There is no God...???

Shenshen · 13-09-2010 03:17PM

tro81 wrote: »

At the end of the day if you beleive in evolution or a creator both require Faith. I put my faith in creation because i believe it fits more closly to the scientic Facts.

Just out of sheer curiosity... how do you explain the big flaws in some of the designs? Inverted light-sensitive cells in our eyes, for example?

And why would you think somebody (divine or otherwise, whichever you believe) would design creatures to look very different, yet make them share up to 99% of their DNA as though they were very close relatives?

tro81 · 13-09-2010 03:28PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Sigh. "Believing" in evolution requires as much "faith" as believing in gravity. It's a demonstrable fact. There is the fact of evolution and the theory which explains the mountains and mountains of facts, all of which point towards evolution. I don't mean this to sound arrogant but evolution is the central theory underpinning modern biology so your statement that creation fits with the scientific facts more than evolution is quite simply wrong.

You are yet to present you facts to prove evolution. You say evolution is a the central theory underpinning modern biology. But theory is not a fact. I know their are many biologist that believe in evolution. but that are many who dont. they are just not as popular. I am not the most intellegent person in the world but i do know that there are many intellegent scientist and some former evolutions that when they have examine the scientific world believe that there had to be a designer.
But still it comes down to belief. what you believe the fact support.

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 03:34PM

tro81 wrote: »

You are yet to present you facts to prove evolution. You say evolution is a the central theory underpinning modern biology. But theory is not a fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

tro81 wrote: »

I know their are many biologist that believe in evolution. but that are many who dont. they are just not as popular. I am not the most intellegent person in the world but i do know that there are many intellegent scientist and some former evolutions that when they have examine the scientific world believe that there had to be a designer.
But still it comes down to belief. what you believe the fact support.

There are those who believe that life had to have a designer yes but they have systematically failed to demonstrate this over and over and over again. It's not that these people are "not popular", it's that their theories have been debunked time and time again but they stick their fingers in their ears and refuse to listen.

I have never come across someone who tried to debunk evolution who actually understood it correctly. I don't know a whole lot about evolution but even with my limited knowledge I have alway been able to see the flaws in the arguments made by people whose faith depends on evolution being false.

tro81 · 13-09-2010 03:34PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Just out of sheer curiosity... how do you explain the big flaws in some of the designs? Inverted light-sensitive cells in our eyes, for example?

And why would you think somebody (divine or otherwise, whichever you believe) would design creatures to look very different, yet make them share up to 99% of their DNA as though they were very close relatives?

ok i must admit i have looked at light-sensitive cell lately. But DNA 99% the same. well a designer of building may design completely different structures for different purpose. Buy why go back to the drawing board every time to change how a door works, or a window. If we have one designer it would be logical that he would use the same basic code but just tweek it where he needs to, to change to what he wants.

Pushtrak · 13-09-2010 03:35PM

tro81 wrote: »

You are yet to present you facts to prove evolution. You say evolution is a the central theory underpinning modern biology. But theory is not a fact. I know their are many biologist that believe in evolution. but that are many who dont. they are just not as popular. I am not the most intellegent person in the world but i do know that there are many intellegent scientist and some former evolutions that when they have examine the scientific world believe that there had to be a designer.
But still it comes down to belief. what you believe the fact support.

In my last post, I recommended clicking the link in my signature. Better that than some long convoluted post in this thread.

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 03:36PM

tro81, what kind of facts would prove evolution to you? I can present many facts but I'd like to focus on the type you're looking for. And please don't ask for something silly like a fossil from every organism from the beginning to today

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 03:37PM

tro81 wrote: »

ok i must admit i have looked at light-sensitive cell lately. But DNA 99% the same. well a designer of building may design completely different structures for different purpose. Buy why go back to the drawing board every time to change how a door works, or a window. If we have one designer it would be logical that he would use the same basic code but just tweek it where he needs to, to change to what he wants.

You mean like how whales and dolphins still have the genes for legs because they evolved from land animals?

tro81 · 13-09-2010 03:40PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

There are those who believe that life had to have a designer yes but they have systematically failed to demonstrate this over and over and over again. It's not that these people are "not popular", it's that their theories have been debunked time and time again but they stick their fingers in their ears and refuse to listen.

I have never come across someone who tried to debunk evolution who actually understood it correctly. I don't know a whole lot about evolution but even with my limited knowledge I have alway been able to see the flaws in the arguments made by people whose faith depends on evolution being false.

I repect your view and your experience. I have found the same when it came to people debuking design.
just another thought why do intellegent designer often look to the natural world and try to copy it because it has a complex but brilliant anwer to many designer problems.

Pushtrak · 13-09-2010 03:41PM

tro81 wrote: »

just another thought why do intellegent designer often look to the natural world and try to copy it because it has a complex but brilliant anwer to many designer problems.

Can you rephrase that?

Edit: I'd advise you check out more of the videos, but I figure you'd be more likely to watch one if I post it here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 03:46PM

tro81 wrote: »

I repect your view and your experience. I have found the same when it came to people debuking design.
just another thought why do intellegent designer often look to the natural world and try to copy it because it has a complex but brilliant anwer to many designer problems.

The natural world has had 4 billion years of trial and error to find out what works. The organisms that had good changes survived and the ones that had bad changes died so an awful lot of what's left gives the illusion of very good design and can be copied.

