In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

Originally posted by SoulReaper
reply to post by Pardon?

 

You cannot take a piece of God and study him in a lab... Science and Humans have their limits.

This does not mean that there is not evidence of God present in the Universe, I happen to see it all around me. In fact the complexity, sheer enormity of information, and precise balance of the physical forces both on a macro and micro level scream of a powerful intelligence at work in their origins.

In no other avenue of life would any logical human being deny this. You don't walk past a house and assume that it used to be a forest a billion years ago but that the trees evolved themselves into 2x4's and nailed themselves together in a useful and intelligent manner all by themselves. If you claimed this... you would be called a moron.

Explain to me how the gigantic Assumptions of Evolutionists are any different. And I am certainly not talking about the obvious biological changes that can and do occur all around us all the time. I'm talking about Non Life becoming life and NON complex molecules smashing into each other in a warm pool becoming Complex and useful biological systems.

Force when not applied intelligently leads to chaos and destruction.
Anything subjected to the environment for long periods of time lends itself most often to decay, disorder, death and equilibrium.... not increasingly complex life forms, order, or useful biological information on the molecular level.

God is a quite logical and cohesive explanation for the source of all that science can discover.

I find the answer of the atheist or evolutionist to be decidedly not logical, cohesive or viable.

Sure you can deny the concept of God... my challenge to you is to provide me with evidence of a MORE cohesive explanation... I've never heard one, but I'm more then excited to hear you fumble your way through an attempt.

Soul

edit on 7-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)

At least the atheist or evolutionist is trying to find an answer rather than taking the pompous and frankly condescending view that "god did it, quod erat demonstrandum".
Again, what you are saying is that you believe in creationism since you don't believe the alternatives. Why believe in anything then? Why not keep an open mind as I do?

reply to post by Lionhearte

No worries, I'm not offended at all. Else I would probably be offended all day every day.
I honestly didn't know "Evolutionists" is a real word in the english language though. Surprising to say the least.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

Oh, and you mixed up evolution and abiogenesis by the way.

So have Evolutionists. Not all of them, but for the majority, they always assume, because one species can have variation, that the entire theory of Evolution is correct - that it proves the Big Bang, that it proves Stellar/Organic/Chemical evolution, etc etc.

All I can say is ignorance knows no boundaries.
My old teacher used to say "sweeping judgments are wrong judgments" .
I doubt the majority of people knowledgeable about biology (as in proper educated) would confuse abiogenesis and evolution (at least not here) but it's possible of course.
Evolution proves evolution. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't want to explain the ultimative origin of life as we know it, nor how the Big Bang happened or anything else.

I believe what the Founding Fathers of the United States of America believed, that there is a Universal Creator but it does not interfere with human life, and that Reason and Logic rule the Universe.

I was raised for many years by completely scientific minded parents who whole heartedly believe that we have come about through evolution, though there is as little -hard evidence- for this, as Christian Creationist beliefs, without taking the same leaps of faith.

I put my trust in the some of the greatest thinkers of our time. Get off your high horses.

Originally posted by ColCurious
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

No worries, I'm not offended at all. Else I would probably be offended all day every day.

I'm the same way, haha.

All I can say is ignorance knows no boundaries.
My old teacher used to say "sweeping judgments are wrong judgments"

.

I agree. I understand the logic behind most evolutionists, after all us creationists are not so different. We're looking at the same evidence, we're just coming to different conclusions. Both parties cannot understand how the other party came to such ridiculous conclusions.. and only one party is right. There are other theories, as well, including influence from aliens, etc, but those are just additions to the two main theories - Life needed a creator, or life didn't. Everything in between is just hearsay.

I doubt the majority of people knowledgeable about biology (as in proper educated) would confuse abiogenesis and evolution (at least not here) but it's possible of course.

You'd be surprised. I must admit my zealotry stems from a hatred of ignorance (yes, some would call this "ironic", yet others will understand), and I favor truth above all. So when I see a thread (not this one), that says "Evolution happens. That's a fact." - it's basically asking for trouble.

