It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reasons Why I Believe There Is A God

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
And even though evolution is a theory, in science a theory is a bit more than a guess.

[edit on 11-12-2006 by melatonin]


Uhhh,not really. It is a guess based upon what information they have.. It may be based on empircal evidence,but it is still a guess,nonetheless.




posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
Don't hold science in such high regard, it has been wrong on numerous occasions also.

Remember eugenics, or several drugs that had once been thought to be helpful, or saying the earth was flat.


But you need to ask who actually resolved these issues.

As someone who works at the forefront of science, I know it is not perfect, but it works and is self-correcting. I do hold the process of science in high regard, there is nothing better at gaining an understanding of the real-world.

Think of all the science sourced technology that you use every day, think of all the scientific theories you are happy to accpet without real question. Then question why you only doubt those areas of science that impinge on your pre-exisitng worldview.

It need not be that way...



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   
When I called out by saying "help me Jesus" hundreds of times while holding my cross he came and took me from the pain and delivered me to the father. There is no doubt...



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Uhhh,not really. It is a guess based upon what information they have.. It may be based on empircal evidence,but it is still a guess,nonetheless.


Nope, a theory is a self-consistent scientific model that has been consistently confirmed and has not been falsified. It uses facts and evidence to build and guide predictions and further research. Since the day Darwin formed the theory, not one piece of evidence has successfully questioned its validity, in fact it has only become stronger with the advent of genetics.

It is more than a guess. When I see an apple drop from a tree, I may make a guess (hypothesis) that pears will fall and not rise into the air. Once I have seen Pears consistently drop from trees, along with cherries, nuts, and all other available fruits and nuts, I think it then becomes a scientific fact that fruit and nuts fall from trees. It is no longer a guess, I may call it the 'theory of falling fruit'. Then we wait for a falsification. Researchers around the world will experiment with fruits and nuts, if after 150 years not a single example of fruit or nuts have been shown to actually float rather than fall, I think we have gone beyond guesswork.

[edit on 11-12-2006 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Uhhh,not really. It is a guess based upon what information they have.. It may be based on empircal evidence,but it is still a guess,nonetheless.


Nope, a theory is a self-consistent scientific model that has been consistently confirmed and has not been falsified. It uses facts and evidence to build and guide predictions and further research. Since the day Darwin formed the theory, not one piece of evidence has successfully questioned its validity, in fact it has only become stronger with the advent of genetics.

It is more than a guess. When I see an apple drop from a tree, I may make a guess (hypothesis) that pears will fall and not rise into the air. Once I have seen Pears consistently drop from trees, along with cherries, nuts, and all other available fruits and nuts, I think it then becomes a scientific fact that fruit and nuts fall from trees. It is no longer a guess, I may call it the 'theory of falling fruit'. Then we wait for a falsification. Researchers around the world will experiment with fruits and nuts, if after 150 years not a single example of fruit or nuts have been shown to actually float rather than fall, I think we have gone beyond guesswork.

[edit on 11-12-2006 by melatonin]


I think not, like I said before, show me a monkey who is evolving. Come on, there has got to be at least one. No? When i see a monkey create a symphony or create art, then i will accept it as fact.

Right now it's only speculation.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Since the day Darwin formed the theory, not one piece of evidence has successfully questioned its validity, in fact it has only become stronger with the advent of genetics.



@ Melatonin

Ummm,that is an opinion., not fact.

[edit on 11-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 11-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
I think not, like I said before, show me a monkey who is evolving. Come on, there has got to be at least one. No? When i see a monkey create a symphony or create art, then i will accept it as fact.

Right now it's only speculation.


What is a symphony, what is art. Give a monkey a drum and a paint brush, it will make a noise and splat paint on paper. Give it a stick and stone and it will learn to use them as a tool to gain food.

Monkeys are evolving and humans are evolving. The rate of evolution is determined by the rate of reproduction. Which is why we tend to use species with faster reproduction rates.

