Evolutionary ignorance.

[DanieltheDragon]

Most creationists or intelligent design folks can not describe evolution nor do they have a basic understanding of evolution. Part of this is education where they were not taught evolution.

There are plenty of resources available, here is one such free course

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/bio ... -selection

Why do creationists avoid learning about evolution?

Is there a fear that if they take the time to be a good student and learn about it, it will make sense?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 21 by DanieltheDragon]

Okay.
I still don't see why I should waste my time pulling out names, when we already know they are there.
That has no meaningful purpose imo.

I never said you should.

[benchwarmer]

To have a good understanding of the Bible imo, equals accepting it as the word of God.

I understand this is only your opinion, but can you please explain the logic behind it? Essentially this is the same as saying "To have a good understanding of the Harry Potter series equals accepting it as the word Voldemort"

I don't see how one can have a good understanding of the Bible and yet think it is not truthful.

Odd, I have the exact opposite opinion. I've studied the Bible, read it through more than once, taken part in Bible studies, and was a member of a few churches over many years. I think I have a good grasp on what it's trying to say. The problem is it paints contradictory images of God, has obvious errors, and is in no way verifiable except in most mundane of things. All in my opinion of course.

Could you give me an example of that?

Sure, join us here:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... hp?t=31286

The Bible contains stories that are easily falsifiable. The only way to get around it is to 'apologize' and explain away what is plainly written. One would think that the 'word of God' would be easily accessible to all without jumping through all kinds of interpretation hoops. The simple fact that there is more than one Christian 'sect' proves that the Bible is not clear even to the very people who hold the Bible as "God's truth".

Millions attend church, and still remain clueless as to what the Bible really teaches.
So how would just picking up a Bible and reading it cover to cover, give one a good understanding of it?

What do you suggest then? If reading it over carefully does not convey the proper meaning, then something is seriously flawed no? In my day job I rely on accurate documentation in order to validate and/or use various hardware and software. Apparently God Himself is not capable of providing a clean API (Application Program Interface). I work with people who can get their ideas across clearly and succinctly with the written word. Why is God having so much trouble doing so?

I could relate to if you said, one would get familiar with its contents.

How is reading something not getting familiar with its contents? You are suggesting there is something else besides the Bible to understand the Bible. Why doesn't the Bible clearly state this on page one? Sounds like a major documentation bug to me.

So why, if I may ask, did you accept evolution? Do you accept it as opposed to creation, or do you accept it along with creation? What do you think about the Bible in relation to your beliefs?

This question wasn't directed at me, but I'll give my answer anyway

I accepted evolution because I went to school and learned about biology. I didn't simply read books, I had to do lab work. I also visited museums. I learned about the scientific method and the processes that real scientists use to validate their findings. I learned about the peer review process and was happy to learn that other scientists are more than happy to try and prove you wrong if you publish research that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

I don't accept creation as written in the Bible because it is full of holes and makes no sense compared to what we know today. There may be a god (or gods) that had a hand in the creation of the universe, but the Bible clearly does not describe the correct one(s). The stories are demonstrably false (given that there are 2 of them that don't line up).

I dislike anything that is against truth, or presented as truth when it's not. I mean, who likes to know they are given fake money, right?

This is ironic, you are presented with peer reviewed research and still don't buy it. Yet you take the word of ancient story writers who clearly don't understand what we understand today.

I joined this website precisely because I was tired of watching people present 'truth' when it's clearly not. At least now I can say I tried to set some things straight, even if nobody listened

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 27 by theStudent]

To have a good understanding of the Bible imo, equals accepting it as the word of God.
I don't see how one can have a good understanding of the Bible and yet think it is not truthful.

I find this ironic, given that in the past you have claimed to have a good understanding of evolutionary theory and yet you don't accept it.
If it's possible to understand something (such as evolution) and yet not accept it, why is it you think it that for one to have a good understanding of the Bible, that means they can only do so if they accept what it claims?

You're creating a completely unjustified double standard here.

Millions attend church, and still remain clueless as to what the Bible really teaches.

So then mere belief doesn't actually entail knowledge, then?
I agree. I remember my classmates in school professing their Christian beliefs, yet not having the slightest clue as to what the Book of Job is.

So how would just picking up a Bible and reading it cover to cover, give one a good understanding of it?

Is that what you're suggesting is all DanieltheDragon and all the rest of us have done? Just read it through once like one would read a novel?
Far from it. What do you think we've been doing on this website? I've been here a year and a half, talking about it.

So why, if I may ask, did you accept evolution?

Long story short, the evidence for it.

Do you accept it as opposed to creation, or do you accept it along with creation?

