Friday, September 19, 2008

Creationism vs Evolution

I find this to be a fascinating topic.

Personally I think the truth is out there.. just well hidden from view.

I'm not a creationist, at least not in the traditional biblical sense, but neither do I believe in Evolution... I believe both are just theories, and that the "out there, but hidden" truth is probably something that is, well, for want of a better word, different.. Possibly entirely unexpected..

I guess my recent interest has been sparked by watching a Kent Hovind video.

Not sure how many of you may have heard of this guy, he is a creationist, and goes around giving talks and debates with evolutionists, and I must admit he is a very very influential and captivating speaker.

I would strongly recommend, that if you ever get a chance, you listen to him talk.. The video I watched is aptly named "Why Evolution is Stupid", and honestly, there is much food for thought in what he says.. He sort of proves once more how this society is full of lies that hide behind science, and how science itself at many levels, both cheats and deceives..

His material is noncopyrighted, so you can download his videos via torrents, or if anyone is really interested, I could possibly burn the .avi file I have, and send it for the cost of DVD, postage and packing via paypal.



Anonymous said...

Evolution stupid????? Now what is based his theories on that?!

Mango, you just blow my mind again!

Anonymous said...

Mango where is kveta? There is no post on her blog since August the 20th.


Fruitarian Mango said...

what you have to understand, is that evolution is just as much theory, as is creationism.. In fact, I am lead to believe, that there is absolutely no real proof that evolution is true at all.

at this moment, she is curled up in a ball sleeping in bed.. She got back from Europe yesterday, and is very tired from the long trip.. I'm sure she will update her blog when she is ready to, but rest assured she is healthy and happy, and back here with me.


Autumn said...

Yeah I'm more of a creationist myself. By way of one of the ancient Vedic traditions .... it actually makes sense. I haven't looked into what evolution is all about yet though :)

Fruitarian Mango said...

Hi Autumn,
I don't really see much of a difference between the 2 to be honest.. both are just a question of belief.. of course, evolution hides behind science, which is odd, since there apparently is no scientific proof in it's truth. (I really recommend that video!) - Creationism, on the other hand has it's root in religion.

We don't know how life or existence at all got here..

In fact, think about it too deeply, and nothing about reality appears to make any sense.

The truth is not really known. but it may certainly be believed..


Anonymous said...

The Creation of life earth was made possible by a superior alien life then Evolution did follow. That's my point of view.
Mango, please tell me what are the real symptoms of detox?

Thank you,

Fruitarian Mango said...

Orellio, i will answer your question about detox as a post (not as a comment).. just give me some time to gather some words together.


Fruitarian Mango said...

Orellio, as per your request.. see:

Symptoms of detox


Anonymous said...

What you once again fail to realise, is that Kent Hovind uses many, many arguments that are made to argue a fact without discrediting it, or proving there point. But rather misleading the listener or using scarecrow arguments.. Arguements of populum and many other CLASSIC debate tools. NOT facts and evidence.

In this video, kent is easily refuted by Richard Dwakins who, if you have any interest in listening to another much more logical, much more intelligent speaker, who isn't currently in jail for the next 10 years( I.E. Kent cheating on taxes. ) then I would reccomend you do a bit of research into the guy.

And there is LOTS of evidence pointing to the theory of evolution. However, if you have any idea what a theory is ( I'll fill you in, clearly you don't ) you would know that i has extensive evidence to back it up. However, the difference between a scientific theory and a law, is that a law is universal and always comes out according to what the law states. A theory requires further testing until it can be proven through 100s even thousands of tests. There's a lot of evidence, TONS of evidence that points to the big bang, evolution and everything( Squecenicng the human genome, THe expansion of the univeres, observing microbial life evolve, recreating primordial ooze, the list goes on.. And on.. And one). Creatism, isn't a theory. It's a faith. There is almost no solid evidence that shows "HEY! Look! The world was created by a god!" The only evidence creationists use, is lack of evidence in certain science. Which, 90% of the time, can be refuted, easily.

