@Jesus: The misconceptions were at least in large part discussed earlier in this thread. The conclusion that the OP is not very well-informed about evolution. As you see, the discussion shifted a bit.
@hackle577: Hmm, that could be good link to check myself. See if i can post it when in the future i meet a similar situation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bvc not any more than any other theory on the Big Bang. Notice, I didn't say it was fact did I? I was just throwing a little something to think about. No diff than anyone else does. It's ok as long as it's not from the Bible though, eh? |
What was there to think about.. And what did we post that was similar to what you typed? We do not quote random stuff from science textbooks without context that gives meaning. Also i am not ill informed about big bang theory.
Saying earlier that you wanted to keep religion out of it but still wanting to include the bible sounds like you consider the bible full of 'facts'.
As for criticising the bible on inconsistantcies, absurdities and vagueness, i guess other people are way more qualified on that. Learning the bible for that reason sounds too cynical to me. (somewhere someone posted a website about that.)
Maybe we should remind ourselves of the definition of 'fact' anyway, is it not something like consensus? Among scientists there is a consensus that evolution in some form caused the different species to be like they are. So, for them, it is a fact. I think there is good reason to consider scientist a authority on the subject, because a lot of the ways we do things could not have been developed without science. For instance, computers.