Is Evolutionist Science worth believing?

[Sinyalan]

so, since evolution as you have said isn't like creation. care to show your scientific evidence? tell me, VP sinyalan, how did your grand papa --- the rock turned himself to be a living form and eventually you? I know I have faith in my GOD that created everything.

Of course, creationism is none comparable to evolution! Period! Didn't you read books about evolution as I have told you to do? You keep on arguing the same issue... don't take it from me because as you said, you don't get nothing from me, remember? So, go ahead read and be enlightened. I like to quote ms. tripwire again... "creationist prove to disprove evolution...". Have you heard or life in Mars? research on this ho chia... that includes your rock questions. Don't take my word for it because you don't get nothing from, correct?

do you employ the same faith to your evolution? oo nga pala science.... without evidence lang just a mere declaration by a bunch of apes turned humans. speculations and imaginations! bwahahaha.

Do I employ faith on evolution? Nope! Do you employ science in creation also? Just like as Adam and Eve and 8 people survived the great flood proved that we came from them?

yah I can prove that evolution lack evidence.

Just as like your faith in creation. Hey, there is/are no scientific records of that as well.

from the state of nothingness, boom.... there came magic matter the dirts, converge in boom a space in an area of..... boom.... immense heat.... magic energy that is. and then.... magic boom... the universe!
science? where is science there? hahaha! magic there is, science none!

Here you go again, ho chia. Science do not employ magic... your creationism is. Now, where can you read all those that you mentioned? In Daily Magic Magazine? or Global Gazette? or Scientific Non-Fiction Magazines? If you go to a Library (which I don't know if you do) where exactly those books belong? Non-fiction? Magic? Unscientific? Religion? who has the highest field of study between creationism and evolution? Here's magic for you... 4 days, god created the universe! Tell me that's not magic... oh right, he is god! He can transform anything with his power... JUST LIKE MAGIC. Do you still think that evolution is magic? tawn sab ka pre.

and then the earth cooled down for millions of years and then boom none stop raining that became the ocean!.... then magic wand strike again grand papa rock became a floating spongy soup... then boom... what do you know? magic... a single cell amoeba!... that transformed into dinosaurs, the biggest elephant, maybe, jaws and kingkong.... and then the apes and then you!

didn't your god created the universe in 4 days tops? That's so fast! considering that the universe is wide open space.

science. bwahahaha! magic-- religion and you!

oppss... does creation employs magic, religion and faith to a non-existent god?

refute it with scientific evidence please. hagbay na nako pinangayo evidence, nausa... ang VP cge man kalimot oi. VP Alzheimer's ba? bwahaha

tsk.. tsk... envious eh? well, you can't fathom the evolution process that's the bottom line here ho chia (nars man unta) at least you can still hold on to your faith in creation - which again, non-scientific. Can you prove that your god made all these without using his abracadabra?

[prakx]

for me i like to connect and link both religion and science..
i wud always like to think outside of the box..

[tripwire]

I go for Evolution... not that I don't believe in God - it's just my personal choice.

[munzter666]

Creation have evidence.... but it requires faith. and you and the other evolutionist don't buy it because your all are persons that goes with logical reasoning and evidence. that's why i wanted to see those evidence!

don't blame me, i am not the one who said that evolution is a science and no faith/hope/speculations/assumptions are required. You claim it to be science then of course evidence will be require of you. but if you say it is your religion, then by all means.........


yah, because saying that genetic mutation, natural selections and the likes transformed a non-life rock into a single cell amoeba, to an amphibian and t to a ree climbing mammals and eventually you. is not good enough evidence isn't it? that's why we dont see/recognize/acknowledge such evidences because this are not evidence at all.

you're calling it a religion now, why? to bash it toe-to-toe with yours? WRONG. NOT AT ALL.
Hear this. from the beginning dirt..... and all came to be! does it sound like in the beginning GOD... and all came to be!
sound religion to me.

any scientific theory is not scientific fact unless proven with evidence. especially if that theory breaks known laws of physics and known scientific facts!

i think you are having a hard time understanding what science is about mr ho, SCIENCE never claims ABSOLUTES. kaya nga PROVISIONALLY ACCEPTED, coz they are OPEN/INVITING BETTER ONES...

faith as evidence doesnt CUT IT.IMO....

lets say I believe in ET, I only have FAITH on my side...no more no less, just FAITH...most RATIONAL people would say: "why in the world would I believe in you"....I would.

gets the point?

[brownprose]

I know what religion is. it entails faith. just like evolution form dirt and everything came to be, great faith there!

Then you might as well check your terms...you got it all wrong bro.

if my GOD is based on assumption, what do you call a rock transforming to a life form? magical assumption?

That's theory not faith...again you need to understand your terms properly.

[Tattva]

@Mr.Ho_chia

Actually thats what our Lama told us. The buddha nature will never be lost, its stays there. It will never fade.

"clouded" is a sign of confusion? So far Mr.False accuser you have nothing to show to me that i am confuse. unlike you, let me quote it again..."Mix breeding man ng zebra-giraffe-horse",hahahaha. A wannabe creationist, mix breeding? pfft! A creationist who believes in mix breeding between two kinds. hahahaha.

here is another misrepresentation..."life came from a rock" ? huh? Biological evolution has nothing to do with life starting from a rock. hahaha. Maau jud ka mobali ug storya noh, liwat ka sa YAWA. hahaha.