The reason why evolution is not widely accecpted is because RELIGION IS CORRUPT. You got it backwards my friend, it's not the scientists that are bad, it's the dogmatict preachers and people like kent. Religion has been one of the main causes of war for 1000s of years.Yes, if there was no religion there would still be war, however religion has indeed caused wars and that cannot be ignored. Religion is tax free. They sucker people in to giving billions of dollars a year for mission trips and other silly things like that. All while they get rich and the people hang on to lies, ignoring the true science in the world. Please, if you're going to look at it from kents side, look at it from the other side AND DO SOME REASEARCH FOR YOU SELF. Check what he says! Try to refute! don't blindly accept it! Find credibles sources that have REAL information with data to back it up!

Christianity has it's roots in sun gods! Worshipped for 1000s of years by countless religions. Go watch

This movie here to see what kind of corruption is involved in religion and how it's used to control people, by the way, they have there sources on there website so feel free to check those out for credibility.

Go watch some richard dawkins videos to learn more about evolution or! You could simply look up the facts your self!

Anonymous said...

Just because objectivities resonate with one and another, doesn't make "evolution" suddenly the one and all "truth" no matter what "evidence" there is.

Same goes for creationism.

One needs to look subjectively and objectively. Within, and without.

Don't take my word for it, just explore on your own and try not to be too literal about it.

There is some truth in both, but due to all the word games and social kind of becomes hard. This is why I say "don't be too literal" and "look within and without."

Fruitarian Mango said...

Hi again Linus,

thanks once more for your feedback..

Like I have said, I am not attached to either creationism or evolutionism, and mention Kent purely as I found one lecture of his to be quite, for want of a better word, entertaining..

I did not find that overall the video you link to, offered any indepth refutal of kent.. He may have been a genuine error on his behalf as he could have been unaware of that science use - the guy in the video had to search to find it.. Besides, if creationism were true, then the pattern that is mentioned in the video of the dogs intestine, may still have been created that way.. - and like the video agrees, that is not proof of evolution.

It doesn't make me value Kent's insight any less knowing he may be in prison on tax evasion..

The crux of the matter is that evidence is not proof. There is no proof of evolution. Evidence I will not deny. I am in full agreement that religion is corrupt... but i believe you are mistaken in thinking that evolution is not widely accepted. The western world, at least, has embraced it hook line and sinker, and it is fed to children at schools as if it were fact. when it clearly isn't. Sure creationism is a question of faith, but for most believers in evolutionism, it is also faith.. blind faith in the educational system.

I'll state again.. I am neither creationist, nor evolutionist, and frankly I'm pretty laid back about what the truth might be, and have better things to do with my time than study either.

I mention Kents video purely because it's the other side of the coin which is normally not given much thought, or ridiculed, and i found the guy to be, like i said, entertaining..


LinusRed said...

I agree and dis-agree with you on a few things here. For one, I agree there is not proof evolution, however I am in strong agreement that there is indeed evidence. Logistically speaking, I support arguments and theories that are backed up by facts and data more so then faith. While I do put a small amount of "faith" into beveling the theory of evolution to be in all likely hood extremely plausible and much more likely then creationism.
It's certainly not a total faith equal to that of a magic man in the sky just plooped everything into existence.

There is solid, concrete evidence and study that has gone into proving the theory of evolution. Most religions argues that their god or gods are real due to LACK of certain evidence in science. And lack of evidence certainly isn't proof of something.

Now, I'm not so ignorant and closed minded to say the universe couldn't have POSSIBLY come from some sort of divine creator. I'm an astrophysics major and I'm currently employed at a lab studying and detecting dark matter. It involves staring blindly into space for hours on end.. The amount of things I have seen is just to wondrous, and I truly adore space. I also know that space is around 156 billion light years wide, and still growing.And, I also know that there are billions of planets in existence, and more are constantly forming over time. There's trillions upon trillions of objects in space and we are but a blip in this giant universe.

