Do you believe in Darwinian evolution?

Discussion in 'The Voting Booth' started by KO2134, Aug 27, 2013.

?

Do you believe in Darwinian evolution?

  1. Yes

    46 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. No

    32 vote(s)
    34.8%
  3. Unsure

    7 vote(s)
    7.6%
  4. Need more information

    7 vote(s)
    7.6%
  1. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    No that is not it at all.....My answer to the question was no i don't beleive in Darwins theory of eveloution and the statment that went with it was It is just a theory. The others beleive seam to think they have to convince me that my answer was wrong by saying I know nothing about science first and I am stupid and other things for not saying they are right. Please read the whole thread before making an alagation like that. I do know a lot and have done a lot but me saying you need to look at the big picture comes from them wanting to focuse on one part of why Darwin wrote what he did and not on the anti-religus and political conitations of what he wrote.

    And yes this is a Correction....you are wrong about my intentions of what I have said!!!

    What I
     
  2. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    Also just because you have spent more time doing something doen't mean you know more about it than any other person.
     
  3. Zaden

    Zaden Registered User

    95
    15
    18
    you keep using that word.jpg
    All in good fun, of course, brother. Believe what you like. This is not the debate you are looking for :biggrin:
     
  4. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
  5. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    234
    63
    Please show the evidence that scientists CARE whether or not a theory has to be adjusted? SCIENTISTS ARE NOT MULLAHS AND IMAMS! We are not into promulgating eternal dogmas. We find models that are useful, need adjustment, and can be replaced without a single tear. IT DOES NOT MATTER that the words of Darwin are not 100% perfectly perfectly true. No scientist has ever maintained they were. It is not a religious dogma. ALL scientific models are subject to revision. If one is revised, IT IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR SCIENTISTS, although it might be a big deal dogmatics.
     
  6. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    234
    63
    Here's the thing: Does ANYONE AT ALL "believe in Darwinian evolution" as it has now been so rigidly and specifically re-defined? I'd say "No, not a single person on the earth." THAT STILL DOES NOT PROVE CREATIONISM TO BE CORRECT. Does anyone "believe in Newtonian physics" if it is rigidly and specifically redefined as "Physics as described exactly by Sir, Isaac Newton, using his exact words and no sources or revisions"? No--except for those ignorant of physics. Newton's model has been revised and updated. That does not mean that "invisible pink unicorn physics" must be true. What is gained AT ALL by admitting that the original version of any scientific model will end up not standing the test of time and be revised in light of later data? THAT STILL DOES NOT PROVE THAT AN ENTIRELY OPPOSITE MODEL MUST BE TRUE.

    There is NOBODY around who is invested in preserving and promulgating this ultra-narrowly defined "Darwinian theory of evolution" as if it were a religious dogma, except in the minds of lunatics who suffer from severe paranoia. Nobody who actually does science CARES that a theory gets revised.
     
  7. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,394
    133
    Let's not jump to the conclusion that all scientists are open minded about their own field, either. Check out Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" and read the history of several of the revolutions he reports on. For the larger scientific revolutions the generation of scientists who were tenured before the discovery was made mostly had to die of old age before the new science became very widely accepted. Until then the new versions saw gradually building consensus with more and more young scientists subscribing. Individual scientists do get entrenched in their old way and this is good for science in general as they challenge the new ways to prove their value in many different ways.

    Science does not care. Individual scientists often do care. Plus individual scientists who switch to a new way after a major discovery are later considered pioneers. This is yet another feature of how science works that many seem unaware of.

    To anyone who hasn't read his book I urge you to. It covers more issues more widely and more accurately than most expect. It's a work of extreme brilliance for its era and to this day it shines by its coverage, completeness and how much of its material remains consistent with the evidence.
     
  8. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    I just have said Darwins theory of evolution. I did not ever say evolution doesn't happen and I am not trying to PROVE creationism because they I beleive they are not mutually exclusive. When I look a theory I don't try to disprove them I use them to try to prove my theories wrong. When you say things like stuped or ignorants you are just showing you are not willing to look at all data. I did not say Newton was wrong I said that "Newton's theory of gravity has been added to by Einstein theory of graved being a frabic. Theories are to try and fill in data where prof is missing. All of these thing are said not make someone admit anything but to make everyone allways to THINK.

    What I don't understand is why you get so upset and always try to make me beleive the way you do. Every theory has a part that is fact and other parts that are supposition and I am refuring to both parts here. You however are jumping to concultions without recognizing that. I also don't beleive you can speek to which sciencetist CARES that a theory gets revisised. It is funny how you seem to think someone is somehow deamed a science and that you must be the judge of that.


    Please think of what I have said....All of what I have said.....you will then not come off as a self-righteous as you have.
     
  9. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    And there is your mistake - trying to argue that the two are not mutually exclusive. One is a scientific theory and the other is a myth. One invites critical thinking to determine it's veracity and the other requires only belief. They are two very different things and any attempt to weigh one against the other is simply a fool's errand.
     
  10. BroBook

    BroBook Premium Member

    590
    236
    63
    Before the beginning , during the middle,& after the end, Wisdom,Strength & Beauty, that's all!!!


