A New Human Species

[riflearm2]

We are getting closer to that time when the creationists need to claim that previous interpretations about the bible were wrong, thus traditionally held Christian beliefs need to be revised to match what the bible supposedly really intended to say:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mysterious-new-human-species-emerges-from-heap-of-fossils/

 

[extragreen]

You have absolutely nothing to offer regarding evolution...until you can prove how that in the beginning all life forms reproduced asexually.....but then how some managed to reproduce sexually.

 

[riflearm2]

That's the beauty of the difference between what science can offer and what religion attempts to offer.

Science doesn't claim to have all of the answers. It has ideas based on intelligence about most things; some are more definitive than others. It allows for more information to be discovered and those ideas to be assessed during these periods to provide a more detailed, accurate answer.

On the other hand, religion claims to have all of the answers exactly how it says. It is rigid with absolutely no flexibility. But, when that intelligence (known as "science") definitively proves things inaccurate with religion, those rigid religious beliefs are suddenly flexible enough to change things and claim it was simply a result of poor translation, literal vs. figurative complications, and misinterpretations.

You guys are wrong on this one, too. I don't have a definitive answer to how it all started. But, the accompanying beliefs that your kind believes encompasses the topic is wrong, wrong, and more wrong.

 

[extragreen]

And when science can't explain, not to mention prove, how things started, nor how these things occurred, they are so rigid in their belief that they simply state that evolution is true.....regardless.

 

[HerdandHokies]

And when science can't explain, not to mention prove, how things started, nor how these things occurred, they are so rigid in their belief that they simply state that evolution is true.....regardless.

Evolution doesn't have anything to do with abiogenesis, and there is an absolutely overwhelming amount of evidence that evolution is how life on earth took its current form.

But I guess since we don't know literally every detail it must have been a sky wizard.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Sky Wizard vs Xenu....same difference.

 

[extragreen]

You guys don't like your beliefs questioned, do you?

 

[CockyHerd]

Much like previous discoveries, those fossils/bones were placed there by the creator to test our faith......

(Sarcasm)

 

[extragreen]

No, I'm telling you, those bones and fossils are a result of some mud and chemical processes that magically combined. And somehow, from somewhere, at some unknown time, that mud was stirred up and became alive. After that, some really unbelievable and strange things happened.....

 

[CockyHerd]

Or a full grown man grew from dust.......He was lonely, so a woman was made from one of his ribs.

 

[extragreen]

Or a full grown man grew from dust.......He was lonely, so a woman was made from one of his ribs.

Not grew, formed.

 

[HerdandHokies]

You guys don't like your beliefs questioned, do you?

By people who have some clue what they're talking about? Sure, it helps you learn.

From you? Sure, it's like working a punching bag.

Edit: And it isn't so much my beliefs but the beliefs of practically the entire scientific community, which could be wrong but given the amount and quality of evidence very probably isn't.

 

[extragreen]

By people who have some clue what they're talking about? Sure, it helps you learn.

From you? Sure, it's like working a punching bag.

Edit: And it isn't so much my beliefs but the beliefs of practically the entire scientific community, which could be wrong but given the amount and quality of evidence very probably isn't.

The scientific community is a very good thing, sometimes a great thing, that has contributed greatly to the human family. But when you attempt to exclude God from the universe he created, it's not a good thing. Science and religion can coexist without one interfering with the other. You want to believe man arrived on this planet by coincidence, go ahead, doesn't really bother me. You want to believe that man and ape came from a common ancestor, fine, just don't expect me to accept it.

 

[riflearm2]

Science and religion can coexist without one interfering with the other. .

I agree. It's just that science and the leading current world religions can't co-exist because science proves much of their religious texts as inaccurate.

 

[HerdandHokies]

The scientific community is a very good thing, sometimes a great thing, that has contributed greatly to the human family. But when you attempt to exclude God from the universe he created, it's not a good thing. Science and religion can coexist without one interfering with the other. You want to believe man arrived on this planet by coincidence, go ahead, doesn't really bother me. You want to believe that man and ape came from a common ancestor, fine, just don't expect me to accept it.

You can accept or not accept whatever you'd like, but the fact remains that an overwhelming amount of evidence supports evolution. You choosing to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore it just because you don't like it makes you a delusional person.

