To answer your first question. See this post. There are a couple quotes from scientists there. However, it is by no means a conclusive list.
Logical fallacy: "a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid."
non sequitur: "A thought that does not logically follow what has just been said: "We had been discussing plumbing, so her remark about astrology was a real non sequitur." Non sequitur is Latin for "It does not follow."
I have to disagree with your opinion. The arguments are very valid as in the question. Did your house evolve?
To quote you "you're arguing that because some task is outside of the ability of current technology, it must have been accomplished by a divine power".
This is incorrect. I do not assume that. Obviously many things we cannot do now... we will be able to do someday.
But think.... If humanity does not understand how to build a blade of grass, how in the world can humanity determine it was not designed?
I would ask you to expand on your hurricane comment. What point are you illustrating?
It was a broad reaching statement regarding humility. Not all scientists or learned people fall into that category, but many do.
There are two kinds of egotists: Those who admit it, and the rest of us. ~Laurence J. Peter
My post was primarily meant to show that many scientists do believe in an intelligent designer. I would like side myself with the group that says we should teach ID in schools. I feel that would leave to many holes for people to teach their own thinking... but I also do not think they should teach evolution for the same reason.
Science has obviously brought about many good advancements for manking. However, they have also brought about bad things too. Some of the sicknesses mankind suffers today was created by scientists. I won't even begin to talk about the military efforts scientists have made. So to assume that because a person is a scientist we should just believe them leaves a person vulnerable to the scientists incorrect conclusions.... and science has a boatload of those in its short history.
Yes, I will find all the information I will need to show incredible design from an incredible designer.
Your post does not offer proof or an answer to my question, but merely an invitation to do my own research. I was hoping that a Biologist with a PHD might offer some proof that shows protozoa evolving into metazoa, not hypothesis. If you cannot prove it, how can you tell people conclusively that it is true?
However, many biologists have concluded that biology proves we have a designer.
If I told you my house was built by accident, would you believe me? Yet, the construction of my house is much more simple than the construction of DNA. While humans recognize that a house is built by someone, we cannot see that incredibly more complex structures require a builder or designer. That is simply ludicrous.
Many scientist believe that a blade of grass happened without intelligence. Yet, those same scientists the world over with all their combined knowledge could not create a blade of grass from non-living material, and they have intelligence.
Unfortunately, they often have more intelligence than they do humility.
If proof is equal to 'substantial evidence to make any other explanation approach unreasonable', it assumes that all future 'explanations' are equal to past 'explanations'. Humanity is quick to assume we have it figured out, when in all likelihood, we have very little knowledge of actual truth.
History should teach us that.
I agree with your invisible smurf argument very much. However, that also lends itself to my comments. Nearly everyone believes that atomic bombs exist because you don't have to be a scientist to recognize that. However, the average person does not understand biology, chemistry, etc... to any level near those of scientists, so if a scientist says that something is true based upon biology, chemistry, astronomy, etc... then most people will usually believe his point-of-view because, well, he is the authority on the subject. However, many credible scientists have found evidence of creation in their work, however they are lambasted by their peers if they talk about these ideas because it does not fit into scientific method.
However, their are simply too many questions a scientist cannot answer because there is no way for them to apply the scientific method in finding the answers. For instance, they cannot answer questions like...
Where did the material that exploded in the big bang come from?
Why is the universe expanding at an ever increasing speed? What is the force causing it to speed up?
How can you create life from non-living matter? How did evolution do it?
I could go on and on... but for time sake...
Regarding the Bible, yes, you are correct that a person should look at the history of the Bible. Yes, there are inaccurate translations out there (King James perhaps the most notable) and other books too. However, we could use your smurf argument yet again!:)
If one of the scientists that created the atomic bomb made his feelings about smurfs public, people would think the guy was a bit strange at least. Many people that supposedly follow the Bible have some pretty stange ideas about Jesus, Christianity, God, etc... most of it having nothing to do with the Bible at all. However, since they call themselves Christians, people look down on the Bible because they associate the insanity of the people that claim to follow it.
For instance, Ghandi said he loved Christ but he hated Christians. Yes, most people who claim they follow Christ have never read the Bible or know much about the man... they are Christians by default... their parents were Christians and so they are. They don't follow Jesus Christ or his teachings in any way. This, obviously isn't true of everyone calling themself a Christian, but true of many. I ask people who call themselves Christians if they have read the Bible from cover to cover and most say they have not. Very few could tell you anything about Jesus, other than... you gotta believe! So many people are turned away from the Bible because of the poor conduct of those claiming to follow it.
