TED Conversations

Gerald O'brian

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Evolution: "just a theory". Scientific caution is sometimes confusing.

The fact that our best available theories are still speculations misleads some people to believe that these ideas are not founded. Hence, some people suppose their uneducated opinion is just as bad, or as good, as the mainstream scientific hypothesis.
This trend is probably led by the way science has been taught, i e as a flawless method that offers facts about reality.
And by pre-scientific philosophy, still strong in our modern societies.

Evolution is "just a theory" the way Notre Dame is "just a pile of rocks", isn't it?

Thoughts?

+6
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jun 7 2013: If you believe in creation, then you believe that God/Allah created everything perfectly, then you believe that God / Allah created DNA and that God /Allah ordained sexual reproduction. DNA and sexual reproduction GUARANTEE evolution. So NOT to believe in evolution is a blasphemy because God / Allah's creations are perfect, so evolution is the perfect way to create living diversity. Any religious leader who preaches otherwise is commiting a blasphemy and by so doing is misleading people like Muhammad Ali.
    • thumb
      Jun 7 2013: I am not sure that all major religions are fixed on that interpretation of creationism. Didn't the Church in Rome recently come out and state that evolution is scientific theory and creationism is a theological precept?
      This would imply some separation of religious theory and science is appropriate. Works for me.
      • thumb
        Jun 9 2013: When in conflict (as they often are) only one of them can be true though. You cannot believe that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the seventh AND believe that the universe was created 13.7 billion years ago and all the things that came out of it formed by natural law.
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2013: Why not? Who says that God's days are not over 2 billion years long. Theology is not science.
          Much of the book of Genesis is based on legend. Language of the day was not liberally sprinkled with descriptive adjectives as I understand.
          Who is to disprove that "Natural" law is God's law. I can't.
          So, is Genesis absolutely true, I don't know
          Is it all science? Again, I don't know, but I have to think that all the information to create the universe and all that is in it was in that little ball, whatever, that exploded to create the "big bang". How did it get there.
      • thumb
        Jun 9 2013: Oh Mike,

        "Who is to disprove that "Natural" law is God's law. I can't. "
        Can you disprove Strobls' law (1st edition) that says "No gods exist or have ever existed"?

        You're just making the scriptures match what you already believe. Who says that Gods days ARE two billion years?

        There is no way to "disprove" that something that hasn't been proved is false. and God has NOT been proven.
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2013: Can't prove God exists or never existed. Strobls (?) he sounds so sure of himself. Nobody is usually that sure unless they are wrong.

          And who says God's days aren't. But if they are, it all kind of falls into place..

          Never said He was, never said He wasn't.
      • thumb
        Jun 9 2013: So, what's your take on psalm 137:9? What does it really mean?

        http://biblehub.com/psalms/137-9.htm
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2013: Let see, about 600 bce the Babylonians invaded Jerusalem and really wiped the floor with them.... Think of the invasion of Poland in '39 and multiplying that exponentially. OK, the surviving Jews were a tad upset. So, 137:9 is saying that the Jews would be happy if they could take babies from Babylonian mothers and kill them.
          So, what does it mean... It means that those Jews were really ticked off.
      • thumb
        Jun 9 2013: And while you're explaining the true meaning of the bible would you care to give your take on these verses and tell me what they really mean?

        "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be quiet." (1 Timothy 2:12)
        "Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses." (1 Samuel 15:3)
        "You shall not let a sorceress live." (Exodus 22:18)
        "When the men would not listen to his host, the husband seized his concubine and thrust her outside to them. They had relations with her and abused her all night until the following dawn, when they let her go. Then at daybreak the woman came and collapsed at the entrance of the house in which her husband was a guest, where she lay until the morning. When her husband rose that day and opened the door of the house to start out again on his journey, there lay the woman, his concubine, at the entrance of the house with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, 'Come, let us go'; but there was no answer. So the man placed her on an ass and started out again for home." (Judges 19:25-28)
        "And the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity." (Romans 1:27)
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2013: They probably mean what they say. Man's relationships with his fellow man is and always has been "challenging". Rape, murder, mayhem.... They killed witches back then and in Europe just a few hundred years ago. The bible first and foremost is a history of the Jews and subsequently the Christians. I don't know the "true meaning " of the bible, that's for theologians.
          I do think that we shouldn't rule out an intelligent designer in the creation of our universe
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2013: I agree with Mike. I think, Bible is a mirror for humanity. It has stories ranging from the highest degree of self-sacrifice down to the lowest depravity. (You missed child cannibalism in Kings 6:6 and eating human feces in Ezekiel). No wonder, so many people don't like what they see in the Bible. I think, most stories are there for reflection. Interpretation and meaning depends on what we see in that reflection.
      • thumb
        Jun 9 2013: Mike,

        "Nobody is usually that sure unless they are wrong." I completely agree. My extreme position is overplayed, but I do it to balance the debate out.
        I'm actually (teapot) agnostic, as are almost all atheists. I take the position of atheism to counter the position of theism. There are hundreds of comments everywhere stating that God exists, is great and all loving. But when one makes the opposite statement people get offended...
      • thumb
        Jun 10 2013: The church of England also accepts the science of evolution

        The bible god concept is a bit schizophrenic. Kill everyone one day. Love they neighbour the next. Blood sacrifices finally torturing for eternity those who use there brains to figure out there is no reason to believe or are convinced of some other gods

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.