yudansha
TheGreatOne
Doubt evolution? I think not (but I don't 'deny' creationism).
I wasn't placing an argument about Buddhism, I was just questioning the general belief in a 'superior being' (the key word being 'questioning' i.e. NOT denying)
Tora: "once someone presents a new vision,those conservative sharks will eat him alive"
That is true Tora, but by '[eating] him alive?' When Albert Einstein presented his special theory of relativity (it was just CALLED a theory, but it was PROVEN to be correct by Einstein himself) it was during the times when the physicists followed the concepts of Newton. Einstein's THEORY proved that Newton was WRONG! To that: most (almost all - those who did not work by Einstein's side as he was doing his research) physicits rejected Einstein's work (that's why Einstein never earned a Nobel Prize for his work on Special Theory of Relativity). As time passed, science EVOLVED (it took approximately 2 decades) and only Einstein's concepts could be applied, whereas Newton's concepts gave wrong outcomes - that's when ALL 'believed' Einstein's "new vision."
Tora: "once you can't prove it wrong ... you can't deny a possibility of a new vision."
It's not about proving something WRONG, it's about proving something RIGHT. In science you don't follow "innocent until proven guilty" (quite the contrary), and if you look at where the human kind has achieved to this point, it is all due to the work of science (i.e. Russia won the 'Space Race' due to science :=).
This just might be your Q&A:
Q - Tora: "there has been another theory offered by Rudolf Steiner which is stating that the apes have descended from human beings"
A - Gary Gabelhouse: "Neanderthal, in my opinion is a blind alley species unto itself."
Tora, I see that you do not understand the concept of evolution. To evolve is to benefit for future successions. How are apes superior to humans ('no warfare' I guess would be your answer ... but I'm not a psychic, nor am I a psycho :=)?
Tora: "unless you're a Buddhist yourself it makes no sense to speculate on this"
Tora, go back to my original post (my 1st post on this thread), and you will see that I was not questioning Buddhism, but rather the belief in the 'superior being,' and since it was said that Buddhism does not really follow the belief in a 'superior being,' then I am still not questioning Buddhism.
To Gary Gabelhouse's post: as a biologist, you must know that EVOLUTION does not have strict guidelines of any sort as to follow some timed succession of species. Evolution may be slow or rapid (by rapid, I don't mean a period of a day, a week, or a year, but rather a period of a decade as opposed to a million years). You then know that evolution is also influenced by the natural disasters such as meteors (i.e. the Yukatan crater off the coast of Mexican peninsula - the largest in existance on Earth), glaciation (ocean levels), movement of tectonic plates (major earthquakes, as in the Permian era - to form Pangea, and cause the largest extinction of 96% species). Such natural occurances influenced the rate of evolution - such as the increase in oxygen concentration levels (resembling those much like today) in the atmosphere during the Cambrian era forced the Cambrian explosion (rapid evolution of species). So, I don't see how the EVOLUTIONARY theories are doubted just as the creationism theories are favoured.
I wasn't placing an argument about Buddhism, I was just questioning the general belief in a 'superior being' (the key word being 'questioning' i.e. NOT denying)
Tora: "once someone presents a new vision,those conservative sharks will eat him alive"
That is true Tora, but by '[eating] him alive?' When Albert Einstein presented his special theory of relativity (it was just CALLED a theory, but it was PROVEN to be correct by Einstein himself) it was during the times when the physicists followed the concepts of Newton. Einstein's THEORY proved that Newton was WRONG! To that: most (almost all - those who did not work by Einstein's side as he was doing his research) physicits rejected Einstein's work (that's why Einstein never earned a Nobel Prize for his work on Special Theory of Relativity). As time passed, science EVOLVED (it took approximately 2 decades) and only Einstein's concepts could be applied, whereas Newton's concepts gave wrong outcomes - that's when ALL 'believed' Einstein's "new vision."
Tora: "once you can't prove it wrong ... you can't deny a possibility of a new vision."
It's not about proving something WRONG, it's about proving something RIGHT. In science you don't follow "innocent until proven guilty" (quite the contrary), and if you look at where the human kind has achieved to this point, it is all due to the work of science (i.e. Russia won the 'Space Race' due to science :=).
This just might be your Q&A:
Q - Tora: "there has been another theory offered by Rudolf Steiner which is stating that the apes have descended from human beings"
A - Gary Gabelhouse: "Neanderthal, in my opinion is a blind alley species unto itself."
Tora, I see that you do not understand the concept of evolution. To evolve is to benefit for future successions. How are apes superior to humans ('no warfare' I guess would be your answer ... but I'm not a psychic, nor am I a psycho :=)?
Tora: "unless you're a Buddhist yourself it makes no sense to speculate on this"
Tora, go back to my original post (my 1st post on this thread), and you will see that I was not questioning Buddhism, but rather the belief in the 'superior being,' and since it was said that Buddhism does not really follow the belief in a 'superior being,' then I am still not questioning Buddhism.
To Gary Gabelhouse's post: as a biologist, you must know that EVOLUTION does not have strict guidelines of any sort as to follow some timed succession of species. Evolution may be slow or rapid (by rapid, I don't mean a period of a day, a week, or a year, but rather a period of a decade as opposed to a million years). You then know that evolution is also influenced by the natural disasters such as meteors (i.e. the Yukatan crater off the coast of Mexican peninsula - the largest in existance on Earth), glaciation (ocean levels), movement of tectonic plates (major earthquakes, as in the Permian era - to form Pangea, and cause the largest extinction of 96% species). Such natural occurances influenced the rate of evolution - such as the increase in oxygen concentration levels (resembling those much like today) in the atmosphere during the Cambrian era forced the Cambrian explosion (rapid evolution of species). So, I don't see how the EVOLUTIONARY theories are doubted just as the creationism theories are favoured.