 

[extragreen]

You can accept or not accept whatever you'd like, but the fact remains that an overwhelming amount of evidence supports evolution. You choosing to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore it just because you don't like it makes you a delusional person.

Your beliefs do not eliminate mine. If you think they do, you are delusional.

 

[extragreen]

I agree. It's just that science and the leading current world religions can't co-exist because science proves much of their religious texts as inaccurate.

Name a couple of things that science proves are wrong.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Science doesn't really prove things in the past right or wrong. It takes available evidence and gives you an idea of how things happened.

Could some omnipotent being have created the world 5000 years ago and 'backdated' everything (including fossil records, anthropological sites, geography, everything) to look like the universe was billions of years old? Well, that's neither provable or disprovable, so if you want to believe it there really isn't a counter argument. There's also no reason to think that's true, like most of the nondisprovable religious arguments.

 

[riflearm2]

Name a couple of things that science proves are wrong.

Prove we really aren't just characters in a video game that a really smart three old is controlling in the year 2251.

Let's see if this one goes over your head.

 

[extragreen]

Science doesn't really prove things in the past right or wrong. It takes available evidence and gives you an idea of how things happened.

Could some omnipotent being have created the world 5000 years ago and 'backdated' everything (including fossil records, anthropological sites, geography, everything) to look like the universe was billions of years old? Well, that's neither provable or disprovable, so if you want to believe it there really isn't a counter argument. There's also no reason to think that's true, like most of the nondisprovable religious arguments.

See, you believe that the dating method being used is absolutely correct and is enough evidence to ridicule what other people believe.

 

[extragreen]

Prove we really aren't just characters in a video game that a really smart three old is controlling in the year 2251.

Let's see if this one goes over your head.

Evidently this one went over your head...."Name a couple of things that science proves are wrong."

 

[riflearm2]

Evidently this one went over your head...."Name a couple of things that science proves are wrong."

The earth isn't flat like the bibles ruins numerous times and like Christianity taught for hundreds of years.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Humans have been around for more than 6500 years.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Pi equals 3.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Geocentrism it is!

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

I could be here all night doing this.

 

[HerdandHokies]

See, you believe that the dating method being used is absolutely correct and is enough evidence to ridicule what other people believe.

If the dating method were the only piece of evidence that statement still wouldn't make any sense but since there are many different pieces of evidence it makes even less. If it quacks like a duck it might not be a duck. If it looks, smells, tastes, acts and quacks like a duck then it's probably a duck. And anybody saying "no it's a biological robot duck sent here to confuse us" is, while we can't prove he's wrong, a silly person.

 

[extragreen]

The earth isn't flat like the bibles ruins numerous times and like Christianity taught for hundreds of years.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Humans have been around for more than 6500 years.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Pi equals 3.

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

Geocentrism it is!

"Oh, we didn't mean that literally."

I could be here all night doing this.

Would that be similar to ........

Luminiferous aether,,,,,oops
Miasmatic theory of disease...oops
Stress theory of peptic ulcers...oops
Immovable continents...oops
The “four humours” theory of human physiology:...oops

If you're going to discredit the Bible using your examples, then let's discredit science using the same logic.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Except science replaced those theories with new ones, based on new evidence. Religion sticks it's fingers in its ears and goes "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" until it becomes undeniable they are wrong, then they keep doing it for a while after that, then they go "GOD DID IT" and pretend they won.

 

[extragreen]

Except science replaced those theories with new ones, based on new evidence. Religion sticks it's fingers in its ears and goes "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" until it becomes undeniable they are wrong, then they keep doing it for a while after that, then they go "GOD DID IT" and pretend they won.

And there you have it......science can be wrong. But the whole time they are wrong, and until another theory comes along, they are right and the Bible is wrong.

 

[HerdandHokies]

No, science is drawing a conclusion based on evidence and the bible is a fairytale.

 

[extragreen]

No, science is drawing a conclusion based on evidence and the bible is a fairytale.

Be a little more scientific and prove it's a fairy tale. You've quickly abandoned science and entered into pure speculation.

 

[GK4Herd]

Well...I knew a guy who tried to convince his family that his girlfriend's pregnancy was a result of asexual reproduction. There's always that.

