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.
Originally posted by NoNik
....and the fact that God stated that he will deal with the evil ones at the end of mans days on Earth.
NN
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
Test your faith.
What child hasn’t been taught values out of the fear of god? When someone sneezes “god bless you” is said. Why?
This is a very presumptuous statement. Making the assumption that, anyone thinks there is a god and that sneezing has some association with that god. Would you say, “god bless you” to an atheist? Pretty insulting really, imposing your beliefs like that.
Perhaps not all but, many children are taught that the thunder and lightning are the work of god. The loud unstoppable thunder is very frightening, so anything with the power to make it is also frightening. To make people/children think that you understand this power or that you can communicate to this power, can make those people/children follow your words/wishes. Very effective if the child/person thinks that thunder is a willed activity by a ubiquitous all-powerful being that can’t be stopped.
Churches exist (to use this power to control the people/money) because of mythology and the reining cult (the Roman Catholic Church).
Hospitals exist only because of the facts of life that are part of evolution.
Without the firm understanding of biology (the major part of evolution) we would not have hospitals. We would have the Barbers for a good leaching.
So I ask you,
If a devout catholic person gets struck down by lightning (the work of god) would you take them to the church or the hospital?
You can either have a church or a hospital, which is more important
for your infant?
Understanding biology caused a creationist to write The Origin of the Species.
Isn't it a sin to distroy life?
A surgens knife must distroy before it can heal.
So surgery is forbiden if you have faith, but hey you can go to confession for that sin.
Originally posted by Rren
It's one thing to ask an honest question or debate the facts/opinions... you've chosen to do neither and with authority no less.
I think I've had my fill... thanks for the laughs.
God Bless You,
-Rren
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory, order modified by mattison0922
Yes without evolution we would not have hospitals because the science that gives us hospital is the same science that gives us ToE. Of course they had medicine. What they didn't have was a consortium of information and standard methods of operation to achieve consistent medical success.
You missed my whole point about the hospitals. Evolution was not just written out. It is the compilation of all the physical science in use and at work. The science obviously came first. If any of the physical science were proven wrong that would have a serious effect on the theory.
So without first having the medical knowledge and the practice you certainly can't predict how a cell will react with an antibody. But once you have all the pieces you’ll notice that your results fit perfectly with the ToE. The support and proof for the theory has to be before the theory.
Whether or not medicine conflicts with ToE isn't relevant. It's whether or not medicine requires ToE, and it doesn't. Doctors don't 'support' ToE, unless you're talking about fake Doctors, ie: Ph.D.'s. Medical doctors don't or at least very rarely offer evidence in support of ToE. For the most part, they're visiting a couple of hundred patients a day, and have little time for thinking about Darwin.
Ask any doctor how their medicine conflicts with evolution, it doesn't. They don't use ToE they support it by using the same science.
Maybe if I said it this way; without scientific proof by a repeatable standard method we would not have effective working knowledge of medicine or ToE. We would still have the plague, god bless you. Good for medicine good for ToE
There are groups who refuse all medical treatment because of their beliefs in god. Really, is this new to you? They even put it on TV shows. Jehovah Witnesses refuse blood for example. Do I know any of these people, no, they die.
No worries? He is supposedly the one who strikes you down. You should be worried in the Hospital maybe he struck you down for not confessing your sins and it trying to get you back by striking you down. So if he is responsible for all activity wouldn't you appeal to him for striking you down in the first place?
The surgeons knife CUTS FLESH. This kills cells. So again
The surgeons knife must destroy before it can heal.
Honestly man, You mixed up a lot of what I wrote and got my points wrong.
Originally posted by mattison0922
Standard methods of operation have nothing to do with ToE.
Originally posted by mattison0922
It's whether or not medicine requires ToE, and it doesn't.