The two don't necessarily have to be in conflict. The Roman Catholic Church accepted evolution long ago.

What do you think about the Bible in relation to your beliefs?

Has a few beautiful passages here and there, tells a semi decent mythology of a people's "history" (quote unquote). In relation to what I believe? Well, since I don't believe what the Bible says in regards to its supernatural claims...

I dislike anything that is against truth, or presented as truth when it's not.

This is a key sentence. This shows, to me, that your arguments, your entire position, is emotionally based. Instead of calmly and rationally looking into the evidence, you have presupposed the Bible to be 'truth' and whenever someone or something comes along that challenges that, that says something different to what the Bible says, you react in an emotional manner towards that person or thing. You dislike it.

I mean, who likes to know they are given fake money, right?

Given that I handle money in my day job, I can speak to that.

I've been accused of quote-mining, appealing to authority, pulling information from creationist websites...

Yes, I remember saying those things to you. Thing is...you have indeed quote mined. I remember you quote mined Darwin, that infamous Creationist quote mine of Darwin talking about the complexity of the eye. I remember talking to you about that.
Unfortunately for readers, I cannot remember where or when you did that, so I am unable to post a link. Readers will want to take what I say here with a grain of salt if they want.

Why don't you assume now that I copied 90% of what they say?

...because you do? Whenever I read a typical post from theStudent, it's chock full of quote boxes from various websites.
Granted, you do have your own writing from time to time, but more often than not, you have quotes galore. It's what I remember most about your posting style here on this site, it's what sticks out in my mind. When I look in my memories, look up 'typical theStudent post', what my mind conjures up is a post that has loads of quote boxes.

but as I did more personal research, it became easier for me to do it on my own, because I understood evolution a lot better.

So you've been able to research and understand something, and not accept it...yet you won't give us atheists the same in return?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 2 by theStudent]




[center]The lies and assumptions of the TEO:
Part One.[/center]

Anyway, to answer for myself... It seems to me I know more about evolution than you think I do, because I know that it's based on assumption, and lies, and you don't.

That's probably the same thing you would say about the Bible right?

YOU KNOW that it's based on assumption and lies?


__________

Questions:

1. Can you elaborate on the lies that the TOE is based on?
2. Can you also elaborate on the assumptions?

___________

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 27 by theStudent]

I don't mean to assume. It's just that these words might have given that impression:

If my ability to debate the theory of evolution could improve, it wouldn't be by studying evolution, or anything you guys think you can teach me.
In fact, it is by studying the truth that we have improved our ability to debate the theory of evolution. Think of it this way...

and

If you studied real money, it don't take you long to identify fake money. And repeatedly identifying real and fake money allows you to become so experienced at it, that in a split second, you can tell the difference between the two, both by sight and touch. I'm sure there are some people who may be able to even identify the fake by smell.

Well, if I were reading a booklet, and I read the first few words, and stopped, I might get an impression that is wrong. However, if I read the entire booklet, I may then realize that I had the wrong impression.
However, it is possible to form wrong impressions because of cemented opinions.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 29 by DanieltheDragon]

Because the evidence supporting evolution was more compelling than that against it.

Can you give me one example?

This had no impact on accepting creation or my beliefs in God.

Is that a yes, or no?

I have other reasons now to not believe in the Christian god, but evolution isn't one of them.

I wanted to know what you thought about the Bible in relation to your beliefs?

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 27 by theStudent]

This is a debate forum right? So I debate

Yes I get that, but there are a ton of topics. If evolution is fake money and the bible is real money then it is a foregone conclusion. If I don't believe the bible is an accurate representation of reality how can you convince me evolution is false using it?

Who said anything about convincing?
Debating doesn't equal convincing. If someone is convinced, well, swell.

Why do you challenge the Bible's authority in your debates?

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 32 by benchwarmer]

I understand this is only your opinion, but can you please explain the logic behind it? Essentially this is the same as saying "To have a good understanding of the Harry Potter series equals accepting it as the word Voldemort"

It's the same as any experiment - please don't try this at home... or anywhere else - If we take a ripe mango, and drop it from a window ten stories high, we know it goes SPLAT. So we know if we jump through that window - no question right? - We'll go SPLAT. Like I say, please don't try that experiment.

One who studies the Bible, and comes to understand it - key, will accept it as the word of God. It has been proven over and over and over again.

Odd, I have the exact opposite opinion. I've studied the Bible, read it through more than once, taken part in Bible studies, and was a member of a few churches over many years. I think I have a good grasp on what it's trying to say. The problem is it paints contradictory images of God, has obvious errors, and is in no way verifiable except in most mundane of things. All in my opinion of course.

