those who believe in evolution...this guy may have your number...

[djmarkpaul]

...seriously decent info here...apart from his preachiness it's a pleasure to watch as it's quite well detailed info...though I do have some descrepincies with some of his leads, it is nonetheless a pretty decent revision on the evolution theory.

click here to watch, it's about an hour long


Reviews and criticism welcome. Were you convinced? To what degree?

Markus

PS

Dun cha jus luv dat cheesy intro?

[Mangle]

"Whoever controls the media, controls the mind."
- Jim Morrison

[Sykonee]

Too lazy to click the link. Give us the lowdown instead.

[esoter1c]

Creationism is evolution.

[dave mcnasty]

Everyone knows evolution is true, it just cant be proven because it happens over such a long time

[tiedye]

^^^
"everyone knows creation is true, it just can't be proven because we're not God."

I believe in evolution, but still. . . that was a pretty arrogant comment. It's all a system of beliefs based around very few facts. There's a reason they aren't supposed to teach evolution in school. You can't just say "everyone knows evolution is true" because everyone is entitled to different beliefs.

[dabbler]

there's facts about creationism?

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by dabbler

there's facts about creationism?

Ever heard of Pi ?

Quite simply you cannot throw paint @ a canvas and have the Mona Lisa.

You can't throw ink up in the air and have it land creating a blue print.

Something created life/evolution.

The whole evo vs creation is more left vs right games to keep ppl dumb.

It's more mutation than evolution.

[Hot Karl]

[dave mcnasty]

Originally Posted by tiedye

^^^
"everyone knows creation is true, it just can't be proven because we're not God."

I believe in evolution, but still. . . that was a pretty arrogant comment. It's all a system of beliefs based around very few facts. There's a reason they aren't supposed to teach evolution in school. You can't just say "everyone knows evolution is true" because everyone is entitled to different beliefs.

Well I hardly think evolution is a "belief" in the same way that creationism is. Creationism depends on a God that there is really no evidence for at all. For evolution you can just look at humans, or Homo sapiens....and you can see a line of ancestors before us, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, Australopithecus Africanus & Afarensis, paranthropus robustus... and it goes on.....if you wanna get really specific there are species in between all of those (like rudolfensis or anamensis etc.)....all of which suggest a slow evolution....a very logical one. I think you have to be very narrow minded to disregard that species evolution.

[decypher]

i haven't watched it all but how does he prove that the majority of american's believe in creationism and the fact that God created all the various kinds of species 10k years ago? What about all the fossils that predate that ?

[Max Lazarus]

Evolution is a theory. Not a religious belief. Science and religion run totally parallel to each other, to try to destroy faith in religion with science is as stupid as trying to debunk science with a belief system.

Faith comes from within, scientific theories come from observing what is external. They can co-exist, but when they conflict all that results is useless perversion. Science makes no assumptions about how or why exactly life began, or what happens afterwards, or why we are alive at all, those are the spiritual questions that a religion tries to answer. As well, anyone who takes spiritual works as facts should recognize that the words of God or what-have-you may have been spoken, but they are always filtered through the imperfect hand of man in their transcription to paper, and should not always be taken literally.

p.s. I didn't read the article because I think Markpaul is batshit crazy for the most part, and really don't give credit to many of his sources.

[Grapes]

Science makes no assumptions about how or why exactly life began, or what happens afterwards, or why we are alive at all, those are the spiritual questions that a religion tries to answer.

I wouldn't say that science makes "assumptions" about anything.. (in a perfect world, anyways)... or they do make assumptions, but then go about trying to prove them with research.

And aren't things like the big bang theory and evolution theories about how life began and how we got to where we are now?

It's true that science is rather silent, though, on "what happens afterwards".. I suppose we're meant to just assume death is the end, period. Somehow I have my doubts..

Good stuff Max

[Magi]

I'm about a third of the way through, keeping an open mind.

I'll post a little bit more when I'm done, but for now all I can say is

HIS TONE IS HORRIBLE it's like I'm listening to a redneck. I can barely stand it.

[Max Lazarus]

Originally Posted by Grapes

And aren't things like the big bang theory and evolution theories about how life began and how we got to where we are now?

The big bang theory can explain almost all cosmology from about a few femtoseconds from the origin until whenever, but what happened before that, why that happened, and whether there is even a 'before that' is still, and I think always will be, a mystery that science can't explain.