Originally posted by mattison0922
Doctors don't 'support' ToE
Originally posted by mattison0922
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory, order modified by mattison0922
Yes without evolution we would not have hospitals because the science that gives us hospital is the same science that gives us ToE. Of course they had medicine. What they didn't have was a consortium of information and standard methods of operation to achieve consistent medical success.
This statement is absurd. Hospitals were in existence long before ToE. Let's completely discount the 'hospitals' used by ancient egyptians, muslims, early persians, etc. for the sake of this argument, and heck, even those associated with monestaries, etc.
Originally posted by mattison0922
Please elaborate on how cell/antibody interactions offer support and proof for ToE. Sounds like a lot of tossing around of words you don't really understand.
Originally posted by mattison0922
ToE is an origins science, and doesn't lend itself to 'proof' as a scientist traditionally uses the term. This is one of the main reasons evolution was labeled a 'pseudoscience' when it was first introduced as a cohesive theory.
Originally posted by mattison0922
“Ummm... we do still have the plague.”
Originally posted by mattison0992
Originally posted by GravityisatheoryThere are groups who refuse all medical treatment because of their beliefs in god. Really, is this new to you? They even put it on TV shows. Jehovah Witnesses refuse blood for example. Do I know any of these people, no, they die.
And this offers proof of evolution how?
While I don't know any Christian Scientists... their members that happen to be among the living include Val Kilmer, Robert Duvall, Bruce Hornsby, and Mike Nesmith.
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
The surgeons knife CUTS FLESH. This kills cells. So again
The surgeons knife must destroy before it can heal.
Originally posted by mattison0992
... it looks like you're confused re: a number of issues yourself.
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
Really, You must have failed every science class you ever had!''
Your statement: "What they didn't have was a consortium of information and standard methods of operation to achieve consistent medical success."
To show ToE you need empirical science. To have effective science you need a standard method of operation or a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in this case it is called the scientific method. en.wikipedia.org...
If your method of medical DNA or RNA testing determines that a rabbit fossil is actually an elephant and another guy performs a DNA test and finds that it is a worm.
Then one would conclude that one or both test methods were screwed up. If you had a standard method of extracting and testing, then the DNA would not be contaminated and everyone performing the same tests using the same SOP’s, would get the same result of a rabbit. Repeatable independent results are the cornerstone of good science and thus good medicine.
Unless you use standard methods of operation (scientific method) all your test results would be worthless. There would not be any ToE because nothing would relate and there would be no such thing as a proof. Also, we would not have hospitals, as any medical treatment would be seen as an indication that the human species has gained the knowledge to adapt to their environment. Hospitals are a Mecca example of our biological knowledge and skills, which have been honed since the first idea of biological evolution began in ancient times.
Originally posted by mattison0922
No, it's not that simple. You misunderstood my point. The issue is the both ToE and Medicine are the result of biology. Without the understanding of biology we never would have developed either. The validity of one validates the other. ToE is equivalent to a numerous collection of theories of biology/biomedical science. That is what I meant.
Originally posted by mattison0922
Doctors don't 'support' ToE
Have you ever received antibiotics from a Doctor? Do you think that doctor understands how this medical treatment works and how it was developed? I hope so.
en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
It is because people don’t the understand science that they think ToE is pseudoscience.
en.wikipedia.org...
Antibodies are used in biological staining. Specifically Immunohistochemical staining.
The antibody is used to detect specific proteins within a tissue sample.
en.wikipedia.org...
This tissue sampling and protein detection is primarily used in pathology.
en.wikipedia.org...
Pathology is the scientific study of nature, primarily diseases and forensic science. If you are doing any work with human tissue you are going to need a pathologist. Pathologists Apply Modern Tools To Study of Ancient Disease Patterns.
topics.nytimes.com...
Originally posted by mattison0922
ToE is an origins science, and doesn't lend itself to 'proof' as a scientist traditionally uses the term. This is one of the main reasons evolution was labeled a 'pseudoscience' when it was first introduced as a cohesive theory.
