Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-09-2007, 04:55 PM   #71
Site Team
 
root's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,006
Default Re: religon (if this offened any one im sorry ill have a mod take it down)

what about Neanderthal man? and all the different homo-xx before homosapien finished evolving?

I've often wondered that if man evolved from Apes, then why do we still have apes? why didn't they evolve too?


the bible says god created the world, then created man,
science shows (through DNA testing) that whilst Neanderthal man was related to modern man (homosapien) they were a different species, evolving in different parts of the world.

(modern man evolved around the equator/africa whilst Neanderthal man evolved further towards northern Europe, where conditions were harsher, and had heavier set features possibly to help in the more harsh climate).

the bible only mentions one species of man, whilst we know that there have been at least two distinctly genetically different species of man.


following on from something said earlier.

carbon dating isn't proven, it (like most science) is best guess based, it works on the idea of a constant decay of carbon isotopes, the same as any nuclear decay, all isotopes have a half life.
trouble is that when you say something is 2 billion years old you have no constant source to base that theory on.

you can prove something is 30 years old, by measuring the amount of carbon isotopes in that, and then comparing 30 years later,
and you can say the same things about other things based in that same time range whilst measuring the same difference.

but you can't just assume that if something is constant for a minute, or even a year, that it'll be constant for 3 million years or more!



as someone said earlier...
nobody know exactly how the earth was created. everything that we are told is literally just best guess...

however:
believing the word of the bible is just blind faith, there are historical references that suggest that there is a lot of truth in the bible however this does *not* make all of it true.
(e.g, I got up this morning, ate breakfast went to work, I used magical super powers to fly there -just because half that sentence is true, it doesn't mean it all is!)
also a lot of the bible is interpreted. it's a best guess of what was meant by original scriptures,
(like that page on dinosaurs in the bible, it's taken a reference, science says hold on there were these huge beasts before we find any reference of man in fossils, so then bible teachers say, well there is this vague reference to a beast, and it could be that...).

and incidentally, the bible doesn't say that Man was on the earth from day1, man was created on the 6th day, but man was able to live in paradise until he was cast out to the earth, (there is no distinct time frame here AFAIK).

the fundamental problem with religion, is each religion says a different thing and claims it as FACT.

you can say the bible is completely correct because this will contradict traditional Jewish scriptures, the Koran, and many other text and practices, Buddhists for example believe in life force, their is life in everything this is similar to saying an omnipresent god, but is is not the same as saying there is a god as an entity, or a holy trinity etc.

you can't say that religion is true without disbelieving other religion, because we (as man) have tried to order religion into chunks that we can manage, we write it down and it becomes a holy law, that Holy law is then preached.
sometimes for better (ten commandments) sometimes for worse like the tridentine mass that prays for the conversion of the jews to accept christ into their hearts.

the problem with religion (as a concept), (in general) is it claims to be unilaterally accepting, however it is not.
there for religion is a liar.

science (as a concept) is not a liar, it never claims to accept anyone.
it has a rule set, that rule set is simple.

if you claim something as fact then the burden of proof is that that has to be repeatable, you have to be able to measure something, or show something time and time again.
if you claim something is theory then that theory can be noted and shared until it is disproved.

for example acid dissolves metals, scientific fact. when claiming something is fact the burden of proof is on the claimer to be able to show that this works time and time again, and that it is a fact.

rule 2, theory.
theory is best guess, it's the burden of proof to disclaim a theory with proof.
I can say I have a theory that acid doesn't dissolve metals.

we will call this "roots theory of substance."
now if any one cares to prove me wrong, they can (a video on you tube is sufficient in this case).
but until I am proved wrong my theory stands fast.
the more fact you can base a theory on the more it will stand the test of time.

for example, the theory of evolution is based on many many scientific findings and facts (based on genetics i.e survival of the fittest and passing on genes from desirable mates based on the likely future of offspring), therefore is has stood up.

the previous theory (that giraffe's got long neck by stretching to the highest leaves does not stand up). there for this theory has been disproved and doesn't stand and is not taught except for as a foot note to show that theory *can be wrong*.

the bible has a theory, so far it has not been disproved and hence many people believe it.

if religion were proved wrong without any shadow of doubt, then people would just stop believing in that theory.

if you don't understand the difference between fact and theory then you need to go back to school.



the theory of evolution is a theory.
biblical scriptures are a theory.

both have a lot of facts in them.

and until such a time as man can travel in time we'll never know which is true.
__________________

__________________
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2007, 05:32 PM   #72
muz
Golden Master
 
muz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,928
Default Re: religon (if this offened any one im sorry ill have a mod take it down)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dorfman View Post

how can something come from nothing?
That one line there absolutely rubbishes the rest of your post ,
My point exactly how can something come from nothing . That disproves gods existence how did god make all that we see from nothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by dorfman View Post

Ok lets take God out of the picture. Most intelligant historians can not prove the bible wrong. Infact they have speifically tried to prove the bible wrong on everything the Bible states that doesn't have "God" in it. I am talking about the historical time-line here folks. The bible has a great tract record in the history aspect, and proving historians wrong, many historians use the Bible to find other things, like kings and so on. With that said, and most historians would agree that the bible is 100% accurate on the historical content of the Bible, that goes a long way in proving God.

Why would this writters and some of these writters are historians mind you just put in God? It doesn't make sense.
Also i do believe some of the bibles content to be true and some of it such as miracles are just over exaggerated or confusions .
Maybe they put in god as this almighty powerfull being nobody can see to control people . If people believe god is everywhere and god can see anything they can keep law and order as people are afriad of Gods wrath

Quote:
Originally Posted by dorfman View Post

Hindu, is really wrong, and most of you should agree because, the Koran and Christian God is not the same...and the beliefs of Hindu's is that all the God(s) are the same God.
Hindus holy book isnt the koran ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dorfman View Post

To me, Either God created everything or Ailens did it.
Mayeb we are just one big alien experiment . I actually find that much more believable than God created it all . I mean Who knows how intelligent aliens are they could be a million years more advanced than us
__________________

__________________
Desktop-AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+-2GB Elixer DDR2 800 250gb+500gb+500gb+120gb
Laptop-Apple Macbook Pro 13" Intel core i5(2.3ghz) 4gb Ram 320gb hard drive
muz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2007, 06:08 PM   #73
Fully Optimized
 
troy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,410
Default Re: religon (if this offened any one im sorry ill have a mod take it down)

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
what about Neanderthal man? and all the different homo-xx before homosapien finished evolving?

I've often wondered that if man evolved from Apes, then why do we still have apes? why didn't they evolve too?

the problem with religion (as a concept), (in general) is it claims to be unilaterally accepting, however it is not.
there for religion is a liar.

science (as a concept) is not a liar, it never claims to accept anyone.
it has a rule set, that rule set is simple.
Those are all good points. How do you explain homo erectus or other early forms of man? There is evidence to prove that they've used tools and even discovered fire. They had a documentary on Discovery about this and if you look at the fossils, and look at how certain species co-evolved with one another you'll see that evolution is certainly real. Whether or not people believe it is another thing.

Religion is not accepting. I believe religion is one reason why there is so much discrimination in the world. If it were truly accepting it would accept people and not care about sexual orientation, race, age, or even questioning of faith. To be honest, I find politics more accepting than religion. Maybe one reason a lot of people don't want to be a part of a religion is the shallowness and narrow views that a lot of people seem to share.
__________________

__________________
Desktop: Dell Dimension E510, 2.5GB RAM, Intel P4 3.0GHZ, 250GB HDD, Windows Vista Premium. Might not be the best, but the old girl is still running good.
troy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0