    Bro Book
     
  11. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    Nothing is mutually exclusive excpet in some peoples minds and any man is a fool if they think they can say that is fact!!! You can only understand as much as the data at the time of the theory being writen down. New information is always comming in. There is more and new that several species of hominids overlaped by thousands of years. The book of Genises is a discription for when hominds became sentient beings. I think from what you have said that you think Genises is myth. I beleive all so called myth has trouth it is based on.
     
  12. widows son

    widows son Premium Member

    1,828
    18
    38
    Evolution is a fact. It did happen, and still is happening.


    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  13. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    Yes I agree but the question is "Do you believe in Darwinian evolution?" There ar many evelution theorys. Thats why they are theorys and they are all based on the same anthropological data. Theorys are really the part of the paper that is not data/proof. If this is not going to start a firestorm. It is the Myth part of the paper that is not proof/fact used to fill in gaps in the data.

    I also hope all of us will let the theroys of evolution be able to evolve themselves and we not become a flat earth group that sticks on Darwins theory only. The catlic church said the earth was flat and killed to prove this. Some of y'all are saying Darwins theory of evolution is it and only it.....this makes me say something I would normaly not say but he it goes.............WTF
     
  14. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    The Book of Genesis is a set of ancient stories that were told mouth-to-ear until someone decided to write them down. Since then, they have been translated and edited many, many times. That much is fact. To argue that the contents of that book are fact is completely absurd as there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that may be used to test their veracity. They may have been made up out of whole cloth. No one can know. That makes them myth, regardless of what one chooses to believe about them.

    And no. A reasoned hypothesis is absolutely not the same as myth. Conflating the terms is disingenuous, at best, if not outright foolish.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2014
  15. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    au contraire mon frere, By calling anything like that only Myth you will miss good starting places for your research in to all things. That is the flat earth mantality to discredit then to discard if you see no value in it. All things point to useful information/data. Look at what was said about Troy...It is a mythical city writen down after the fact, but now they have found a city that they think may be it.

    People normaly write down this based on an experance like in the movies there ar no movies that don't have a starting point as fact. All movies have an experance that caused them to be writen even the fiction ones. It could be a drug induced experance but that is an experance. So if when looking at a so called myth you need to look for the sparks throughout for where to look for evdince of fact. The new age flat earthers always try to discredit so they can say the whole story is disproved and they miss some evidence that might help them. Please keep seeking firther light don't limit your self.
     
  16. nfasson

    nfasson Registered User

    74
    8
    8
    I consider myself a Christian and also believe in Evolution. Does that blow your mind?

    My reasoning is, the Bible is what, 1,000+ pages all devoted to God and Man, but spends maybe two pages at best talking about the creation of the universe and everything in it.

    That tells me that explaining how things came to be where not a big priority when it was written. Maybe man's relationship with God is more important?

    Evolution is an observable and proveable theory that shows how life propagates on this planet. That's it. It doesn't try to disprove God or prove that man is somehow inferior bc he descended from other mammals. The fact that it literally four billion years for us to finally show up seems to be an indicator that we're not exactly run-of-the-mill. And the fact that we are so vastly different from other animals... our thinking, our ability to adapt, our sheer willpower. It's not normal compared to other creatures.

    And, I don't understand why Creationists try to cram both Genesis and Evolution together when they really should just say, "God created the heavens and Earth in seven days. Period. End of story."

    Why try to "prove" dinosaurs and man lived at the same time or use some crazy pseudoscience to "prove" the Earth is only 14,000 years old? In the Bible, God created the Earth in seven days. If you are a literal interpreter, you don't add anything to that. Nothing! Why try to compromise?

    I will now step off the soapbox...




    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  17. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    754
    26
    48
    See you are thinking and not limiting. The problems I have with this thread is the word "Darwin's evelution" which leaves all other evelution theorys out of the mix. As your first line states I beleive in both the bible and evolution and many ways these things go together.
     
  18. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,394
    133
    I consider myself a Mason and I also believe in traffic lights. Does that blow your mind?

    To me they are equivalent statements in that the two points mentioned have the same amount of correlation with each other.
     
  19. nfasson

    nfasson Registered User

    74
    8
    8
    Well, that's kind of my point. They should be unrelated but certain folks have decided to deem Evolution a threat to their faith.


    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  20. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,394
    133
    There are multiple species of belief. Different dimensions of belief can be in surface disagreement without having any effect on each other.

    As Masons we are all men who accept the existence of a supreme being. Nearly all members of this forum are members of western secular culture, and all members of all on-line forums use the secular derived Internet. We have our own evidence in our own hearts knowing full well the external objective evidence never happens. This is a topic each of us must have resolved to be able to thrive in society.

    That's two different dimensions of belief that we all experience in our lives and that we have all come to peace with. Does not the topic of evolution work exactly the same way? The objective evidence outside about the mechanics of life. The subjective evidence in our own hearts about why life happens and what it means. This isn't even really about the Aristotle quote that an educated man can entertain an idea that he does not agree with. This is really about dimensional perspective.

    Understanding the fatherhood of the divine is a matter of spiritual breadth. Understanding the mechanics of living beings is a matter of secular depth. They are separate dimensions. This is one of the types of Geometry we should be learning and teaching. Here we have the linage of Masons going back and forward in time across the generations to show us how the topics are not in conflict, the lineage of length of time.
     

Share My Freemasonry