Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTAForums Annual Awards 2018

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Dingdongs

Creationism or Evolution?

Recommended Posts

RedDagger

Please tell me about that "plenty of evidence".

The only proof for evolution is "Monkeys are genetically and physically similar to us, that means we evolved from them.", how is that proof?

I hate saying this kind of thing but you really need to read up on evolution before trying to make any arguments against it, because right now you don't know what you're actually arguing against. Edited by RedDagger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andreaz1

The creationists I see in this thread are not coming with any single piece of evidence for their own theory at all except "nature can not have done this on its own". Because there is none.

 

They blatantly disregard every piece of established scientific evidence that you show them because they can not personally understand it because it's too complicated and therefore it must have been too complicated for nature to accomplish over billions of years.

 

Meanwhile there is no problem in crediting some universal "creator" who somehow existed before everything else did and managed to get every single piece of every living organism just right in order for things on this planet to work the way they do. Just for fun he created the entire universe at the same time but no life on any other planet than this one as far as we know. The scientific way of looking at it is that the vast majority of planets we've seen simply can not host life as we know it because of their hostile environments. Would all all-knowing perfect creator not have been able to solve this somehow? It all sounds so ridiculous I can't even describe it with words. You say "where is the evidence of evolution?". Where is the evidence of your creator? How are you allowed to not show a single piece of proper physical evidence of him/her/it?

 

If this creator managed to get everything spot on from the beginning, how does one explain that not everyone is born exactly the same and that man kind as a whole (and everything else) is still changing? Why don't all humans still have dark skin and dark eyes? Why are some people missing some or all wisdom teeth and why are wisdom teeth as a whole slowly disappearing? How is antibiotic resitance a thing? Can you believe in random genomic mutations to have accomplished this but not in evolution?

Edited by Andreaz1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

The only proof for evolution is "Monkeys are genetically and physically similar to us"

there's literally mountains of physical and chemical evidence that lays the foundation for evolution. it's not just "monkey's are similar to us." that's an extremely gross misunderstanding of the theory itself.

 

how old are you?

have you graduated public high school?

 

your understanding of evolution is much too shallow. you're not equipped to take part in this discussion. if you want to continue having this discussion then I suggest you begin reading. right now.

 

http://necsi.edu/projects/evolution/evidence/evidence_intro.html

 

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topics.php?topic_id=14

 

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fast and bulbous squid

Nah dudes, climate change is obviously a hoax backed up by FAKE SCIENCE made by the government so that they can use regulations as a way to steal more money from us as a part of their grand socialist scheme!

 

 

I wish that this was a strawman's argument, but that's literally what I see climate change deniers arguing. Never doubt the importance of extensive research in forming your opinions on scientific topics.

 

 

Edit: somehow my fever-addled mind thought this was a climate change thread. Apologies for my stupidity

Edited by Small Moist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Constant K

Why not both?

 

 

The narrative of human origins that we have been given by science is one in which apes evolve into men. Instead, a worldwide inner alchemical tradition suggests that realized beings may have crossed with primates in some way, even if only in dreams, possibly resulting in the creation of language/consciousness. Realized beings may have been enlightened humans from earlier civilizations. If the origin of language is enlightenment, does this describe a mutation in consciousness that spontaneously emerged, or was it taught to early humans? It seems likely that many of the culture heroes of ancient civilizations may have been realized beings, particularly based on Chinese mythology. The story of the Yellow Emperor explains the origin of Chinese medicine as Tantric instruction by enlightened teachers. From an Asian inner science perspective, it would be absurd to assume that realized beings have not played a significant role in human cultural evolution, since the pre-birth consciousness or super subtle body is the enlightened point of origin. This is consistent with the idea of a golden age, prior to the fall of man, which actually represents the true potential of humanity to achieve complete liberation of consciousness the union of the three bodies. The three archetypal illuminated characters the shaman, the yogi, and the alchemist have represented inner illumination/awakening in multiple civilizations where they became sages, Buddhas, and immortals in historical descriptions.