Evolution proves evolution. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't want to explain the ultimative origin of life as we know it, nor how the Big Bang happened or anything else.

To be honest, I do believe in one thing - Micro-Evolution. I detest calling it that, and sometimes only prefer saying "variation", but I have to be specific unfortunately. If I went around telling people I believe in Evolution, they would be utterly confused. I agree nature can do extraordinary things, and life finds a way to adapt. Yet, I will never assume that something can slowly evolve into an entirely unrecognizable creature in millions of years for many reasons - limitations in variation, it's unobservable, and it's untestable. It's simply assumed, and I can't do that.

Though, since most people will see my cross avatar and call me retarded right on the spot, I simply hold no fervor to the majority (particularly here on ATS), and whatever I have to say is moot.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

Originally posted by HumanCondition
Actually I never said they were unintelligent or retarded.

No, no, of course you didn't. They just don't agree with you so they have mental issues.

Evolution is observed everyday and can be seen in your own anatomy.

When you think of Evolution, you are talking about Micro-Evolution, which is simply variation.

When I think of Evolution, I think of 5 things-

Cosmic Evolution, Stellar Evolution, Chemical Evolution, Organic Evolution, and Macro-Evolution.

None of these have been proven true, and just because all six of them (the five above and Micro-Evolution) are all apart of the same theory, does not mean they are all true when you can prove one of them (Micro-Evolution, an OBSERVABLE, TESTABLE, TRUTH).

And how has creationism been proven?

Please don't insult me by giving me a verse from the bible as proof...

Give me a hard physical, example of creationism.

Evolution may not be "proven", beyond a doubt, but Creationism has nothing at all exept a few lines of print. Evolution has millions of hours of reserch, experimentation, results and publications...

What one thing can you show me, that puts a hundred years of physical scientific results (that can be repeated constantly with similar or same results).

reply to post by Lionhearte

Cosmic Evolution, Stellar Evolution, Chemical Evolution, Organic Evolution, and Macro-Evolution.

So when you think of evolution, you think of poorly written, poorly illustrated Chick Tracts co-authored by Kent "Dr. Dino" Hovind who got his doctorate in "Christian Education" -- through a correspondance course from a diploma mill that has no faculty and whose campus consisted of a double-wide trailer, mind you -- by writing a thesis that is barely cogent or literate?

I am truly sorry that your education and understanding of science begins and ends at that point.

reply to post by Barcs


Barcs again in reference to your post on page 18 how many pairs of chromosomes, did these 'early' humans have?

reply to post by Lionhearte


There is evidence that early man and neanderthal's did copulate but there isn't concrete evidence. Also we can't map the dna code of the neanderthal at this time do to shotty process, so how would you know if neanderthals and humans are alike? Since there's no concrete evidence to support it. Also a major problem with all of this is the chromosome count, we still don't know how 48 became 46 and that's the real question. I'm not religious so that's not my gripe with this, my gripe is a missing link, and mythical stories of us being a produced slave race. I'm just not willing at this time to jump to any conclusions when there isn't a shred of concrete evidence.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

If people eat too many GMO foods or covertly breed with aliens in underground laboratories THEN YES humans can evolve, BUT they didn't evolve on their own now did they???

Of course we did... Even if God created human based on his look as many believe, didn't wee adjust and change over time... thus we have different races with different characteristics.

We are one of many different sub-species of humanoid, and at some time in our evolution, we coexisted with 8 different humanoid species.

Either God could not make up his mind, or evolution took place.

Long time ago (20 - some years ago) Carl Sagan developed 'world history calendar', where whole history was placed on calendar, 12 months, and we humans are just small time before new year at the end of calendar (very good way to explain how insignificant our race and history is compared to whole world).

And lets not forget question that would hunt us down even if we were created (quite possible by some alien race) - who created our creator, or he started from nothing?!

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

There is evidence that early man and neanderthal's did copulate but there isn't concrete evidence. Also we can't map the dna code of the neanderthal at this time do to shotty process, so how would you know if neanderthals and humans are alike? Since there's no concrete evidence to support it. Also a major problem with all of this is the chromosome count, we still don't know how 48 became 46 and that's the real question. I'm not religious so that's not my gripe with this, my gripe is a missing link, and mythical stories of us being a produced slave race. I'm just not willing at this time to jump to any conclusions when there isn't a shred of concrete evidence.

