Religion Creationism, Evolution and the Bible

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder




Oh FFS Republicans and the Right, do not backslide into the 1800s and start acting like evolution isn't a thing.

This is not the time to hand the Left such a massive talking point to hit the Right with, particularly when it is such a stupid stance to take as well.
 

posh-goofiness

Well-known member




Oh FFS Republicans and the Right, do not backslide into the 1800s and start acting like evolution isn't a thing.

This is not the time to hand the Left such a massive talking point to hit the Right with, particularly when it is such a stupid stance to take as well.

Implying this wasn't a statement designed to do so.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard




Oh FFS Republicans and the Right, do not backslide into the 1800s and start acting like evolution isn't a thing.

This is not the time to hand the Left such a massive talking point to hit the Right with, particularly when it is such a stupid stance to take as well.


It's not a stupid stance to take, it's the factual stance to take.

The complete lack of scientific rigor applied to the 'Theory of Evolution' has set the standard for how Critical Race Theory and other pieces of nonsense are treated. That it is true is assumed, and no standard for falsification is permitted to exist.

It's dogma, plain and simple, just one that people were taught to absorb unthinkingly as children in schools.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
It's not a stupid stance to take, it's the factual stance to take.

The complete lack of scientific rigor applied to the 'Theory of Evolution' has set the standard for how Critical Race Theory and other pieces of nonsense are treated. That it is true is assumed, and no standard for falsification is permitted to exist.

It's dogma, plain and simple, just one that people were taught to absorb unthinkingly as children in schools.
They've proven interspecies evolution with experiments with fish and birds that saw changes in one generation to the next.

Trying to make this any part of the Right's platform is handing the Left a fucking gold mine of shit to sling against us.

Edit: And it would be fully justified shit too, no spin needed.
 

ShadowsOfParadox

Well-known member
...You know something I've never understood.

How does Evolution disprove God or Creationism? Beyond the time frame argument which is easily answered with "time in the Bible isn't strictly literal". Which... actually, I'm pretty sure that the hard non-Bible evidence we have of the Bible's Historicity don't always quite line up so another easy answer is straight up "Human Error".
 

posh-goofiness

Well-known member
...You know something I've never understood.

How does Evolution disprove God or Creationism? Beyond the time frame argument which is easily answered with "time in the Bible isn't strictly literal". Which... actually, I'm pretty sure that the hard non-Bible evidence we have of the Bible's Historicity don't always quite line up so another easy answer is straight up "Human Error".
It directly contradicts Genesis.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
They've proven interspecies evolution with experiments with fish and birds that saw changes in one generation to the next.

No they haven't. Like everything else with evolution as a theory of origins, they'll take tiny genetic variations, then claim that is the same thing as entire species changing.

The truth is, the more time has passed, the deeper our understanding of how complex life is, especially on the microscopic level, the more blindingly obvious it has been that evolution isn't remotely scientific. The only reason it is still held as fact is because, as Dawkins unintentionally admitted, 'Evolution allows an atheist to be intellectually fulfilled,' to paraphrase him slightly.

It's how and why atheists claim science is 'theirs,' and then frame every argument as 'science vs irrational religion,' instead of 'our religious dogma vs others' religious dogma.' If you actually apply the scientific method, atheists are left without answers as to how the universe began, and how life came to exist.

They must force evolution to be taught, for the same reason that the political left cannot tolerate any breach in total control of the media narrative. Because as soon as they have an argument based on actual facts, it becomes clear that all they have is sophistry, and any amount of sunlight will wipe their position away.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
No they haven't. Like everything else with evolution as a theory of origins, they'll take tiny genetic variations, then claim that is the same thing as entire species changing.

The truth is, the more time has passed, the deeper our understanding of how complex life is, especially on the microscopic level, the more blindingly obvious it has been that evolution isn't remotely scientific. The only reason it is still held as fact is because, as Dawkins unintentionally admitted, 'Evolution allows an atheist to be intellectually fulfilled,' to paraphrase him slightly.

It's how and why atheists claim science is 'theirs,' and then frame every argument as 'science vs irrational religion,' instead of 'our religious dogma vs others' religious dogma.' If you actually apply the scientific method, atheists are left without answers as to how the universe began, and how life came to exist.

