Need to prove to my mom that Evolution is real

[jimbob27]

Evolution is as false as Christian creationism.

Indeed.

I believe we were all genetically engineered by and extinct species of dolphin.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Evolution is as false as Christian creationism.

Then I'm sure you will have no trouble demonstrating it.

 

[Dionysius]

Evolution is as false as Christian creationism.

okaaay then. what theory, exactly, do you support as opposed to
the above? or were you just being contrary?

EDIT: i posted this before i saw the other two posts on garric`s nonsensical statement.

 

[mdwh]

You need to prove things to others, forcing your belifs on them? You are one sick guy! What your Mom thinks is her choice and she isn't harming anyone. So why do you care? Just leave your mom alone, you aren't being a hero you know! And the other posts seem to convince me that you don't like chirstian things and are trying to convert people to athiesm. Ok;

A "debate" involves both people expressing their views, and trying to convince the other. No one has suggested that she doesn't have a right to her viewpoint.

#2 Being and Athiest doesn't please any God or Grant you any Afterlife so what's the point of converting people to it. It won't solve any of the worlds problems.

So... what's the point of converting to Christianity? I hope you're not trying to appeal to the flawed Pascal's Wager here...

And actually, problems are solved by science. Whilst there's no problem if people believe religion, it is a problem when they use this as a substitute for science.

#3 Keep in mind even though you may have scientifical evedence agasit God, there is lots of scientifical and archilogiacal evedence for him.

Er, like what?

 

[Dionysius]

#3 Keep in mind even though you may have scientifical evedence agasit God, there is lots of scientifical and archilogiacal evedence for him.

Er, like what?

Precisely...

 

[GoodSarmatian]

#3 Keep in mind even though you may have scientifical evedence agasit God, there is lots of scientifical and archilogiacal evedence for him.

There is no evidence for God. There is evidence people believe in God for quite a long time.
The is no scientific evidence against God. It is impossible to proof something doesn't exist.
There is evidence that many things "gods" told their "prophets" are complete nonsense...

I believe in God, but I don't believe in some books written a thousand years ago when people were trying to explain the world without scientific method.

 

[garric]

okaaay then. what theory, exactly, do you support as opposed to
the above? or were you just being contrary?

EDIT: i posted this before i saw the other two posts on garric`s nonsensical statement.

You can neither demonstrate creationism nor (macro)evolution.

It's funny how people berate Christianity because supposedly the people who practice it got all of their information from some book or their priest, yet people who believe in evolution too got their info from some book or were taught this theory by a science teacher. It's sad really how people can't seem to take a step back from their indoctrination and look at the big picture.

 

[Dionysius]

You can neither demonstrate creationism nor (macro)evolution.

It's funny how people berate Christianity because supposedly the people who practice it got all of their information from some book or their priest, yet people who believe in evolution too got their info from some book or were taught this theory by a science teacher. It's sad really how people can't seem to take a step back from their indoctrination and look at the big picture.

while i understand what you mean when you say evolutionists
just read it in a book,
EVOLUTION IS THE BIG PICTURE!

and you still havent told me what you reckon.
what theory do you support, if any?

 

[garric]

while i understand what you mean when you say evolutionists just read it in a book,
EVOLUTION IS THE BIG PICTURE!

Evolution is the big picture? Okay, what is that even supposed to mean?

 

[Dionysius]

it is the correct theory. a theory, yes, but as it has
been mentioned before atoms are just a theory.
do i have to type out the bloody theory for you?
selective breeding is a sort of evolution.
not actual evolutiuon but see:

farmer picks fastest growing chick to breed-->
chicken that grew fastest has chicks-->[chicks inherit fast growth]
farmer picks fastest growing chick to breed-->
chicken that grew fastest has chicks-->[chicks inherit fast growth]
farmer picks fastest growing chick to breed-->

etcetra, etcetera. eventually you end up with a morbidly obese
chicken that cant really breed.
but as far as nature was concerned; fat chickens were clearly doing
well, a very long line of them survived and bred; hey, why
not make this chick a little faster growing again.
survival of the fittest. in this case, fattest, as thats what
was surviving to breed.evolution is survival of the fittest,
and if a certain trait is proving useful it will end up increasing
or growing [or whatever].