If you think you'll ever see a monkey give birth to a human, then you don't understand how evolution works. Small, gradual changes. We are talking 5 million years since the split with the common ancestor for the two species of chimps and humans, we aren't even that different than between a cat and dog. I doubt you can even conceive of how much change can occur in that time.

Since IQ tests have been developed and since proper measurements on human size has begun, we are smarter, larger, faster. That is in a few hundred years (or only a few decades for IQ). Think what can happen over periods of millions of years. We have even seen a possible new human mutation that confers protection against heart disease - we need more evidence to show that it is truly novel

So, evolution requires new mutations that give new features and traits. We have evidence that they do happen and have happened in the past. Give time and mutations, we have evolution - genetics over time or descent with modification.


@speaker

@ Melatonin

Ummm,that is an opinion., not fact.


No, that is what theory means in science.


[edit on 11-12-2006 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:43 PM
link   
@ Melatonin...

Here was the opinion that I was referring to,not your whole post..

Melatonin said,

Since the day Darwin formed the theory, not one piece of evidence has successfully questioned its validity, in fact it has only become stronger with the advent of genetics.


That is an opinion,not fact.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Since IQ tests have been developed and since proper measurements on human size has begun, we are smarter, larger, faster. That is in a few hundred years (or only a few decades for IQ). Think what can happen over periods of millions of years. We have even seen a possible new human mutation that confers protection against heart disease - we need more evidence to show that it is truly novel

So, evolution requires new mutations that give new features and traits. We have evidence that they do happen and have happened in the past. Give time and mutations, we have evolution - genetics over time or descent with modification.


IQ tests are a joke, they say if Einstein would have taken one he probably wouldn't have scored that high because his mind works different that that.

I'm not to sure if we're smarter, i've seen some of the stuff the Greeks did and they seemed pretty intelligent to me.

As for being larger, that's simply because we eat more. That has nothing to do with evolution.

As for the mutations against heart disease, that is another case of Micro-evolution, not Macro-evolution.


[edit on 11-12-2006 by thehumbleone]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
As far as IQ goes, philosophers such as Plato and Pythagoras would laugh at the average person's level of intelligence today... Notice that I stated average.. I'm not talking about a well-read individual..I'm talking about your average everyday louse that sits and watches the "Boob tube" all day.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:56 PM
link   
In all fairness,though, humble, the theory of evolution is not something that you should fear. There comes a time when you have to separate science from what you personally believe. Science deals with the empirical... It does not and cannot delve into the spiritual because there is no way to quantify it.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
In all fairness,though, humble, the theory of evolution is not something that you should fear. There comes a time when you have to separate science from what you personally believe. Science deals with the empirical... It does not and cannot delve into the spiritual because there is no way to quantify it.


True, but I believe that quantum physics will break these boundaries, then maybe science and religion will be able to agree.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Quantum physics is coming a long way in suggesting many thing that "orthodox" science probably would have never considered 100 years ago, yes... However, regardless, there is no ultimate way to quantify an ethereal substance..

I love quantum and theoretical physics, but I don't think we should put all of our eggs into a basket before they have hatched.. That's just my opinion.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   
I thought this was interesting, you can check it out if you want:www.near-death.com...



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Looks very interesting,humble. I will read it later. I think that ultimately..one day,some way,some how, we will know the truth... It may be long after you and I are gone from this earth, but,...it'll come.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
IQ tests are a joke, they say if Einstein would have taken one he probably wouldn't have scored that high because his mind works different that that.


What they say and what is the actuality can be quite distinct.

I use IQ tests, such as the WASI/WAIS and do question how much they tell us about human intelligence, it measures one aspect of intelligence that's all. But, they do predict academic and career success, they do predict the structure of the brain.


I'm not to sure if we're smarter, i've seen some of the stuff the Greeks did and they seemed pretty intelligent to me.