They must force evolution to be taught, for the same reason that the political left cannot tolerate any breach in total control of the media narrative. Because as soon as they have an argument based on actual facts, it becomes clear that all they have is sophistry, and any amount of sunlight will wipe their position away.
This isn't about atheism versus religion, you dolt; that you even view it that way is part of the problem.

Guppy experiments can show actual, real-time evolution in human life-times:

This is just the latest recreation of an experiment done to prove evolution. Other experiments simple changed the background color of the tank they had the fish in, because the fish evolved to utilize better camouflage.

This is not a fight the Right should touch any part of this, and if Hershel doesn't walk this back or learn better and admit so, any support I had for him has evaporated.

This is part of why I'm a Registered Independent; the GOP has it's stupid moments, and the person's views matters more to me than what letter is by their name.

Fuck the two party system.
 

King Krávoka

An infection of Your universe.
It directly contradicts Genesis.
If you take Genesis literally, you have to accept that all variations of the human race had came into being in the course of only a few thousand years. This means that young earth creationists are more accepting of evolution than The Science, conversely, it also means that racists have overestimated the genetic permanence of human behaviors.
 

posh-goofiness

Well-known member
If you take Genesis literally, you have to accept that all variations of the human race had came into being in the course of only a few thousand years. This means that young earth creationists are more accepting of evolution than The Science, conversely, it also means that racists have overestimated the genetic permanence of human behaviors.
🤷‍♂️ Not my problem. I'm not a creationist.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
No they haven't. Like everything else with evolution as a theory of origins, they'll take tiny genetic variations, then claim that is the same thing as entire species changing.

The truth is, the more time has passed, the deeper our understanding of how complex life is, especially on the microscopic level, the more blindingly obvious it has been that evolution isn't remotely scientific. The only reason it is still held as fact is because, as Dawkins unintentionally admitted, 'Evolution allows an atheist to be intellectually fulfilled,' to paraphrase him slightly.

It's how and why atheists claim science is 'theirs,' and then frame every argument as 'science vs irrational religion,' instead of 'our religious dogma vs others' religious dogma.' If you actually apply the scientific method, atheists are left without answers as to how the universe began, and how life came to exist.

They must force evolution to be taught, for the same reason that the political left cannot tolerate any breach in total control of the media narrative. Because as soon as they have an argument based on actual facts, it becomes clear that all they have is sophistry, and any amount of sunlight will wipe their position away.
Well, I may disagree with your conclusions on the validity of evolution as a theory, but I can't argue against the call for more scientific rigor in general.
 

Bigking321

Well-known member
People are conflating adaptation to a environment with the theory of evolution. They aren't the same thing at all. They see any variation and are "evolution is true". Where it's actually just another breed of the same animal, not transformation into a new animal.

The theory of evolution is complete scientific garbage. Any rigorous analysis and it completely falls apart.

You just can't question it because it "proves" that they don't need God in their worldview.

It's a cornerstone of the atheist religion. You can't question it or you're a heretic.

This means that young earth creationists are more accepting of evolution than The Science
This is a bit of a misunderstanding.

You can have multiple types of a creature without changing the type of creature it is. Just look at dog breeds.

Radically different but still dogs.

Some base human type spread all over the planet with different environments and living conditions? Sure they will look different after a while. Still human though. Not changing into anything else.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
People are conflating adaptation to a environment with the theory of evolution. They aren't the same thing at all. They see any variation and are "evolution is true". Where it's actually just another breed of the same animal, not transformation into a new animal.

The theory of evolution is complete scientific garbage. Any rigorous analysis and it completely falls apart.

You just can't question it because it "proves" that they don't need God in their worldview.

It's a cornerstone of the atheist religion. You can't question it or you're a heretic.


This is a bit of a misunderstanding.

You can have multiple types of a creature without changing the type of creature it is. Just look at dog breeds.

Radically different but still dogs.