However, archeologists whether athiest, agnostic, or Christian, almost all of them believe that Jesus was a real historical person. The Bible (Many modern translations are more accurate because of the dramatically increased availablity of ancient scrolls to refer to. KJ was published in 1611 from eight scrolls. Today we have several thousand to compare from.) is true and actually proves itself to be so by its contents. Prophecies have taken place as it recorded to the very detail. So much so that those who oppose the Bible say they were written after the fact... because they had to be... no man could have just guessed at those events. Many of the ancient scrolls we have today contain prophecies that were fulfilled hundreds of years later. If one takes the time to look at the evidence, they will see. Most people don't want to investigate because they are not that interested.
So your right... most people prefer to have a comfortable religion... rather than a true one. That does not mean a true religion does not exist.
Some quotes from scientists you might find interesting.
Dr. Emery S. Dunfee - Physics
"One wonders why, with all the evidence, the (Godless) theory of evolution still persists. One major reason is that many people have a sort of vested interest in this theory. Jobs would be lost,
I guess all the web servers on the planet are then breaking the law since they all are sharing files with the world. text, images, media, video....
The RIAA... what a joke!
Not true. They do not present proofs. They present theories that they think may be true. Unfortunately, most people who believe in evolution, have not really spent much time looking at the actual evidence. People believe in evolution because it appears that most scientists believe in it and since they must be smarter than the average person, it must be true. However, if a person takes the time to research the facts, they will find that this is much more evidence to prove we have an intelligent designer. In fact many notable scientists of the present and the past believe that the universe was created by a supreme being.
This is a happy day for M$ opponents! Why? This will multiply the exploits in Windows by a hundredfold and nobody will be able to use their crap OS. Linux and Mac will be happy to service the hundreds of millions of people looking for an OS that works! Hurray!
Linus is definately not your average Linux user. In fact I'm surprised he uses any GUI at all! I personally think Gnome (Ubuntu too) is the way to go to encourage Windows users to make the switch. Its just clean and easy to use and it appears to be the general consensus for most of the big distributions. KDE has its place though, and I don't think anyone is an idiot to choose either.
Hello Doctor,
How many Microsoft funded studies has Microsoft published for public review where the results of the study cast a bad or negative light on the company or its products?
If the answer is 0, would not this indicate they are not interested in the truth but in misinforming the public for their own benefit?
Sue a really big company and if we win, we get a boatload of cash!
If we lose, we go our merry way to bankruptcy court and then out of business!
Funny, either way the SCO customer does not seem to be in their mindset. Thus, the mass exodus of customers moving away from SCO.
They could learn a lesson from Google. Create a great product that people love and the financial reward will come.
Slashdot Mirror
really? I need to give them another look. Thanks for the heads up!
Yes, Google Earth on Linux would be awesome. I hope ATI starts giving their Linux drivers a little more respect.
Logical fallacy: "a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid."
non sequitur: "A thought that does not logically follow what has just been said: "We had been discussing plumbing, so her remark about astrology was a real non sequitur." Non sequitur is Latin for "It does not follow."
I have to disagree with your opinion. The arguments are very valid as in the question. Did your house evolve?
To quote you "you're arguing that because some task is outside of the ability of current technology, it must have been accomplished by a divine power".
This is incorrect. I do not assume that. Obviously many things we cannot do now... we will be able to do someday.
But think.... If humanity does not understand how to build a blade of grass, how in the world can humanity determine it was not designed?
I would ask you to expand on your hurricane comment. What point are you illustrating?
It was a broad reaching statement regarding humility. Not all scientists or learned people fall into that category, but many do.
There are two kinds of egotists: Those who admit it, and the rest of us. ~Laurence J. Peter
Science has obviously brought about many good advancements for manking. However, they have also brought about bad things too. Some of the sicknesses mankind suffers today was created by scientists. I won't even begin to talk about the military efforts scientists have made. So to assume that because a person is a scientist we should just believe them leaves a person vulnerable to the scientists incorrect conclusions.... and science has a boatload of those in its short history.
Your post does not offer proof or an answer to my question, but merely an invitation to do my own research. I was hoping that a Biologist with a PHD might offer some proof that shows protozoa evolving into metazoa, not hypothesis. If you cannot prove it, how can you tell people conclusively that it is true?
However, many biologists have concluded that biology proves we have a designer.
If I told you my house was built by accident, would you believe me? Yet, the construction of my house is much more simple than the construction of DNA. While humans recognize that a house is built by someone, we cannot see that incredibly more complex structures require a builder or designer. That is simply ludicrous.
Many scientist believe that a blade of grass happened without intelligence. Yet, those same scientists the world over with all their combined knowledge could not create a blade of grass from non-living material, and they have intelligence.
Unfortunately, they often have more intelligence than they do humility.
If proof is equal to 'substantial evidence to make any other explanation approach unreasonable', it assumes that all future 'explanations' are equal to past 'explanations'. Humanity is quick to assume we have it figured out, when in all likelihood, we have very little knowledge of actual truth. History should teach us that.