Basically, the point i'm leading up to, is that if there is a creator, he certainly hasn't shown any signs to us on earth at all. And that all religions on earth are based on false dietys. There are 1000s of planets we've discovered where life is plausible, albeit they're too far away to closely study but, from what we can tell from as far as we are, life is possible on many of them. Now, if a man suddenly appeared in front of me and created a new form of matter in his hands then said "I made all of this" I wouldn't just ignorantly say "THERE IS NO GAWD" I'd probably look in amazement and ask 100s of questions. However, with evidence and data we have to day, as far we know the universe was created of none divine causes. Evolution, is the scientific way of explaining life. Scientific, in that it involves using the scientific method to come to a conclusion. We gather data, experiment, form conclusions ect. ect. and we have solid evidence backing it up. Now, that's certainly not to say it's rule out all other theories forever true, however it holds the most likely hood at the moment.

Now, addressing the remark about evolution being taught in schools. I believe that all teachers should be subject to questioning by there students, that is, all but math teachers. Math teachers are truly the only ones that can state "My word, is law." For, 1 + 1 is always 2. A good science teacher should never simply say "This is true, you must accept it and not question it at all." however, lets face it. It's simply another flaw in society today as we know it. 80% of the teachers you get, are bad. And hardly know anything about the subjects they teach until you get into a college level.

They read directly from text books and when question, will say most likely say "It's in the text book, it's true." A large majority of them will not induce scientific methodology in there students by proclaiming "This is the basis of the theory of evolution! Now, I want you to go home and read extensive view points from creations and athiests alike! Reasearch there claims, and come back to me with what you find, all matieral cited!" The schools either teach creationism as fact, or evolution as fact. I for one, think our entire school system could use some reform but, that's a topic for perhaps another time.

At this point, it's 5:30am, my direction of this post is slewed, and I'm certainly a bit tired. So, I'll leave on that note.

Much regards,


Fruitarian Mango said...

Well, I'm guessing it would be pretty difficult to prove the existence of creation.. It is not as if God would sign the bottom, of the fjords with his name. So it doesn't surprise me that people like Kent will try to discredit evolution in order to promote creationism. fair shot, i reckon the evolutionists should be pleased of his presence and ability to argue his case so well, after all, it should give them a chance to debate their theories.

When it comes to the crux of it though, evolutionists believe that it all started with an extremely dense piece of material that exploded into the ever expanding universe, whereas creationists think the universe was created. Both scenarios seem beyond the capacity of normal human comprehension, and require faith to make them work.. - where did the lump of dirt come from?

However, there are certain features of the universe we live in that seem beyond coincidence to me, and if anywhere at all, personally lead me more to the side of an ultimate divine creation.. Take for example the fact that the moon fits perfectly over the sun during an eclipse.. I have to awe at that one.. and then, still on the moon, it seems beyond coincidence to me that the moons rotation coincides exactly such that we only ever see one side of it. I'm not saying this is proof of anything, but hey, if a few bones can be considered evidence, then i'll be bold, and call the moon evidence of divine creation.. in fact, the awe of existence at all is evidence.

Also, this whole carbon dating thing has it's flaws as I've seen documentaries where bones where given to different labs for dating and very very different results where given back (I'm talking hundreds of thousands to even millions of years difference).. I recall one particular incident, about 20 years ago, when cave paintings discovered in south africa were carbon dated (or whatever method was use - i don't recall), and the results astounded the scientific community - they were older than any other cave paintings ever discovered, causing a stir and a reconsidering of just how old good old homosapiens are..

Anyhow, cutting a long story short, it turned out that an 80 year old woman recognised the paintings as ones she herself had drawn as a child!!

Indeed, there is no way to state with undoubted 100% certainty the age of any object (indeed, even the age of the universe which you claim to somehow know - that knowledge is based on the big bang theory being true which is still unproven), and kent mentions the "circular reasoning" evolutionists use ("these bones are so old because they appear in this section of the sediment", and "this sediment is so old, because it contains these bones")..

Like I said, I'm not attached to any theory.. Personally I wouldn't be overly surprised if it were discovered that the whole universe was sneezed from the mouth of a giant dragon.. - the thought of that great white handkerchief is chilling!


Anonymous said...

You talk about evolution as though it is a faith based belief.