Some base human type spread all over the planet with different environments and living conditions? Sure they will look different after a while. Still human though. Not changing into anything else.
That's what evolution is though; adaptation to an environment. It's just that, over an extremely long period of time (far longer than the concept of the scientific method has existed; which goes to explain why it's a bit difficult to prove), those adaptations eventually result in something that may as well be considered a different species entirely.
 

Bigking321

Well-known member
That's what evolution is though; adaptation to an environment. It's just that, over an extremely long period of time (far longer than the concept of the scientific method has existed; which goes to explain why it's a bit difficult to prove), those adaptations eventually result in something that may as well be considered a different species entirely.
That's the theory.

Unfortunately there is basically no evidence of actual animal to animal transition.

Darwin himself stated that his theory would be proven false if the fossil record wasn't full of transitional creatures moving from one animal to another. And there aren't.

They don't teach that in school though. Just that the theory is real. Don't ever question it.

That's scientific right?
 

ShadowsOfParadox

Well-known member
And there aren't
Except you know... for all the ones that ARE there.

Just as an example off the top of my head, Australopithecus is a thing.

There's also Archaeopteryx.

Again, off the top of my head. There's plenty more if you actually go and check. There's plenty of breaks in the fossil record, but like, it's not like we have a total picture of all the "finished" species either.

There's an interesting question about "why do we only have tiny and giant dinosaurs" and the current 'most likely' answer is "Juveniles of the big ones", but, well, we don't exactly have fossils of juveniles either.

There's plenty of holes in the Fossil Record, as to be expected from a process that random chance has so much influence over.
 

Bigking321

Well-known member
Shrug.

Hey if it seems good enough to you I'm not going to stop you from believing whatever.

I would just point out that we've seen people in the sciences lie rather blatantly based on their politics. Why would this area be any different.

The fact that leftists push this narrative so hard would be a huge flashing warning light to me.

Unless people believe its the one area they wouldn't twist to their purposes.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
Shrug.

Hey if it seems good enough to you I'm not going to stop you from believing whatever.

I would just point out that we've seen people in the sciences lie rather blatantly based on their politics. Why would this area be any different.

The fact that leftists push this narrative so hard would be a huge flashing warning light to me.

Unless people believe its the one area they wouldn't twist to their purposes.
True; science has been politicized as of late, and has been pushing lies in service to a particular ideology. That said, throwing out the baby with the bathwater and indulging in identity politics is what got us into this mess in the first place. Taking the opposite position to one's enemies simply due to guilt by association is what someone who is utterly incapable of thinking for themselves does, and we have all justifiably derided the regressive left for doing exactly that. Don't sink to their level.
 

Bigking321

Well-known member
Don't sink to their level.

No worries there.

I've looked at their claims and how their positions are directly antithetical to the scientific method and come to my own conclusions.

They are pushing a narrative not backed by reality and insist it never be questioned.
 

ShadowsOfParadox

Well-known member
I've looked at their claims and how their positions are directly antithetical to the scientific method and come to my own conclusions.
Really not clear to me how demonstrating that species can change and then saying "and this is why all these super similar birbs that are just different enough to not breed with each other happened" is "antithetical to the scientific method".
It directly contradicts Genesis.
How though? Why exactly can't God's "Week of Creation" be a longer timeframe in reality compressed in the telling because human minds don't really grok things like "millions".
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Really not clear to me how demonstrating that species can change and then saying "and this is why all these super similar birbs that are just different enough to not breed with each other happened" is "antithetical to the scientific method".

How though? Why exactly can't God's "Week of Creation" be a longer timeframe in reality compressed in the telling because human minds don't really grok things like "millions".
Because some people do not understand how hard it is for fossils to get preserved at all, have no concept of things like 'geological unconformities' where gaps of millions of years between rock formations mean that 'transistionary' fossils may have been destroyed by natural processes, or that 99% of all life that has ever lived on this planet is extinct already and we have a fossil record that captures only brief snapshots into it.

They view the theory of evolution as a threat to thier religious views, because their church father's felt the same, and passed down a twisted view of evolution and what it means to them.

There is no conflict between the natural theory of evolution and any Abrahamic text or religion, unless someone is a young earth creationist who wants to take the Biblical time scale literally.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top