Evolution... Do we believe?
- Thread starter PopeFrancieLXIX
- Start date
Cruciform
New member
:thumb:
Pot, kettle, black.
Just as with your other assertions, like the hydroplate comedies, the claim that the earth was created 6 thousand years after the agricultural revolution, and the flood fantasy, you are inventing a controversy that doesn't actually exist in any meaningful way anywhere else.
There is no debate to be had about the hydroplates. They are fantasies.
There is no debate about evolution. It is, if you will excuse my language, 'proved beyond any doubt'. There is debate about mechanisms, but not about natural selection as the general principle.
There is no debate about a global flood some few thousands of years ago. It is utterly disproved.
There is no debate about maths and science as disciplines. It's pretty clear how they differ from how they are used. Inductive logic is fundamental to science. Maths proves deductively, science doesn't prove (hence my quotation marks around 'proved beyond any doubt').
These are all examples of your 'contrarianism'.
Stuart
I see. So you are talking about psychological states and mythological fantasies.
This is something that I think people should really take some time to consider in detail.
Superficially the universe looks very ordered and full of intent, as if a superpowered human has set everything going for whatever purpose it had.
But cosmology really boils down to gravity; the illusion of design in living species is all down to evolution by natural selection; all events are regulated by the Second Law of Thermodynamics, a statement that implies events are spontaneous if energy or matter are spread out.
What is clearly true is natural selection has given us a very powerful sense of design, because that is central to our survival as a species. We are primed to read things into the merest suggestion of a pattern, even if no pattern really exists. That's how our ancestors survived the sabretooths on the African savannah. Those who reacted even when there was no sabretooth tended to survive ahead of those who didn't react. We see faces in everything: the surface of Mars, the moon, currant buns: the reason we see faces is because faces are so important to us. But those other faces we see aren't really there. The human brain is ripe for seeing intent where none exists.
So, what would you say cannot be explained without the concept of intent? I feel I have thought about this question in quite a lot of depth, and I haven't found anything.
Now you might argue that you need some kind of intelligence to set up these 'laws'. But with every passing century that god-of-the-gaps idea gets whittled down. Is your god a shrinkable one? Sure there are things that don't have an explanation yet, but you can't conclude intent from that.
And what do you think free will is? The freedom to choose to leap over a building in a single bound? The freedom to make ethical choices of which religious zealots would disapprove?
Clearly there is no such thing as 100% free will. We are limited by genetics to have brains that work in a particular way, and those brains are the products of natural selection which is not a designer but a cobbler-together of things that 'just work'. The concept of free will is a religious platitude, not actually a helpful idea for analysing human behaviour.
Both christianity and science need mystery. But while science sees mystery as a challenge to explain, christianity has to protect mystery for its own survival.
Scientists come up with ideas then do their best to disprove them, but religions tend to ignore disproofs and carry on, accumulating stupid ideas as they go.
Science is interested in the whole universe, whatever it turns out to be like. Christianity seems really only interested in getting its members into the Heaven Club, one of the most selfish and deluded aims in all humanity.
An electron.
So you would rather everyone just agreed with you? I'm not being personal here; I would rather discuss ideas. But your ideas strike me as not very well thought-through. I am also keen to learn. What can you teach me?
Stuart
popsthebuilder
New member
Stuu,
No myth. Everything goes along a preordained path in order for the universe and existence to work as we know it. You can call it evolution. Evolution is the product of being that all has in order to be.
Even if the universe or big bang came to be from absolutely nothing, it couldn't have started itself if it is only nothing.
The laws you speak of were set in motion because they where what worked for creation. This was caused by creation. Remember, let there be light i.e. the big bang.
Free will is your conscience. It allows us to wander off the path that all other existence conforms to.
It is a gift with great potential and responsability.
Just because your biased knowledge that is based on manipulated religions doesn't add up within scientific examination doesn't mean that the truth does not.
God is all existence, you could refer to it as the universe if it made you feel better. So how is that selfish to try and get people to unify with the universe or creation or God?
Electrons are only half protons are the other. They have order.
Questions are great and very welcome, needless sarcasm and negativity are not needed to ask a question, or make a statement. Thanks.
No myth. Everything goes along a preordained path in order for the universe and existence to work as we know it. You can call it evolution. Evolution is the product of being that all has in order to be.
Even if the universe or big bang came to be from absolutely nothing, it couldn't have started itself if it is only nothing.
The laws you speak of were set in motion because they where what worked for creation. This was caused by creation. Remember, let there be light i.e. the big bang.
Free will is your conscience. It allows us to wander off the path that all other existence conforms to.
It is a gift with great potential and responsability.
Just because your biased knowledge that is based on manipulated religions doesn't add up within scientific examination doesn't mean that the truth does not.
God is all existence, you could refer to it as the universe if it made you feel better. So how is that selfish to try and get people to unify with the universe or creation or God?
Electrons are only half protons are the other. They have order.
Questions are great and very welcome, needless sarcasm and negativity are not needed to ask a question, or make a statement. Thanks.
Whatever it takes. That's the evolutionists' unspoken motto.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
How about you just state what this "challenge" is exactly and then folk can address it?
Otherwise this is just typical mantra Stripe nonsense - that went way beyond tedious and dull about four and a half years ago. You've already made a complete plank of yourself in regards to maths being science so don't compound the matter...
Humans aren't born of one parent. Humans don't walk again after they have been judicially executed. So, myth.
Christianity gets your commitment partly because of the principle that the more ridiculous the dogma you have to believe, the more commitment you will have to make.
Two religious platitudes. Let me know when you have something meaningful to say.
Why not?
Matter and energy are borrowed from the gravitational energy of the inflation of space-time. If we ever go into a Big Crunch, a reversal of the Big Bang, then all the borrowed gravitational energy will be paid back. So the total energy of the universe is actually zero.
Two more platitudes.
The Big Bang didn't release light at the start. And don't forget that your mythology has the earth created before the light. If you aren't using Genesis, then what the heck are you using?
Responsibility for what? This is another religious platitude. We can pretty much completely explain the phenomenon of the conscience with respect to our survival in tribal groups, and the selection pressure that has.
Compare that explanation with your just-so story of a 'gift', presumably from some 'giver', for which the unambiguous evidence is zero.
Huh?
Religious platitude.
Your universe has intent. Mine doesn't.
Because it is a lie, perpetrated to make the believer feel better.
Good grief.
Maybe the sarcasm is necessary.
Stuart
For those playing along at home, here are all Stripe's contributions to this thread, entitled ' Evolution... Do we believe? ', so far. I'm beginning to wonder if he might not be a genius:
(Stripe got that one right).
Are we getting full value from our YECs?
I don't find any of this as entertaining and hilarious as I feel I have the right to expect.
Stuart
Math is science.lain:
Evolutionists do not think math is science.
Something so trivial should be simple to agree with, but not when a YEC says it.
(Stripe got that one right).
You can't read and you call me a failure.
Congratulations on steering the conversation as far away as possible from the challenge issued to your precious evolutionism.
Are we getting full value from our YECs?
I don't find any of this as entertaining and hilarious as I feel I have the right to expect.
Stuart
popsthebuilder
New member
Stuu,
Again just because you are confused on some smaller issues doesn't mean that there is no God or creator or creation or existence or universe.
Sorry, that isn't a principal, it's poorly thought out opinion. Assumption will just make you the nk something is true when it is way off. You may think I'm full of it, but I don't assume what I say pertaining to the rightious, and God.
Something meaningful? Look you think evolution is some thing evidently, all I'm sayin is that it is pertinent to
Productive existince, so what is your problem with what I said? Note; disliking me has little to do with theoretical discussion, and isn't a viable answer as far as I am concerned. Really, though, If you are trying to convince me that evolution is some survival of the fittest thing that at the same time has nothing to do with advancing to our highest capacity, then you might as well just not bother. Really.
Wow did you really say that. 0 equals 0 therefore nothing cannot create anything.
I'm not talking to sound interesting, or fun to you. I am speaking of truth in existence. Sorry it doesn't tickle your fancy. Don't ask next time, I guess. Why would you pretend to want real answers if all you want fun time stories. If you want stories then you should be a big fan of the bible which according to your hypocritical self is a fairy tail or myth. If you don't want to have serious discussion, fine. But stop pretending like you do, please.
Earth is the word used for matter. In the first few lines. No wonder you are so lost. Your comprehension isn't too great. That's okay though, that's why I'm here.
Wow you are really misusing the word platitude. Look it up maybe? Uhm, no, I, actually, am the first instance of the gift of free will being linked to potential, or responsability. So it is the opposite of a platitude.
Even if I was lying about it(which I will never due because I'm not really down with goin to hell) it still wouldn't be selfish you little ball of angst.
You can keep with the sarcasm if it helps you cope with being wrong about everything you posted, whatever. I'll just consider you little stewy till you fix you.
Thanks, little stewy.
Again just because you are confused on some smaller issues doesn't mean that there is no God or creator or creation or existence or universe.
Sorry, that isn't a principal, it's poorly thought out opinion. Assumption will just make you the nk something is true when it is way off. You may think I'm full of it, but I don't assume what I say pertaining to the rightious, and God.
