The Biblical Case for Pro-Choice & Stem Cell Research

[anonemouse 1]

Tennessee. Millions of years is fact, as much as gravity is fact.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

And just for good measure, Five Misconceptions about Evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

[gadgetlady 4]

Millions of years is fact, as much as gravity is fact.

That's what I mean about evolution being rammed down our throats. It is not fact, yet it is presented as fact.

[anonemouse 1]

Okay, can we just agree to disagree? Neither one of us is getting anywhere. We can go 'round and 'round with this forever.

[gadgetlady 4]

I don't have a problem with agreeing to disagree. I just have a problem with someone saying millions of years is a fact when it's not. So yes, let's agree to disagree.

[anonemouse 1]

To be quite honest, I have a problem with someone saying that we shouldn't believe in something if it isn't proven, and then believing in something that isn't proven.

To me, something has been proven to be a fact when the preponderance of evidence supports it. For example, smoking causes lung cancer. Do all smokers get lung cancer or has the cancer of all people with lung cancer been caused by smoke? No. But that doesn't mean it doesn't cause it.

[gadgetlady 4]

Well I have to believe in something, so I choose to believe what I choose to believe. You choose to believe the other thing. Neither is proven. I believe there is more evidence for creation and the world around us more closely aligns with creation theory.

I've never known an explosion in a brick pile to create a building. It's counter-intuitive. It works the other way around.

To inject a little levity, here's my favorite joke:

Scientists say to God, "We've finally done it! We can create man from dust." God says, "Show me." The scientists bend down to gather some dust and God stops them. "Get your own dust."

and

My favorite Thomas Edison quote: "Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge."

[anonemouse 1]

I've never known an explosion in a brick pile to create a building. It's counter-intuitive. It works the other way around.

A reference to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, yes?

This shows more a misconception about thermodynamics than about evolution. The second law of thermodynamics says, "No process is possible in which the sole result is the transfer of energy from a cooler to a hotter body." [Atkins, 1984, The Second Law, pg. 25] Now you may be scratching your head wondering what this has to do with evolution. The confusion arises when the 2nd law is phrased in another equivalent way, "The entropy of a closed system cannot decrease." Entropy is an indication of unusable energy and often (but not always!) corresponds to intuitive notions of disorder or randomness. Creationists thus misinterpret the 2nd law to say that things invariably progress from order to disorder.

However, they neglect the fact that life is not a closed system. The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things. If a mature Tomato plant can have more usable energy than the seed it grew from, why should anyone expect that the next generation of tomatoes can't have more usable energy still? Creationists sometimes try to get around this by claiming that the information carried by living things lets them create order. However, not only is life irrelevant to the 2nd law, but order from disorder is common in nonliving systems, too. Snowflakes, sand dunes, tornadoes, stalactites, graded river beds, and lightning are just a few examples of order coming from disorder in nature; none require an intelligent program to achieve that order. In any nontrivial system with lots of energy flowing through it, you are almost certain to find order arising somewhere in the system. If order from disorder is supposed to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, why is it ubiquitous in nature?

The thermodynamics argument against evolution displays a misconception about evolution as well as about thermodynamics, since a clear understanding of how evolution works should reveal major flaws in the argument. Evolution says that organisms reproduce with only small changes between generations (after their own kind, so to speak). For example, animals might have appendages which are longer or shorter, thicker or flatter, lighter or darker than their parents. Occasionally, a change might be on the order of having four or six fingers instead of five. Once the differences appear, the theory of evolution calls for differential reproductive success. For example, maybe the animals with longer appendages survive to have more offspring than short-appendaged ones. All of these processes can be observed today. They obviously don't violate any physical laws.

From http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html, which I referred to earlier.

[gadgetlady 4]

Anyone else want to take a crack at this? I do have a point.

Let me ask you a question: Read the following scriptures and tell me who they're taking about. Don't cheat -- don't go look them up. Just give me a gut reaction based on your knowledge of the Bible as to who they're talking about:

"They have pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."

"I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting."

"He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not."

"He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth."

"In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven."

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

"See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey."

"I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver."

[anonemouse 1]

Well, why don't you make your point, then?

An interesting link for the debate about the age of Earth.

[BJean 16]

I have lived all across this country. From a very early age right up to this moment, I have had creationism crammed down my throat. Unlike laurend, I haven't had anyone EVER cram the idea of evolution down my throat. EVER. Not even in college. It has always been presented as a theory to me.

