warri0r45

That is odd. Firstly your going on assumptions, not logic. Secondly, it's illogical. You put a cat in a box, 1 cat and after that you end up assuming there are two when there was clealy 1? Can't say I agree with that one. :?

I don't think that evolution was left out and there are no omissions God didn't intend. And even if the theory of evolution was left out, it would still contradict the current creation story in the Bible. If you need to know why I think they are incompatible, read my earlier posts. I generally don't like an interpretation where you assume the evolution theory is true and try to fit it in. Of course, your interpretation is up to you, but why would you believe in an unchanging truth with ommisions, be they god intended or not? The bible dosen't contain all truths of the universe, we all know that. Why is it that things were left out? God thought we couldn't handle it? Perhaps he wants us to fill the gaps with science. There are gaps, plenty of them, really. perhaps you would find it boring to have every possible truth at your disposal in a book. I know I would. That's why I use science to fill gaps. Again, what you believe about this is up to you. Whenever I argue beliefs (as I am doing; my comment on god wanting us to fill gaps with science is just that, a belief) I will always question others viewpoint, not try to change them.

Why not make an arabic tribute band - Sheep of Allah. As a matter of fact, I'm going to see said metal band in around a month. (the real one :lol: ) \m/

The Bible is sufficient for me to live my life by. That doesn't mean scientific discoveries are pointless. If science doesn't contradict the Bible I'm more then happy to believe in it. However, if I'm supposed to live by either the Bible or science aka man's speculation, my choice would be the Bible as I consider it to be the truth. Science can never be the truth, as it can change. It's a framework to explain some aspects of the world. It doesn't answer metaphysical question and that's why I consider philosophy to be more interesting. Philosophy is something everyone can discuss, whereas science requires observation and research, which is also the reason I'm not interested in a detailed evolutionary debate. Regarding your "if I was a theist view", I don't share your view. I do believe in hell, as it's pretty clear it's a reality if you read the Bible. However, even if we don't share our views we can still go to the pub. Though I'm not much of a drinker, so you'd be better off bringing someone else. While I will concede that science can never know something 100% and is accountable and therefore changable, I would argue that it is a better test of truth than the bible. We have different beliefs there about truth and where it comes from. No big deal. Here's why I think science is a better judge: 1) It's more objective than any religion and without a doubt the most objective system of inquiry man has ever produced. As a result, we can generally (although not always, case in point evolution) accept findings made and the method is such that anyone can analyse, criticise and even test for themselves if they so wish. 2) It's accountable and fluid; it canges. Your argument is that something that changes so much can't possibly be the bringer of truth. Fair enough, but for me that fact is proof of man's fallibility and weaknesses. We aren't perfect and can make mistakes thus science is set up so it can change and get rid of mistakes. By that logic I could argue that science is pointing closer towards the truth every day as we gain more knowlege, yet it will never have the exact coordinates of or a picture of truth as I'd say there is simply to great a scale of inquiry for that (take string theory, for example. People are theorising that the fundamentals of this universe are made of incresingly smaller particles. Strings are supposedly what make up everything according to this theory and they are smaller than any particle known). Added to this accountability, I have the advantage of knowing what science knows can never be completely wrong, only parts of it can be. You are fully entitled to believe that the bible is the absolute truth, but due to that fact that it is not accountable for change, if it is actually wrong and say, hinduism is correct, then you would be following something which is false. We believe different things on the whole truth issue, that's apparant. No big deal really. The only instance where I get annoyed with religion is when followers try and disprove credible science on the basis that it dosen't coincide with thier beliefs. I just wanted to clear up one thing with you. Do you accept that the Bible has omissions? If so, perhaps evolution was left out? perhaps eve, a woman, a symbol of humanity being made from dust and the rib of another living thing (although also a human) could be symbolic of the changes over time of evolution which brought about humans. Just a thought.

Why do you say that? They actually kill for a purpose - hunger - and generally don't kill if it doesn't serve a purpose. Perhaps some animals know better what is moral and what is not than some humans. I see you're taking morality on a purely evolutionary standpoint. I agree, you could argue an animal only killing for food is it's morality and killing within the species is 'morally' wrong for them as it in no way aids the species, as is the same for humans. I was, on this occasion, referring to morality which is more of a conciousness gone mad thing. You know, how some people latch on to an idea and get the idea in thier head that it's wrong and can never be right. Kinda like pro lifers. :lol: Anyway it's kinda late and I probably don't really know what I'm talking about, but what I think I was getting as was that animals don't have an opinionated morality like we humans do. I hope a word or two of that made sense.

