Phefw! I've seen the film! King Kong killed the Dinosaurs :-p

If I remember rightly the giantology stuff is some very clever viral marketing for the PS2 game "Shadow of the Colossus"

there's some mention about that one too rec, the marketing scheme for ps2. i totally dont know how it ties in with giantology cause simply due to the fact that i dont know what this game is all about

The Iran skeleton is a hoax.

i dont mean to discredit you indy, but care to elaborate? a digital doctoring or what was it then ?

The identity of Casper Shilling, the alleged discoverer is dubious at best.

People usually take the facts and filter them through their presuppositions.
The two prevailing presuppositions are:
1. Supreme being > by means of special, one time creation > current life forms in distinct branches and species.
2. Sudden appearance of matter > by means of non-directed processes during millions of years > current life forms in distinct branches and species.

Unfortunately, the body of truth used to govern the given presupposition assumed by each is found to be quite different from the other. And neither side can acknowledge the opposing 'body of truth'.
Briefly stated, they are.
1. The Bible.
a. Regarded as: Spiritual, non-scientific, historical.
2. Scientific evolution.
a. Regarded as: Scientific, definite, fact based.

Problem:

Both are belief systems
Neither one can be repeated or tested.
Neither one can be observed because:
1. Creation happened once and only once.
2. The macro-changes of evolution are too slow to be observed.

We have *laws* of gravity because it is testable and repeatable.
We have *laws* of physics because anyone can get a cup of water and prove it will boil at 212 or freeze at 32.
May I pole the group to see if we aggree that both are belief systems only because they are not repeatable/testable?

In other words, can anyone show me:
God creating something.
or
evolution evolving something.

Again, I'm only asking if anyone agrees with me that there are only two belief systems involved here. HNY

P.S. To be consistent with the thread, I think dinosaurs became extinct after the Biblical flood because they couldn't adapt to the climatic changes of the post-flood environment.

You always find what you're looking for.

Edited by - Doc on 1/2/2006 2:54:47 PM

Some interesting points. Although evolutionary changes are too slow to be observed in a human lifetime, or a hundred lifetimes, we have pieced together what we know from fossil evidence. Granted this is not 100% perfect proof, but its the best we can do and certainly, in my opinion, more feasible than words written by 'learned' men hundreds of years ago.

You mention the "law" of gravity being testable and repeatable, and therefore presumably provable, yet if you want to be pedantic there is nothing we can absolutely prove. Who is to say that gravity is always an attractive force? Out in the far reaches of space-time where space (supposedly) curves in on itself in about eleven different dimensions, perhaps gravity has a completely different effect. Perhaps it's just in this very small area of the universe that it has the effect we witness and "prove". There is no way we as humans can "prove" anything; we can either propose theories on a subject or we can prove them for a particular set of constraints, for example the law of gravity applies in all regions of space-time where the fourth dimension of time is linear . Or something like that.

I do agree with you that there are two belief systems at work here, but I'm inclined to believe one more than the other based on the amount and quality of evidence.

Edited by - Accushot on 1/2/2006 3:13:20 PM

@ kimk
your link to the ancient artifacts and the links there lead to another religiously inspired anti-evolution-site: The revolution against evolution www.rae.org.
Poor stuff.

Liked the giantology-skeleton things though and Indy's Links too. Very clever campaign.

@ Doc
Very clear post - and good questions. But one of your fundamental points is wrong:

---

Both are belief systems
Neither one can be repeated or tested.
Neither one can be observed because:
1. Creation happened once and only once.
2. The macro-changes of evolution are too slow to be observed.

---

Science can observe the changes of evolution in more and more fields:
a) bacteria in laboratoriums (just as an example)
b) virus in "nature" (think about actual Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza HPAI)

I admit: this is hardly what you meant.
But there are examples how men observe evolution evolving in natural habitat.
example 1 Rapid Evolution of Fish
Another example (I read it several weeks ago but don't find the link now): Researchers have found a changed species of a fish in a part of dutch rivers. The fish exists in two different sub-species in the Rhine and another River; about 30 years ago - after construction of a canal - it seems that some of the subspecies mixed, but remained isolated. Effect: a new, a third sub-species.
I'll give the link as soon as possible.

---

Spiritual, non-scientific, historical

---

The bible is mythological, not historical. This becomes apparant when you consider it abstractly alongside another example of mythology, for example, the Odyssey.

I'm not going to write an essay on this because it seems pretty clear that people don't read my epic posts.

Sorry, but the bible is historical as well, as it records many things that happened in history, Babiloniansn, romans ect.

@TET
Some of us do. I've read the lot and I doubt I'm the only one.

@Finalday
The bible is only historic in as far as it describes some events that happened in the past. You don't see many historians referencing the bible as an accurate historical source because the facts are often tainted, or dictated, by religion and religious beliefs.

Ok, SOME people don't read them.

@Accushot:

Historians don't cite the Bible, usually, because of the fact that the Bible is a religious text which is purposed to serve as a testament of faith as well as a chronicle of past events.

This doesn't mean that historians do not consider it to be a valueless source of historical information. However, as you say, there are renditions in the Bible of past events that historians are unable to state are corroborated by other evidence.

Certainly, however, there are events in history which the Bible relates and which also are corroborated by other sources such as the destruction of the Temple and the reason(s) for its destruction, the fact that there was someone named Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified in the jurisdiction of the Roman Prefect, Pontius Pilate, that there was a Babylonian community of jews who existed in the reign of Nebuchadnezzer, etc.