.
Does anyone truly believe in Evolution anymore?
- Thread starter Hobie
- Start date
Im thinking of pulling outdated non fiction books from the library that say the earth is billions of years old. Come on do they expect anyone to actually believe that. I could take those books and bury them in the skip and someone could dig them up and claim they are billions of years old because they were in a layer that they dated to be billions of years old.
Yes, believing in the sciences does not negate any belief in God.
Many Christians rely on weather forecasts (even if with some justified skeptacism). Believing in meteorology does not mean denying that God is in control.
In the sciences, formulating the right questions is key to finding useful answers, so I'll leave with a stray question mark
?
Haha my dad is an amateur meterologist, he has his own weather station at home but there is no way I would use the stats gathered from that to do any forecasts. The weather has always been unpredictable where I live. What I can predict is that anything could happen during the day in which we could have four seasons in one day. One minute its hailing, next minute the sun comes out. A good day is when we have rainbows.
So take your umbrella and your jandals, be prepared for anything.
So take your umbrella and your jandals, be prepared for anything.
I like to think of science as a technical explanation of what God did/does.
Is it theology for geeks?
I remember having to learn some weird equations in philosophy class about logic. If xxx then...
In library school it was all about Boolean searches.
My brain doesnt function on that level though. We have lots of books in the library cataloguing all the plants and animals God created. Every kind. They must all somehow be entered under the Lambs books of Life.
Under my name I expect several pages by now although maybe its a really short entry? Who knows. I never got into catlaoguing. I was asked to do it once but I think it would have done me in. Thankfully nowadays there is automated catloguing so you dont have to describe every single book in the library and make a new entry all the time by hand. Yes for computers!
I believe you are talking about the 15 Logical Fallacies like: the post hoc fallacy. Post hoc (post hoc ergo propter hoc: "after this, therefore because of this")
rtm3039
Am I? Honestly I dont remember much it was only philosophy 101 and it didnt stick in my brain. Some weird things you learn in university. BUt i do remember in my first year some christian groups would hold lectures questioning evolutionary theory. Since I was doing social science and not hard science it didnt really affect my studies but some of the social darwinism showed up in things like eugenics.
This is where some people believe that certain people are more highly evolved than others so should be sterilised or out bred or whatever. It was a big thing in the 1940s under nazism. The atheists really took to darwinism and evolutionary theory to justify all this genocide.
Have never heard anyone consider philosophy as something "weird" you learn in college, but I guess. I've always enjoyed philosophy and with we still had gatherings of people to discuss such things.
Yes, eugenics was founded under the belief that we could make the human species better by selective breeding. It was a bid thing during Nazi Germany and, because of this, it became a "thing of the past."
It was western philosophy which was the complete opposite of eastern philosophy which is kind of the way I was brought up, even if it wasnt explicitly taught to me, I would never have viewed the world in terms of logic etc the way those western philosphers like Descartes did.
So it was a struggle intially for me even to make head or tail of it (western philosophy). When youve insitnctively known things and are content with that, its seems weird to have to break it down and isolate things the way westerners do.
Its kind if like if your left handed but have to adjust to a right handed world.
Or even if you are female and in a mans world. A man can not understand what it takes to be female cos he just takes things for granted. Many things are designed for MEN and not for women. Machinery for example. Or take the bicycle. Why are bicycles differnt for women? Cars arent that way but bicycles have adifference and not just in colour.
So it was a struggle intially for me even to make head or tail of it (western philosophy). When youve insitnctively known things and are content with that, its seems weird to have to break it down and isolate things the way westerners do.
Its kind if like if your left handed but have to adjust to a right handed world.
Or even if you are female and in a mans world. A man can not understand what it takes to be female cos he just takes things for granted. Many things are designed for MEN and not for women. Machinery for example. Or take the bicycle. Why are bicycles differnt for women? Cars arent that way but bicycles have adifference and not just in colour.
Well, in the old days women wore dresses and not pants. So, the frame was designed to a woman did not have to list her dress to get on the bike and show off some skin.
I think they are still made that way even though women dont always wear skirts nowadays. But men can ride them too and actually it is easier to mount bikes that have a low crossbar. So that ought to be the default design.
Also, if a man wans to wear a skirt he can also ride a bike too. Some men wear lavalavas and robes, monks also wear skirts not trousers. I dont tend to wear a skirt when I ride a bike because it might get caught in the chain even with a low cross bar. And a short skirt will ride up so everyone can see your knickers, unless you wear stockings I have no idea what the purpose of miniskirts were or why people wore them, they are probably the most imoracticall clothing ever.
When some people design clothes often you think um how do you even wear this. I cant actually do anything in it.
When some people design clothes often you think um how do you even wear this. I cant actually do anything in it.