Does anyone else find it incredibly interesting that human beings have become such an outright dominant force on this planet that we actually care for 'animal rights?' I know I do. Do you guys think a lion would be sympathetic towards you while ripping into your intestines for sweet nourishment? Of course, they don't have morality like we do and I'm not saying animal rights is a useless idea, but I just find it interesting. I actually believe we sould not treat animals like crap just because we 'can;' we should always have a reason, which we generally do. Oh and my stance on the sheeps making us organs? In a perfect world it would work perfectly with no pain for a blissfully ignorant sheep and everyone would have a perfectly suitable organ to use. Some problems will be overcome by the refinement of the science and some (mostly morality issues) we will just have to get over if we actually want this technology as a race.

Don't worry man, there's nothing more frustrating and dumbfounding than having to deal with everyone elses [cabbage]. I've been through similar stuff. My brother being an [wagon], my mother being an [wagon], my parents splitting up, other annoying/depressing things that I believe were everyone elses problems but I had to deal with them because I am a family member of these people. I'm too passive to get angry, generally think about my problems and don't heave them onto others and generally don't annoy or insult anyone which makes it all the more frustrating when other people's issues get heaved onto me. Sorry about talking about myself there and probably sounding like I have some sort of mental issues or something, but I can assure you I don't and my problems are generally other peoples. Sorry for perhaps sounding a bit selfish and arrogant in this post too, I just can't help but get frustrated. My advice would be to ride it out and stick to focusing on what you want from life. If someone pushes you down, pick yourself up with the peace of mind that you aim for something higher. Listen to music. Find something to pour out your emotions creatively and productively. This last one's a bit cliche, but never give up.

I consider the Bible to be the truth. Not man's speculation, that might or might not be true. It's not an option for me to live by some guys speculation, if it's not the truth I might aswell shred my Bible to pieces. Though I do agree that only God knows the whole story. Interesting. If we don't know everything and the bible does not contain every truth, why not try to uncover more of that truth? Or would you rather stay in the dark you're whole life? You see science (call it what you want, man's best guess, man's speculation, whatever. It has it's limitations but it is the best thing we have from an objectie standpoint) can fill in the blanks for us and I believe (if I were a theist) that god gave us this incredible gift of inquiry, logic and reasoning to help us find out what we don't know. I also believe (if I were a theist) that we will never truly know everything about this universe as that would make us on par with god. It's when we go to heaven (you see, there is no hell. It's only through our fear, tainted egos and shaded eyes that we don't see that god's love is eternal and there's no need to fear, need or want. Ever) that everything is revealed to us in some Nirvana-esque instance and we subsequently become on par with god. We get to be mates and go to the pub for a beer, you see?

That's Queenslanders for ya. :D

What else do we do, destroy it with antimatter? it has to go somewhere. And it's not as ad hoc as out of sight, out of mind implies. It is, would and would have to be highly regulated and scrutinised.

Put it in the middle of Australia and you'll get some problems. Not environmental hazards, the waste will be fine. What you'll get are greenies. :uhh: If there's anything we Aussies have it's wide open, arid, unhospitable, desolate space. ...and greenies. (the greenies are a political party which is 'environmentally friendly' yet they seem to have little alternative policy and alot of 'blah blah blah blah, YOU CANT DO THAT!!!!11!! blah blah blah.')

because there hasnt been millions of years. macro evolotion is a perfectly good theory until you factor in billions of years. i refuse to believe that i came from an ape. there is no way someone who evolved could come up with music, art, love, or anything beautiful. Please, read the part I bolded and upsized and try again. I don't want what information you don't agree with or your beliefs about it, I asked you to look through a scientists eyes. Just pretend. Flatter me. Try and explain to me given billions of years, why macro evolution would be such a rediculous concept. Edit: Sorry, I just noticed the part where you said 'macro evolution is a perfectly good idea when you factor in billions of years' :anxious: :? :oops: You can disregard the above.

You don't even have to do something bad. Just go near a cop, act reaaal suspiciously and start to run away. See what happens. :D :P

I'd probably say the break up of my parents marriage after 14 years, however, I could turn that around completely as it has made me the more introspective and creative person I am today. Other than that, well, being sick blows majorly. I hate it with a passion and as a result I've become a germophobe. :-X :uhh: I remember when I was sick once. I think I almost died; not because of the illness, but because of the weakness. I only ate a few biscuits one of the days I was sick and as a result became very physically weak and threw up the entire contents of my stomach while desperately trying to breathe. I was so weak I couldn't really stand properly or get up to move around. That sucked majorly.

Yes, most mutations are bad but no, most mutations don't make you infertile, they may just make you [developmentally delayed]ed physically, chemically or kill you. Granted, good mutations are rare, but things such as the evolution of sex, mieosis, bottleneck events, genetic drift, population genetics and environmental pressures mean that any good mutations that do occur will be multiplied where bad mutations are generally always killed off. And @ Viktor, no worries.

