My fear about McCain...

The classical theory of abiogenisis has nothing to do with evolution. Abiogenis was a folksy belief that, for instance, flies came from meat, because flies were always around rotten meat. Evolution states that several factors came together that created a piece of matter that reproduces itself. Not that life just randomly pops out of rocks. It's ridiculously desperate of fundamentalists to try to equate the two, especially since they came up with the original abiogenisis, and the biological sciences that disproved their superstition came up with evolution.
 
Okay the part of the argument I caught appeared to be 3D and Soc agreeing that Abiogenesis requires a leap of faith to rationally accept, which it does, and agreeing that that does nothing to diminish the unrelated theory of evolution.

If that was not the case, my mistake.
 
Watermark said:
OK, I've heard people argue that evolution doesn't exist because of abiogenisis before, and maybe I read things wrong.
Click to expand...

Evolution logically springs from abiogenesis (both are essentially evolution, though). Neither has to do with origins - merely processes.

Acording to the theory, you start with molecules that contain enzymes which are 8-12 strands long (non-life sustaining) and arrive eventually at molecules that contain enzymes which are 200-300 strand long (life sustaining). Ultimately, once we have our first single-celled organisms on Earth, then evolution begins to take place.

The leap of faith required is getting from 0 strands of enzyme to 8.
 
Socrtease said:
And there in lies the difference. There is no test to disprove any religious thought. It can never be subject to the scientific method. Most Scientist hold certain theories to be sound because regardless of what tests are done to disprove them they don't get disproven. I would argue though that believers of string theory are the closest thing to a religion that science can get to.
Click to expand...
Exactly. People say that they are more "scientific" because they disbelieve with certainty in a Deity. That is no more scientific than those who believe with certainty in a Deity. It really has nothing at all to do with science. It is a totally misapplied argument.
 
Damocles said:
Exactly. People say that they are more "scientific" because they disbelieve with certainty in a Deity. That is no more scientific than those who believe with certainty in a Deity. It really has nothing at all to do with science. It is a totally misapplied argument.
Click to expand...

yup!
 
Watermark said:
It's also ridiculous to try to equate religion to science as "They all require elements of faith folks?!"
Click to expand...
This only proves you have no idea what the scientific process is. I equate total certainty in either belief Deity or no Deity. I did not equate the scientific process with either of them. Another attempted to bring that subject up, I pointed out that method has nothing to do with "proof" as the scientific process is not able to prove anything, it was never designed to prove anything.
 
Sooner or later the Christian-bashers are going to have to acknowledge that there is hardly a single ideology or belief system on the planet (religious or otherwise) that hasn't ended in warfare or bloodshed. It doesn't atone for the Crusades or whatever, but it is just silly to act like Christianity (or other ideologies, for that matter) is some horrible thing that breeds hypocrisy and causes destruction.

Humans breed hypocrisy, humans cause destruction. Beliefs provide a reason on occasion, but the reason is often just an excuse. In the absence of the original excuse an alternate is easily found.
 
RStringfield said:
I don't see any reason to assume his view only applies to abortion. If the Constitution should be brought to "God's standards" on abortion why not other issues? From what I understand, he was also referring the marriage amendment. This is a dangerous principle.

Why is it we are supposed to believe the Republicans really don't mean what they say (we already know they don't like when they talk about limited government), like with this and McCain's crackpot war mongering, but Obama says a prayer and that is somehow shows he's a theocrat?

On the original post... I don't see how anything could increase your fears about McCain. McCain alone is bad enough. Huckabee could not get an amedment as President much less as VP. McCain can/will further our descent into a nation of war.
Click to expand...

BOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

McCain!!!!!! 2008
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top