Growth is not without risk, but trying to stay static, or even go backward, will cause *more* problems than growth will. So to answer your question about 'growth at what expense?', the cost of growth is *less* than the cost of not growing.
It's true that technological advances can be associated with side effects, problems, and misuse. But you can't put the genie back into the bottle. The only effective answer is to learn more and grow more and apply that to the problems, and then work to address any new ones that come up.
There are those who reflexively oppose any new progress based on ideas about potential harm, even if that progress might effectively address some of our current problems. In the misguided attempt to mitigate all possible harm, we leave ourselves without the tools to mitigate the harm that has already been done.
'Because it's there' is a biological imperative. Whether we evolved or were created from whole cloth, growth is an integral part of our character. Growth is life, and life is growth (banal as it may sound). We either grow (as individuals and as a species) or we are as good as dead. Growth is painful and expensive, failure to grow is fatal. There is *no* middle ground.
IPlural
Reply #539 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 11:18 PM
Reply #539 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 11:18 PM
YellowStone has been buldging for a while now and it is really noticed along the lake shores where the water has run beyond the lake and into the surrounding woods. At first they thought it might be springs over flowing the lake, then after investigating they found the whole park is buldging pretty much, just waiting to go POP... Like Mt Saint Helens all over again, but with enough force and resulting earth quakes and ash to pretty much screw this country up and much of Canada...
The Atlantic and Pacific Conveyors will shut off making it so the warm water flow from the equator which also brings warm air with it will not be there anymore. Then people in the Amazon can all learn how to ride Taboggins...
The Yucatan Peninsula is thought to have been dug out by an impact that caused mass extinction and also might have caused a Magnetic Shift reversing poles for a time. Traces that support such a claim have been dug out of sea side cliffs in the Balatic sea area and a few other places. Also traces of radioactive particals found around the globe have been traced back to that specific impact.
Yep a really big rock could mooph just about if not all of us...
There are many things as you say that can and will happen eventually.
Did you know there is a island off of Africa which has a fault line running down the middle of it. If someone where to place a small payload in this fault in the correct area the resulting mass sliding into the ocean would cause a Tasunomi(spelling) that would reach would shoot out towards this side of the Atlantic at 600 - 700 mph, when it reached our shores it would swell up to 600 feet high and carry 50 miles and up inland? Florida would be washed away pretty much and it would change the whole of the USA's eastern coast line.
We spend too much money on new and enhanced ways to kill...
Also, water is a natural source of shielding for use in conjunction with other materials. It also could be built into the reclaimation process for any colonies in space. As far as traveling on ship goes, we would probably have to send out robotics, remote-bot's(mobies) and intelligent ships to do the building of a colony with some human techs. Then send colonists after a couple years so that they reach the intended colony after some sort of base camp was in place and in time to do some real humping on building the rest of the living space and such. They could scavenge the ships as needed, heck the ships could bedesigned with that thought in mind, with modular design. Say the Medical area was not self contained on the ship but could be converted to be so with ease...
anyway...
[Message Edited]
The Atlantic and Pacific Conveyors will shut off making it so the warm water flow from the equator which also brings warm air with it will not be there anymore. Then people in the Amazon can all learn how to ride Taboggins...
The Yucatan Peninsula is thought to have been dug out by an impact that caused mass extinction and also might have caused a Magnetic Shift reversing poles for a time. Traces that support such a claim have been dug out of sea side cliffs in the Balatic sea area and a few other places. Also traces of radioactive particals found around the globe have been traced back to that specific impact.
Yep a really big rock could mooph just about if not all of us...
There are many things as you say that can and will happen eventually.
Did you know there is a island off of Africa which has a fault line running down the middle of it. If someone where to place a small payload in this fault in the correct area the resulting mass sliding into the ocean would cause a Tasunomi(spelling) that would reach would shoot out towards this side of the Atlantic at 600 - 700 mph, when it reached our shores it would swell up to 600 feet high and carry 50 miles and up inland? Florida would be washed away pretty much and it would change the whole of the USA's eastern coast line.
We spend too much money on new and enhanced ways to kill...
Also, water is a natural source of shielding for use in conjunction with other materials. It also could be built into the reclaimation process for any colonies in space. As far as traveling on ship goes, we would probably have to send out robotics, remote-bot's(mobies) and intelligent ships to do the building of a colony with some human techs. Then send colonists after a couple years so that they reach the intended colony after some sort of base camp was in place and in time to do some real humping on building the rest of the living space and such. They could scavenge the ships as needed, heck the ships could bedesigned with that thought in mind, with modular design. Say the Medical area was not self contained on the ship but could be converted to be so with ease...
anyway...
[Message Edited]
EventHorizon
Reply #540 Wednesday, October 8, 2003 1:14 AM
Tsunami..hehe Interesting read IP.
Reply #540 Wednesday, October 8, 2003 1:14 AM
| Tasunomi |
Tsunami..hehe
Interesting read IP.Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 27 of 56 | |
|
|---|
Reply #521 Tuesday, October 7, 2003 3:42 PM