Its compatible because evolution is a religion? wow...If thats how you see it then maybe you need to study further. Dont just stay in a creationist site try other site. I can only say that youre a blind victim of creationism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Organic evolution is another way to prove evolution but i dont subscribe to its idea. what i believe is Common descent where biological evolution is covered.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now iwanted to say more but ill stop right here because you are playing all this time, Your point has been going in circles, the answer to your question about how micro can go macro had been explained already. i even gave you some questions for further clarification but you REFUSE to answer it. How can i prove my case further if you are not honest with our discussion? You are going in circles my friend.


listen to your lame excuse...

"sir why would i dignify your questions with an answer? you see sir (forgive the language ha)... you don't go speculating and as people to show evidence that will disprove your speculations and if none you will assume that your speculation is true/fact? can you see that?"

hahaha, speculating? hahahaha. Sa tinood sir wala kay matubag. changes in allele frequencies, mutation, natural selection, genetic drift are speculations? pfft. Even creationists will use microevolution to support their claim for the different species we have today.


empirical science? Define it.

naa pa macroevolution? define it.

then kung gusto pa ka makabalo kung gi unsa pagka micro to macro...ANSWER MY QUESTIONS in my previous post. Cgruo nasayop ka noh nya gusto ka mobawi sa imong sayup mao ng mo buy sa ka ug time nya ginagmay tuyok hangtud ma correct nimo imong sayup.

Sir tubaga sa akong pangutana osa ka mo ingun nga speculation.

[Tattva]

A recurring theme in antievolution literature is that if science cannot account for the origin of life, evolution is false, and that "spontaneous generation" was disproven, so therefore evolution is false. This syllogism fails, because evolution (that is, common descent and transmutation of species) occurs whether or not life arose by chance, law or design, but there is another more insidious mistake here. It is not true that "spontaneous generation" has been ruled out in all cases by science; the claims disproven were more restricted than that.




Credit goes to John S. Wilikns from Talkorigins.org


discuss...

Since my friend doesnt want to go toe to toe with me on micro to macro discussion. cguro ganahan siya ani cge padayun ta.

[diatabz]

You know, I always thought God created the world and all... He just forgot to mention evolution...

[brownprose]

You know, I always thought God created the world and all... He just forgot to mention evolution...

nice! :mrgreen:

[brown_dog]

Echoing ms. tripwire's; "... creationism only proves to disprove evolution..."

This is a valid argument.
theory#1 proved theory#2 is wrong therefore theory#1 is correct.

For some people the theory of evolution or Darwinism has only scientific connotations, with seemingly no direct implication in their daily lives. This is, of course, a common misunderstanding. Far beyond just being an issue within the framework of the biological sciences, the theory of evolution constitutes the underpinning of a deceptive philosophy that has held sway over a large number of people: Materialism.

Materialist philosophy, which accepts only the existence of matter and presupposes man to be 'a heap of matter', asserts that he is no more than an animal, with 'conflict' the sole rule of his existence. Although propagated as a modern philosophy based on science, materialism is in fact an ancient dogma with no scientific basis. Conceived in Ancient Greece, the dogma was rediscovered by the atheistic philosophers of the 18th century. It was then implanted in the 19th century into several science disciplines by thinkers such as Karl Marx, Charles Darwin and Sigmund Freud. In other words science was distorted to make room for materialism.
The past two centuries have been a bloody arena of materialism: Ideologies based on materialism (or competing ideologies arguing against materialism, yet sharing its basic tenets) have brought permanent violence, war and chaos to the world. Communism, responsible for the death of 120 million people, is the direct outcome of materialistic philosophy. Fascism, despite pretending to be an alternative to the materialistic world-view, accepted the fundamental materialist concept of progress though conflict and sparked off oppressive regimes, massacres, world wars and genocide.

Besides these two bloody ideologies, individual and social ethics have also been corrupted by materialism.

The deceptive message of materialism, reducing man to an animal whose existence is coincidental and with no responsibility to any being, demolished moral pillars such as love, mercy, self-sacrifice, modesty, honesty and justice. Having been misled by the materialists' motto "life is a struggle", people came to see their lives as nothing more than a clash of interests which, in turn, led to life according to the law of the jungle.

Traces of this philosophy, which has a lot to answer as regards man-made disasters of the last two centuries, can be found in every ideology that perceives differences among people as a 'reason for conflict'. That includes the terrorists of the present day who claim to uphold religion, yet commit one of the greatest sins by murdering innocent people.

The theory of evolution, or Darwinism, comes in handy at this point by completing the jigsaw puzzle. It provides the myth that materialism is a scientific idea. That is why, Karl Marx, the founder of communism and dialectical materialism, wrote that Darwinism was "the basis in natural history" for his worldview

However, that basis is rotten. Modern scientific discoveries reveal over and over again that the popular belief associating Darwinism with science is false. Scientific evidence refutes Darwinism comprehensively and reveals that the origin of our existence is not evolution but creation. God has created the universe, all living things and man.

If you want scientific evidences of Evolution these evidences are virtually limitless. Mostly composed of new discoveries of modern Biological science, Statistical, Argumentative, historical, sociological, and Ethical implications.