Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry

order now!

Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry

Unread postby rpsoft » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:30 pm

It would be great if this message gets to Bernie Goldberg. No matter how long it is, the whole argument of mine gets much longer and is free. And yes, you people have my email address. My point was that I simply loved Bernie’s book crazies and wimps, until I got to the section talking about religion and evolution. Then I saw what appeared to be the normal nonsense the main stream media is pushing down our throats – that science and religion are at odds. There may be some extreme religious who believe the earth is 6000 years. I believe the 4.5 billion year story personally from the geo-physicists. And there are some extreme intolerant atheists like Bill Maher on the other side who say that anyone who questions the current and full theory of evolution is stupid and a religious bigot. I don’t agree with that either. The truth is that for most of us in the middle 93% or so of America who are not extremists, there is no conflict between science and a belief in God. I have had 8 years of college training on scientific method including both undergraduate and graduate studies. To the credit of my public school, they never ever confused the words fact and theory. Yet today, many extremists on both sides do. Let me make this simple. There is no conflict between Science and a belief in God.
Here are the real rules. Science is what can be proven, and that of course should be taught in schools. Now much of science can be proven such as Math (it is called a pure science since it is so easily proven), chemistry and much of physics and a good portion of biology. I am a big believer in Science. I have worked in technology first as an engineer and later as a VP and later a Sr. VP, in a high tech world and in fact have over 35 years as an engineer who used scientific methods. However, some things called science facts today are just theories, and that is just plain wrong.
While Bill Maher froths at the mouth pushing his evolutionary theory down everyone’s throats, guess what most of my religious friends of different faiths think of evolution? They don’t care. And why should they? Evolution and a belief in God can work side by side. Those who believe in God know that God does not get into nor influence every facet of science. Religion does not question gravity. Why should religion question evolution? So the argument is not religion versus evolution. That is an argument for pin head extremists. The argument is where does proved science leave off and we get into theory? And theory is the same as a belief system. And how we do we in America deal with all of this? When confused, look at the Statue of Liberty. The statue implies from many we become one. Okay, then we should be tolerant. When science leaves off and we get into theory, believe in the theory you believe the most, the big bang theory or God. Neither has been proven, and neither is therefore proven science or even science at all until proven. And we should respect the beliefs of others. And please, please, do not use the argument that most scientists agree. Every time I hear the phrase that most people agree, I know the person is lying and knows it. Saying most people agree means the speaker has no clue of logic or proof for their facts and therefore want to get away with something stupid. Most scientists at one time thought the earth was flat. And later most scientists thought that asbestos saved lives, or that putting halogens in cables would also save lives during a fire. Nope. Real scientists keep their minds open, and every year learn more. Having a closed mind such as screaming that evolution is 100% correct is not being a scientist, but being a closed minded bigot.
Some parts of evolution are logical and make sense and some parts even contradict itself. Evolution is not proven. Sad to say, but with all of the possibilities a real scientist with an open mind would realize that there are just too many variables and that all of it cannot be proven. Therefore evolution as a whole is a theory only. Likewise a few elements of the big bang theory such as the expanding universe seem to make sense and be provable. But believing something can come from nothing at its beginnings is not science, but a belief system no more valid than a belief in God. And the big bang machine being built today proves nothing. Since it is clearly a very complex “something” it has no chance of proving that something can come from nothing. Even the most complex equation many hear, that of E = mc2 by Einstein has been proven – that mass and energy are related. But let us keep our heads here. The total evolution THEORY and the total big band THEORY are theories and it is anti science to teach then in school as fact. True scientists are open minded and would say the same thing as me – that some parts make sense and other parts need work. Teaching theories as fact however, should be very disturbing to us all.
For evolution, some parts make sense such as survival of the fittest and natural selection since we can see in the world today, but others cannot ever be proven since just too many possibilities remain. For example, to not believe in God but believe in evolution, one must believe that living things can come from non living things, but only once. Huh? Okay, as an engineer I might be able to believe that living things can come from non living things, but why only once as evolutionists seem to say? Why not living things coming from non living things hundreds or times or millions of times? This very illogical evolutionary premise knocks big holes in the theory at the start. Then evolutionists claim that earth is part of a closed system. Nope, we know that to be false. Animals or their carbon traces could have come to earth as space dust in their DNA structures. But dust would be dead you say? Well, in premise one you have to agree that living things can come from non living things, so, why not start out with space dust DNA? How can that possibility be excluded from a true scientific proof? Evolutionists claim that because two animals look the same and have some of the same chemicals, they must have evolved from each other. Nope. Just as a 2005 BMW car is not evolved from a 2005 Toyota. They both look the same because their APPLICATION is the same. Likewise animals have to have similar applications and other similarities to exist on earth. Then we have that one part of science disagrees with other parts of science. Darwin’s theories of constant change seem to imply continual and similar amounts of change. Nope. Most species occurred in a similar period and have not changed much since. Geologists tell us that life on earth may have been killed off multiple times by 6 ice ages, volcanoes filling the earth with smoke and blocking air, and giant meteor crashes. (note none were CO2 as Gore worries about – sorry had to throw that in). Well, if the animals died out, then evolution was not constant at all. For example, some evolutionists say birds evolved from dinosaurs. If the dinosaurs all died at once as some geologists say, then the birds descended from dead dinosaurs? I for one believe the geologists and say that evolutionists either better start revising their theories to meet the rest of science or just pull their stuff altogether.
Nope, Some parts make sense but not the constant Darwin evolution stuff. Survival of the fittest makes sense and we can see it with species going extinct today that can no longer take the changes in the earth. And as for humans descending from Apes, I would call that extremely illogical – even from part of evolutionary theory itself – the survival of the fittest part. If Apes are a stable species and can survive on earth as they do, and if humans are a stable species that can survive on earth, then what exactly is the motivation for one to evolve into the other? There is none. One could argue that if there is any relationship there at all, perhaps both evolved from a third species long ago that was unstable and therefore left not enough bones to leave a trail. But we don’t know do we? We know that the Piltdown man that someone came up with the prove the ape to man thing was a fake. As scientists, why cant we just say, we honestly don’t know what happened here? Why make up a fairy tale and sell it as fact?
Anyway, just too many possibilities. I believe in part of evolution and part of big bang, but to teach the whole thing as fact, one would have to ignore huge sections of proof. And to say that Religion and Science are at odds is incorrect for the 93% Americans who are not extremists. The real story is that science and science are at odds, and that schools no longer care what is theory and what is fact, and that is very very sad.
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:13 pm

Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry



Re: Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry

Unread postby Topher » Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:09 pm

(Takes a few warmup swings.)

Your post started out in a promising manner, but then you got lost.

"Science is what can be proven." Not exactly. As wikipedia puts it, "Science is the effort to discover, and increase human understanding of how the physical world works." This is done through the scientific method. In the scientific method, scientists form hypotheses, which can be tested through observation and experimentation. If the observations and experiments confirm the hypotheses, then a theory can be formed based on the results. Very, very few things in science have ever been "proven," as experiments conducted under the scientific method never verify something with 100% certainty, they can only falsify with 100% certainty. I don't know of any scientist who says that evolution is 100% correct, but it is the best scientific explanation for the data that is currently available.

Science only teaches theories, as there really aren't any "facts" from a scientific standpoint. Scientists gather data through observation and experimentation, but most are careful to include margins of error and alternate explanations in their results.

You continue with "as an engineer I might be able to believe that living things can come from non living things, but why only once as evolutionists seem to say? Why not living things coming from non living things hundreds or times or millions of times?" I'm pretty sure the argument you are attempting to negate is that evolutionists say that life only had to come from non-living things once, not that it only happened once. Most evolutionary biologists aren't very quick to draw the line between living and non-living anyway: Are amino acids alive? How about RNA? Or does it take a complete cell before you can consider it life?

"Evolutionists claim that because two animals look the same and have some of the same chemicals, they must have evolved from each other." Evolutionists rarely claim that something evolved from something else. Usually, it is a case of both evolving from a common ancestor, but recently, through DNA analysis, some connections based on appearance have been disproved, while others that were unsuspected were shown to exist. Your BMW vs. Toyota example is a good illustration of this: One didn't evolve from the other, but both have the Model T as a distant "ancestor." Likewise, the argument isn't that man isn't descended from modern apes, but rather that both share a common ancestor.

Please, go find a good book or two on evolutionary biology and read it. I think you'll be surprised to see what evolutionary biologists actually think.

Topher Kersting
User avatar
Media pundit
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

Re: Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry

Unread postby Jorge_Banner » Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:27 pm

Life Member JPFO.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote. Ben Franklin
Beware the Truce of the Bear
Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again.
A is A
Media analyst
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:07 am

Re: Crazies and Wimps, discussion goes awry

Unread postby crisb » Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:25 am

Hi rpsoft,

After reading your post I've come to the conclusion that you need a vacation. Go to the beach in Puerto Rico and relax with a couple of Pina Coladas, it will do you a lot of good. Forget all that about theory and fact and evolution; go with God, He'll put your mind at ease. :wink:

New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:09 am

Return to Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right: How One Side Lost Its Mind and the Other Lost Its Nerve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest