[aldo_14]

It's abiogenesis the Catholic church objects to, IIRC.  Although abiogenesis is still very much an area of experimentation (evolution is more advanced along in the proof gathered and the developed theories), so it's not so controversial.

[Grug]

Catholics?

You're speaking to one. Read the thread carefully. You'll also notice that the Roman Catholic church supports evolution, and not ID. You want to be real careful using the terms "Catholic" and "Christian" interchangably.

Technically I'm catholic and christian. >..>

[Col. Fishguts]

If ID is in fact true, that is fundemental, irrefutable proof of God. But proof denies faith. Without faith, organized religion and God Himself are nothing. We have never been promised proof of His existance. Indeed, He wishes us to take Him upon faith alone, without proof. Faith is what will in the end save you. Faith is what you are asked to have; no more, no less.

“Oh dear,” says God, “I hadn’t thought of that,” and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

ah, the big creation debate, where devout catholics still think that adam was made from dirt

Catholicism has accepted Evolution. It's protties (or americans ) who are generally more guilty of the creationist fallacy.
(that said: most muslims are fiercely anti-evolution too, and I'm guessing the same goes for most other religions also. Maybe it's being caused by living in the 3rd world? Although the American experience seems to indicate otherwise)

[Janos]

This thread is also a living proof of just how creationists, with their completely blind BS arguments, manage to sound as if there really were "a debate".

A creationist says: "well how about transitional fossils and catdogs huh"
Biologist must reply with long and elaborate answer which goes from basics of theories to practical results
Creationist then goes on: "oh huh well what about chicken embryos and blood clotting and eye and wings"
Biologists starts with explaining blood clotting, but is cut short by..
.. creationist who continues with stuff like radiocarbon, a goddamn PILTDOWN MAN, some old thing which has been corrected umpteen times before
Biologist continues with his explanation. He is asked to give proof of some weird transitional fossil [which don't exist unless creationists want them to] about a half-dog half-penguin. Of course, the point that this hypothetical animal would actually disprove evolutionary theories as they are is completely lost somewhere during the fierce "debate" buzzword bombardment.
Biologist: wtf, then continues with explanation.
Creationist declares victory because "durrr, he didn't manage to answer my dumbarse questions"
Then an uninformed dude looks at the debate and goes "ohh he sure raised a lot of questions" and walks away, happy in his ignorance.

It's infuriating.

[Flipside]

A lot of creationism is based not on disproving evolution, but on relying on the fact that the scientific answers, whilst correct, require some level of concentration and focus to understand. Most people can't be bothered with doing things like concentrating or thinking, after all, that's what scientists are for.

You begin to see the catch 22 situation forming. No-one wants to think about it, except those who are paid to think, and those who are paid to think about it struggle getting the message across to those who are not, because theres an 'explanation' that requires less thought and is therefore more compatible with their lifestyles.

Memes and Science, the Alpha and the Omega

[aldo_14]

ah, the big creation debate, where devout catholics still think that adam was made from dirt

Catholicism has accepted Evolution. It's protties (or americans ) who are generally more guilty of the creationist fallacy.
(that said: most muslims are fiercely anti-evolution too, and I'm guessing the same goes for most other religions also. Maybe it's being caused by living in the 3rd world? Although the American experience seems to indicate otherwise)

I thought it was more the fundamentalist US baptists who pushed it.  Certainly Scotland has a fair mix of both Protestants and Catholics, but I've never heard a peep about it here.  Although the wee free keep moaning about ferries on Sundays, but they're all hidden away in an island in the far north, so we just ignore them (wee free - presbytarian church.  They're the sort of dour faced moany bastards who'd find something to moan about if they were in heaven itself).

[aldo_14]

Firslty, animals don't have the fear of man.  That's why carnivores like sharks, alligators, cheetahs, etc attack man (because we're fragile & slow prey compared to, say, a gazelle).  Would you go out on a walk, unarmed, in the middle of the African plains?

Actually, you would be reasonably safe doing that. Most carnivores do fear people. The ones that don't are either ones that do not come in contact with people often enough to develop such a fear (sharks) or just aren't that bright. The documented instances of attacks upon humans tend to point to two possiblities: we should stop poking the animal with a stick (whether we realized we were or not is, unfortunately, irrevelant; the animal doesn't much care if you think you're harrassing it, all it cares about is that it thinks you're harrassing it) or the animal was desperate enough that it took the first available prey to come along.

Although an excellent argument exists that they just ignore us because we taste bad. According to the societies which both practiced cannablism and have been studied in detail, human meat tastes like pork. Flyblown, rancid pork that's been left sitting in the dirt for week. As correlation it should be noted that most attacks on humans by predators end with one or two bites, and the human is not actually consumed.

Missed this earlier, but I want to come back and say I think you're wrong here.  Animals that have been in contact with man usually will have learnt to be scared due to our ability to, well, kill or hurt them and outthink them in doing so.  And smaller animals will be naturally fearful of an apex predator (which we really are), and in particular any form of herbivore will have an evolved 'flight' response to a reasonable sized predator.  However, animals which we have not hurt before (i.e. have no experience base to fear us), or which we are not a physical theat to, are not afraid of us.  Take your average silverback - it is not afraid to challenge human encroachers onto its territory.  The likes of the Great White Whale more or less ignore us (because we're no threat to them).   Predators can attack humans - take a dingo (or any carnivore) stealing a baby (babies and children are good prey - they are easy to kill and carry; usually it just take a shake to snap the neck for a large-ish predator).  Or even any of the people who've climbed into tiger or whatnot cages at zoos and been killed.  Even my brothers hamster will bite me (little bastard!). There is most certainly no universally protective 'fear of God' put into modern animals to stop them attacking people, which is what the implication was - and i doubt God would only install a fear of humanity that only worked on certain animals at certain situations.