ToE explains the change of life NOT the origin. That is Abiogenesis. Another form of biology considered being outside the framework of ToE.
ToE can’t lend itself to ‘proof’. That is putting the cart in front of the horse. It is the facts that support the hypotheses that are ‘proven’ correct to make the many theories that compose the body of knowledge collectively known as ToE.
lifesciences.asu.edu...
Originally posted by mattison0922
“Ummm... we do still have the plague.”
The plague is a very general term but within the context that it was intended it was the fatal Black Plague. Sorry that wasn’t made clear. When they didn’t know what caused it or how to treat it, it was given the name the Black Plague because of its visible symptoms. Luckily the black plague died out as it indicates here on Wiki. en.wikipedia.org...
Once the medical knowledge caught up, the Black Plague was identified and all current forms of it are known as the Bubonic Plague, Yersinia pestis. Modern antibiotics are effective against the Bubonic Plague. Antibiotics such as; Streptomycin, Chloramphenicol, Tetracycline, Gentamicin, Doxycycline. This medical knowledge allows us to survive such an affliction and basically adapt to our environment. It also helps to understand what may have wiped out prehistoric man.
Well, thanks again for the history 101, lesson, but we do still have the plague. Not too many people die of it, but it's not as if Yersinia Pestis was wiped out. Furthermore, you've missed the point. The plague didn't 'disappear' due to antibiotics, it either burns itself out, or improvements in sanitation and hygiene improve. Neither antibiotics nor ToE stopped the plague.
[edit on 23-5-2006 by mattison0922]
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
Mattison, I’m sorry you misunderstood what I was saying. Your clarifications changed the meaning of what I said and then you refuted the new claim. It is this type conjecture, which creates the pseudoscience concepts in the first place. A few things were responses to Rren without quoting.
The existence of hospital proves that our current biological knowledge is correct and accurate.
We use it to make medical/biological predictions about both the past (ToE) and the future (Medical practices and biology).
So we know that the biological part of the ToE is also correct and accurate. To say that the ToE is wrong is like saying that all biology is wrong but, it can’t be, we have hospitals proving the science right.
Biology was the cause of both.
So, are you saying that Christian Scientists are the equivalent of Faith Healer?
en.wikipedia.org...
I was not aware that Christian Scientists “…refuse all medical treatment..”. I can’t believe that Val Kilmer, Robert Duvall, Bruce Hornsby, and Mike Nesmith refuse all forms of medical treatment. Andy Kauffman tried Faith Healing to cure his cancer it didn’t work. He then tried Psychic surgery, he’s dead.
A practice that may have been first documented by the Romans. en.wikipedia.org...
For this god they built a temple to worship and pray for healing. Faith healers hospital/church?
Which is pretty much where this thought started before you chimed in. Zeus is one the Greek mythological figures believed to have the ability to strike people down with lightning. Since the belief in the God of Moses has become dominate this ability to strike one down has been perceived to now be his. So, if a faith healer were to be struck down by lightning. Wouldn’t this be seen as an act of god? That’s what the insurance company would list as the cause of death but would a faith healer even have insurance? Hum.
Why would you go to the hospital you can’t get away from an omnipotent presence?
He got ya the first time, he’ll get ya again.
Wouldn’t it be logical to appeal to the tyrant, oh, I mean god?
This is an extreme example of number 6, Thou shall not kill. Despite gods speculated incredible power his instructions were curt, as the tablets did not elaborate. So if it is wrong to kill, some people might be pro-life. They believe that a single cell is life as soon as it is conceived. Well, then if a single cell is enough for the pro-life group to stop procedures (and even kill doctors) in the name of god, sighting #6, what about thousands of cells slain by a knife to remove a cancer created by god? Isn’t it believed that he created cancer for some (sick) reason? He placed it in the body to make those suffer for their sins knowing that it can’t be removed because cutting into the body that was created in his image would be an additional sin.
Yeah, no kidding. I was raised Roman Catholic.