Actually, scientists are working on neanderthal's gene structure for some time now.

Almost a year ago Svante Pääbo provided proof that we actually did mate with neanderthals, and much more. Probably not yet in your history/biology book, but soon expect those to change...

Svante Pääbo: DNA clues to our inner neanderthal

And this is major difference between scientific work, investigation and pure belief that something else created not only us, but whole world.

Originally posted by Furbs


Are you of the opinion that a religious belief and a scientific theory should hold the same amount of credence?

That depends on the theory, the word Theory is thrown around so losely today. If anybody actually followed the scientific method this days haft our theorys would be hypothesis, including Evolution.

Quote Einstein : “it is the theory that determines what we observe”

reply to post by SuperFrog


Brilliant! (The link is a TED talk, for those of you who know how very fascinating those are...you have to click the author's bio, though, to get the vid started)...

Svante Pääbo's research on the DNA of human and nonhuman primates has exposed the key genetic changes that transformed our grunting ape-like ancestors into the charming latte-sipping humans we are today. As a director at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, Pääbo and his team developed a technique of isolating and sequencing the DNA of creatures long extinct, using a variety of fragile, ancient source material from Homo sapiens and other human species.

His work shows that all humans trace their ancestry to a small population of Africans who later spread out across the world. We’ve also learned that Neanderthals, the short stocky hunters who disappeared 30,000 years ago, mated with the more modern human species and left their imprint deep within our genome. In 2007, Time named the Swedish biologist one of the 100 Most Influential People in the World for his work.
He says: "Neanderthals are not totally extinct. In some of us they live on, a little bit."
"His work takes on the macro issues of the origins of humans, and why modern humans composed an evolutionary experiment that worked while other near species did not."
Sesh Velamoor, Foundation for the Future

Thanks for sharing that! It's only 17 minutes long, folks....definitely check it out!

Originally posted by WormwoodSquirm
I think it is possible evolutionists and creationists are both right! Evolution is obvious but if we were tinkered with or genetically enhanced as per the Annunaki story or by something we very would call gods (far enhanced) then everyone is right and needs to stop fighting over it. It is obvious we have changed and come a long way in 10k years. We have wiped out all other hominids etc. and our very genetics show tinkering in the lab which is proof of a sort of creation of some kind.
I think we existed but were boosted. Therefore both stories could be in harmony. No need for evolution and creation battles for the well informed.

Its amazing how few people even have the capacity to believe that. For some reason, most people have allowed themseves to believe that everything is either "option a" or "option b", and the two stand in stark opposition. Its why there's Democrats and Republicans, its why there's creationists and evolutionists, and its obvious to the thinking few that both sides are generally always wrong (and that works mainly because they are generally partially right.)

If more people in this world had the capacity to understand that there are always more than two options, most of our problems would be solved. Absolutism is the enemy of logic, reason, and truth. We may share this view of a "combination" of sorts, and I won't say our thinking is correct, but its certainly not lacking logic and reason the way either "option a" or "option b" are.

Originally posted by Masterjaden
How about a 65 million year old Caelocanth??? No fossils for the 65 million years in between when it was last seen in the fossil record and it being a living creature today??

The problem with the fossil record stems from circular logic for the dating of the layers and the problems with the original theories that were built upon.

That is the problem with the modern paradigms. they are built on foundations that are seriously flawed. It was brought up that I was referring to theories from the 1800's.

No I wasn't. I was referring to the evolution of theories based on proven false foundations.

Those who are stuck in the paradigms would like to believe that you can improve upon falsehoods, but unfortunately, that's not the way it works.

Once you discover that they are falsehoods, you can no longer use ANYTHING from those falshoods as a basis for ANYTHING and expect it to remain accurate.

So the problem becomes that people are too stupid or too enamored with their own supposed greatness to admit they were wrong and start over.

