Evolution or Creationism? **With a poll :P**

[QUOTE="zakkro"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]actually it was lizards that evolved into birds.gobo212

[QUOTE="zakkro"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]Can you see gravity? (say yes I dare you) Guybrush_3

I can see the effects of evolution. You would too if you bothered to do some research.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="zakkro"] I can see the effects of gravity. I can't see lizards turning into birds. Are you suggesting that dogs can give births to cats? zakkro

I can see the effects of evolution. You would too if you bothered to do some research.

fixed.

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"]Guess you didn't catch the sarcasm in his post.foxhound_fox

The Bible is not meant to be read literally.:| Everybody knows this. Words change over thousands of years. Meanings and phrases differ. Everything is symbolic.

By the way, your second paragraph is wrong. That is not what happened with Job.

fixed. Guybrush_3

fixed.

Guybrush_3

The Bible is not meant to be read literally.:| Everybody knows this. Words change over thousands of years. Meanings and phrases differ.

By the way, your second paragraph is wrong. That is not what happened with Job.

Samurai_Xavier

The Bible is meant to be read literally. It is the exact recorded history of the world and how God put early men through moral tests in order to build modern society.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]fixed. zakkro

lol @ evolutionism. I guess I also follow gravitism, cellism, and a relativism as well.

[QUOTE="zakkro"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]fixed. Guybrush_3

lol @ evolutionism. I guess I also follow gravitism, cellism, and a relativism as well.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]fixed.

harashawn

Kind of like how Galileo was wrong and the church was right?

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="zakkro"] Until you can show me an animal turning into another, I cannot accept evolutionism.zakkro

lol @ evolutionism. I guess I also follow gravitism, cellism, and a relativism as well.

you must be playing the same game as foxhound.

Kind of like how Galileo was wrong and the church was right?

Guybrush_3

you must be playing the same game as foxhound.Guybrush_3

I know you're only trying to annoy Christians, please stop. harashawn

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]fixed.

harashawn

you are dooming this thread to death.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Kind of like how Galileo was wrong and the church was right?

harashawn

The church imprisoned him because he said the earth was not the center of the universe, and it moves around the sun, based on the parts of the bible where it says that the earth can not move.

[QUOTE="harashawn"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]fixed.

zakkro

The bible... duh!

Evolution is all wrong. The first human male was made out of dust and the first human female was made of the male's rib. DUH! :roll: :P

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

The church imprisoned him because he said the earth was not the center of the universe, and it moves around the sun, based on the parts of the bible where it says that the earth can not move.

harashawn

Yes, it was wrong for the Church to do that. I cannot justify someone else's mistakes.

I really don't know what else you want me to say here.

don't use the bible to refute science (which is what often happens)

another thing. Scientic theories do not become theories without mountains of facts, laws, and empirical evidence to back them up. A theory does not become a theory without good reason. The part of science that is often wrong is hypothisises

don't use the bible to refute science (which is what often happens)

another thing. Scientic theories do not become theories without mountains of facts, laws, and empirical evidence to back them up. A theory does not become a theory without good reason. The part of science that is often wrong is hypothisises

Guybrush_3

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

don't use the bible to refute science (which is what often happens)

another thing. Scientic theories do not become theories without mountains of facts, laws, and empirical evidence to back them up. A theory does not become a theory without good reason. The part of science that is often wrong is hypothisises

harashawn

Evolution. How else does one explain Charmeleon?colecoavenger

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

don't use the bible to refute science (which is what often happens)

another thing. Scientic theories do not become theories without mountains of facts, laws, and empirical evidence to back them up. A theory does not become a theory without good reason. The part of science that is often wrong is hypothisises

harashawn

[QUOTE="zakkro"] You mean an explanation of accumulated facts and observances.harashawn

then your understood definition is wrong. Why exactly are you so sure that it will one day be dissproved. Do you think the same thing about gravity, or cells?

then your understood definition is wrong.

Guybrush_3

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

then your understood definition is wrong.

harashawn

A theory can also be a fact. :P

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

then your understood definition is wrong.

harashawn

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

then your understood definition is wrong.

harashawn

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

then your understood definition is wrong.

harashawn

You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven are in mathematics.

You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven are in mathematics.

Guybrush_3

You still haven't told me why I am wrong.

You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven absolutelyare in mathematics.

Guybrush_3

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven are in mathematics.

harashawn

You still haven't told me why I am wrong.

Your perception of science is off. You seem to think that things in science can be proven like they are in math. It doesnt work like that.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven absolutelyare in mathematics.

foxhound_fox

he wants absolute proof that evolution is true.

Your perception of science is off. You seem to think that things in science can be proven like they are in math. It doesnt work like that.

Guybrush_3

he wants absolute proof that evolution is true.

Guybrush_3

[QUOTE="harashawn"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

You are equating it to a hypothosis.

The only things that are ever proven are in mathematics.

Guybrush_3

You still haven't told me why I am wrong.

Your perception of science is off. You seem to think that things in science can be proven like they are in math. It doesnt work like that.

you are 100% correct in all of your argument so far guybrush, science is just an obseravtion and interpretation of the world but one that has hard evidence to back its claims up, as such most things in science are just theorys and never facts

he wants absolute proof that evolution is true. Guybrush_3

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]he wants absolute proof that evolution is true.

harashawn

actually you didnt define a definition of you theory of evolution you just said that a new theroy will take its place, i for one disagree especially when I consider modern genetics, itmay be refined but it will never be obselete