 

[mdwh]

It's funny how people berate Christianity because supposedly the people who practice it got all of their information from some book or their priest,

Strawman alert!

yet people who believe in evolution too got their info from some book or were taught this theory by a science teacher.

Not this one again.

Question: Where did the priest get his information? Where did the scientists get their information?

The issue is not that teachers or priests might lie to us (what, you're seriously suggesting there's a worldwide conspiracy where scientists just make this stuff up? LOL) - the issue is with how that knowledge appears in the first place.

And no, I wouldn't believe one single book or teacher. I will believe it when multiple books, teachers, and scientists all say it.

What I find interesting is people who are unwilling to believe anything scientific, because there's a tiny non-zero chance it might be wrong, but they believe other things where there is no evidence whatsoever.

 

[Eukaryote]

There is no evidence for God. There is evidence people believe in God for quite a long time.
The is no scientific evidence against God. It is impossible to proof something doesn't exist.
There is evidence that many things "gods" told their "prophets" are complete nonsense...

There is scientifical evedence of God if you pay attention, talk to smart people who have education, and watch a few documentries of course, I don't actully remember any scientific evedence of God I've leared but since I'm not a mormon I don't need to, I just need to know it's there. I'm content with that.

 

[Eukaryote]

So... what's the point of converting to Christianity? I hope you're not trying to appeal to the flawed Pascal's Wager here...

I'm not trying to convert people to christianity, and I'm not saying that will help anything, I'm just pointing out that converting people to athiesm doesn't help anyone either. Man, I feel like MobBoss in here!


Keep in mind, I'm not a creationist*, just a guy who like to argue.


*I'm not actully an eveloutionist either, I'm more of an Idon'tcareist. It doesn't help you to conduct science or worship God so I focus on the fact that I'm here, not how I got here.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm just pointing out that converting people to athiesm doesn't help anyone either.

Especially if they don't have a moral centre outside of their religion. However, converting people to a mindset that allows science to operate helps those who need solutions from science.

 

[mdwh]

I'm not trying to convert people to christianity, and I'm not saying that will help anything, I'm just pointing out that converting people to athiesm doesn't help anyone either. Man, I feel like MobBoss in here!

Well I don't see how converting people to Christianity (or especially to believing Creationism) will help.

And whilst I've no great desire to convert people away from Christianity in general, I do think there is benefit in converting people from believing in Creationism. For one, they'd stop interfering with the school systems and trying to mess up teaching of science for the next few generations.

 

[warpus]

It doesn't help you to conduct science or worship God so I focus on the fact that I'm here, not how I got here.

If people hadn't been 'conducting science' for the last couple hundred years we wouldn't have computers, cars, planes, there would be no internet, no space program, no fast food franchises, ...

I don't know about you, but some of these things do help me.

 

[Smidlee]

If people hadn't been 'conducting science' for the last couple hundred years we wouldn't have computers, cars, planes, there would be no internet, no space program, no fast food franchises, ...

All these examples wasn't just for the sake of science. All of these examples made huge profits. That;'s the reason why you can't buy a washing machine which uses no detegents and 1/3 the water and power even though it was invented over 15 years ago. ( Of course this machine would kill detergent companies profit) The Almighty Dollar rules even when it comes to science.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

We're working on fixing that, if it's even true.

 

[warpus]

All these examples wasn't just for the sake of science. All of these examples made huge profits. That;'s the reason why you can't buy a washing machine which uses no detegents and 1/3 the water and power even though it was invented over 15 years ago. ( Of course this machine would kill detergent companies profit) The Almighty Dollar rules even when it comes to science.

It might, but if it wasn't for science we wouldn't even have washing machines.

 

[damunzy]

Are the stars "embedded" in a firmament?

Like maybe, Dark Matter or Dark Energy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

from Wikipedia entry on Dark Matter
Only about 4% of the total energy density in the universe (as inferred from gravitational effects) can be seen directly. About 22% is thought to be composed of dark matter. The remaining 74% is thought to consist of dark energy, an even stranger component, distributed diffusely in space.