Warrior, see, I'm going to be honest here and I'm not trying to sound bigoted, but, you're looking at the face value of religion. Science and religion can fit together, I don't believe any religious text should be set in stone, why couldn't God be at the seat of the universe and still control Evolution, why can't God be nature. After all, they both control the universe. Essentially we believe in the same thing, to me God=Nature, one is just a deity who is more conscious to each person and the other is unconscious to each person, mentally. Two different outlooks, but also very similar at the same time. Dude, I agree with you. I'm responding to those who seem to think that they can't.

I'm curious why people who will accept micro evolution are so quick to dismiss macro evolution. Could you explain why it's so unbeleviable given a timeline of billions of years? I'm studying some key concepts of cell biology and genetics this semester and can't, for the life of me, understand why our DNA would somehow miraculously prevent us from conveying beneficial mutations to an extent where we see specieation (or speciesisation? the term I'm looking for is the creation of a new species). Try and respond without a belief too, please. Keep in mind the question is based on the evidence that the earth is around 4.6 billion years old. If you don't like that little piece of information, please, try not to quote bible verses or beliefs at me. Answer as if you were a scientist.

Sorry, it may sound stupid but I probably missed it. I haven't really been all that attentive with this topic for some reason. If you could point out where you answered my question, great, if not, I'm not really all that ingaged to be honest. okay to be honest i dont actually care about your opinion eithier, so in other words dont post because im not guna listen to you if you have that atitude :thumbsup: No need to be negative.

The people around you can change, die, abandon you etc. Sure I love the people around me and I do rely on them to some extent. But God is unchanging and is the only one I can truely, always, no matter what, rely on. Maybe it sounds like I'm reading out of a Bible since it's my source of truth. I know it annoys people but as I've said before, I'd rather you listen to the Bible than what I have to say. There are many ways of saying something that is true. Just because it's written by man and man isn't perfect, doesn't mean God can't use man to write a book the way he intended . Don't limit God. I'd still say if the christian God exists he didn't use evolution (I'm refering to macro-evolution). Adam and Eve are both guilty of eating the forbidden fruit. I don't think I've ever heard the question: Are we punished for Eve's sin? It's always Adam's sin. I'm curious why you would accept micro evolution but not macro. Ok, sure, your belief is that you can't, but that dosen't mean macro evolution didn't happen. This is where you're limiting yourself. Do you think that god would be limited by a book of what, 2000 pages? (terrible estimate probably, sorry). I seriously doubt that. The rest of the bible is in your head. All those nuts and bolts god gave you in the form of a logical brain. If micro evolution happens, which it does, then why can't macro evolution happen? It just takes a little longer but follows essentially the same principals and logic. Why should god's creation be limited to one stagnant, unchanging existance? And why should god and his word be limited to a finite book? I just though of it and it makes me curious why god would want such a thing to happen. Anyway, as a sidenote you've redeemed yourself to me (although from what you've said, you don't care what others think, which is fine) when you said you believe that the bible is the source of truth. It's refreshing once in a while for a believer to actually recognise what they follow is a belief in an absolute truth and not an absolute truth.

Sorry, it may sound stupid but I probably missed it. I haven't really been all that attentive with this topic for some reason. If you could point out where you answered my question, great, if not, I'm not really all that ingaged to be honest.

Pass the weed, please. "lucky"? I think not. :wall: You lie, [bleep]!! I am currently 27 years old,(HEY KIDS, SOMETHING TO LOOK FORWARD TO --->) 12 years of the same [cabbage]. Edit: Cabbage..once again... 3 You think your experience will be the same for everyone? I wouldn't even say I went through a phase of thinking life is meaningless. I'm sure it does pass for most well ajusted people.

Take the Power Back - Rage Against the Machine. =P~

8-) and; \

im not going to get into an argument with you over this. all im going to say is that you are indeed an idiot. in a room where everyone want silence, you are the man who yells at everyone to be quiet, and adds to the noise, rather than to set the example and be quiet yourself. you want to stop me from getting attention by answering me. good idea \ by the way im not agreeing with his assumptions. im going to gnore all toher spam that this guy posts as well :XD: so lets get back on topic \ How 'bout you set an example than and end yourself? You know, since you have no emotion and all. ding 10k posts >_< can you not read? are you really that thick? re read my first post, it does not say i want to kill myself. If there's no point to life and everything we ever do is so rediculously insignificant and you don't want to die, why do you want to live?

Yes, that's exactly the point I was getting at. People did that. People provide aid, people give to charities and people cause the problem. Where's god's grace in all of this? Can you answer the question in my previous post?