If you understood what science is all about - observing what we can experience, and providing instructions for others to observe the same. Science then tries to make sense of observation through a theory - the test of a theory is predicting something so far not observed from a theory and then trying to observe it. The observation may or may not be what you expect, if it is it strengthens the theory, if it isn't then doesn't necessarily invalidate the theory. The theory may need minor/major revision in light of the observation or could be possibly shown to be completely wrong. That is what science is about - describing things we observe.

Any scientific theory can only describe a subset of what is, as best we can observe and test it.

On to evolution - there are hundreds of thousands of proven, documented cases of evolution (anyone can review the literature or repeat experiments). To dismiss it in any sense as completely or even mostly wrong is just plain idiocy. Is it completely correct? no - there are still things we can't explain (but what we can't complain is being reduced quite quickly), but like the theory of gravity it is incredibly well supported by evidence.

(don't believe in the theory of gravity - toss an apple up in the air and see what happens; don't believe in evolution - think about why people get the flu every year? why do we still need to develop new antibiotics? - examine the literature on evolution of viruses and bacteria - or better yet become a biologist and study them)

Please also don't confuse evolution with the big bang. They are unrelated.

Why would you believe in the big bang rather than creationism? Because we can "see" all the way back to very small fractions of a second after it occurred. We can "see" from then until now. Its a lot less to believe something happened in a small fraction of a second and see what came after than to believe in whichever creation myth someone wants to believe.

But you say "I don't like science because of XYZ!" ie maybe the way agriculture works with non organic food, or genetic modification? This is typically the result of a profit driven corporation (eg Monsanto). Incidentally corporations only exist to maximise profit for their shareholders.

Science is not a belief, or religion and you don't need faith at all. It is simply a process.

Fruitarian Mango said...

Until any theory is fully proved, belief in it is by the very nature of semantics based on faith. There is no avoiding that.. And evolutionism, despite whatever evidence exists that points toward it, has not been proven to be fact, ergo accepting it fully as truth requires a leap of faith akin to that of creationism.

You can argue this point all you like, but accepting evolution for most requires faith in the media, faith in the schooling system, faith that we are not being hoodwinked.

There is a complete lack of "missing links" between various kinds of life in the fossil record. This would not be the case if the theory of evolution was a valid hypothesis. Sometimes evolutionists have tried to make a case that this or that newly-discovered fossil was a "missing link," but all such attempts have ended in failure.

Note, I am not arguing the case for creationism, I am merely stating the fact that belief in evolutionism will remain a question of faith until such time that it is categorically proven to be fact.


JG said...

Wow Mango.. That is just very very deep and true.. I love your website..And have became a fruitarian about 5 days ago.. starting to detox etc.. I would love to speak to you again in about 6 months etc when I have been on fruits only for a while.. If you want to check out my blog it is, where I have another blog linked to my "BALDING" blog.. I am bald at 25 and will study and update my blog, as I believe that a fruit only diet will grow my hereditary hair loss back with time (This is not the reason I went fruit only but will be a nice extra :) )

May you be blessed


Fruitarian Mango said...

Janus, great to hear from you.. Of course, I would love to hear from you when you feel ready for the interview, and to know of what changes have occurred on your head.. I am well aware that many seemingly incurable things can be healed if and when we return to a more natural diet and lifestyle, and see it as quite possible that your hair may regrow.. Ehret healed many people of many different things while fasting, including even one mans life long stuttering..
Good luck, and I'll be monitoring your progress!!

JG said...

Thanks Mango,
I have read, I think almost all of your writings, but cannot remember Ehret? If you EVER come to South Africa (hehe what are the chances)(Trust me it is way nice here , especially in the Cape province,white beaches, lot's of fresh fruits and the most lovely weather - if it ever may happen)please let me know, I would fly or drive just to meet and talk with you.

May the Divine ( God ) be with you, for you have a good heart.


Fruitarian Mango said...

hi Janus, Ehret is the author of the book "Mucusless diet healing system".. a raw pioneer of his era.. And many thanks for the invite to south africa.. you never know! but for the moment, i've no foreseeable travel plans, other than a planned migration to the tropics sometime before 2010 reaches us.. Sounds great there though!!