«

[Ajax]

Man, these intense conversations bring back a ton of memories....sigh.... Back to the good old days of discussing religion all day every day for two years. You get to know a lot about your personal views and what you stand for. Keep it up guys! k:

[ReamusLQ]

You know Ajax, a little help from you (since after two years, I assume you know more than I do...I've got seminary on my side mainly) if you know...you care to put in your two cents. k:

[Ajax]

Well, Reamus, it seems like you're doing a pretty good job of letting people know where you're coming from.

Going off the evolution stand point, it's important to remember that the Bible never mentions exactly HOW long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden. Who knows, maybe they were in their "perfect yet naive" state for generations before they actually "progressed" by eating the fruit from the tree. If that's the case, then a natural evolution process could've occured.

I have to say this, too. I took a couple of different classes at my University on evolution and archaeology. I went into them thinking that evolution was, as a whole, correct. What I ended up learning (much to the chagrin of the professors) is that grand scale evolution seems bogus to me. I've seen the evidence of humanoid skulls found in Africa and parts of Asia, which suggest a slow progression to what we are: homo sapiens sapiens. Now, I look at this so called "evidence" and can't convince myself that humans come from apes (or even the ape-like organisms like homo erectus). What we've got to realize is that Darwin's theory claims every living creature on this earth evolved from a single cell that "magically" appeared as a result of sunlight hitting water and reacting with indigenous gases. Wow. Some claim.

I do agree that evolution occurs on a small scale. Take the evidence that made Darwin believe in evolution to begin with: finches on the Galapagos Islands. They radiated into several different sub-species over generations, each with something unique. But in my mind, that's not really Evolution, it's adaptation. Things, over time, can adapt to fit better in the environment around them, but to actually go from one species to something completely different doesn't add up. Only something, or SOMEONE, greater can do that.

[wendymaree]

Hmmm...that was very interesting, Alex. I don't claim to believe in either evolution or the Garden of Eden, nor disbelieve, as I really don't know for sure. I wasn't around. However, I saw a thought-provoking documentary last year about ancient mumified remains found somewhere. This is all very vague as I don't remember names or places, but some scientific type spent a great deal of time trying to track down the remains of an early species of human in order to prove the missing link theory. (i.e, that humankind descended from primitive apes.) However what he discovered was even better: an incredibly ancient skull with enough remaining bone segments that showed the creature walked upright like a human. Scientific dating showed that this was the oldest skeleton so far discovered. However, the skull was larger than later finds...even larger than our skull size today. So this scientiist deduced that humankind is de-evolving, not evolving.

[taikara]

@wendymaree:

Maybe it was an alien!!

Maybe aliens created Earth!!!



(sorry, I couldn't resist :angel

[Ajax]

Yeah, I think I heard about that too. Like I said, in my Archaeology class we spent weeks going over each find and how that fit into the whole human tree. The Neanderthals were actually bigger than the average human today (and that includes the size of the cranium). Who knows why they didn't make it? They're finding new things all the time that make everyone step back and re-evaluate how they've put the puzzle together. Did anyone read about the discoveries on the island next to Indonesia with the "little people"? Interesting stuff.

But, though I know I'm being somewhat close-minded, after looking at things it's hard to say that my ancient relatives were single-celled organisms. Call me old-fashioned...

[wendymaree]

Originally posted by taikara@Feb 17 2005, 07:18 AM
@wendymaree:

Maybe it was an alien!!*

Maybe aliens created Earth!!!

Gene Roddenberry would be proud of you. :bleh:

Actually, you know, the myths and Bible stories all have strange types of beings that suppposedly wandered about here at various stages. Could we have descended from an Alien gene pool? Hell-o? gene pool...Gene Roddenberry...is anyone getting alien connections here? Is anyone hearing the music from The Twilight Zone? :whistle:

[taikara]

:blink:

Whoah.

Do not attempt to adjust your monitor.... we control the vertical and the horizontal...

[Reup]

Originally posted by Ajax@Feb 17 2005, 07:57 AM
I have to say this, too. I took a couple of different classes at my University on evolution and archaeology. I went into them thinking that evolution was, as a whole, correct. What I ended up learning (much to the chagrin of the professors) is that grand scale evolution seems bogus to me. I've seen the evidence of humanoid skulls found in Africa and parts of Asia, which suggest a slow progression to what we are: homo sapiens sapiens. Now, I look at this so called "evidence" and can't convince myself that humans come from apes (or even the ape-like organisms like homo erectus). What we've got to realize is that Darwin's theory claims every living creature on this earth evolved from a single cell that "magically" appeared as a result of sunlight hitting water and reacting with indigenous gases. Wow. Some claim.

I do agree that evolution occurs on a small scale. Take the evidence that made Darwin believe in evolution to begin with: finches on the Galapagos Islands. They radiated into several different sub-species over generations, each with something unique. But in my mind, that's not really Evolution, it's adaptation. Things, over time, can adapt to fit better in the environment around them, but to actually go from one species to something completely different doesn't add up. Only something, or SOMEONE, greater can do that.

Might I suggest reading Richard Dawkins 'The Blind Watchmaker". He thorougly explains how the mechanism of evolution (that is: plenty of time and a lot of random small changes that in- or decrease the chance of survival) can make a large transgression from one species to another quite feasible.
There's also a bit on the appearance of life on earth, and there's nothing magical about this either. It's due to pure chance, a lot of different molecules and again a LOT of time. (the 'miracle' was the appearance of that single cel out of inorganic matter in the first place).

Off course there are plenty of books that prove the validity of many biblical tales as well... but Dawkins had me convinced of evolution big time (I stopped being a Catholic not long after reading a lot of Darwin, Dawkins, Dennett e.a.). As far as I can tell evolution is the best explanation for the occurence of life I've yet encountered!

[ReamusLQ]

What I have never really understood, is why (to me it seems like this atleast) the majority of people feel they can either believe in a religion, or science. They feel as if Science is attacking and trying to cut down religion. Why is this? It has always been my understanding, that the two ultimately work side by side.