Why do fundamentalists believe the world is 6000-10000 years old?

[itinerant1]

I had superior grades in logic at the university. Point out my flaw…

Sorry to hear about your university experience.

First, you said:
P. Darwin’s theory was crucial to the Marxist view of science.
C. Anyone who promotes evolution as a foundation of any science is a Marxist.

Your premise says that Marx found evolution theory crucial; but your conclusion contains an assumed (hidden) premise, i.e. that Darwinian evolution theory is co-extensive with the Marxist view of science. Hence, your argument for that reason is both invalid and false. The cause of the invalidity is clear.

The falsity of the argument is seen by considering that Darwinian theory is not co-extensive with Marxist science. A simple comparison will suffice: Marxist science is built on such concepts as proletarian science and the dialectics of nature, notions which are alien to Darwinian evolution theory.
**
Second**, your argument falsely assumes that there is only one theory of evolution, Darwinism, which can be promoted as the foundation of science. The simple fact in itself that there are those who promote non-Darwinian theories of evolution falsifies your conclusion.

Third, every counter-example of anyone who is non-Marxist or anti-Marxist yet promotes evolution theory as the basis of science falsifies your conclusion.

I previously cited one notable instance of Theodosius Dobzhansky, but for some reason you chose to ignore this counter-example…

 

[spn82756]

I have already learned about talkorigins. I disrespect anyone who uses them as a resource. My only guess is that they are Marxists. Only Marxists have sincere interest in promoting evolution. It is a completely useless idea to everyone else.

Rest assured…your respect is NOT something I am looking for or would even want.

 

[buffalo]

Sorry i must have misunderstood.

I’m not a catholic, apparently in a NONER!! hehe

“If you do deny the existence of the human soul, how do you explain the vast difference between our thinking ability and the capabilities of even the highest of the non-human animals.”

Brain size?

Nope- The raven is arguably the most intelligent of all animals with a pea size brain.

 

[geometer]

Sorry to hear about your university experience.

First, you said:
P. Darwin’s theory was crucial to the Marxist view of science.
C. Anyone who promotes evolution as a foundation of any science is a Marxist.

Your premise says that Marx found evolution theory crucial; but your conclusion contains an assumed (hidden) premise, i.e. that Darwinian evolution theory is co-extensive with the Marxist view of science. Hence, your argument for that reason is both invalid and false. The cause of the invalidity is clear.

The falsity of the argument is seen by considering that Darwinian theory is not co-extensive with Marxist science. A simple comparison will suffice: Marxist science is built on such concepts as proletarian science and the dialectics of nature, notions which are alien to Darwinian evolution theory.
**
Second**, your argument falsely assumes that there is only one theory of evolution, Darwinism, which can be promoted as the foundation of science. The simple fact in itself that there are those who promote non-Darwinian theories of evolution falsifies your conclusion.

Third, every counter-example of anyone who is non-Marxist or anti-Marxist yet promotes evolution theory as the basis of science falsifies your conclusion.

I previously cited one notable instance of Theodosius Dobzhansky, but for some reason you chose to ignore this counter-example…

He is a marxist.

 

[spn82756]

He is a marxist.

from wikipedia (a marxist webite)

Belief in God
A constant defender of Darwinian (a marxist) evolution and founder of the BGA (Behavior Genetics Association), Dobzhansky, according to Francisco J. Ayala (a marxist) nevertheless “was a religious man”.[4] Dobzhansky himself spoke of God as creating through evolution, and considered himself a communicant of the Eastern Orthodox Church. (a marxist church).

Don’t you see? If you disagree with geometer…You’re a MARXIST!

 

[geometer]

from wikipedia (a marxist webite)

Belief in God
A constant defender of Darwinian (a marxist) evolution and founder of the BGA (Behavior Genetics Association), Dobzhansky, according to Francisco J. Ayala (a marxist) nevertheless “was a religious man”.[4] Dobzhansky himself spoke of God as creating through evolution, and considered himself a communicant of the Eastern Orthodox Church. (a marxist church).

Don’t you see? If you disagree with geometer…You’re a MARXIST!

You really do not know me and you never will, if you love marxism.

By the way I have noted how the modern definition of evolution is different from what it used to be. In a recent court case the judge asked for a definition of this mysterious principle. The scientist answered with no embarassment, that evolution means change.

One must wonder, how many biologists are needed to evolution a lightbulb?

 

[spn82756]

You really do not know me and you never will, if you love marxism.

I’m no Marxist…you label everything and everyone that disagrees with you as Marxist.

 

[geometer]

I’m no Marxist…you label everything and everyone that disagrees with you as Marxist.

I got that epistemological principle from you. You label all all science evolution. Its fun isn’t it. Lets be equivocal about everything…

 

[spn82756]

I got that epistemological principle from you. You label all all science evolution. Its fun isn’t it. Lets be equivocal about everything…

Ah…so because I’m a scientist…you can assume certain charactoristics about my believe system. Well…I’m a conservative Catholic who believes in the infinite power of God to do as he pleases.

