Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Doug-
I am mainly familiar with homonid fossils and it is definitely possible to measure progress in fitness as each species that supercedes the other timewise (Ardipithecus, Austrolopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthal, and Homosapiens) show improvements in bipedal mobility and endurance, an increase in brain size, and an ever more sophisticated tool tradition.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Ed-
I agree that it continues to be a good idea to pursue the material and reductionist card to the end and see just how far it takes us, (assuming we ever get to an end) . It will certainly be interesting to see what the new hadron collider turns up !
jstan-
I have read some about brain scans, mostly from a Buddhist perspective. However, as far as I know, the biochemistry of the brain and spiritual experiences has not been equivalently explored beyond figuring out how psychedelics work. There are many more experiences beyond that which no one has yet looked at, the main problem being, as we see here, that it is so difficult to find scientists and religious people who can share any kind of a common vocabulary.
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
I think Karl Baba said it best. "We think we know more then we really do."
We just don't know, and quoting bible verses or quoting Darwin doesn't really change that. You have to go out on your own and find your own space, you own theories. and to me this is really important, allow others to do the same, even if they don't agree with you.
Your life is all about your journey, and what you do with it. My thought is one day we may be called to account what we did with our riches, our gift of life, but I'm not saying others have to believe that. If one day if comes to that, will you be able to stand tall and give your account? As the one thing I do know, there is more out there then meets the eye....
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
21st century Creationists, a sure sign of the Apocalypse!
We ARE Devo!
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 5, 2009 - 02:29pm PT
|
F.
Dawkins has a new book just out:
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
Thanks for that, flanders it is good to be alerted that Phillip E. Johnson, has no credibilty what so ever.
Where do you find this dreck?
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
I have hesitated to get into this thread but now here goes . . .
From my point of view, and I see it all the time and have to deal with this question (Evolution vs. Creation) all the time, it really is better understood from an understanding of what science is and isn’t first, and then attempt to prove the original hypothesis or in this case the evolution theory valid or invalid.
Many think that science and religion have nothing to do with one another, and to be a good scientist you have to be an atheist. Wrong. To paraphrase Paul Hewitt, Science is about Cosmic Order. Science can only attempt to answer How? or What? questions. Science is a very powerful tool, but can only work with Scientific Hypotheses, in other words they must be testable. Science works in the realm of the physical observable and measurable Universe. Religion/faith on the other is about Cosmic Purpose and can ask and attempt to answer Why? questions. Also philosophy and logic can also attempt questions of purpose, science cannot.
Science and Religion are very important human endeavors and are different, but compatible human endeavors. They are two different tools that ask two different kinds of questions. Can Science find physical evidence that issues of faith and God might be true? Sure. Can Religion and books of faith also in turn demonstrate concepts and principles of Science? Sure. They can at times support one another. Do they always? No.
Do we know all there is to know in the scientific realm about the Universe around us? Hardly. Does the World of Religion and faith know all there is to know about God and Creation? Hardly. We struggle to look through a dark pane of glass whether on the science side or the religion side of human endeavor, to know.
Don’t think for a moment that you have to be an Atheist to be a good scientist. Many great men and women of science have been very devout in their faith and religion: Aristotle, Copernicus, Galileo, Tycho Brahe, Keppler, Newton, perhaps Einstein a little even. The list could go on and on. There are many good books just on this topic that prove it. So, if you are going to attempt to throw out religion and faith and God out with the bath water altogether, then you would eliminate what made these great scientists who they really are. We have a science logic side to us, and we have a faith and worship side to us that wants to know and be with God. To deny this makes you less than complete. Something is missing.
Now from this foundation we can then look at the Evolution vs. Creation hypotheses and theories . . .
I’ll come back to it when I have more time.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
What is "superior" ?
What is "higher" ?
And what is the soul?
I'm not here to hold your hand, you're a big boy now, you do your work.
I've simply stated some facts which you will interpret according to your intelligence.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
"To have or show realization, something must have or show concrete existence. Concrete existence (by definition) cannot be shown to occur without either having interactions or invoking a "universal observer." The former is readily accessible to any living being, the latter is unnecessary and unparsimonious."
I think it's in this first sentense that you lose your way here, Wescrist. Basically you're restating the basic supposition of materialism, that some "thing," to be real, must me made of material, must be "concrete," or materially based. The problem, of course, is that, on one hand, awareness itself is not a thing (you use the eyeball as a reference, but an eyeball is a thing), while the content of awareness is comprised of things. You cannot describe awareness in terms of "qualities" because qualities all have aspects of things, or content. Awareness itself has no beginning or end, is unborn. Not so all that arises IN awareness.
Interesting that you can take the opposite tack and say that awareness as a "no-thing" is the only true reality and that isolating material from the matrix of awareness is a false abstraction. It ususally works the other way - folks claiming that "awareness" discussed sans content is a false abstraction, and that material is the only "thing" that is real. "No-things" such as awarness are merely epiphenomenons, secondary phenomenon that occurs alongside or in parallel to the primary phenomenon of atomic material activity.
Now the paradox is that the opposite is also true - that awareness IS matter. It is just this paradox that people try and overcome with a rigid materialism. We so much want life to be measurable, graspable, knowable.
True, neurofeedback is a type of biofeedback, but it is never refered to as biofeedback. It's a very interesting field full of paradoxes.
