unworthyone

I came here as requested from a invitee. I have plans to learn, but, still I have not seen evidence that there is no God that created life.

[ April 06, 2002: Message edited by: unworthyone ]</p>

BLoggins02

Fair enough, there probably won't be such evidence, most likely because scientists aren't interested in proving or disproving religion, but instead trying to figure out how the world works.

If I am a curious person, "God created it" may tell me who, but it doesn't tell me how. Genesis 1 doesn't help us cure deseases and advance the health of our species, but evolutionary biology does.

If I were a theist, I don't think I would have any problem reconciling my beliefs with evolutionary theory or abiogenesis, but then again I wouldn't be a Literalist either.

copernicus

The questions you have asked and the forum you are asking them in is called "Evolution/Creation". There is another forum dedicated to discussions on the existence of God.

Most christians seem to find no incompatibility between evolutionary theory and the existence of God. Hence, there is no reason for us to believe that you were talking about evidence for God's existence.

DMB

Unworthyone: Most probabilities are estimates. I am sure that automaton could explain to you how he arrived at his estimate for the probability concerning the grasses.

Now please don't take this the wrong way, but it is clear that you don't as yet know much about evolution/natural selection. So how much do you know or understand about the calculation of probabilities? I wouldn't want automaton to waste time explaining a calculation to you if you first needed mathematics lessons in order to be able to follow it.

You keep asking for probabilities of a type which is much harder to estimate, because so much more information is required. Few people here have the time to do the necessary research, and it is doubtful how meaningful such a figure would be even after a huge amount of research.

It is quite clear that you have not followed up Copernicus's suggestion about reading The Blind Watchmaker. This would supply many of the ideas you need to understand, and I don't think most members of this board will be offended if I suggest that it will give you a better grounding in the subject than a discussion here.

I would strongly recommend that you get hold of this book and read it attentively. If this reading raises further questions, then by all means come back and discuss them here.

Lizard

Interesting sidelight: When Einstein's theory came out, in the 1920's, there were religious people who thought it was dangerous because they thought "relativity" meant there was no absolute right or wrong. Another case of people knowing nothing about what they're criticizing, yet feeling perfectly free to say "it ain't so."

We all know there was no such thing as immorality before Darwin introduced his theory. At least, that's what one would think from listening to the anti-evos. So what about all that nasty stuff going on in the Old Testament? There's enough immorality there to provide fodder for dozens of X-rated movie plots. And all that happened millennia before anyone suspected such a thing as evolution existed.

Is it just possible the anti-evos are intentionally demonizing science and scientists in order to polarize their followers and increase the dollars in the offering plates? Nothing succeeds like creating an "us vs. them" situation. Even if you have to create it yourself. Witness "The Wedge Strategy" of the Discovery Institute.

Others here have mentioned that there is no necessary conflict between science and faith. Science just happens to be the only reliable way to investigate the physical universe and how it works. If faith depends on the Bible for answers to unlocking the genetic code and saving lives, I'm afraid it will fail miserably.

Faith is important to many people. It is not falsifiable, yet it is "real" to those who believe. There may well be a God behind all the wonders we observe in the natural world. But that is not for science to say. There is no way to see God under a microscope or through a telescope. There is no scientific method for validating either the existence or non-existence of God. As the Bible says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Also, as Jesus (I think) said (something to this effect), "You will look here, and you will look there, but you will not find the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven is within you."

Why creationists want to create scientific proof for the existence or presence of God in nature is a mystery to me. The only reason I can think of is that it seems to be a way to sneak religion into K-12 public school science classes. Or maybe, just maybe... their faith is weak?

Myself, I'm agnostic. It seems the only scientifically defensible position. However, I grant that faith in *something* is probably a hard-wired human need.