Most theologians, priests, ministers and born again Christians of all walks insist that creationism is the way the truth and the light. I have never read or spoken with anyone who can provide as much proof of creationism as I have heard or read about the scientific possibility of evolution. No one on the side of evolution cares one whit whether I believe in that theory or not.

Contrarily, some Christians think that people who do not believe in creationism are wrong. Creationism is based on belief. All of the evidence points to that. That people can manipulate words and say that certain "data" points to proof of creationism, is simply part of a belief system. Most of us have been brainwashed from a very early age to believe that whatever our minister, Sunday school teacher, Priest or other religious person in our lives presents to them, is absolute truth. To expect us to give up our powers of reasoning and rationale is quite frankly, a much more shocking bit of propaganda than any data I've read or heard about the theory of evolution.

Before anyone should jump to conclusions, I am a Christian.

[gadgetlady 4]

I have lived all across this country. From a very early age right up to this moment, I have had creationism crammed down my throat. Unlike laurend, I haven't had anyone EVER cram the idea of evolution down my throat. EVER. Not even in college. It has always been presented as a theory to me.

Wow! I guess we have completely different experiences. Maybe growing up in California makes the difference. I don't know. All I know is I never heard of creation science or intelligent design until I was in my late 20's (the early '90's). Prior to that, I had literally never heard of anything BUT evolution, and it was and has always been presented as fact.

Most theologians, priests, ministers and born again Christians of all walks insist that creationism is the way the truth and the light. I have never read or spoken with anyone who can provide as much proof of creationism as I have heard or read about the scientific possibility of evolution. No one on the side of evolution cares one whit whether I believe in that theory or not.

If I recommended a book or two, would you read them? Because even if you've never spoken with anyone who can provide any credible facts that point to creationism, that doesn't mean they aren't out there.

Contrarily, some Christians think that people who do not believe in creationism are wrong. Creationism is based on belief. All of the evidence points to that. That people can manipulate words and say that certain "data" points to proof of creationism, is simply part of a belief system. Most of us have been brainwashed from a very early age to believe that whatever our minister, Sunday school teacher, Priest or other religious person in our lives presents to them, is absolute truth. To expect us to give up our powers of reasoning and rationale is quite frankly, a much more shocking bit of propaganda than any data I've read or heard about the theory of evolution.

That makes me sad. I said in another thread that one of my former pastors used to say being Christians doesn't mean we check our brains at the door. Unfortunately, that's the impression a lot of people have of Christianity, and while some people may be of the opinion "God said it - I believe it - That settles it", that certainly doesn't mean that's the only attitude out there. I strongly recommend the website www.str.org which encourages Christians to think clearly and be intellectually fair in their presentations.

[gadgetlady 4]

laurend, I will respond to your lengthy post; I'm just worn out tonight. It's been a long day. Have a good night!

[BJean 16]

Gadgetlady: You missed my point about the "credible facts" that point to creationism. They are belief based. Not science based. I have not just heard someone talk about it and I haven't just been exposed to a few books about it. All aspects of religion, Christian and others, have held a whole lot of interest for me. Therefore I have spent lots of my time reading, thinking, researching and listening. The fact that you think I am uninformed goes exactly to the point of my earlier reply to your posts. But thanks for wanting to share.

[gadgetlady 4]

Gadgetlady: You missed my point about the "credible facts" that point to creationism. They are belief based. Not science based. I have not just heard someone talk about it and I haven't just been exposed to a few books about it. All aspects of religion, Christian and others, have held a whole lot of interest for me. Therefore I have spent lots of my time reading, thinking, researching and listening. The fact that you think I am uninformed goes exactly to the point of my earlier reply to your posts. But thanks for wanting to share.

But you're missing MY point. There are facts that are science based. I don't know what facts you've seen; that's why I asked. Try this site, for example: http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/index.htm

From http://www.gotquestions.org/intelligent-design.html:

The Intelligent Design Theory is not Biblical Creationism. There is an important distinction between the two positions. Biblical Creationists begin with a conclusion: that the Biblical account of creation is reliable and correct; that life on Earth was designed by an Intelligent Agent (God). They then look for evidence from the natural realm to support this conclusion. Intelligent Design Theorists begin with the natural realm and reach their conclusion subsequently: that life on Earth was designed by an Intelligent Agent (whoever that might be). (emphasis added)

[BJean 16]

Oops. I'm sorry. I thought you were serious.

Like George Michael said in his popular song... "ya gotta have faith."