 

The Big Bang, Darwinian evolution, and Integral Theory do not negate the reality of enlightenment as the origin of human consciousness, when the mind is fully regressed to the starting point of the body, and the Coniunctio experience restores the original state of inner illumination, the reversal of the fall of man. The most primitive reptilian structures of the body, the pineal gland, and a complete kundalini activation, the pre-birth yang super subtle body, the Filius Philosophorum, result in super consciousness when fully activated by meditation, qi gong, or Tantric yoga. The scientific problem is that there is no way of measuring or quantifying the Coniunctio, or Tantric Mahamudra experience of the recreation of conception, which restores the nondual enlightened face of the Dharmakaya/Buddhahood, and then returns it to void.

This is a farcry from an actual scientific argument for creationism but then the argument is also about science vs faith..and when faith by dictionary is termed as a belief and science is all about the facts, it is difficult to put forward an argument for creationism in this 'enlightened' age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

This is a farcry from an actual scientific argument

That's rather an understatement. It's closer to entirely incoherent and self contradictory ramblings and reads like an effort to shoehorn as many different forms of quackery, pseudoscience and historical spirituality into a single paragraph as humanly possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Constant K

lol I tried

 

..and to think that was the best I could come up with..

Presuppositions really.

Edited by krypt0s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triple Vacuum Seal

Creationism is a sham. God told me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

The problem with this topic is that there isn't an intellectually honest way to defend creationism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JuniorChubb

The problem with this topic is that there isn't an intellectually honest way to defend creationism.

 

The trouble is creationism is forced on many people and arguing against it contradicts what some have been taught since birth by their parents and religion... It is very difficult for some people to accept regardless of what they are confronted with. Religion trumps science for many many people around the world.

 

A defence is not needed when you have faith.

Edited by JuniorChubb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro
A defence is not needed when you have faith.

I don't have a problem with faith though, or religion for that matter. But there needs to be a new enlightenment among the religious movements of the world, where they collectively stop interpreting ancient myths literally. Some ancient myths are incredibly important for understanding the symbolism of the human subconscious. They are incredibly important for understanding the foundations of human morality and human nature. But interpreting them literally is just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hendrik498

I'll never understand these people. Expecting a debate about a subject that's pretty much an established scientific fact. It stems from both ignorance and arrogance. I tell the guy that we didn't evolve from monkeys and it doesn't even register. If only people were smart enough to know how ignorant they are. Maybe they'd shut the f*ck up about things they know nothing about.

There is a quote "A fool thinks he knows everything, while a smart person thinks he knows nothing.", where do you stand in here? Evolution is simply a theory, not a 100% fully proven fact.

Edited by The Lone Spirit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

The fact that earth is round is also 'just a theory'. You throw around 'just a theory' and 'fact' like the distinction is self evident. The amount of evidence for evolution is immense. It's an empirical fact, just like the roundness of earth is an empirical fact.

Edited by Eutyphro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DareYokel

There is a quote "A fool thinks he knows everything, while a smart person thinks he knows nothing.", where do you stand in here? Evolution is simply a theory, not a 100% fully proven fact.

You clearly don't know the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. You could have googled it before you posted but you were so full of yourself and too arrogant to even question your own ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDagger

Yeah, you're better off not posting in here until you actually understand what you're talking about, stupid one-liners aren't going to get you anywhere.

 

Just as a reference, gravity is also a theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hendrik498

 

There is a quote "A fool thinks he knows everything, while a smart person thinks he knows nothing.", where do you stand in here? Evolution is simply a theory, not a 100% fully proven fact.

You clearly don't know the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. You could have googled it before you posted but you were so full of yourself and too arrogant to even question your own ignorance.

 

The amount of rudeness on your mouth just makes me feel funny. You could've googled the difference between a discussion and an argument, you speak like everything you say is true. I never called you ignorant for having an opinion. You could tell me about the "proof" you have for evolution instead of just saying "f*ck you, you're idiotic", because being rude won't change my mind. If you think I'm doing wrong by not believing in evolution, then make me believe it instead of trying to create a pointless argument.

 

Yeah, you're better off not posting in here until you actually understand what you're talking about, stupid one-liners aren't going to get you anywhere.

 

Just as a reference, gravity is also a theory.

Gravity has actual proof unlike evolution. Evolution is all about "If something is similar to another thing, then that means it evolved from that". If you pay attention when you jump, you'll notice that you slowly slow down as split-seconds pass and then do a complete stop, and finally you slowly fall down, your fall down speed will increase depending on the amount of time you spent falling, flat-earthers claim Earth is constantly going up and that there's no gravity, if that was true, you would immediately fall down in a locked speed. The Round-Earth theory also has proof, and i don't think i even have to explain that one, you probably already know that when a ship is coming towards, you see the upper parts of it first, you probably already know if keep going in a straight line and do 1 tour around Earth, you would end up the in the same place you started going from.