Sorry to go back 4 pages, BTW, but figured I should mention is.

[Bobboau]

and the God squad has given up again...

that or the local highschool hasn't let out yet... (even er)

[Flipside]

Actually, Australia is an excellent example of what happens when most prey are cut off from the threat of humanity, and, indeed, how quickly humanity can have an effect once it appears.

[Col. Fishguts]

Fundamentalists who follow the argument of "Evolution is false -> science is flawed and hence is evil" should not be allowed to use the fruits of other theoretical, scientific branches.
Solid state physics for starters, that mucking about with atoms and electrons clearly was not meant to be used by men, it must be the work of Satan. So, no semiconductor devices = no computers  = no internet for creationists.
The web would be a much happier place....

[aldo_14]

Oz also strikes me as a very good example of how a survival-aiding mutation can cause evolutionary development, namely in the rabbits developing a resistance to the Myxomatosis introduced to try and kill them off, and this resistance spreading across the population.

  Although obviously evolution (very little in reality) doesn't require a catastrophe-type event for the species to occur  to have beneficial mutations (lest I risk encouraging one of the fundamental mistakes I saw being made earlier).   The physical isolation of Oz is also quite neat in demonstrating convergent evolution and dispelling the myth of design - namely that you see animals that are just as well adapted as those in the rest of the world, but using a different body 'design' such as the kangaroos hop thanks to millions of years of isolation (why would God make 2 designs of animals?  Wouldn't he just make a perfect design?).

[Galemp]

Genesis 1:16:
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Therefore the moon isn't actually reflecting light, it's creating it; and the sun isn't a star.

That is all.

[karajorma]

This thread is also a living proof of just how creationists, with their completely blind BS arguments, manage to sound as if there really were "a debate".

Which is why a sensible tactic is to go on the offensive and show the flaws in creationism first. After just 3 threads on the subject you may have noticed that no one is brave enough to even mention ID and Charismatic took steps to actually distance creationism from ID

We're not doing that on this thread cause quite frankly the discussion would be over if even one of us did. Any one of the 7 or 8 of us answering ZmaN and Charismatic's posts could easily raise so many flaws in the creationist model that we doubt they'd ever come back and the thread would be over.

We're not trying to win this argument. We're simply sustaining it in the hope that certain people will see that you can believe in evolution and christianity at the same time.

[aldo_14]

Genesis 1:16:
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Therefore the moon isn't actually reflecting light, it's creating it; and the sun isn't a star.

That is all.

Well, obviously you're not meant to take that bit literally.  But you are meant to take the bit about a vast flood covering the earth to 20 foot over the highest mountain, leaving absolutely no trace in history, somehow failing to wipe out millions of fish and bird, with every land animal on earth (including penguins and sloths) held in a boat about twice the size of the Titanic and crewed by eight managing to survive on the denuded apocalyptic post-flood landscape, covered in sediment strata that have managed to break carbon dating, sort plants and pollen into climatological order, raised heavier animals above lighter ones and turned their bones into rock in record time) very seriously.  But not the bit about the flat earth immobile in space and created in 6 days, about 6,000 years ago.  Or are you?  I get so mixed up.

[Shade]

About 15 minutes until that webcast starts. Time make some tea and get tuned in

(Unless I miscalculated the time difference)

[Kosh]

somehow failing to wipe out millions of fish and bird, with every land animal on earth (including penguins and sloths) held in a boat about twice the size of the Titanic and crewed by eight managing to survive on the denuded apocalyptic post-flood landscape

And also one of those animals (termites) typically only eats wood, while another (carpenter ants) will only make their nests in wood. Both of them can do enough damage to actually sink a wooden ship if they have enough time to do it.


And with crap-"theories" like ID getting so popular, it is little wonder why people are so afraid of the chinese catching up to them. You don't see them teaching religion as science (or psuedo-science as science).

[Shade]

Glass jars... I'd be more concerned with the beavers personally, they'll want to give those teeth a workout sooner or later.

[Janos]

The likes of the Great White Whale more or less ignore us (because we're no threat to them).

I think that someone is trying to kill me
Infecting my blood and destroying my mind
No man of the flesh could ever stop me
The fight for this fish is a fight to the death

White whale - holy grail

What remorseless emperor commands me
I no longer govern my soul
I am completely immersed in darkness
As I turn my body away from the sun

White whale - holy grail

Split your lungs with blood and thunder
When you see the white whale
Break your backs and crack your oars men
If you wish to prevail

This ivory leg is what propels me
Harpoons thrust in the sky
Aim directly for his crooked brow
And look him straight in the eye

White whale - holy grail

[karajorma]

About 15 minutes until that webcast starts. Time make some tea and get tuned in

(Unless I miscalculated the time difference)

It's about an hour away.