I don’t remember which poster commented on me posting about God speaking to Moses about the theory of relativity. (confusing sentence…I know). But when I explained where I was coming from I never received an answer. The Bible is not a science book though.

BTW…do you take everything in the Bible literally? I just want to know.

 

[geometer]

Ah…so because I’m a scientist…you can assume certain charactoristics about my believe system. Well…I’m a conservative Catholic who believes in the infinite power of God to do as he pleases.

I don’t remember which poster commented on me posting about God speaking to Moses about the theory of relativity. (confusing sentence…I know). But when I explained where I was coming from I never received an answer. The Bible is not a science book though.

BTW…do you take everything in the Bible literally? I just want to know.

If you really have a science education, you know that evolution is nothing like hard science which can be easily physically verified. Even in biology departments courses in evolution are elective courses which carry very little credit toward a degree in biology.

Lets be a little more sober about just what little evolutionary speculations offer us in practical terms.

 

[spn82756]

If you really have a science education, you know that evolution is nothing like hard science which can be easily physically verified. Even in biology departments courses in evolution are elective courses which carry very little credit toward a degree in biology.

Lets be a little more sober about just what little evolutionary speculations offer us in practical terms.

It’s not always true. Not everything in science that “works” is easily demonstrated physically. Einstein physics presents a real problem to demonstrate physically at times…but we know it works. My degree is in atmospheric science. Derived equations can make various assumptions that may not be valid in the real world…but once those assumptions are made…the science works.

 

[geometer]

It’s not always true. Not everything in science that “works” is easily demonstrated physically. Einstein physics presents a real problem to demonstrate physically at times…but we know it works. My degree is in atmospheric science. Derived equations can make various assumptions that may not be valid in the real world…but once those assumptions are made…the science works.

There is no rule that a phenomenon must be easily observed. It is simply a waste of time to propose effects that can’t be observed.

If that is the case you would make more money writing science fiction novels, and you must admit this characterizes the whole body of literature about evolution. Stories about dinosaurs and ape men to scare children…

 

[spn82756]

There is no rule that a phenomenon must be easily observed. It is simply a waste of time to propose effects that can’t be observed.

If that is the case you would make more money writing science fiction novels, and you must admit this characterizes the whole body of literature about evolution. Stories about dinosaurs and ape men to scare children…

Okay…let’s change the course of the thread just a bit. But no sarcasm from either of us.

Where do dinosaurs fit into the picture? The fossils are there?

 

[geometer]

Okay…let’s change the course of the thread just a bit. But no sarcasm from either of us.

Where do dinosaurs fit into the picture? The fossils are there?

The fossil record is full of anomalies and does not strongly support evolution or any theory, there are die hard evolutionist who agree with this observation. When very little of the fossil record had been uncovered it was easier to think that it demonstrated evolving species.

Billions of fossils have been collected, and the mystery gets bigger as time goes on.

 

[spn82756]

The fossil record is full of anomalies and does not strongly support evolution or any theory, there are die hard evolutionist who agree with this observation. When very little of the fossil record had been uncovered it was easier to think that it demonstrated evolving species.

Billions of fossils have been collected, and the mystery get bigger as time goes on.

Assuming that evolution is a false theory…how to dinosaur fossils come into the picture. I am no longer trying to use them in the evolution debate…just there existance and how to reconcile it with the Bible.

 

[AlbertBall]

deleted

 

[AlbertBall]

forgot

 

[geometer]

Assuming that evolution is a false theory…how to dinosaur fossils come into the picture. I am no longer trying to use them in the evolution debate…just there existance and how to reconcile it with the Bible.

I believe there are some mentions dinosaurs in scripture,and of course dragons which were known to all cultures. But the leviathan is a whale I believe,and the behemoth might be a dinosaur because of the description of it having a tail like a tree trunk, but some think the word means elephant.

 

[spn82756]

I believe there are some mentions dinosaurs in scripture,and of course dragons which were known to all cultures. But the leviathan is a whale I believe,and the behemoth might be a dinosaur because of the description of it having a tail like a tree trunk, but some think the word means elephant.

I would think that animals of such size…and some of such ferocity…that there would be many categorical descriptions of them. The Bible would be filled with stories of their being. This would all have had to happen after the fall of man when Adam and Eve were expelled from the Eden. Up until then there were no meat eaters.

 

[geometer]

I would think that animals of such size…and some of such ferocity…that there would be many categorical descriptions of them. The Bible would be filled with stories of their being. This would all have had to happen after the fall of man when Adam and Eve were expelled from the Eden. Up until then there were no meat eaters.

At the time that the scriptures were written, perhaps the dinosaur problem had been largely forgotten. And maybe the writers had little interest in them. There are no moby dick stories in the scriptures, or accounts of any troubles with large animals that we have today such as elephants. Dinosaurs may have been just as peaceful as elephants, if any existed at that time.