I don't doubt they were. But they didn't create quantum theory


Plus, we didn't have IQ tests then. We can only assess like with like. The Flynn effect shows IQ rising every decade - it will likely tail off eventually.


As for being larger, that's simply because we eat more. That has nothing to do with evolution.


It is, yes.

Diet is part of the environmental effects on our genome and offspring and can have prolonged effects on future generations. People who suffered malnutrition in europe during WWII passed on these effects to their children (increased schizophrenia etc), people who drink alcohol cause defects in their children (fetal alcohol syndrome). Diet has effects on the developing fetus.

The reason we have an obesity epidemic in the west is because we have evolved to store fat for famine stress. And we'll find that if the current situation continues of high energy diet, those who have the genes that have high protection against famine stress will die young (as they will store more fat) and those genes will become less common in the gene pool - that is, change in gene frequency over time or evolution.


As for the mutations against heart disease, that is another case of Micro-evolution, not Macro-evolution.


No, microevolution is evolution within existing allele variation, changes of pre-existing alleles. If you accept new mutations then you accept the possibility of macroevolution. That is what macroevolution requires, with enough time, new mutations can produce a human from an ape-like ancestor.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
@ Melatonin...

Here was the opinion that I was referring to,not your whole post..

Melatonin said,

Since the day Darwin formed the theory, not one piece of evidence has successfully questioned its validity, in fact it has only become stronger with the advent of genetics.


That is an opinion,not fact.


(Jeez, I replied to this before, guess it never stuck...)

Heheh, fair enough, I wasn't to know.

Maybe you can provide the information that has falsified the theory of evolution, I'd be quite interested in it.

If you mean it is questionable it has become stronger through genetics, it clearly has, we have strengthened the relationship between our closest relatives rather than have more reason to doubt it (e.g. vitamin C pseudogene). We can use genetic clocks to support and clarify the relationships for other phylogenies.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
@ Melatonin



Well, you said that it has never been successively challenged... In whose mind has it never been successively challenged? Yours, perhaps? The use of the word successively is very subjective. Successive by whose standards?

[edit on 11-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
@ Melatonin



Well, you said that it has never been successively challenged... In whose mind has it never been successively challenged? Yours, perhaps? The use of the word successively is very subjective. Successive by whose standards?

[edit on 11-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]


Well I meant successfully. If it was successfully challenged it would have been falsified. To successfully challenge a theory you just need to show it to be wrong. Also, it is tested everyday. Every fossil we find is a challenge, many experiments in genetics are a challenge. In fact, it is probably the most challenged theory in the history of science.

If someone can do so, the theory will need to be either adjusted if possbile, or if it is fatal, it will be discarded. Darwin was wrong on a few counts with his original theory, especially his mechanism of heredity, when shown to be so, that particular mechanism was discarded and the explanation supported by evidence was incorporated into the larger theory (i.e. it was adjusted).

I would generally expect it to be other scientists who do this. However, anyone can publish scientific research of it provides reliable evidence. A 12 year old girl has published before - it was an experiment related to laying of hands in an american medical journal.

[edit on 11-12-2006 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
Yes God exists....I can feel his presence...I see him in many things...I've bathed in his light during my NDE...Yes God exists and loves you too.

God for me is not based on faith anymore because I have seen him and floated in his light outside the gates of heaven.

As always your path, your faith is your choice.


As subjective as my conviction that kinglizard prayed for me, at least on the strength of his testimony.

I personally don't understand the great divide between evolution and faith, God is capable of creating evolution. I respect both science and faith and I don't feel the two are mutually exclusive.

We're sentient beings able to effect evolution and not just be effected by it, an immeasurable IQ. I feel IQ tests evaluate succesful socializtion to academic expectation. Not quite the whole story of the mystery of the mind and its creative aptitudes.



If we believe not, yet He abideth faithful; of these things put them in remembrance. - Tim 2:13-14

As kinglizard said, always your choice. God doesn't need me like I need Him.


[edit on 13-12-2006 by clearwater]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join