One of the main things that points towards evolution over a designer is that a lot of the "design" is very bad and we would never copy it. A good example is the giraffe's laryngeal nerve: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/03/the-neck-of-the.html

We have this nerve and it's a few inches long but the giraffe has the same nerve and it goes the whole way down it's neck and the whole way back up to a destination a few inches from where it started. A designer would spot this inefficiency and reroute the nerve but evolution doesn't have foresight so as the giraffe's neck lengthened the nerve got longer and longer, because evolution doesn't "know" any better

Shenshen · 13-09-2010 03:53PM

tro81 wrote: »

ok i must admit i have looked at light-sensitive cell lately. But DNA 99% the same. well a designer of building may design completely different structures for different purpose. Buy why go back to the drawing board every time to change how a door works, or a window. If we have one designer it would be logical that he would use the same basic code but just tweek it where he needs to, to change to what he wants.

Then why would you suspect he/she took mammals, which he already established as land animals, and stripped back some of the development to place them in the seas again as dolphins and whales?
Why not just leave that to the already created fish?

I would have the same question for bats and for flightless birds?

Why develop several different patterns (fish, birds, mammals in this example) and then tweek members of one to fit the environment of the others?

To go with the door example, why create a door and then cut it to size to work as a staircase?

Turtwig · 13-09-2010 03:57PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Then why would you suspect he/she took mammals, which he already established as land animals, and stripped back some of the development to place them in the seas again as dolphins and whales?
Why not just leave that to the already created fish?

I would have the same question for bats and for flightless birds?

Why develop several different patterns (fish, birds, mammals in this example) and then tweek members of one to fit the environment of the others?

To go with the door example, why create a door and then cut it to size to work as a staircase?

Better question : Why all the mass extinction events?

tro81 · 13-09-2010 03:59PM

ok ive got to go to work now but im willing to look at you vid later. maybe chat later in week

MagicMarker · 13-09-2010 04:00PM

tenner says we never hear from tro81 again.

Pushtrak · 13-09-2010 04:01PM

tro81 wrote: »

ok ive got to go to work now but im willing to look at you vid later. maybe chat later in week

Assuming you find it interesting, you should go on to look at others too.

MagicMarker wrote: »

tenner says we never hear from tro81 again.

Sadly, yeah, probably so. Even sadder, he/she will likely still go on saying there is no evidence.

sensibleken · 13-09-2010 04:21PM

If Intelligent design exists, explain Jedward.

Dades · 13-09-2010 04:23PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Then why would you suspect he/she took mammals, which he already established as land animals, and stripped back some of the development to place them in the seas again as dolphins and whales?

More perplexing, is why are we mammals?

Turtwig · 13-09-2010 04:24PM

sensibleken wrote: »

If Intelligent design exists, explain Jedward.

It's a feedback system. The religiosity of people tends to increase when they hear Jedward singing. "Oh Jesus!" "Oh God!" "Oh Holy Lord".

Shenshen · 13-09-2010 04:33PM

Dades wrote: »

More perplexing, is why are we mammals?

In fairness, it really is a question that's be puzzling me. Why do creationists think these creatures exist the way they do?
I''ve asked many, many times, but I've yet to get any answer that's not "Interesting, but you know what, I've got to run to this urgent appointment just now..."

Nemi · 13-09-2010 05:26PM

sensibleken wrote: »

If Intelligent design exists, explain Jedward.

Oh, Ken, we're all Devo now.

theg81der · 13-09-2010 05:51PM

Who says evolution and God don`t both exist?

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 06:03PM

theg81der wrote: »

Who says evolution and God don`t both exist?

Lots of people. And lots of people don't say that. It's all part of the wishy washy vaguery that makes the god concept unfalsifiable, ill-defined and totally useless

Pushtrak · 13-09-2010 06:06PM

theg81der wrote: »

Who says evolution and God don`t both exist?

Religious texts?

Goduznt Xzst · 13-09-2010 07:12PM

MagicMarker wrote: »

tenner says we never hear from tro81 again.

Nah, he'll be back. He'll wait until the thread has moved on sufficiently enough that he doesn't have to field any of the questions posed to him, or watch any of the videos.

He'll probably be back with something like:

"If we evolved from monkeys, then how come there are still monkeys?"

Nemi · 13-09-2010 07:55PM

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

"If we evolved from monkeys, then how come there are still monkeys?"

There's still monkeys?

Just let me get my Uzi.

Linoge · 13-09-2010 07:56PM

Im sad that tro8l is gone. Who is going to pose intelligent arguments and put forward interesting arguments now?!

And I was just about to post for him one of my favourite of all gods creatures, the spider wasp! Such an amazing example of gods perfection.

Sam Vimes · 13-09-2010 08:11PM

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

He'll probably be back with something like:

"If we evolved from monkeys, then how come there are still monkeys?"

I've always wondered that myself. I've also wondered, since Americans came from Europeans, how come there are still Europeans?

13-09-2010 08:12PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I've always wondered that myself. I've also wondered, since Americans came from Europeans, how come there are still Europeans?

If adults come from children why are there still children?!

Pushtrak · 13-09-2010 11:11PM

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

"If we evolved from monkeys, then how come there are still monkeys?"

Funny video I posted before in the funny side of religion thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANG7gc6vyEM

tro81 · 16-09-2010 03:58PM

MagicMarker wrote: »

tenner says we never hear from tro81 again.

ill take that bet

There is no God...???

Comments