This leads to the current state that we have where we have built on errors and gotten much farther from the truth as opposed to getting closer to it.

Jaden

You're right, there is no argument, you fools are too indoctrinated and illogical to even search for the truth, let alone find it.

You still didn't provide a single shred of evidence to suggest evolution is wrong or creationism / ID is right. Maybe if you start posting sources and discussing the actual science behind modern synthesis you might actually get somewhere. You are just instantly rejecting it because you don't like it or it goes against your faith. How about we discuss the science, instead of just making blatantly wrong statements attacking a field of science for no apparent reason.

You don't understand the difference between science and the scientific paradigms, do you?... There's nothing but blind faith in the paradigms. The theory of Evolution is a paradigm of science. It is NOT science.

Proof???? You keep yappering, but not a single thing to back up your claims. Of COURSE evolution is science, it wouldn't be a scientific theory if it was not.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Masterjaden

 

Actually I do not believe in any kind of self-evolution except of the mind. An organism is built with certain characteristics it keeps for as long as it lives. Cross breeding and genetic manipulation has nothing to do with evolution.

Actually cross breeding is a large part of it. If homo sapiens didn't interbreed with neanderthals we wouldn't have such a diverse gene pool.

Originally posted by dogstar23

Originally posted by WormwoodSquirm
I think it is possible evolutionists and creationists are both right! Evolution is obvious but if we were tinkered with or genetically enhanced as per the Annunaki story or by something we very would call gods (far enhanced) then everyone is right and needs to stop fighting over it. It is obvious we have changed and come a long way in 10k years. We have wiped out all other hominids etc. and our very genetics show tinkering in the lab which is proof of a sort of creation of some kind.
I think we existed but were boosted. Therefore both stories could be in harmony. No need for evolution and creation battles for the well informed.

Its amazing how few people even have the capacity to believe that. For some reason, most people have allowed themseves to believe that everything is either "option a" or "option b", and the two stand in stark opposition.

You know what my reason is? What WormwoodSquirm wrote is total bull#. Our very genetics show no signs whatsoever of tinkering in the laboratory. WormwoodSquirm can feel free to prove me wrong by indicating which loci in the human genome show this, and how such revelation is interpreted. He can't do it thou, because as I pointed out, what he wrote is just bull#.

Originally posted by yourmaker
a little perspective...

thats 138 000 000 people more or less ...

in ONE country.

how can scientific and religious minds co-exist like that without one side blowing up at the other?

amazing.

Nope. They only polled just over 1000 people. This is clearly somebody trying to push an agenda. 100 out of 300,000,000 people is not adequate to reflect an entire country's views.

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

There is evidence that early man and neanderthal's did copulate but there isn't concrete evidence. Also we can't map the dna code of the neanderthal at this time do to shotty process, so how would you know if neanderthals and humans are alike? Since there's no concrete evidence to support it. Also a major problem with all of this is the chromosome count, we still don't know how 48 became 46 and that's the real question. I'm not religious so that's not my gripe with this, my gripe is a missing link, and mythical stories of us being a produced slave race. I'm just not willing at this time to jump to any conclusions when there isn't a shred of concrete evidence.

Yes we do know. I posted the link for you way back earlier in this thread. They fused and there is clear evidence of it. Go back a re read the link I posted. As for your question of Neanderthal and Denosivan chromosomes they had 46, same as humans. And yes, the breed with Neanderthals IS CONCRETE. We've mapped the whole genome of several specimens.

Originally posted by Tbrooks76

Originally posted by Furbs


Are you of the opinion that a religious belief and a scientific theory should hold the same amount of credence?

That depends on the theory, the word Theory is thrown around so losely today. If anybody actually followed the scientific method this days haft our theorys would be hypothesis, including Evolution.

Quote Einstein : “it is the theory that determines what we observe”

Ah, so observing evolution and speciation in a lab did not actually happen. Right...

reply to post by Barcs


lol.....Evolution was not seen in a lab, come on.

This what I think....
All swans we have seen are white, and therefore all swans are white," before the discovery of black swans