Poll for Atheists and Agnostics...
Pages
| Author | Topic: Poll for Atheists and Agnostics... |
|---|---|
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1823
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 09:03
Profile
Homepage
quote:From my experience nearly all Christians (me included) believe in evolution to a certain extent (even some of my more fundementalist leaning friends believe in "micro evolution"). I would then say that most Christians believe in evolution to a large extent. After all, evolution seems like a pretty good creation that God has made. -------------------- Riot Shields Voodoo Economics It's just business Cattle prods And the IMF I trust I can rely on your vote Posts: 530 | Registered: Sunday, September 1 2002 07:00 |
|
Member # 165
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 09:33
Profile
Homepage
Some of us go so far to believe that God's only real role in the creation was committing foul play with some amino acids. Call me a heretic, but I don't like arguing with science. -------------------- desperance -- je me souviens arena -- et je me souviens de vous Posts: 2449 | Registered: Monday, October 15 2001 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 09:33
Profile
Homepage
I was really surprised when I first came across a Christian who didn't believe in evolution. It just hadn't occurred to me that such people could exist. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 09:49
Profile
Homepage
Silly Khoth. Didn't you understand human nature? Someone will believe in anything, from science to scientology to those health insurance advertisements. I take something similar to Alec's view of God. Someone had to come up with all those laws of physics that keep the universe together, but beyond that everything can run quite nicely on its own. The Bible is mostly PR and heavily edited now, whatever it may once have been, but it does have some good bits if you pick and choose carefully. —Alorael, who was raised Jewish, more or less, with a splash of Christianity thrown in for good measure. He currently considers himself Jewish, sort of, but he doesn't believe in organized religion. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 147
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 12:27
Profile
If Satanism is selling strange blue crystals and talking about the mystical powers of Stonhenge and the unity of all life at great length, new-agers are Satanists. Posts: 1000 | Registered: Thursday, October 11 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 48
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 14:56
Profile
quote:As for me personally, I believe that micro-evolution (i.e. an organism adapting to an enviornment) is definitely possible, but I don't believe in the idea of one species evolving into an entirely different one. Here are a few of my main doubts about evolution: 1. Isn't evolution about "one common ancestor evolving into all organisms on earth"? Nowadays, we see species going endangered then extinct swiftly. We don't see new species appearing, though. 2. Can you find a half-fish and half-frog today? No. Darwin said that they are extinct- but there is a chance that they never existed (or they could have co-existed with amphibians AND fish but went extinct due to natural selection). 3. Theoratically, the "speed of evolution" increases with time. If this is true, we would ahve evolved into another species already :D (Then again, you don't have to agree with me :) ) -------------------- "Father, forgive them, for they don't know what they are doing.-Luke 23:34 Posts: 329 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 14
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 16:47
Profile
It's not that I think religion is bad, it's just that organized religion mucks things up. Ad the movie Dogma said, why do you have to go and muck up a perfectly good idea by building a belief system on it? While one can believe in the lessons, values, etc. of a religion, that does not necessarily mean one has to follow along with the organized religion. There are a lot of examples of organized religion being counterproductive. -------------------- Dragyn Bob "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here!"-The Divine Comedy Posts: 1481 | Registered: Thursday, September 27 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 17:01
Profile
Homepage
Against my better judgement, I will respond to Andy. quote:We see species dying out constantly because humans are very quickly changing climates and terrain, crowding out wildlife, and making life very difficult for other species. Evolution, in contrast, takes place over millions of years, or at the very least tens of thousands of years. And even before humans, there were periods of mass extinctions at times of rapid change (the Ice Age, etc.) followed by more stable periods. quote:[/b] There are lungfish, which can breathe both in and out of water, and a variety of fish that can spend long periods of time on land. Then there are amphibians themselves, which have a stage in life where they are essentially fish, then another where they are closer to reptiles. Then the reptiles finally severed their ties to large bodies of water. If that isn't a clear progression of evolution, I can't think of one. quote:I've never heard this theory. The speed of evolution isn't constant, but I've never heard any theories that put it any faster than ten thousand years or so for significant change. Homo sapiens sapiens hasn't been around all that long in evolutionary terms. And before Homo sapiens sapiens, we were just Homo sapiens, which evolved from Homo habilis, and so on. —Alorael, who is sure he has opened the floodgates to a new evolution argument. Oh well. It's been too long since there was a good unsolvable argument on Spiderweb. Almost a week, maybe! Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Friday, May 23 2003 21:33
Profile
Homepage