Originally posted by mattison0992
I don't think I misunderstood you, and I quoted you directly. I didn't 'clarify' anything. How does quoting you directly and in full change the meaning of what you said?
Originally posted by mattison0992
quote: Ask any doctor how their medicine conflicts with evolution, it doesn't. They don't use ToE they support it by using the same science.
Whether or not medicine conflicts with ToE isn't relevant. It's whether or not medicine requires ToE, and it doesn't. Doctors don't 'support' ToE,
Originally posted by mattison0992
quote: I was not aware that Christian Scientists “…refuse all medical treatment..”. I can’t believe that Val Kilmer, Robert Duvall, Bruce Hornsby, and Mike Nesmith refuse all forms of medical treatment. Andy Kauffman tried Faith Healing to cure his cancer it didn’t work. He then tried Psychic surgery, he’s dead.
A practice that may have been first documented by the Romans. en.wikipedia.org...
You don't have to believe it. I don't know what the personal beliefs of any of these individuals are, but I do know they are listed on the Web (not that the web is necessarily a reliable source of info), as being 'Christian Scientists.' What's the basis for your inability to believe these people would refuse medical treatment?
Originally posted by mattison0992
Yes without evolution we would not have hospitals because the science that gives us hospital is the same science that gives us ToE. Of course they had medicine. What they didn't have was a consortium of information and standard methods of operation to achieve consistent medical success.
This statement is absurd. Hospitals were in existence long before ToE.
Originally posted by mattison0992
quote: The existence of hospital proves that our current biological knowledge is correct and accurate.
It proves nothing of the sort. What do the large number of people who die in hospitals from nosocomial infections every prove about our understanding of Biology?
Originally posted by mattison0992
The proliferation of antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals,
Originally posted by mattison0992
surgical instruments left behind in patients
Originally posted by mattison0992
What does all this say about 'biological knowledge?
Originally posted by mattison0992
' What about the thousands of people who die from incurable diseases in hospitals
Originally posted by mattison0992
what does that prove about our understanding of biological knowledge?
Originally posted by mattison0992
quote: We use it to make medical/biological predictions about both the past (ToE) and the future (Medical practices and biology).
Describe three things that ToE has contributed to medicine?
Originally posted by mattison0992
Biology as a discipline didn't even exist until the 18th or 19th century. AFTER the first hospitals appeared. In fact you could say that biology arose because of hospitals, not the other way around. Lots of things in biology are wrong... we discover this everyday. Species are reclassified, mechanisms are clarified or otherwise rewritten, etc. Biology, like all science is dynamic and subject to falsification. Because certain aspects of biology appear to be correct, doesn't make all biological theories correct. It's like evaluating an exam based on a single question: This question is answered correctly, therefore the others must be too. This is a serious logical fallacy.
Originally posted by mattison0992
In fact you could say that biology arose because of hospitals
Originally posted by mattison0992
Lots of things in biology are wrong... we discover this everyday.
Originally posted by mattison0992
Species are reclassified, mechanisms are clarified or otherwise rewritten, etc. Biology, like all science is dynamic and subject to falsification.
Originally posted by mattison0992
Because certain aspects of biology appear to be correct, doesn't make all biological theories correct. It's like evaluating an exam based on a single question: This question is answered correctly, therefore the others must be too. This is a serious logical fallacy.
Originally posted by mattison0992
This isn't my area of expertise, and quite frankly, I couldn't care less about questions such as this. It's pseudotheological.
Originally posted by mattison0992
“I can't respond to this either.”
Originally posted by mattison0992
Ummm... me too. Soooo.....
Originally posted by Gravityisatheory
Doctors use antibiotics, which combat bacterial infections. The observable evolution of bacteria is a fact. Doctors are fully aware of this.
The facts of this can be found at “the answers in genesis” site. Considering their position on creation they do a fantastic job of explaining the fact of evolution.