JL
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
Why is it so imperative that we know exactly how old everything is? (Me included, hehehe) What will age verification accomplish ? Is it beneficial in helping humans that need it ? Does it help to find God ? Is it a crucial factor in determining other scientific data that might produce something specific and great for this planet, mankind and the galaxies beyond?
Or do the arguments keep one from focusing on things much more important. Like life and death and helping the bro ? Jess asking.
|
|
bc
climber
Prescott, AZ
|
|
Note to Flanders (and anyone else providing creationist "literature"), When a creationist quotes a well known evolutionist, you can be almost certain he is quote-mining.
Typically, the evolutionist will employ some rhetorical device where she questions a part of evolutionary theory and then goes on to provide an answer. Something like, "To many the eye is too comlpex to have evolved, but in fact eye evolution is well understood". The creationist will then quote the first bit of the writer's quote, but leave out the last bit. Ellipses (the ... between different parts of the quote) are also employed to mangle the writers original meaning. This kind of writing on the part of Johnson and many other creationist writers can only be characterized as lying to make a point. Good xtians lying to save souls. Nice.
The paragraph you provided from Phillip E. Johnson's where he quotes Gould is a classic case of this. Go here to read what Gould really wrote. [url=" http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part3.html"] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part3.html[/url] Scroll down to quote #3.12 .
In the future please consider reading the original source before providing such quotes. If you can't find the original material, the Quote Mine Project is a great place to start.
|
|
bc
climber
Prescott, AZ
|
|
Lynne, Why is it so imperative that we know exactly how old everything is? (Me included, hehehe) What will age verification accomplish ? Is it beneficial in helping humans that need it ? Does it help to find God ? Is it a crucial factor in determining other scientific data that might produce something specific and great for this planet, mankind and the galaxies beyond?
You're joking, right?
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
Actually, No.
Edit: When I see many people, including babies and children along with their parents hungry and starving to death without enough warmth or water I wonder how important great debates are. Just give me a 1-10 why age dating is so significant in the big scheme of things.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
khanom, In defense of WBraun....I didn't get him at first. After reading quite a few of his posts I think I see where he is coming from and often he has some valid points.
People use words and vocabulary diffently. I just met someone a few months ago and it took me awhile to really understand exactly what they were saying. Now I'm pretty much on the same page with them and we actually have some great discussions. lynnie
|
|
Flanders!
Trad climber
June Lake, CA
|
|
Pay no attention to those men behind the curtain.........
|
|
cintune
climber
the Moon and Antarctica
|
|
Lynne, I recently had that same experience.
Turned out she was Belgian.
|
|
bc
climber
Prescott, AZ
|
|
Lynne, You may not see the value of this, but it is central to our understanding of many things and not just anthropology or evolution. Having an accurate understanding of where a data point rests in time is incredibly valuable. Long range weather patterns (measured in centuries or more) is one area to consider. By knowing when things happened in the past, we can better understand when things may happen in the future. Your remark reminds me of the people who say, "Why bother going into space?" without fully understanding the benefits such research and exploration has given humanity. Consider that our understanding of evolution has led to an even greater understanding of human diseases. Ever gotten a flu shot?
Science, the how, where, what and WHEN, of things is probably the best way humankind has discovered for, in your words, "life and death and helping the bro."
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
bc, thank you for your thoughtful response. I will have to give it more than a cursory thought and respond more fully later. But I have always supported space exploration. It is a concrete, hands on attempt at learning more about our great universe.
Dating and weather patterns.....not quite so concrete as there are so many variables. I wonder if we will ever really be able to understand and predict the big picture in weather patterns?
Flanders, :D
cintune, if I get what you're saying.....very funny !!! Even if I don't...it's funny. hehehe
Oh Dr. F, we love to love each other right ?
Scientists seek the truth and true scientists never throw out other's theories as folly. Truth seeks not only the truth but allow others to seek it also.
I was simply stating that we only have one short life on this planet and we need to prioritize ...... death and famine, carbon dating all important, but some are a bit higher on the scale of importance, imho.
Sometime you and your bride need to go to facelift. We have some really great discussions and music around the campfire. Peace always, Lynnie
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
Lynne:
Humans have always sought to understand our world, each other, and our place in the Universe. All advances in science we enjoy and take for granted today are a direct result of that quest for understanding. From the micro-cosmic (understanding biology, genes, dna, molecules, atoms, particles, etc) to the macro-cosmic (human development, the earth, solar system, newtonian physics, the universe, etc) all these field seek answers to questions and, in the greater scheme of things, are all connected.
It is always perplexing to me how some people will reject the scientific method or the quest for knowledge one moment and the next extol the virtues of a new medicine, vacine, computer, or just a plain old convenience. Are they oblivious to these contradictions. Or don't they really understand that one would not exist without the other?
So why does the age of something matter?
If you don't seek to answer such a question, you can't really understand it or how nature works.
Would you ask: "why does American (or World) history matter?"
Does mathematics matter?
Does anything matter?
We can choose to live in the artifice that nothing really matters but what is of immediate concern to us. That construct is a lie. Everything is connected to everything else. There is no means of parsing out the elements you deem unimportant to your world view from all the rest of the messy reality that is our existence.
Go ahead, leave the big question of "what is the meaning of life?" for religion to answer if you like. But in finding meaning through a belief in God doesn't mean you have to reject science's attempts to answer the other questions -- we can and should probe for answers to those.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Didn't Fred Beckey date an "Ardi" BITD?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!