quote:I believe the proper term, sir, is an opiate. :P I could expand on Alorael's points a bit, but I'm tired and therefore incoherent, and agree with them anyway. -------------------- We're all amazed but not amused By all the things that you said you'd do. You're much concerned but not involved by Decisions that are made by you But we are sick and tired of hearing your song, Telling us how you are going to change right from wrong, 'Cause if you really want to hear our views, You haven't done nothin'. Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 00:10
Profile
Homepage
Adding a bit to the point 3, evolution slows down over time if anything, as niches are filled and genetic variation is reduced. Also, improvements in the DNA copying mechanism reduce the mutation rate and slow things down too, probably. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 14
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 03:47
Profile
But at some point, we will devise our own means of 'evolution' and create genetic freaks! Then we can improve on nature and make ourselves horrendously overpowered and destroy the ecosystem even more! HOORJ -------------------- Dragyn Bob "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here!"-The Divine Comedy Posts: 1481 | Registered: Thursday, September 27 2001 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1823
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 05:09
Profile
Homepage
The irony of that is that it is already, in a way, true. We step around natural selection by all the machines and stuff that we have made. Instead of letting our environment kill us, we change it, or adapt in a non biological way, by, for example, inventing sun block. -------------------- Riot Shields Voodoo Economics It's just business Cattle prods And the IMF I trust I can rely on your vote Posts: 530 | Registered: Sunday, September 1 2002 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 341
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 05:16
Profile
Exactly. We no longer adapt to our environment, we adapt our environment to fit us. It's because the advent of civilisation killed the idea of the alpha male. Today, somepone who is extrordinarily clever or strong is perhaps slightly more likely to have children that someone who isn't, but most people still have as good a chance of procreation as anyone else, and the prinicple of monogamy has destroyed the idea that the best male can spread his genes throughout a species. -------------------- "This stolen joke proves I have a sense of humour!" "This tired old proverb proves I am profound" "This hyperlink to someone who doesn't know me proves I am popular!" Nothing like a bandwagon. Except maybe irony. Posts: 159 | Registered: Monday, December 3 2001 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 08:29
Profile
Homepage
Medicine is also anti-evolution. In the past, sickly people or people with, say, cystic fibrosis didn't live long enough to have children. Now, almost any set of genes, no matter how unhealthy, can be survived with for quite some time. So every gene, no matter how damaging, is reproduced. —Alorael, who sees a more likely effect of genetic manipulation than superpowered humans. Instead, it's likely that someone will miss the importance of one critical but misunderstood gene, remove it from everyone because it seems harmful, and consign the entire species to death by a new virus. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 341
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 08:53
Profile
Whilst we are irradicating many previously deadly illnesses, at the same time we are creating new ones. A parituclar strain of disease could become resistant to antibiotics and other cures, whilst our treatment of the environment is increasing the risk of asthma and other allergies and even life-theratening illnesses such as cancer. -------------------- "This stolen joke proves I have a sense of humour!" "This tired old proverb proves I am profound" "This hyperlink to someone who doesn't know me proves I am popular!" Nothing like a bandwagon. Except maybe irony. Posts: 159 | Registered: Monday, December 3 2001 08:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 09:07
Profile
Homepage
quote:Medicine is not really anti-evolution. It helps preserve genetic variation that is harmful now but might be useful later. Reproducing damaging genes is not bad for evolution, unless there are so many of them that it wipes out a good gene. Gould wrote a nice essay about that, but I forget which. Anyway, even with medicine, we can still evolve to be sexier. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Member # 165
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 09:13
Profile
Homepage
Saying that civilization has harmed evolution is patently insane. We're evolving to suit the parameters of our niche, and that niche is human civilization. We no longer need increased size and strength or perfect health to survive, so these are not significant winnowing factors in procreation, and are not taken into consideration by natural selection. [ Saturday, May 24, 2003 09:14: Message edited by: el presidente ] -------------------- desperance -- je me souviens arena -- et je me souviens de vous Posts: 2449 | Registered: Monday, October 15 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 14
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 09:55
Profile
Even though we no longer require increased size and strength, or natural weapons, people are still trying to do this. I mean face it, it would be cool to be a 10 foot hulk with claws and a barbed tail and Einstein's brain. -------------------- Dragyn Bob "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here!"-The Divine Comedy Posts: 1481 | Registered: Thursday, September 27 2001 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 341
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 11:13
Profile