It is this fact that doctors understand and continuously provide evidence for in their practice. So as in the Wiki quote above they are supporting the idea that evolution occurs. The fact that evolution occurs supports the ToE.
Right they're Christian Scientists.
The basis is that they are not faith healers.
Hmmm... perhaps you need to read up on the definition of Christian Science. An interesting quote that appears to contradict what you've written.
This subject started by my saying there are groups who “refuse all medical treatment” and you made the inference that this is the same as Christian Scientists. This became a whole new point to refute because we both know that this is not intension of the Christian Science faith. “…followers are free to choose to seek traditional medical treatment…” I re-quoted the portion in the above quote to make it clear that it was that distinction “refuse all medical treatment” which should have made it clear that I was talking about faith healers not Christian Scientists. The people you listed are not faith healers. They do not refuse ALL medical treatment. In as much as I also don’t know these people, these people are famous and if they really were to refuse all medical treatment (as faith healers) the news media would exploit such information. As they have done with the example I gave you, Andy Kauffman.
"Christian Scientists who choose to rely on medical treatment for a specific problem normally give up Christian Science treatment for that period."
I said “without evolution” not “without ToE”
I didn’t say which came first because that is irrelevant.
Biology itself is not a discipline it is a very broad category of science. From Dictionary.com;
Biology is; “The science of life and of living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, and distribution. It includes botany and zoology and all their subdivisions.”
Botany: The science or study of plants.
Botany/Medicine 60k BC en.wikipedia.org...
Which means that botany began before 60k years ago. IE so did biology and its theories.
What do you think it to proves? You think hospitals would exist if they used incorrect and inaccurate methods?
How does anyone identify a nosocomial infection? That would require the understanding of a discipline in biology. How do you treat such an infection? Without proven medication you wouldn’t know where to begin treatment.
But since we have many years experience in treating such an affliction we have developed antibiotics from ancient practices and medicines through the historically accumulative biological knowledge.
If our biology (broad term covering thousands of disciplines) was wrong we would not have such abilities to provide a cure.
Out of the endless amounts of antibiotics only a few are appropriate to address the problem.
The proliferation of antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals,
This is proof of evolution
It might say that these people have been exposed to hazardous chemicals in their drinking water. It might alert you to the fact that human hormone disrupter medications that were rejected by the FDA are currently used as platisizers in standard plastic food packages. These hormone/plastisizers are fat-soluble. Without the accurate biological knowledge to test peoples blood for chemical contamination you wouldn’t know how prevent additional people from getting the same thing. With out correct biological knowledge we wouldn’t know what causes or encourages incurable necrotizing faceitis. Without empirical knowledge of bacteria no one would even know that it is not a mystical affliction
Originally posted by mattison0992
We use it to make medical/biological predictions about both the past (ToE) and the future (Medical practices and biology).
Describe three things that ToE has contributed to medicine?
This is proof you don’t understand the difference between evolution and ToE.
It also indicates that you missed understood the quote you used.
This is an incorrect use of the term ToE. Theories do not directly contribute anything they make predictions as it says in the quote.
But to address the intent
Describe three (3) things the evolution has contributed to medicine?
1) Genomics, en.wikipedia.org...
2) Antibiotics to treat bacteria. This was learned from ancient use of molds and Propolis.
3) Identification of inherited chromosomal translocations for human disease (incl. Cancer) research
4) How about a whole site of contributions. evolution.berkeley.edu...
6) Even drugs; Digitalis, morphine, quinine, and ephedrine are all modern medicines that have been passed down to us from prehistoric signature practice.
Alternatively
Describe three (3) things that biology has contributed to; evolution, ToE, and medicine.
· The understanding of DNA en.wikipedia.org...
· The understanding of genetics en.wikipedia.org...
· The understanding of cellular variation
· www.talkorigins.org...
Biology is not a discipline it is an enormous category of life science. Microbiology would be a discipline of biology.
Originally posted by