Understood.
Notice some things you said:

• I've studied the Bible
• read it through more than once
• taken part in Bible studies
• was a member of a few churches over many years
• I think I have a good grasp on what it's trying to say
• The problem is it paints contradictory images of God, has obvious errors, and is in no way verifiable except in most mundane of things.

Am I to translate one of those to be "have a good understanding of the Bible"?

You see, to say, you have a good understanding of the Bible, would lead to a number of questions:

1. How do you know?
2. Does it harmonize with what you understand?

If the first question does not agree with the second, and the answer to the second, is no, then there is a problem.
I hope that's not puzzling.

Sure, join us here:

We'll see.

The Bible contains stories that are easily falsifiable. The only way to get around it is to 'apologize' and explain away what is plainly written. One would think that the 'word of God' would be easily accessible to all without jumping through all kinds of interpretation hoops. The simple fact that there is more than one Christian 'sect' proves that the Bible is not clear even to the very people who hold the Bible as "God's truth".

When nations are at war, and a soldier or soldiers need to send a message to his allies, but at the same time prevent the enemy from detecting, or intercepting, or even understanding that message, they use various "cloaking" methods, including code that only the ally can understand.
The Bible is full of information on how God prevents his enemies from understanding, and even holds back wisdom from them.
You see, he reads hearts, and he knows who are scoffers of his word, and who hates righteousness.

What do you suggest then? If reading it over carefully does not convey the proper meaning, then something is seriously flawed no?

I agree, but it's not the Bible.
I've never met anyone who jumped of a boat or ship, said they were going for a swim, and they never learned how to.
I think the lifeguard would give up on jumping in to save them.
"Man, let them drown," he'll say, "I'm done."

In my day job I rely on accurate documentation in order to validate and/or use various hardware and software. Apparently God Himself is not capable of providing a clean API (Application Program Interface). I work with people who can get their ideas across clearly and succinctly with the written word. Why is God having so much trouble doing so?

No trouble at all.
The problem lies with the scoffers who will die without understanding.

How is reading something not getting familiar with its contents?

B, look at my word carefully.
Don't tell me you don't understand them. That would highlight a classic example of what I said above.

I could relate to if you said, one would get familiar with its contents.

Be right back.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 32 by benchwarmer]

This question wasn't directed at me, but I'll give my answer anyway Smile

I accepted evolution because I went to school and learned about biology. I didn't simply read books, I had to do lab work. I also visited museums. I learned about the scientific method and the processes that real scientists use to validate their findings. I learned about the peer review process and was happy to learn that other scientists are more than happy to try and prove you wrong if you publish research that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

I don't accept creation as written in the Bible because it is full of holes and makes no sense compared to what we know today. There may be a god (or gods) that had a hand in the creation of the universe, but the Bible clearly does not describe the correct one(s). The stories are demonstrably false (given that there are 2 of them that don't line up).

Thank you.

This is ironic, you are presented with peer reviewed research and still don't buy it. Yet you take the word of ancient story writers who clearly don't understand what we understand today.

This is interesting... especially this part:

ancient story writers who clearly don't understand what we understand today.

Expanding Earth
Rather, let me put the "allowed to see" list here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersede ... c_theories

...then give the ones not listed, as well as the ones currently awaiting obsoletion.
Future of an expanding universe
There's the Big Rip, Big Crunch, Big Bounce... one of these I think has become obsolete with the ever existing universe theory, and the Big Banged universe died.
Tongue map
Spontaneous generation
Evolution of genome size...
The Universe Is...
The genes we share with rice — or rhinos or reef coral — are among the most striking signs of our common heritage.
Larger Genetic Differences Within Africans Than Between Africans and Eurasians.
Origins of Modern Humans: Multiregional or Out of Africa?
Neandertals and humans?
Neandertals not in Africa?
Biologists once thought humans had 2 million genes. Now it turns out we have fewer than nematode worms.
For a long time they were considered to be simple organisms... now... Moss beats human: Simple moss plants outperform us by gene number.
The Expanding Universe: From Slowdown to Speed Up.
The Age of Coral Reefs?
complex cognition has evolved in species with very different brains through a process of convergent evolution rather than shared ancestry
Dragonflies - Most scientists believed these insects were unable to smell anything at all.
Scientists long thought that praying mantises were deaf, but...
Bats Not So Blind After All, Study Suggests
Ten percent of the brain myth
Radiation heat transfer once believed to dominate over convection heat transfer in wildfire spread — study reveals that’s not the case.
Newly Discovered Brain Region Helps Make Humans Unique.
Yawning gap divides monkeys and us. Scientists believed that differences between primates were mainly the result of variations in individual DNA letters. But...
The Mystery of Matter.
..................................................This is too much.