Edited by The Lone Spirit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

Gravity has actual proof unlike evolution.

evolution has the same kinds of proofs that gravity has.

for some reason you've simply chosen to ignore them.

 

I just gave you 3 links to resources that are full of physical and chemical and biological proofs for evolution.

did you read any of them?

 

apparently not...

 

Evolution is all about "If something is similar to another thing, then that means it evolved from that".

we just explained to you why this statement is incorrect.

that's not what evolution "is all about." you're just wrong.

 

you have literally no idea what you're talking about. go back and do some basic research. don't get upset at people for calling you out when you sound like an idiot because you are saying idiotic things. ignorance is your fault. it's not our fault.

 

make me believe it

that's not how an education works.

the evidence is there but you're not actually looking at it. you have clearly misunderstood and failed to grasp the basic tenets of evolution. evolution is not based on "this looks similar to that." that's not how it works. if you would like to learn how it works then you could have paid attention in school... or you could choose to spend some time reading up on the MOUNTAINS of published scientific literature that relates to the subject of evolutionary biology.

Edited by El Diablo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DareYokel

The amount of rudeness on your mouth just makes me feel funny. You could've googled the difference between a discussion and an argument, you speak like everything you say is true. I never called you ignorant for having an opinion. You could tell me about the "proof" you have for evolution instead of just saying "f*ck you, you're idiotic", because being rude won't change my mind. If you think I'm doing wrong by not believing in evolution, then make me believe it instead of trying to create a pointless argument.

Why would I even bother with you when you've ignored links that others have posted that would have educated you on the subject? And why would I bother with someone who doesn't know what a scientific theory means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Gravity has actual proof unlike evolution.

Wrong. As I've already noted above, Richard Lenski's E Coli long term evolution experiment has already demonstrated that evolution occurs spontaneously and without external input, and that when mutant traits which result in better suitability for a particular environment occur they become the dominant evolved form of an organism.

 

Claiming there's no evidence for evolution does little more than advertise your ignorance on the subject.

 

Evolution is all about "If something is similar to another thing, then that means it evolved from that".

If this entirely wrong statement is the breadth of your understanding summarised, I strongly suggest you don't continue this discussion as you have nothing of scientific validity, or even basic factual accuracy, to contribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hendrik498

 

The amount of rudeness on your mouth just makes me feel funny. You could've googled the difference between a discussion and an argument, you speak like everything you say is true. I never called you ignorant for having an opinion. You could tell me about the "proof" you have for evolution instead of just saying "f*ck you, you're idiotic", because being rude won't change my mind. If you think I'm doing wrong by not believing in evolution, then make me believe it instead of trying to create a pointless argument.

Why would I even bother with you when you've ignored links that others have posted that would have educated you on the subject? And why would I bother with someone who doesn't know what a scientific theory means?

 

What links? I didn't see any links.

 

Gravity has actual proof unlike evolution.

evolution has the same kinds of proofs that gravity has.

for some reason you've simply chosen to ignore them.

 

I just gave you 3 links to resources that are full of physical and chemical and biological proofs for evolution.

did you read any of them?

 

apparently not...

That's a big lie, you never gave me any links.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DareYokel

OK, since El Diablo's post with three links is literally on this page I just reported you for trolling. Better luck next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDagger

That's a big lie, you never gave me any links.

 

The only proof for evolution is "Monkeys are genetically and physically similar to us"

there's literally mountains of physical and chemical evidence that lays the foundation for evolution. it's not just "monkey's are similar to us." that's an extremely gross misunderstanding of the theory itself.

 

how old are you?

have you graduated public high school?

 

your understanding of evolution is much too shallow. you're not equipped to take part in this discussion. if you want to continue having this discussion then I suggest you begin reading. right now.

 

http://necsi.edu/projects/evolution/evidence/evidence_intro.html

 

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topics.php?topic_id=14

 

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence

 

 

Gravity has actual proof unlike evolution.