Something meaningful? Look you think evolution is some thing evidently, all I'm sayin is that it is pertinent to
Productive existince, so what is your problem with what I said? Note; disliking me has little to do with theoretical discussion, and isn't a viable answer as far as I am concerned. Really, though, If you are trying to convince me that evolution is some survival of the fittest thing that at the same time has nothing to do with advancing to our highest capacity, then you might as well just not bother. Really.
Wow did you really say that. 0 equals 0 therefore nothing cannot create anything.
I'm not talking to sound interesting, or fun to you. I am speaking of truth in existence. Sorry it doesn't tickle your fancy. Don't ask next time, I guess. Why would you pretend to want real answers if all you want fun time stories. If you want stories then you should be a big fan of the bible which according to your hypocritical self is a fairy tail or myth. If you don't want to have serious discussion, fine. But stop pretending like you do, please.
Earth is the word used for matter. In the first few lines. No wonder you are so lost. Your comprehension isn't too great. That's okay though, that's why I'm here.
Wow you are really misusing the word platitude. Look it up maybe? Uhm, no, I, actually, am the first instance of the gift of free will being linked to potential, or responsability. So it is the opposite of a platitude.
Even if I was lying about it(which I will never due because I'm not really down with goin to hell) it still wouldn't be selfish you little ball of angst.
You can keep with the sarcasm if it helps you cope with being wrong about everything you posted, whatever. I'll just consider you little stewy till you fix you.
Thanks, little stewy.
gcthomas
New member
He has been disappointing, just like those newly discovered comedians. You know, you see them on TV, and you think they are great, a breath of fresh air. Then each time you see them again if dawns on you that they only really had one idea, and it wasn't that good a one anyway.
He certainly needs some fresh material. "Evolutionists can't read" was a funny catch phrase for a while but it's getting a bit tired now.
:idunno:
I was being specific about christianity. But the conclusion that there is no god of the kind you believe in, or any intelligence behind the universe, is based entirely on the complete lack of any unambiguous evidence for any such thing. You can believe, but you have absolutely no good reason to do so.
Natural selection doesn't have goals. Evolution happens in the direction of being fittest for survival and reproduction. When you think about it, those criteria are obvious.
No. What I said was that the total energy of the universe is zero. That means that the net total of nothing came from an original state of nothing. The matter and energy we see are borrowed from the gravitational energy of the inflation of the universe. The gravitational energy is negative; we are in debt to it.
Do you not believe I am serious?
Ha•'a•retz, the word used in Genesis 1:1 means earth or land.
A platitude is a statement that is written to appear impressive, but actually doesn't mean anything. Your platitudes were exactly that.
I wouldn't worry about going to hell if I were you. It too is a lie.
I see that by resorting to a sort of name-calling informality you have run out of proper arguments. I guess that must mean you agree with me. I can't remember anyone giving up so quickly before.
Stuart (as it is spelled)
Hedshaker
New member
In a sense, our boy is correct. But the accurate statement should be more along the line of "Whatever it takes, that is evolution's motto."
Yes I know, evolution really does not have a motto. But it appears that is how it works. Whatever might give a population an advantage, even if it has some problems, works. Our eyes are not perfect (we can only see a small fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum for example), our upright stance often provides back problems, etc. But all-in-all we work. We work well enough to have become the dominant species on the planet (Well maybe except for cockroaches---but their overall impact is less---unless your spouse sees one in the kitchen!).
Why do honey bees die when they sting you? Would it not be better if one were able to keep stinging? Probably, but for the group, losing one individual from many in exchange for the warning to the predator is "just good enough"---"whatever works" based on efficiency.
oatmeal
Well-known member
There is evolution with species, you can breed dogs to get different dogs, but they are always going to be dogs.
You cannot breed frogs long enough to produce kittens.
Genesis 1 everything after its kind. Kind is the word genos, from which we get the biological term genus.
In the horse, donkey world, you can breed a horse with a donkey and get a mule, but mules do not reproduce, the horse and donkey though close, are not close enough to produce reproducing animals.
3 things;
1. If you buy the Noah story, then all intra species change happened in the last 4000 years or so, correct?
2. what prevents change from going beyond the species level?
3. in what language is genos = kind?
there is no natural selection and there is not random mutation. Also, "species" is a vague and malleable term, only useful for evolutionists who want to speak in ways that hide the fact that they assume the truth of their ideas and use it as evidence.
Dogs can be bred to get different dogs, but there is no evolution, or speciation, involved.
The bulk of it. Likely not all.
The limited size of the genome and the fact that random changes does not mean infinite changes. Put simply, a genome can be altered only so much before further changes would be terminal.
That's the thing with YEC evolution deniers. They believe in breakneck speeds of evolution.
Stuart