Watch as you get many replies from ignorant nerds saying there are no facts to support creation.
I asked for proof. Do you have any information that proves protozoa evolved into a metazoa. Remember, were looking for proof here... not hypothesis.
However, their are simply too many questions a scientist cannot answer because there is no way for them to apply the scientific method in finding the answers. For instance, they cannot answer questions like...
Where did the material that exploded in the big bang come from?
Why is the universe expanding at an ever increasing speed? What is the force causing it to speed up?
How can you create life from non-living matter? How did evolution do it?
I could go on and on... but for time sake...
Regarding the Bible, yes, you are correct that a person should look at the history of the Bible. Yes, there are inaccurate translations out there (King James perhaps the most notable) and other books too. However, we could use your smurf argument yet again! :)
If one of the scientists that created the atomic bomb made his feelings about smurfs public, people would think the guy was a bit strange at least. Many people that supposedly follow the Bible have some pretty stange ideas about Jesus, Christianity, God, etc... most of it having nothing to do with the Bible at all. However, since they call themselves Christians, people look down on the Bible because they associate the insanity of the people that claim to follow it.
For instance, Ghandi said he loved Christ but he hated Christians. Yes, most people who claim they follow Christ have never read the Bible or know much about the man... they are Christians by default... their parents were Christians and so they are. They don't follow Jesus Christ or his teachings in any way. This, obviously isn't true of everyone calling themself a Christian, but true of many. I ask people who call themselves Christians if they have read the Bible from cover to cover and most say they have not. Very few could tell you anything about Jesus, other than... you gotta believe! So many people are turned away from the Bible because of the poor conduct of those claiming to follow it.
However, archeologists whether athiest, agnostic, or Christian, almost all of them believe that Jesus was a real historical person. The Bible (Many modern translations are more accurate because of the dramatically increased availablity of ancient scrolls to refer to. KJ was published in 1611 from eight scrolls. Today we have several thousand to compare from.) is true and actually proves itself to be so by its contents. Prophecies have taken place as it recorded to the very detail. So much so that those who oppose the Bible say they were written after the fact... because they had to be... no man could have just guessed at those events. Many of the ancient scrolls we have today contain prophecies that were fulfilled hundreds of years later. If one takes the time to look at the evidence, they will see. Most people don't want to investigate because they are not that interested.
So your right... most people prefer to have a comfortable religion... rather than a true one. That does not mean a true religion does not exist.
Some quotes from scientists you might find interesting.
Dr. Emery S. Dunfee - Physics
"One wonders why, with all the evidence, the (Godless) theory of evolution still persists. One major reason is that many people have a sort of vested interest in this theory. Jobs would be lost,
Could you show me proof of a protozoa evolving into a metazoa?
I guess all the web servers on the planet are then breaking the law since they all are sharing files with the world. text, images, media, video.... The RIAA... what a joke!
Not true. They do not present proofs. They present theories that they think may be true. Unfortunately, most people who believe in evolution, have not really spent much time looking at the actual evidence. People believe in evolution because it appears that most scientists believe in it and since they must be smarter than the average person, it must be true. However, if a person takes the time to research the facts, they will find that this is much more evidence to prove we have an intelligent designer. In fact many notable scientists of the present and the past believe that the universe was created by a supreme being.
This is a happy day for M$ opponents! Why? This will multiply the exploits in Windows by a hundredfold and nobody will be able to use their crap OS. Linux and Mac will be happy to service the hundreds of millions of people looking for an OS that works! Hurray!
Yes, I can say my spam problem is solved. I get practically none. However, it wasn't Billy or his money machine that did it for me... It was Google.
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers!
Thats one down and ten thousand applications to go! Finally Microsoft has to formulate something new to them, an exit strategy!
Exactly!
So why do they try so hard to stamp it out in every market they enter?
Linus is definately not your average Linux user. In fact I'm surprised he uses any GUI at all! I personally think Gnome (Ubuntu too) is the way to go to encourage Windows users to make the switch. Its just clean and easy to use and it appears to be the general consensus for most of the big distributions. KDE has its place though, and I don't think anyone is an idiot to choose either.
Hello Doctor, How many Microsoft funded studies has Microsoft published for public review where the results of the study cast a bad or negative light on the company or its products? If the answer is 0, would not this indicate they are not interested in the truth but in misinforming the public for their own benefit?
LOL!!! Yeah, I can't believe Google is so evil as to want to run a business! Go GOOGLE!
Sue a really big company and if we win, we get a boatload of cash! If we lose, we go our merry way to bankruptcy court and then out of business! Funny, either way the SCO customer does not seem to be in their mindset. Thus, the mass exodus of customers moving away from SCO. They could learn a lesson from Google. Create a great product that people love and the financial reward will come.