Alec, that is in part my point. In our Civilisation, there are no defining factors that make one person significantly more likely to procreate than another. As you say strength and health are no longer factors because really there are none. In effect everyone is as likely to procreate as anyone else (assuming they can - but IVF and test-tube children mean we are no longer neccesarily erradicating infertility), and as such evolution has come to an end. The human race hasn't really evolved much at all since the beginning of proper civilisation - any change is due to imrovements in evironment. You say we are evolving to suit civilisation, but it is difficult to become more civilised. Traits like pacifism aren't going to make someone more likely to have children, and even if we all became more intelligent the world still needs low-skilled jobs to keep the machine working. If civilisation is the goal of evolution, and we have achieved it, then surely it has put an end for the necessity of evolution? (admitedly thats a very simple explaination, but ther are some very simple people...) Edit: I concur with DragynBob. I want big claws. [ Saturday, May 24, 2003 11:28: Message edited by: wychwenthal ] -------------------- "This stolen joke proves I have a sense of humour!" "This tired old proverb proves I am profound" "This hyperlink to someone who doesn't know me proves I am popular!" Nothing like a bandwagon. Except maybe irony. Posts: 159 | Registered: Monday, December 3 2001 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 48
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 11:27
Profile
quote:This reminds me of an article (this is definitely not made up, but I forgot where I found it) that says someone found a "20,000-year-old dinosaur fossil." How can that happen when evolution should theoratically take that long? :D It looks like geologic dating is still a far-from-perfect method. (We are assuming that radioactive elements decay at the same rate for thousands or even millions of years. But an assumption may or may not be true.) Since dinosaurs are believed to have gone extinct 65 millions years ago, this result (if it's correct) is indeed strange. Can anyone find an explanation for these "outliers" in evolution? quote:I personally would say that it depends on the religion. Look at the conflicts between the U.S. and Arab nations today. It can be defined as a inter-religion conflict. Take Islam for example. Muhummad originally made the religion to me non-violent. But his later followers started the idea of "holy war." Due to this fact, many people today have the stereotype that "Islamic people are people who know nothing but hate and jihad." Or take Christianity for example. The Bible tells us to love our enemies, but frankly, most people (myself included) find this hard to be done in real life. And unfortunately I have seen some very "intolerant" Christians, i.e. those who use their religion as a weapon to condemn other people who are defined as "sinful" in the Bible. They totally forgot the fact that the Bible also says that we are ALL sinners. Since I tolerate people who are different, including believers of other religions and non-believers, I found this very saddening. See, the problem is: despite the fact that most religion are good by themselves, some believers distorted them way beyond recovery. [ Saturday, May 24, 2003 11:41: Message edited by: y0d1n2a3 ] -------------------- "Father, forgive them, for they don't know what they are doing.-Luke 23:34 Posts: 329 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 11:30
Profile
Homepage
I think it's wrong to say that evolution has a goal. It just does what it does, with no concern for what happens. Anyway, in a hundred years' time, there will be plenty of selection pressure in favour of being able to survive in a nuclear wasteland :P Really, humans are only the "best" species because what counts as "best" has been chosen by humans. Rats are at least as successful as humans, and probably have much better long-term survival prospects. And don't forget God's inordinate fondness for beetles. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 11:49
Profile
Homepage
Radioactive decay rates: We do have indirect evidence (spectra from distant stars) that the laws of physics were pretty much the same millions of years ago. There is uncertainty in radioactive dating, but on the whole it is pretty good. As for your 20,000 year old dinosaur, I'd guess it was a fake or a mistake, or some oddity with the particular circumstances of that dinosaur. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 48
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 11:56
Profile
quote:That is possible. Theoratically, if an organism can distinguish between Carbon-12 and Carbon-14 and has the ability to minimize the intake of C-14, it is possible that carbon dating can find it to be "already dead" for a few thousand years when it is still alive. :D (The opposite might have happened as well.) -------------------- "Father, forgive them, for they don't know what they are doing.-Luke 23:34 Posts: 329 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 12:08
Profile
Homepage
Could you try to dig up a source for this thing? Carbon dating a fossil sounds like an odd thing to do, rather like using an eggtimer to time a marathon. -------------------- Grammar wenches beware: This is the house that the malt that the rat that the cat that the dog that the cow that the maiden that the man that the priest that the cock that the farmer kept waked married kissed milked tossed worried killed ate lay in. My Website desperance.net - Leave your sanity at the door Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Saturday, May 24 2003 12:32
Profile
Homepage
Alec, there is no longer anything that helps procreation, except possibly attractiveness. Evolution in a biological sense isn't going anywhere. However, civilization has brought the new concept of meme evolution. That's what we see when our customs change. The rise of Christianity, the creation of Protestantism, and the current trend towards atheism visible all over are all part of meme evolution. —Alorael, who would guess, knowing nothing about this fossil, that the hypothesis was that some dinosaur species were still around 20,000 years ago. There's nothing wrong with that theory, especially if those were evolutionary dead-ends that died out. It may not be right, but there's no reason the theory has to be wrong. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |