Creation vs Evolution

[acehighinfinity]

Hey yall,

I watched the debate video on Ken Ham vs Bill Nye. Observational Science vs The Holy Bible - creationist. Youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_04S0fYU7FI

I have numbered some of them for Science (evolution) a. and b. for Creation/Holy Bible. I do have a lot of questions here, and if you don't mind answering them that would be great:

1.a - How did consciousness(mind) come from 'Matter'? Bill Nye and many scientist are unable to answer this.
1.b - Genesis 1:27 "So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them." and Genesis 3:21-24 "The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.� - Man was cursed with the knowledge of Good and Evil (consciousness/mind).

2.a - What scientific evidence support do you have for the Age Of Earth? 4.5 Billion years old (Earth/Universe).
2.b - The holy bible works out to 6000-10000yrs for the age of Earth.

3. - How did the Atom before the Big Bang get there? We know the Big Bang is only a theory.

4.a - How were dinosaurs killed? There are two theories for Science; meteorite and disease.
4.b - Genesis 6:7-8 " So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them..." - A global flood is the very cause.

5. If Science believes homo-sapiens existed an estimate of 200,000yrs ago and Earth is around 4.5 Billions years old. - Why is there a long period (massive gap) of years between Earth and homo-sapiens?

6. Is the moon in its correct place as we see it today if 4.5 Billion years was true? According to the moon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon. "The Moon's linear distance from Earth is currently increasing at a rate of 3.82±0.07 cm per year, but this rate is not constant" - Why do they say the moon is moving away from Earth but its not constant? Does the moon have a start and stop button? The calculation does not add up.

[smalltownatheist]

That's right. Trying to disprove things is what science does, so that we weed out as many wrong things as we can to get to what is most likely true. Veritasium just posted an excellent video illustrating this.

[acehighinfinity]

[Replying to post 12 by smalltownatheist]

Yes, Bill was right. We don't know, but science is working on the question. Simply saying, "God did it" isn't an answer that facilitates looking for facts.

When you do find out then I'm all ears. Other then that you have no answer and the holy bible does.

[smalltownatheist]

[Replying to post 22 by acehighinfinity]

Having a line in a book that says essentially, "because magic" isn't an answer. It might be a comfort to fill in that blank with something, but if you want to be intellectually honest, a better answer is, "I don't know right now".

[acehighinfinity]

[Replying to post 23 by smalltownatheist]

Having a line in a book that says essentially, "because magic" isn't an answer.

You can label it however you want to satisfy your ego. There are historians who have written about Christ; Tacitus, and Pontius Pilate had Christ crucified. Surely, you can not deny the history/significance of Jesus Christ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.php

It might be a comfort to fill in that blank with something, but if you want to be intellectually honest, a better answer is, "I don't know right now".

That will apply to me once they erase/remove that particular scripture from the Holy Bible other then that Science clearly has no answer? Thanks for bringing it up because it applies to Science and most importantly 'YOU!'

[Goat]

[Replying to post 23 by smalltownatheist]

Having a line in a book that says essentially, "because magic" isn't an answer.

You can label it however you want to satisfy your ego. There are historians who have written about Christ; Tacitus, and Pontius Pilate had Christ crucified. Surely, you can not deny the history/significance of Jesus Christ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.php

It might be a comfort to fill in that blank with something, but if you want to be intellectually honest, a better answer is, "I don't know right now".

That will apply to me once they erase/remove that particular scripture from the Holy Bible other then that Science clearly has no answer? Thanks for bringing it up because it applies to Science and most importantly 'YOU!'

Surely you should realize the problems with using Tacitus as evidence for Jesus.

It is very weak evidence at best. For one, Tacitus referred to by Christ, not Jesus, which indicates he got his information from Christians. If he was using Roman sources, he would have used the name Jesus.

[smalltownatheist]

[Replying to acehighinfinity]

There are no contemporary or extra-biblical sources for Jesus. As Goat pointed out, Tacitus only talked about "Christ" (as does Lucian, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger), but he was most likely relying on oral tradition and not independent research. Besides, this only proves there were "Christians", not that there was an actual Jesus, and certainly not a demigod Jesus.

There's no historical corroboration. Tacitus, Suetonius, and Josephus refer to the middle of the first century, and their texts were actually written at the very end of the first century, after the gospel story had already been created.

But this thread isn't about the historicity of Jesus; we can discuss that if you want on another thread. The point I think you're missing is that, even if there had been an actual man named Jesus in history, that doesn't make "because magic" a valid claim (or a valid answer to any question that science can't answer). Any supernatural claims about a real historical figure are still supernatural claims that require substantial evidence.

[NoisForm]

Hey there acehigh. I'll just touch on the first question (each of these questions could no doubt be debated for years and fill countless books - we don't have that kinda time!).

How did consciousness(mind) come from 'Matter'? Bill Nye and many scientist are unable to answer this.
1.b - Genesis 1:27 "So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them." and Genesis 3:21-24 "The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.�[/b] - Man was cursed with the knowledge of Good and Evil (consciousness/mind).

There's something very important in your question and in the answer that many people seem to miss. Your answer doesn't line up with your question. Your question was 'How did consciousness(mind) come from 'Matter'?'. Notice the word 'how'. The answer to 'how' requires an explanation of the process.

Imagine someone asked you how a car engine fires up, and your explanation was 'by turning the key'. I'm sure you'd agree that's not actually a very good explanation of how it happens. You'd have to explain the ignition system, how a combustion engine works, etc. to answer the 'how' question.

The answer is no one at this point can explain quite how this occurs. So, when you say 'Bill Nye and many scientist are unable to answer this', you can add 'and neither can anyone else'. There isn't a theologian or apologist on the planet that can tell us how a god supposedly did anything. Answering with 'God did it' then, doesn't actually explain anything at all. Science looks to explain how, not 'who' or 'why'.

When you quote the Bible, even if we were to assume it were true (which isn't the case in this sub forum), it says nothing about HOW consciousness arose. It merely says that God did it - that's it. Where does the scripture speak of 'how' this occurred? Where is the explanation of how? There isn't one. That is, it claims knowledge of where consciousness came from (a god), but not 'how'. Science on the other hand claims it 'comes from' the brain - also, it doesn't know quite how, -yet-, so it doesn't claim to. So, neither of us know how, we simply claim two different sources.

We do have many reasons for suspecting that the brain is the actual source of 'consciousness'. Change the brain, the consciousness changes. Eliminate the brain - no more evidence of consciousness at all. Go to sleep (i.e., change the chemicals in the brain), the consciousness changes dramatically. Add some other chemicals (say, seratonin), the 'consciousness' gets a feeling of well being. One can even stimulate the brain in such a way to give the feeling of a 'godlike presence'. And on and on...

Absolutely everything that we do to the brain directly effects consciousness, up to and including eliminating it completely. These things give a very good indication that the brain gives rise to consciousness. But you (and Bill) are right, we do not yet know HOW. None of us. We're working on it.

I do find it rather sad (genuinely), that someone like yourself would actually consider it a 'curse' to be able to...think.

[NoisForm]

I missed the explanation. How did God do it? Did he create RNA first, then what did he do?

Your "explanation" is like you'd tell a 5 year old about babies and storks.


Please tell us how God created the proteins to make people.

EXPLAIN! Not tell us "God did it".

Heh. I see I was very late to this party, and you've already got this covered. The creationists really seem to get tripped up on the meaning of 'how'.

[otseng]

You can label it however you want to satisfy your ego.

Moderator Comment

Please do not make any comments of a personal nature.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Danmark]

How does "Man was cursed with the knowledge of Good and Evil" explain the origin of consciousness?

Statements like that, and ones like "God created man" or "God created animals" and "God created the Sun," don't explain anything. They have no more explanatory value and are no more believable, than "Moloch created man" or "Raven spit on the dry earth to create the seas."