And "four humours" theory of psychology? Don't tell me you are using the science of Ancient Greece to prove your point. Lol.

 

[GK4Herd]

And here's the article EG lifted these items from...

http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2010/1...ularly-wrong-widely-held-scientific-theories/


I find it ironic that you have to use a science blog to prove science doesn't get everything right. Also, interesting to note that geocentrism, a philosophy that the church punished Galileo for debunking, is also on the same list.

 

[extragreen]

Well...I knew a guy who tried to convince his family that his girlfriend's pregnancy was a result of asexual reproduction. There's always that.

And "four humours" theory of psychology? Don't tell me you are using the science of Ancient Greece to prove your point. Lol.

Don't tell me you want to disregard a science that was a major influence on medical practice and teaching for 2000 years up until about 1800.

 

[extragreen]

And here's the article EG lifted these items from...

http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2010/1...ularly-wrong-widely-held-scientific-theories/


I find it ironic that you have to use a science blog to prove science doesn't get everything right. Also, interesting to note that geocentrism, a philosophy that the church punished Galileo for debunking, is also on the same list.

I find it ironic that people attempt to debunk a belief system with another belief system.

 

[GK4Herd]

Don't tell me you want to disregard a science that was a major influence on medical practice and teaching for 2000 years up until about 1800.

No...I want to revel in the progress of the science of medicine. The advancement of science has saved literally millions of lives through the development of vaccines. Just a few hundred years ago, disease eradicated nearly entire populations of people throughout the world. Today...thanks to the advancement of science we have developed vaccines that has eliminated the most feared diseases of our past. We have mapped the entire genome sequence of the human body enabling us to deliver methods of treatment with efficiency not known even 10 years ago. We are operating on children still in the womb. Our life expectancy, as well as the quality of our life is all improving because of the advancements of science. We are performing surgery that is so minimally invasive due to the advancement of science that operations that were both life threatening and laid you up for months are now being done on an outpatient basis.

You can google all the failures of science you want, but it only serves to show how much you misunderstand what science is actually about. Science is about progressing the body of knowledge...not declaring something is a certain way and sticking with that belief in light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and when it becomes so patently absurd saying it wasn't ever meant literally anyway. Science is about progressing the truth. If that means you change a way of thinking so be it. But without the scientific process and the fact that science holds itself accountable, we'd would still be stalled in those ancient ways of thinking that you googled to prove your point.

Sadly, you don't even realize that you didn't disprove science, you actually proved how effective it is. If we applied the "religious method" of doing things to science we'd still be stuck back in the days of Ancient Greece that you brought up. We'd just disregard all the evidence, much of which is overwhelming, and continue to defend it with contortionist arguments that would make Houdini proud.

Say hello to Socrates for me while you're combing through the centuries looking for the bumps in the road to progress. Me...I'm going to live in a world that has been made better by the advances of people who dared to learn from their mistakes. Because science b****es.

 

[extragreen]

I've already praised the virtues of science...in this thread. But it is out of its realm when it comes to origin of life and evolution.

 

[GreenDuke]

Prove we really aren't just characters in a video game that a really smart three old is controlling in the year 2251.

Let's see if this one goes over your head.

You just went all St Elsewhere with this post.

 

[GK4Herd]

You just went all St Elsewhere with this post.

I wasn't sure what he was referencing, but I'm sure it was a Twilight Zone plot at one time.

 

[HerdandHokies]

I've already praised the virtues of science...in this thread. But it is out of its realm when it comes to origin of life and evolution.

The origin of life, for now, is pretty much out of the realm of science. We don't have a great idea of how it happened. There have been some experiments where they managed to create some proteins, but you are correct that abiogenesis is not understood at all by science. That doesn't make religious answers any more likely to be right.

Evolution is safely within the realm of science, though. It's mechanisms are well understood and there is evidence of it everywhere.

 

[extragreen]

The origin of life, for now, is pretty much out of the realm of science. We don't have a great idea of how it happened. There have been some experiments where they managed to create some proteins, but you are correct that abiogenesis is not understood at all by science. That doesn't make religious answers any more likely to be right.

Evolution is safely within the realm of science, though. It's mechanisms are well understood and there is evidence of it everywhere.

I'm talking about macro-evolution. The basis for that is pure speculation.