Evolution is a theory about the development of life and can explain a lot about where we've come from and how we got here, but the origin of life itself is highly debatable, as is it's probability/improbability. If a universe has no sentient beings to observe it, who will ever know it exists? I mean, maybe life only happens once, for a few billion years against a backdrop of infinity, and we is part of it. We have such a limited perspective on what is going on, really... the best reason science has given us for existence it seems to me is to procreate.

[dave mcnasty]

Good ol' family guy

[Magi]

So I just finished it (with some breaks in between)

Filled to the brim with FALLACY and PROPAGANDA

I don't even know where to begin.

To clarify, I'm not bashing his belief. I'm bashing the way he's presenting it, and the way he's presenting his opponents (evolutionist's) position.

It would be interesting to see him debate with a competent scientist/evolutionist, rather than the ones he claims to have debated against in the past.

To be fair, he has some good points, and I'm still looking for more info on the circular logic behind fossil/rock dating.

But in the end I get the impression that he's just preaching to the choir.

[dj_soo]

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...49809EC588EEDF

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by Max Lazarus

The big bang theory can explain almost all cosmology from about a few femtoseconds from the origin until whenever, but what happened before that, why that happened, and whether there is even a 'before that' is still, and I think always will be, a mystery that science can't explain.

Evolution is a theory about the development of life and can explain a lot about where we've come from and how we got here, but the origin of life itself is highly debatable, as is it's probability/improbability. If a universe has no sentient beings to observe it, who will ever know it exists? I mean, maybe life only happens once, for a few billion years against a backdrop of infinity, and we is part of it. We have such a limited perspective on what is going on, really... the best reason science has given us for existence it seems to me is to procreate.

I think the stuff you're talking about... not only has science not tackled it, but it's so outside the realm of scientific discourse that it won't ever be addressed! It's like, a completely different playing field, one of spirituality and philosophy.

"Why are we here?".. science would respond "We just are. There's no "why" about it."

"What are we supposed to be doing here, what is our purpose??" would probably just garner a blank look.. or, as you say, something about procreating and continuing the species would be brought up.

These are the reasons that people often say science doesn't have all the answers.. it can barely bring itself to face some of the questions. That said, evolution, within its own parameters, has always seemed a pretty reputable theory...

[(val)Liam]

spirituality and science need their own spaces based on the fact that spirituality isn't something to be measured... I've had many conversations with less stubborn christians that are open to the idea that evolution was apart of God's plan... and as a person that who's spirituality floats around eastern teachings, the concept of evolution fits into that spirituality perfectly... and its because of the inability to measure spirituality, many of its ideas can be ammended so that it can fit with the modern sciences while keeping its core beliefs... to prove evolution to be correct doesn't necessarily prove the idea of God to be wrong...

I hope what I was trying to say made sense...

[Max Lazarus]

Originally Posted by Grapes

These are the reasons that people often say science doesn't have all the answers.. it can barely bring itself to face some of the questions. That said, evolution, within its own parameters, has always seemed a pretty reputable theory...

Word, yo.

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by Max Lazarus

The big bang theory can explain almost all cosmology from about a few femtoseconds from the origin until whenever, but what happened before that, why that happened, and whether there is even a 'before that' is still, and I think always will be, a mystery that science can't explain.

Perhaps this is the case nowadays, but I feel it is because of the paradigm of ego and conformacy to the status quo which is the problem to this mystery. What I mean is, I believe it's already been discovered, look into the tibetan book of the dead, compare the bardos and other states of conciousness to some of these scientific concepts with a metaphysical awareness and it may make more sense for you. Mind you if you are into orthodox science it may seem like a fringe endavour, but the experience of meditation in my own personal explorations has found many parallels already between the big bang theory (created by a christian astronomer if I remember correctly) and eastern spiritual philosophies.

It may also be worthy to note that mysticism and science were one and the same until very recently as far as the historic time line from Sumeria and onwards is concerned.

Evolution is a theory about the development of life and can explain a lot about where we've come from and how we got here, but the origin of life itself is highly debatable, as is it's probability/improbability. If a universe has no sentient beings to observe it, who will ever know it exists? I mean, maybe life only happens once, for a few billion years against a backdrop of infinity, and we is part of it. We have such a limited perspective on what is going on, really... the best reason science has given us for existence it seems to me is to procreate.

I really think you should read into some eastern philosophy...it would make a decent antithesis to some ideas you proposed. Good points.