Wrong. As I've already noted above, Richard Lenski's E Coli long term evolution experiment has already demonstrated that evolution occurs spontaneously and without external input, and that when mutant traits which result in better suitability for a particular environment occur they become the dominant evolved form of an organism.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JuniorChubb

 

A defence is not needed when you have faith.

I don't have a problem with faith though, or religion for that matter. But there needs to be a new enlightenment among the religious movements of the world, where they collectively stop interpreting ancient myths literally. Some ancient myths are incredibly important for understanding the symbolism of the human subconscious. They are incredibly important for understanding the foundations of human morality and human nature. But interpreting them literally is just wrong.

 

 

I cannot see religions changing, they are based on their own 'facts', to change the basis of these beliefs would be hypocritical and maybe alienate the faithful, the literal translations are here to stay. Off shoots of religions (that cherry pick parts of the religion they spring from) do crop up though. IMO they just splinter the followers rather than strengthening the faith.

 

As much as I believe in the importance of religion in shaping our world I do not think it holds the answers of our subconscious or morality. I believe the attributes that make us social creatures are evolved just like our physical features. Morality, empathy, language, trading are all evolved traits, these are all attributes that benefit those with them, groups without these qualities are less likely to succeed.

 

If you are looking for religion to unlock the secrets of morality/subconscious it would suggest to me that morality is linked to a creator. IMO religion just popped up as a 'catch all' answer to the unknown.

 

It a strange situation for me, I believe religion to be a farce, abused by many for personal gain, an excuse for conflict over land and even a reason to kill but in day to day life I see it being a positive influence for so many people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PwnageSoldier

I believe more in science and evolution because it's backed proof. Creationism and god are only things you can believe in, and I have enough of a brain to see that believing in something that doesn't do jack sh*t is wasted time. I know this because I was born a roman catholic and left as a atheist. This is just my view on religion. I just find it pointless, but I do understand believing in stuff does take weight off, and I respect that you believe what you believe. That doesn't change the fact I find believing in a invisible force to be stupid and a waste of time. I likely just repeated myself, but whatever. Point still stands, I just don't think the idea of Creationism is what really happened. I know some of you cat-aholics are going to be all #TrIgGeRrEd up on me, but just try to keep your comments to yourself. I just expressed my opinion. /shrug

 

EDIT: Just realised I sound like a SJW. Sorry, I'm not entirely edumacated on using words correctly.

Edited by PwnageSoldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jpm1

i think at the very, very beginning it was God. but i also think man is a primate. i mean when you look at chimps faces, even a 4 yo kid would see there's something ressembling. don't get me wrong, i'm not trying to shock anyone, but i think lot, really a lot of animals suffering is caused by the fact that we don't want to see there's something ressembling between humans and animals. On a purely scientific level, humans are primates. you ask any scientist that has a scientific approach of the problem, this is what he'll tell you. and i think being logical is a good way to do, much better at least than obscurantism that says it's like that, but that is completely unable to proove what he's saying

Edited by jpm1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hayduke

The existence of this thread reminds me how Trump was elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blind Joe Death

The problem with this topic is that there isn't an intellectually honest way to defend creationism.

Actually, there are many compelling, highly intelligent and "intellectually honest" ways to defend creationism, though not the form of creationism defined in the original post. However, you would be right in assuming that you will most likely not find them here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Actually, there are many compelling, highly intelligent and "intellectually honest" ways to defend creationism

I don't think there are, though. Even academics who have attempted to defend theories such as intelligent design have done so almost solely through misrepresentation of evidence or logical fallacy. All arguments on creationism, from early-world to intelligent design, fundamentally fail Occam's Razor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jpm1

i live in a region with lot of important prehistoric caves, and when you live in such place it's impossible to say Man hasn't been subject to an evolution. we weren't always sapiens sapiens. it's a fact. here are few pics i took when i was visiting a cave in Les eyzies

 

 

286964_10150282038460680_1745936_o.jpg?o

 

288931_10150282038500680_4289393_o.jpg?o

 

288725_10150282039390680_504884_o.jpg?oh

 

286638_10150282038575680_3081784_o.jpg?o

 

289049_10150282038720680_3514716_o.jpg?o

 

284498_10150282038785680_3037912_n.jpg?o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

there are many compelling, highly intelligent and "intellectually honest" ways to defend creationism

perhaps you'd like to enlighten us?

 

I'll wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.