Cornell University scientists say that birds may be able to hear sounds at far greater distances than we once thought, perhaps hundreds of miles. Experiments have shown that homing pigeons can hear infrasound. These are sound waves that have a frequency too low for humans to hear, but which may travel thousands of miles through the atmosphere. It was thought that these sounds perhaps aid birds to migrate, helping them to identify surface features such as ocean breakers crashing over shorelines, or winds whistling through mountain peaks.

How do salmon navigate? Earth Magnetic Field?
I'm sorry B, I know you don't like this, but I just gotta lol. It's funny. LOL.

How many times has the Bible changed? Zero.
Apparently those "ancient story writers" know what you don't understand today, or are now beginning to understand, or are ignoring.

The Universe Has Probably Hosted Many Alien Civilizations: Study
Well, find them then. What's taking you guys so long?
Really B, how much do they know? What do they know that those ancient writers don't? Tsh tsh. Such little, and limited knowledge, and they are puffed up enough to fly in the face of reason.

Question:
Did scientists know the earth would be such a mess in the 20th century?
Those "ancient story tellers" knew.

Question:
Do scientists know the solution?
Those "ancient story tellers" do.

Also, in case you are like some who think that ancient people were backward, and we are more intelligent, I suggest you give that some more thought.
Nazca Lines: Mysterious Geoglyphs in Peru

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 33 by rikuoamero]

I find this ironic, given that in the past you have claimed to have a good understanding of evolutionary theory and yet you don't accept it.
If it's possible to understand something (such as evolution) and yet not accept it, why is it you think it that for one to have a good understanding of the Bible, that means they can only do so if they accept what it claims?

Because I believe the Bible gives evidence it is true, while evolution doesn't.

You're creating a completely unjustified double standard here.

Okay.

So then mere belief doesn't actually entail knowledge, then?
I agree. I remember my classmates in school professing their Christian beliefs, yet not having the slightest clue as to what the Book of Job is.

Now that's funny, but not as funny as the ones who don't even know where to find Genesis.

Is that what you're suggesting is all DanieltheDragon and all the rest of us have done? Just read it through once like one would read a novel?
Far from it. What do you think we've been doing on this website? I've been here a year and a half, talking about it.

Talking about what?
The negatives you searched out, and think they support atheists' arguments?

Long story short, the evidence for it.

Make the story shorter. Give me one.

The two don't necessarily have to be in conflict. The Roman Catholic Church accepted evolution long ago.

The Roman Catholic Church accepts dabbling in politics, and supporting and blessing wars, and long ago it was instumental in torturing to death "heretcs".
Jesus didn't.

Has a few beautiful passages here and there, tells a semi decent mythology of a people's "history" (quote unquote). In relation to what I believe? Well, since I don't believe what the Bible says in regards to its supernatural claims...

...you don't believe any of it to be truth.

This is a key sentence. This shows, to me, that your arguments, your entire position, is emotionally based. Instead of calmly and rationally looking into the evidence, you have presupposed the Bible to be 'truth' and whenever someone or something comes along that challenges that, that says something different to what the Bible says, you react in an emotional manner towards that person or thing. You dislike it.

Do you dislike evolution?
According to your answer, I suggest that your arguments, your entire position, is emotionally based. Instead of calmly and rationally looking into the evidence, you have presupposed evolution to be 'truth' and whenever someone or something comes along that challenges that, that says something different to what the evolutionists say, you react in an emotional manner towards that person or thing. You dislike it.

...because you do? Whenever I read a typical post from theStudent, it's chock full of quote boxes from various websites.
Granted, you do have your own writing from time to time, but more often than not, you have quotes galore. It's what I remember most about your posting style here on this site, it's what sticks out in my mind. When I look in my memories, look up 'typical theStudent post', what my mind conjures up is a post that has loads of quote boxes.

I really hope that you do take the time to read them.
They are visible proof that theStudent always provides evidence to go along with what he says, and the source. I didn't break any rule, did I?

So you've been able to research and understand something, and not accept it...yet you won't give us atheists the same in return?

That's because evolution and the Bible, are on two completely different planes - like sunrise and sunset.
However, you made a good point, so, I'll give you atheists that.
Which puts us back at the starting point - one or the other.

And so it goes...
You don't understand evoluion. No. I do understand.
You don't understand the Bible. No. I do understand.
You have preconceived religious ideas. No. I do not.
You have preconceived evolution ideas. No. I do not.
You are not thinking rationally. You're not thinking sensibly.
And back and forth we go...